LEG IS~LA TIVE ASSEMBLY. - Parliament of Victoria

1700 SuperannuatJon Act. rASSEMBLY.] Forests Department.

LEG IS~LA TIVE ASSEMBLY. WednesdaYJ Optober 19J' 1932.

The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Peacock) took the chair at 4.6 p.m., and read the prayer.

SUPERANNUATION AOT. A.MENDING BILL-SCALE OF

OONTRIBUTIONS.

Mr. FROST (MaryboTough and Daylesford) asked the Premier-

Whether the Government intends to introduce an amending Superannuation Bill this session; if so, when?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer).-The answer is-Yes; as soou as the Bill is drafted.

Mr. HOLLAND (Flemington) asked the Treasurer-

What ,proportion of the fortnightly contribution required to be made under the- ( a) Fourtll schedule; (b) Fifth schedule; and (c) Sixth sehedule to the Superannuation Act 192R is charged for each risk covered in fixing the scale of contrihutions for, say, two units at age 30 rates und.er the said Act?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer).-The answer is-

~IALES.

To provide for a pension to be payable to the contributor as from the age of 65 years ..

To provide for a pension to be payable to the cont.ributor upon retirement on account of inability and until 65 years of age ..

To provide for It widow's pension to be payable on t,he death of the contributor whether before or after retirement on pension

To provide for children's pensions .•

FEMALES. Fifth

Schedule. Age 65

Retirement. To provide for n pension to be 8. d.

payable to the contributor upon attaining the age of 65 or 60 as the case may be . . 1 11

To provide for (a) a pension upon retirement at anv time on account of ill health lind until attaining the maximum ap;e for retirement nnd (b) the return of contributions paid upon death in the spryice of a contributor 0 11

Fourth Schedule.

8. d. 1 7

011

1 5 o 7

4 6

Sixth Schedule.

Age 60 Retirement.

8. d.

3 3

o 7

2 10 3 10

FORESTS DEPARTMENT. OFFICIAL STAFF.

Mr. LIND (Gippsland East) asked the Minister of Forests-

). The names of the forest inspect?rs now ill the service, giving the dates of appomtment to their ·present class?

2. The names of the forest inspectors now in the service who held the rank of Chief Forester towards the end of the year 1922?

3. The names of a\J senior forest officers no", in the service, with their yearly rate of pay on 1st January, 1928.

4. The names of any forest inspectors now ill the service who have also served in the Forest Nurseries and Plantation Branch of the Vic· torian Forests Department activities?

5 The names and ages of the senior fore8t officers who have over 30 years' service in th& Forests Department and have qualified for promotion to the higher classes, in accordance with the Forests Acts Y

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister' of Forests) -The answers are-

1.

2.

3.

Code, Robert Stevens, appointed 1st July, 1925.

Firth, James, appointed 1st July, 1925. Grainger, Arnold William, appointed 1st

July, 1929. Maguire, Thomas Edwin, appointed 1st

July, 1929. Newton, Thomas William, appointed 1st

July, 1929.

Firth, James, appointed chief forester lpt December, 1922.

Grainger, Arnold William, appointed chipf forester, 1st July, 1913.

Name, Present Rank, Salary Received on Jd July, 1928.

4.

5.

Code, R. S., inspector, £559 per annum. Ferguson, K. V. (M.A., B.Sc.), silvicultural

officer, £377 per annum. Firth, J., inspector, £559 per annum. Galbraith, H. D., chief forester, £390 per

annum. Gerraty, F. G., chief forester, £390 pPf

annum. Grainger, A. 'V., inspector, £481 per annum. Hayden, T. F., chief forester, £468 p~r

annum. Hone, A. A. (B.Sc. For. (Adel.) Dip. For.

(Oxon) ), working plans officer, £481 rer annum.

Maguire, T. E., inspector, £481 per annum. Newton, T. W., inspector, £481 per annum. Rowe, M. H., superintendent plantations,

£481 per annum. Warren, W. J., chief forester, £416 pH

annum.

Code, R. S. Firth, J.

Code, R. S., age 55 years. Firth, J., age 54 years. Grainger, A. W., age 62 years. Maguire, T. E., age 58 years.

These officers have received all staff promo. tions for which they have qualified.

Education Department. [19 OCTOBER, 1932.] State Goal Mine. 1701

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT. TEMPORARY TEACHERS-REFUNDS TO

EXCHANGE TEACHERS. For Mr. HAYES (Melbourne), Mr.

Cook asked the Minister of Public lnstruction-

1. If the Government is prepared to give temporary teachers on the employment register preference over junior teachers when applying lor advertised vacancies?

2. Why the Education Department publishes 1l10nthly that applications for fifth class -vacancies will be received from first class junior teachers and temporary teachers on the .employment register if it is not intended to consider temporary teachers' applications?

3. If, in view of the fact that there is a very limited number of qualified temporary teachers, it would not be possible t'O absorb them immediately~'

Mr. PENNINGTON (Minister of Public Instruction).-The answers are-

1. No, as it would be contrary to the provisions of section 106 and the seventh schedule ()f the Public Service Act 1928.

2. Vacancies are advertiseu in the Education Gazette in order to fulfil the requirements of the Public Service Act.

3. It is regretted that it is not possible to absorb the temporary teachers in the Service at present.

Mr. BENNETT (Gippsland West) .asked the Minister of Public Instruc:tion-

Whether the Government will consider the refund of exchange to teachers who were employed on exchange duty in England last year?

Mr. PENNINGTON (Minister of Public Instruction) .-The princi pIe on which payments have been made to exchange teachers was that generally recognized, namely, in the currency of their OWl!

~ountry. Later in the session, however, ' the Treasurer will give consideration to the question of bearing some proportion .()f the exchange costs.

CATTLE AND SWINE OOMPENSATION FUNDK

Mr. MONCUR (Walhalla) asked the I Minister of Agl'icllIture-

1. 'What was the total amount standmg to ,the credit of-(a) the Cattle Compensatioll 1Fund; and ('b) the Swine Compensation Fund ~tJ the 30th of September, 1932?

2. W'hat was the total amount paid as com-pensation for the year ended the 30th of June, '1931 from-(a) the Cattle Compensation TFund; and (b) the Swine Compensation Fund!

Mr. ALLAN (Minister of Agricul~ture ) .-The answers are-

1. (a) The amount of credit of the Cattle <:ompensation Fund on the 30th of September,

1932, was £1,340. This credit results from the sum. of £6,000 advanced by the Treasurer under sectIOn 10 (4) of the Cattle Compensation Act to meet the de~ciency in the fund. ( b) The amount at credIt of the Swine Compensation Fund on the same date was £19,677.

2. (a) The amount paid from the Cattle Compensation Fund for the year 1931-32 was £28,949. (b) The amount paid from the Swine Compensation Fund for the year 1931-32 was £2,517.

OROWN LANDS AT MYRTLEFORD. ANNULMENT OF SALE.

Mr. LIND (Gippsland East) asked the Minister of Lands-

1. Whether the Crown lands at Myrtleford r~cent~y purchased at auction by M'essrs. o SullIvan Brothers, which sale was subsequently cancelled by him, have been again submitted to auction?

2. If so, what price per acre was paid for the land, and what is the name of the purchaser ~'

3. What pri('e was paid by Messrs. O'Sullivan Brothers for the land at the first sale on the 27t,h of July, 1932?

4. Wl1at is the area of this land and the profit or loss to the Crown occasioned by such re-sale?

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands).The answers are-

1. Yes . 2. Sixty-nine pounds per acre; Pan look

Brothers Proprietary Limited', of Eurobin. 3. Nineteen pounds per acre. 4. 28 acres 1 rood 17 perches. The difference

between the purchase money of the first sale and price now paid is £1,417 6s. 3d.

FINANCIAL EMERGENCY ACT. CORPORATIONS' MORTGAGES: OERTIFICATES

GRANTED. Mr. SLA TER (Dundas) asked the

Treasurer-1. The number of certificates granted pur

suant to sub-section (4) of section 14 of the Financial Emergency Act 1931?

2. The names, addresses, and occupations of the persons, firms, or corporations t'O whom or to which such certificates have been issued?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer) .-The answers are-

1. Two. 2. The Ballarat Land Mortgage and Agency

Company Limited, Ballarat, and the City and Suburban Investments Limited, 480 Bourkestreet, Melbourne.

STATE OOAL MINE. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE.

Mr. • McKENZIE (W onthaggi). - I wish to move the adjournment of the House for the purpose of diAcussing A

1002 Btale [ASSEMBLY.] Goal Mi~.

definite matter of urgBnt public importance, namely, ({ the administration of the Government in connexion with the existing dispute at the State Coal Mine."

Twelve members rose in their places (as required by the Standing Order) to indicate approval of the proposed discussion.

Mr. McKENZIE (tV onthaggi). - 1 make no apology for taking up the time of honorable members on this question, because I consider it is a matter seriously .affecting not only my electorate and the town of W onthaggi, but also the whole State. Six weeks ago I mentioned the subject on the adjournment of the House, and expressed the hope that the dispute would be settled. Unfortunately, my prediction did not come true, and the trouble continues. It is for that reason that I wish to draw the attention of honorable members and of the public to what I say is the real position of the dispute. There has been no work at the mine since the 5th of September-that is, about six weeks. That state of affairs, honorable members will understand, is disastrous to the business interests of Wonthaggi, and is particularly hard on the men concerned. It is so hard that the more prosperous of the loeal people have inaugurated soup kitchens in an endeavour to alleviate the distress prevailing. I wish at the outset to disabuse the minds of the Ministerial Suppol'ters on one point-men do not deliberately go into a strike for the fun of striking. No man in his sane senses -and the worker is as sane as any other man--will deliberately inflict hardship on himself and his family just to air a grievance, as it were. But a strike is the last resort of the worker, very often, to obtain that satisfaction which ,he belie'ves he is entitled to.

Before proceeding, to speak of the specific matters on which I have based my motion, I think I shall be quite in order in referring to the actual position of the State Coal Mine, because I believe that the people of the State, including many of the new members of this House and some of the old members, do not realize what a wonderful asset this State enterprise is. The mine was opened about the year 1909, to overcome 'R difficulty that had arisen in connexion with a strike in New South Wales, when the Victorian railways and indus-

tries geueraliy were deprived of their coal supplies. One of the reasons animating me in making this preliminary survey of the enterprise itself is the fact that ridiculous and absurd statements have been made by a Minister in this House and by members of another place to the effect that it may be necessary to close the State Coal Mine altogether. Statements like that reflect on the credit of a town such as Wonthaggi, in the eyes of the business world; and, in these particularly hard times, it is necessary for us to obtain all the credit, possible in carrying on our businesses. There is a' distinct ShYllPSS amongst Melbourne merchants now that they have heard politicians making statements that the mine, which is the life-blood of the town, may be closed'.

I want honorable members to realize what the mine means to the State as an asset. Since 1909-a matter of about 22 years-there has grown up a town of about 12,000 people. Wonthaggi is the fourth largest country town in the State, with a prosperous and, until recently, thriving population. It is a market town for farmers of the surrounding districts, the value of whose property has been materially increased by the fact that there is a centre of population at their immediate door. The benefit to Mel~ bourne, through the business transacted by that large town, is almost incalculable. There is also the factor of the benefit derived by the Government through the amount of taxes collected from W onthaggi. There is the benefit gained by all consumers of fuel, and by the Railways Commissioners in particular, through the establishment of the State Coal Mine. The price of coal has been stabilized. New South Wales interests have not been able to fix arbitrarily excessive prices, because here we have a mine competing with the New South Wales coalfields. In this last direction alone the W onthaggi enterprise has been of tremendous benefit to the State. Millions of pounds have been earned by the railways in hauling coal from the mina to the metropolitan area. The quantity of coal produced since the inception of the mine is more than 10,500,000 tons, valued at about £9,500,000. The wages paid have approximated over £7,000,000.

State [19 OOTOBER, 1932.J Goal Mine. 1703·

Now let us examine the financial position of the mine. Here we have an enterprise in which the capital originally invested amounted to £250,000. Oompar& that with Yallourn with its £20,000,000, and with other State activities. With the exception of £70,000, that original investment of £250,000 has been returned to the Government. Under an Act passed by the Hogan Government last year, £50POO of the profits of the mine for the year was taken into Consolidated Re,renue. If we deduct that amount from the £70,000 owing, we shall find that the State Coal Mine has cleared itself of the original capital invested with the exception of £20,000. During that period the Government has received £160,000 in interest on the capital involved. The depreciation fund now stands at £213,731. That is not one of those imaginary depreciation funds of which we hear in relation to many businesses, but it is an actual cash reserve, in Government bonds, and it is more than the original amount of capital invested. To sum up, practicallv all the original capital has been ref~nded out of profits; interest has been paid to the extent of £160,000, and a huge depreciation fund that now exceeds the capital originally invested has been built up. Oan any member of this House 'point out any private enterprise in Victoria which is in the same position? The State Ooal Mine stands unique amongst our en terprises.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-And it still has a liquid asset.

Mr. McKENZIE.-It has. A highlyqualified chartered accountant of this city, Mr. Lawson, stated in the course of evidence on oath before the State Coal Mine Industrial Tribunal a few weeks

. ago--I have perused the balance-sheet of the State

mine and find rather a unique position. . . . that, as a Government concern, it is as sound a proposition as I have had in my experience to investigate.

I do not believe that the people of Victoria realize what a tremendous asset there is down there in the Powlett valley. The true position of the mine is not disclosed altogether in its balance-sheets. As is the case with numbers of enterpl'ises, the idea of those concerned seems to be rather to cloak the facts than to bring them to light. In this regard, I am

reminded 6f a comment by the ex-member for St. Rilda, Mr. Burnett Gray. Speaking of the present Attorney-General, Mr. Burnett Gray said he was « a skilful wrapper-up of the obvious." I do not know whether that was a compliment or otherwise ; perhaps it was a case of fiftyfifty. But these financial statements in relation to State concerns frequently secm to wrap up the obvious. I am reminded of that by the fact that the State AnditorGeneral, Mr. Norris, has commented that the balance-sheets of the State Coal Mine certainly do not disclose anything on the side of inflation.

I admit frankly that the present position of the mine is not so good. We lost last year about £60,000, and we a.re faced with another loss this year. But that position, lmfortunately, is not unique. Most private enterprises during the current period of depression have not shown anything like the profits that they showed in the past. Owing to the depressed conditions, the mine worked only about half-time last year, but overhead expenses were continuing all the time. And it was impossible to dispose of all the output. Therefore, the balance-sheet did not come out as satisfactorily as we could have wished. In the private coal mines of New South Wales-there are, perhaps, no better in the world-and on almost every coalfield in respect of which balance-sheets were issued last year, losses were shown amounting, in some cases, to huge sums. This was due not only to the depression but to a price-cutting war. These conditions will not last. I venture to say that in years to come the State Coal Mine will again show large profits, particularly if we establish a briquetting faC'tory to use up the slack. If the State does not seize the peculiarly good opportunity we now have of establishing a black coal briquetting industry, I believe that private enterprise will.

l\Ir. LINTON.-YOU will have Yalloul'll competing against Wonthaggi.

·Mr. McKENZIE.-That is not ahsolutely correct. The brown coal which is briquetted at Yallourn cannot be used on railway engines. It is not of a high enough calorific value. It has not sufficient heating qualities. It has been tried and' has proved a failure. Briquettes made of black coal can be burned on the

1704 Stak [ASSEMBLY.] Goal Mine.

fast express trains as has been proved on the Continent of Europe-in F'rance, Bel-gium, and Germany. With a large and regular supply of black coal briquettes made from the slack at W onthaggi, there would be no need for the Railway Department to im.port a single ton of coal from New South Wales. The general impression is that if a black coal briquetting factory were established we should have olle State enterprise competing against another, whereas, as a matter or fact, the whole output of the briquetting plant could be readily used by the Railway Department. It would mean that the State Uoal Mine would be working full time, with consequent profit to the State.

I now come to my main bone of contention. It will be recollected that the Government, in pursuance of its policy, applied to the Commonwealth Arbitration Court, presided over by Judge Beeby, to have the miners' award set aside. Judge Beeby granted the application, and the award was set aside. The Government then set up a tribunal under the State Coal Mine Industrial Tribunal Act to fix wages and conditions for the men working at the mine. That tribunal was accepted by me as the men's representative, 1I0t with my blessing, as has been stated, but because I thought it was infinitely better to ac"Cept the tribunal than to leave the men to the tender mercies of the mine management with whom they would have to bargain. That was the only reason for my acceptance of the tribunal. I hope that the men will soon be back under a Commonwealth Arbitration Court award. The tribunal, presided over by Judge Winneke, early in September delivered an awa.rd which made a 20 per cent. cut in the wages of the miners. This cut was on top of the 12! per cent. cut which was brought into vogue by Judge Beeby the y"ear before. There was, therefore, a. total cut of 32! per cent. I regard this as an extremely vicious cut. I do. not think, when the tribunal was brought Into being, the Government expected for a moment that such a huge cut would be made. I am in a position to say that the management of the State Coal Mine did not expect it. However, the miners were told that they must accept this cut and work under it. The announcement was not well received.

Mr. CAIN.-Men would' not be human if they readily accepted it.

Mr. McKenzie.

Mr. McKENZIE.-That is so. However, the cut was not the cause of thestoppagp.. The cause of the stoppage was. this: In pursuance .of their policy the management decided to dismiss 400 or' 500 men in the industry. They said, "There are too many men in it." The· miners offered to ration the work--to· share it between them. That offer ·was. not acceptable. I do not want to go into· the pros and cons of the question, but I may say that 260 men were dismissed on the 22nd of July.

Mr. HOGAN.-To whom was it not ac-· ceptable?

Mr. McKENZIE.-To the Government. The rationing of the work was acceptable to the men. The men showed a self-sacrificing spirit-the true essence of' unionism. The management definitely dismissed 260 men. These men had been signed on as temporary employees during' the period of the coal strike in New South Wales. At that time more coal was required, and extra hands were put on to· hew it. These men knew that they were liable to dismissal, but they were hoping' that their services would be retained~ Many of them had made their homes in W onthaggi. They went to draw theirpay on the 22nd of July of this year, and each man found in his envelope a noticeinforming him that he would be dismissed. Not an hour's notice of the intention Ot the management was given to the men. The dismissals were accepted, and the men went off the mine. Then arose another ma.tter which has been a bone of contention. Another 240 men expected to be dismissed as we had been told that 50() men would have to go out' of the industry.

Mr. HOGAN.-Did they tell them wherethey could go?

Mr. McKENZIE.-They could go away and starve as far as this Government was:· concerned. In the coal-mining industry-as in some other industries-· there is the well-established seniorityrule. I am not going to argue as to. whether the rule works out absolutelyright in practice .. My point is this: In, the coal-mining industry for years there has been a rule of last on first off, the last: man to be employed being the first to beput off if it came to a question of dismissal.

Mr. CAIN.-Or shortening of hands.

State [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Goal Mine. 1705

Mr. McKENZIE.-Yes. The last on was first to go. Generally, the men affected were temporary hands. In the private coal mines of New South Wales, and, i.ndeed, in mines all over the world, the seniority rule is observed. I challenge contradiction of that statement. The men have an object in insisting on the observance of the seniority rule. It prevents the victimization of leading men in the union. In the absence of that rule it would be easy to deal with a man who is considered troublesome. A man is considered trouble- . some in an industry if he agitates for the betterment of that industry. Without the rule the management could make a paltry excuse, and say to such a man, "Out you go." That was done to .my knowledge when I worked at the mIne. r have in mind the case of a man named Jack Burns, a union organizer, who was employed at the mine. He was. a man conthmally agitating for better conditions-and why should not men agitate for better conditions ?-and was told at a moment's notice that he had to leave the mine. He had to go. The seniority rule has been struggled for for many years by coal-miners in particular, and they are very loa.th to give it up.

The second question that is in dispute now is the question of efficiency, and it is a very burning one. The management contend that they have the right to say to a man, "You are inefficient; you are not able to earn the minimum wage, and therefore you must go." On the face of it, that looks a fair thing; but I wish to explain that every man ir;t the ~tate. Coal Mine works on contract, and IS paId so much a ton. He cavels for a placecavelling simply means balloting. The men are grouped together in parties, and they draw for places. In some of the places no man could earn the minimum wage. The seams are too low, but they have to be worked to carryon the development of the mine, fmd mine managements all over the world see that if a man is doing a fair thing at his bord, and does not earn the minimum wage at the end of a fortnight, he is paid up to the minimum wage. I admit that there maybe some men who, if they found they could not reach the minimum wage except by strenuous work. would be prepared t.o sit back and, perhaps, go slow; but when these dismissals came about the manage-

ment said, "There are a number of men here who, in our opinion, are not competent miners, and we do not intend to reinstate those men." The position whioh obtains differs from that which obtains in any other industry I know. A man may. be a perfectly competent miner-a hard-working, conscientious man-but he may, unfortunatelYr cavel into a bad place. I know men who have been so unlucky as to draw bad places every quarter for twelve months, and every quarter their pay has had to be made up to them. If those men were in a good place they would earn well over the minimum wage. The management has said, in effect, to such men, " Your pay has had to be made up to the minimum wage for twelve months, and you must go." The management has not taken into consideration the fact that it was impossible for men to make the minimum wage in the places where they were working. The men object to the attitude of the management. They made a perfectly reasonable and sane proposition to the management; in fact, I made it myself on behalf of the men. The men said, " The dispute has narrowed down to eight or ten men who, you say, are inefficient. We say, and they say, that they are efficient. Mate those men together in parties of four, give them a reasonable bord to work in, and if at the end of a month or two months they cannot and do not make the minimum wage, and are definitely proved inefficient, you win have the right to dismiss them without any fuss at all." I ask honorable members on the other (the Ministerial) side of the House whether that was not a sane and reasonable proposition. The following is the letter I wrote to the mine management on the 5th of October:-Dear Mr. McLeish,-

From external appearances it appears that a deadlock has been reached in negotiations for a settlement of the very unfortunate dispute at the mine. With a view of attempting to bring about a settlement of the disastrous state. of affairs prevailing, I am taking the liberty of approaching you on the matter. From what I can gather, the twobig questions in the way are- ( 1) Seniority and (2) efficiency.

From a remark of Mr. Williams at a recent meeting of the union, I ga.ther that there is. not much in the way of reaching agreement on the seniority question.

. ,

1706 State [ASSEMBLY.] Coal Mine.

I believe agreement on that point can be reached without much trouble-

Now', as regards efficiency~ I understamd that there are about nine men whom you classify as non-efficient.

Permit me to put this proposition before you for your consideration---could these men be mated togeUler in parties and put in the general cavel and given, say, a month's tria.l ~ At the expirat·ion of this period, if these men are proved definitely inefficient, you have the right to dismiss them without any objection being raised by the union.

I would. like to know your views on this matter as early as possible. .

You will understand this is not inspired in any way, but is an honest attempt 011 my part to end the impas$e.

Mr. HOGAN.-Would that settle the trouble?

Mr. ~M:cKENZIE.-It would end the trouble to-morrow.

Mr. HOGAN.-Is that the only outstanding matter?

Mr. JYIcKENZIE.-There is another point to which I wish to refer. Besides' the matter of efficiency there is the matter of what is known as the Appeal Board. When the men were being dismissed, the management said, " You have the right to put up a case, and, if it is a fair and. reasonable case, we will consider it and we may reinstate you." That sounded all right, and the men sent two of their leaders down to sit on the Appeal Board with the management in conference, in order that they might watch the interests of men who, perhaps, were not able to look after their own interest$. What is objected to is the constitution of the Board. It consists of the general manager of ·the mine, Mr. McLeish, and two railway officials, Mr. Brennan and Mr. Cameron. I have nothing whatever personally against those two officials, nor have the miners; but they say that Mr. Brennan and Mr. Cameron do not know the first thing about coal-mining, and that all they do is to view the matter from a cold, hard, economic position. They say, in effect, "You men have repeatedly had your wages made up, and, therefore, you have 'to be dismissed." The miners say that Mr. Brennan and lfr. Cameron know nothing about this job but that they are prepared to !lbide by 'the decision of the man who dJOS

know about the job-Mr. McLeish, the general manager of the mine. They are prepared to accept his decision. As an

evidence of that, I shall quote the following resolution which was carried by the men at a meeting on the 5th of Deptember:- /~

That this meeting determines that the management be 'notitied that t~e org~nizati~n is prepa.red to resume wor}< U??1edlately III seniority and the alleged lllefficient m~n to resume work, and all cases to be reVlewed before the management.

On the same day as that on which the resolution was conveyed to the management by telephone, the management refused to accept the proposal. The management is being unfairly i!lte;-fered with by the Chairman of the RaIlways Commissioners, Mr. Clapp, whu, OIL

account of his occupying that posit~oll, is virtually general, manager of the mlne. I believe that, but for him, the agreement that we have endeavoured to bring about would have been actually finalized.

A deputation 'waited on the Minister of Railways last week with the request that the present Appeal Board be set aside, and that Mr. McLeish be made the A.ppeal Board. The men do not expect any wonderfully favorable consideration from Mr. McLeish, because he is every inoh the mine manager. His predecessor, Mr. Broome, who managed the mine for twenty years, was one of the greatest public servants this State has had, and knew his job from A to Z. Further than that, he knew how to handle :rp.en. Mr. 1YIcLeish mayor may not kn'ow how to

. do so, but so far he has not proved that he can. He has not had the opportunity to prove it. The purpose of the deputation the other day was chiefly to ask that the Appeal Board should be done away with, and I shall state the idea that, rightly or wron~ly, the members of the deputation took away with them. They were satisfied from what the Minister said-they may have taken away the wrong impression, and if so the Minister will correct me-that he was prepared to say that Mr. Cameron and Mr. Brennan should go off the Board, and Mr. McLeish should deal with the men himself.

The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Pea~ cock).-The time allowed the hORorable member has expirad.

On the motion of Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood) the Standing Orders were suspended to enable the honorable member for Wonthaggi to continue his speech.

State [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Coal Mine. 1707

Mr. McKENZIE (vVonthaggi).-Let me repeat what I am asking the Government to clo.

Mr. OAIN.-Don't get away from the suhject-matter of the deputation. It is important.

}.ill'. McKENZIE.-The :Minister of Railways listened to the deputation from the federation in New South Wales and the W onthaggi miners-they are· alsu members of the federation-and the W 011-

thaggi men returned to their town sat~slied that the Minister was going to dISband the Board and leave the management of the mine to the manager. Whether the impression that the men took away from the Minister's room was rigllt or wrong I submit that their request was a reasonable one. It was that the man who knows the job of managing the mine should handle it, and that there should not. be associated with him men from outsIde, who no matter how efficient they are' on their own particular jobs, do not know anything about the management of the State Coal Mine. The miners at W onthaggi are engaged in one of the most difficult and dangerous occupations. They work in the bowels of the earth, and often they are compelled to work a whole shift stripped almost naked and kneeling in water. I know how dangerous and arduous the work is because I have worked in the mine myself. I remind the Government that the miners worked loyally for the State during the big New South Wales coal strike, despite the fact that great pressure was brought to bear. on them to go out on strike. By continuing to work then they saved this State many thousands of pounds. Every time the miners go down into the mine they face danger. I have seen soine of the finest men I have known go down into the mine for their shift, and I have helped to carry out their corpses. Men engaged in such a dangerous industry should receive sympathetic consideration from the Government. The request that has been made to the Government on the men's behalf is not that they should be allowed to manage the mine. The argument might be advanced that the management is not to be allowed to dismiss men. The fact is that men are dismissed every week by the management. Some time ago four men working in a party were dismissed by the management, and many of

the men considered that such dismissal . was unjust to the men, and that they had been victimized. I took the matter to the then Premier, the honorable member for Warrenheip and Grenville, and L persisted in my representations for three weeks to have the four men reinstated. The representations on their behalf were unsuccessful. That fact shows that the management can and does dismiss men.

I am certain that the strike could be ended if the Government exercised the human touch of sympathy. The men are ]Jot unreasonable. They have got into their minds the id~a that they are being treated unjustly. If the Minister of Railw;:tys, and I believe that he is as sympathetic as any other member, will be pre· .pared to instruct the Railways Oommis· sioners to disband the Appeal Board, and leave the settlement of the matter to Mr. McLeish, I believe that work will start again next week. I expect that the Minister will say that the 20 per cent. cut in wages has been brought into the matter. I know that it has. My attitude is that when an industrial tribunal, although I do

. not agree with its constitution, makes an award it must be obeyed. I believe the men afe prepared to work under the award· of the tribunal that dealt with their case although the award, they consider, is harsh and unjust. The dispute about the seniority rule has been overcome, and the difficu1ty in regard to the efficiency question could be cleared up by providing the test for which I have asked. The only other thing that requires to be done is to disband the Appeal Board. If that were done the miners would be allowed to earn their bread and butter which they are most anxious to do. While they are idle they cannot go on the dole because their work is available to them at the mine. All that they are asking is to be allowed to work under existing conditions, bad and all as they are, and I can say that they are so bad that I do not want to work under them again, because I worked under them long enough. I ask for fair treatment for the miners, and I believe that if it is given to them the whole trouble will be quickly settled.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood).It is with gTeat reluctance that I intrude in the discussion of this matter, . because

1708 State [ASSEMBLY.] Goal Mine.

the honorable member for W onthaggi has put his case so temperately and thoroughly that for anyone outside the particular industry to intrude will probably be only to weaken the honorable member's case. It appears to me that this is a matter which affects, not only the people of W onthaggi, but also the people of Victoria and the whole commercial life of the cpmmunity. The State mine, as the honorable member has shown, has been a valuable asset to the State. Not only ha~ it enabled the Government to dispose at a high profit of large areas of land which otherwise would have been valueless, but it has stimulatp.d .railway activities, and yielded a large re·· turn to the Railway Department. More-' over, the development of the mine lIas brought about the establishment of a community of 12,000 people at W onthaggi, and that population has been the consumer of commodities produced by other sections of the community. Taking th~se various advantages into consideration, it would _be extremely difficult to estimate th~ value of the enterprise to the State. I was a member of the House when the industry was established, and I remember the spectacular attempt that was made to create interest in the venture by the trans· port of coal from the mine by bullock teams. The founders of the mine estimated that its life would be twenty years, and provision for depreciation was made on that estimate. The period of tweJlty years has passed, and geologists now estimate that the mine has another twenty years of life before it. In: view of the fact that bores are revealing new deposits of coal, which may be exploited in the future to the benefit of the State, the life of the Wonthaggi coalfield may extend far beyond another twenty years. These are critical times when we should do everything to avoid fostering of strikes and industrial disturbances, and in view of that the Government ought to be reaching out with both hands to restore harmony in the coal.mining industry at W onthaggi. It appears to me from what has been stated that thEl utmost effort has not been made ,by the Government to bring about an ami.cable settlement of the dispute.

If the position is as stated by the honorable Inember for W onthaggi, the whole trouble can be reduced to three heads. One he has eliminated as being capable of an amicable settlement, and thus there are

Mr 1"nnecliffe.

only two matters in dispute, namely, the competent authority to determine who shall be dismissed from the mine, and the disbandment of the Appeal Board." To me there appears to be no reason why reasonably-minded men should not get to· gether and settle the whole matter in 24 hours. I point out to the Minister of Railways that this matter is of vital and profound importance. I administered the Railway Department for a period of more than twelve months, and I was thoroughly convinced that the Commissioners were not making the most efficient use of the mine. It was proved in times of industrial crises that it was possible to use W onthaggi run-of-mine coal for ordinary railway purposes. Probably the highest efficiency was not obtained from the coal, but the Commissioners used it, and I understand that they are now using run-of-mine coal for. ordinary haulage on the Melbourne to W onthaggi line. If "it can be done with heavy haulage over a very bad grade, as I understand this is, then it can also be done with the major portion of the goods traffic in the State, if not with a great deal of the minor passenger traffic. Perhaps on the fast expresses there may be some reason for the Railways Commissioners not availing themselves of this coal. Here is a valuable State asset, and it does not appear that the Commissioners are makiug any very earnest effort to utilize it to the full advantage. The question of the briquetting of black coal was brushed aside, I thought rather brusquely, by the Minister on the ground that it would mean the establishment of an industry in competition with Yallourn. There is Ii.ot, and there never was, any intention of doing that, because black coal briquettes could be used for railway purposes and for purposes for which the brown coal briquettes are not altogether suitable. This question should not be bru~hed 'aside; it should be investigated by the Government with a view to employing as tnany of our own citizens as possible in connexion with this national enterprise.

I trust that the very fine statement made by the honorable member for W onthaggi will not be treated cavalierly by the Government, but that the forcible arguments advanced by him will be con' sidered. I hope that the matter will be

State [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Goal Mine. 170~

investigated very exhaustively and thoroughly to see if it is not possible to put the men in work again and bring about a stimulus of th~ industry in this State. It is up to the Government to deal generously with the miners, to reach out and try to find a solution of the trouble, and not adopt a stand-and-deliver 8ttitude when the interests of such a large body of people are at stake. I trust that something creative will emanate from the Ministry instead of th(! attitude which it has adopted from the heginning of dismissing men rather thall absorbing them in employment. When the men offered to accept rationing, instead of availing themselves of that offer the Government determined to dismis~ fiOO employees and cast them out On tho field of sustenance. I think that the v.;hole attitude of the Government in connexion with this trouble suggests that it. is inept and ineffective, and demons~ trates it as being incompetent to deal with a vital industrial problem.

Mr. COOK (Bendigo).-In supporting the motion moved by the honorable member for W onthaggi, I wish to compliment him upon the excellent manner in which he placed the matter before the House. As one who has had experience 1Iot only in the coal-mining industry, but particularly so far as concerns the men employed, he has shown that men can be good unionists, loyal to their fellow men, tind at t.he same time reasonable in their requests. T do nnt oesire to go over the ground that was covered by the honOI'able member for W onthaggi, because he has submitted his case in a far better manner than I could; but I am naturally sympathetic with him, representing as I do a mining community, and knowing something of the difficulties which confront the miners from day to day. It seems to me that the three outstandin~ features of the trouble at W onthaggi-which would apparently be overcome easily by the acceptance of the ruen's demands, requests, or offers-relate to the men's offer to meet the tnaDa$!emcnt of the mine, the Appeal Uoard, and the question of seniority. I· would impress on the House and the Minister particularly that these practice13 are world wide, and have -been in operation in the coal-mining industry in other countries from time immemorial, or at

least for quite a number of years. This. il!dicates very clearly that what the Wonthaggi miners are fighting for to-day has been the established practice in their industry in other parts of the world over 8. long period. When we come to consider that point of view, surely it is a reasonable reQuest that the Government of the day will meet the men in the spirit in which those men have madetheir offer. It is interesting to learn from the honorable member for W onthaggi that the men themselves have made a proposi tion a refusal of which by the Government would, to my mind, be diffi~ cult to justify. I am told that the Appeal Board is comprised of men whc know nothing at all about the coal~ mining industry. Yet they are sitting tv determine the conditions which should obtain in the industry. Despite thefact that the men are prepared to meet the management on this particular matter, and take all the risks connected. therewith, we still find that the Govern-· ment is not prepared to meet the men in the spirit in which they have madetheir representations. From that standpoint I urge the Minister to carry intopractice the impression that he gave the men recently. I was delighted to heart.he honorable member for W onthaggi tell the House that the men who represented the miners came away from thedeputation with the firm conviction that.. the :Minister himself was prepared to· meet the men on the g~ound which they suggested. I should like to ask for an explanation from the Minister as towhy the impression that was distinctly gained from the deputation has not been given effect up to the present time. It is worth repeating that the men themselves carried a resolution stating that they were prepared to meet the minemanagement. What fairer offer could bemade? As has been pointed out already,. they did not expect to get everything for which they asked the mine" manage~ ment, but they do object to men who know nothing at all about the industry dealing with the great fundamental questions associated with it. They realized that the man who is in charge. of the mine naturally understands every pa.rt of the industry itself, and must have some knowledge of the type of men with whom he is dealing. An offer has

lHO State [ASSEMBLY., Goal Mine.

been made to the Governmellt, and it seems extraordinary in a democratic community such as this that the offer has not been accepted by the Government. I sincerely hope that it will bt~ accepted, and I join with pleasure and earnestness, with other speakers who have preceded me, in appealing to the Minister, at least, to allow the matter to bn handled by those who understand it thoroughly-that is to say, the management of the mine and the miners themselves.

I have said that the honorable member for Wonthaggi stated his case in u most moderate manner-more moderately, I think, than I 'would have stated it had the miners concerned been in my electorate. I ask the Minister whether it is the intention of the Government, by dealing with· the men as they arn dealing with them, to endeavour tC.1

destroy unionism or to try to destroy the spirit of unionism that has permeated the workers. The position at W onthaggi is being watched throughout· the length and breadth of the industrial movement. Industrialists see about 2.000 men who bv a certain set of cir·, c~mstances have been reduced practically to that condition where they are entirely at the mercy of a Government. Because those people are in that condition to-day the Government is taking advantage of them, and up to the present has refused to meet them in a conciliatory manner, ~mch as that ill which the men themselves are prepared to meet the mine management and the Government, I appeal to the Minister on this questioIl. It affeets not onlY- W onthaggi, but the whole unionistic movement in this State. If the Government is prepared to refuse to deal with the position at Wonthaggi in the way -suggested by the men themselves, then we may be led to the conclusion that it is the Government's desire to take advantage of the economic position of the working class in order to drive them back to' where t,h'ey were probably 50 years ago. About that time there was a strike of miners at Bendigo, and you, Mr. Speaker, had actual experience of what happened. Mr. Longmore, the Minister of Mines of that day, instead of kow-towing to the mine-owners, told . them that if they did not open their mines in 24 hours he would cancel their

Mr. Cook,

leases. I wish that there could be displayed now the spirit which was demonstrated at that time, when there was no Labour party, and when unionism was not an active factor in industry. It is evident that there was spirit among the men then, and that they were prepared to stand up for their rights. Even though there was no Labour movement as it is now understood, there was a grand old type of L~beral at the head of the Mines Department, and, instead of standing up for the mine-owners, he stood up for the men. I mention that for the reason that surely it is not too much to ask a Minister, who has been declared to be a democrat, to meet the men.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE. - The ::Minister never claimed to be a democrat.

Mr. MENZIEs.-I have never claimed to be one.

Mr. OOOK.-Then God help the honorable gentleman and the men! I hope as a result of the repre:,entations made here to-day, that the Minister will see that the dispnte is brought to an end, that he will meet the men on the ground they have suggested, and that he will stand for the retention of practices that have obtained for many years with satisfaction to all concerned.

Mr. MURPHY (Port 1I1elbourne).--· As a member of the Puhlic Accounts Oommittee, I visited Wonthaggi some years ago. We were making an investigation, and :1\11'. Broome, the then manager of the State Ooal Mine, gave evidence before us. While this discussion has been going on, I have thought of the evidence given by him, particularly when he stated that from 1914 to 1918 the W onthaggi mine saved Victoria £1,000,000. He was giving sworn evidence when he made that declaration. rrhe price of the coal was fixed by the Railway Department. Evidence was also tendered in regard to that matter, and we learned that one of the reasons for the Department fixing a low price was that this coal contained a quantity of slack, An engineer informed us on oath that; if certain things were done to the Victorian locomotives, the Wonthaggi coal could be utilized just as well as the Newcastle coal. It is only within the last two ycars 'that the State Ooal Mine has made losses, and it is for that reason that the action of the authorities has been


taken, but we have to consider the immense advantage that the mine has been to the whole of the community. If there had been no State Coal Mine, then undoubtedly Victoria would have paid infinitely more to New South Wales for coal. I do not intend to go over the groulld covered by the honorable member for W onthaggi, because he has well covered it, but I maintain that the evidence of lfr. Broome should be considered. Unfortunately, as I have pointed out before, the valuable reports of the Public Accounts Oommittee on the subject of the State Ooal Mine are pigeonholed. The probability is that they are not read by any of the :Ministers, who, therefore, do not know what is going on at W onthaggi,. and do not know the value of the reports. Meanwhile the country suffers from that neglect. Mr. Walter was chairman of the Public Accounts Committee when the evidence to which I have referred was given. That evidence showed that the State Ooal Mine was of great assistance to Victoria during its time of need, from 1914 to 1918, and, as Mr. Broome said, it saved the State £1,000,000. Because losses have been made during the last twelve months, hundreds of men have been put out of work, and 'Victoria is buying large quantities of Newcastle coal. I wish the Minister of Railways to go into the pros and cons of the matter. Is it wise to create all this unemployment? Is it wise to have many miners out of work, especially as they have stated that they a.re willing to work under conditions that should be acceptable to the Minister. I join with other honorable members in saying that we should do all we can to end the disastrous consequences suffered by Victoria through what is occurring at W onthaggi now.

Mr. MENZIES (Minister of Railways). -I do not desire to go into all of the matters discussed here to-day, because to do so would occupy more time than I have at my disposal. Various honorable members have referred to the possibilities of briquetting W onthaggi slack coal and to other matters connected with the carrying on of the State Ooal Mine; but I think I . shall serve the most useful purpose if I confine my remarks to the matters whirh 'were referred to by the

honorable member for Wonthaggi and which have given rise to the present unfortunate dispute. Those matters are' three in number. The first in point of imDortance, though not in point of time, is the reduction order made by the State Coal :Mine tribunal. The second is the question of dismissals in order to reduce the staff to what was considered to be a reasonable proportion, and the third concerns itself ,vith what are known as dismissals out of seniority, largely on account of inefficiency or alleged inefficiency. It will help honorable members to get these matters in proportion if I make a few observations designed to put them in chronological order, because these matters cannot be fully understood unless they are put in chronological order. It was decided early in July of this year that the staff of the State Ooal Mine should be reduced to some proportion which wonld enable a reasonable number of shifts to be given to each miner each fortnight. That idea, of conrse, involved a .decision upon a major matter of policy. Honorable members and the public generally will be aware of the fact that, if there is one industry in Australia that has suffered from overmanning, it is the coal-mining industry. The result of that overmanning has been not only, to some extent, to aggravate costs in the industry, but to reduce the effective earnings of the men employed in the mines over a given period. A.t that time it was known that the State Ooal Mine tribunal ,"'.'us to be appointed. Legislation was then under consideration for the constitution of that tribunal. It was also known, of course, and was pointed out by honorable members on both sides of the House during the debate on the St:J.tc Coal Mine Industrial Tribunal Bill. LlUlt the result of the operation of that' body would be to make some reduction in the coal-miners' wages. Under the circumstances, it was considered proper by the management of the State Ooal Mineand the decision was approved by the Government-that there sh0uld be a reduction of the staff to a point which would enable a reasonable full fortnight's work to be given to the miners each fortnight. I do not wish to canvass the pros and cons of that matter. That decision was arrived at, and it was properly arrived at, and as a result a

1712 State [ASSEMBLY.] Goal·Mine.

substantial number of men received' notice of disnllssal from the mine. Most of them, numbering about 200, were dismissed as being men who were taken on temporarily in 1929 during the stoppage on the northern coalfields of New South Wales. They were taken on at Won-thaggi at a time when the demand for Wonthaggi coal had been artificially and temporarily increased by a temporary st{)lppage on the Maitland field. And, naturally, it was determined that, when the reduction in staff should be made, we should :first put off those men who had been brought into the industry in a temporary way in 1929.

Mr. McKENZIE.-Y ou know that there has never been any objection raised to that.

Mr. ~\1ENZIES.:-That is so. In addition to these, and to certain other dismissals which do not come into the picture here, the management of the mine decided that when it was putting off men to effect this general reduction it would take the opportunity of dismissing some men out of their seniority, who had, in the opinion of tJhe management, been established to be

Mr. MENZIES.--It is important to remember that it was done in that order, because it goes to show that the Board was set up, in the first place, not to make dismissals, but to deal with dismissalR already made, and, if possible, or if it became reasonable or necessary, to mitigate the severity-if there were any severity-in any order of dismissal already made. That Board was constituted, not as a means of oppression, but as a means of relief.

Mr. McKENZIE.-With men who knew nothing about it.

Mr. MENZIES.--I shall come to that. There is an old adage that. the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I shall tell the House something about how that Board has functioned. The Board consisted of the chairman of the Staff Board, Mr. Oameron; a member of the Staff Board, Mr. T. F. Brennan; and Mr. McLeish, then acting-general manager of the mine. That Board had the advantage of reports and assistance from the und~rmanagers of the mine, who were well versed in the practical problems which the miners had to confront. Moreover, the Board was, for a fortnight at least, attended at its sittings by Messrs Asquith and Williams, represent.ing the minenl' organization. They attended as ad vo· cates, and they complimented the Board on the method in which it was conducting its investigation.

Mr. McKENzIE.-I deny that ... You are not sticking to the truth.

T;he SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Peacock).-The honorable member for W onthaggi must withdraw that remark.

Mr. McKENZIE (Wonthagqi).-In deference to your request, Mr. Speaker, J withdraw; but my statement is absolutely correct, and the Minister has been misinformed.

Mr. MENZIES (Minister of Railways). -When statements are made to me by responsible officers of a Department which I administer-officers whom I know and whose veracity I can judge-I accept those statement.s.

inefficient miners; and the number of men who reeeived notices of dismissal out of their seniority in those circumstances was 51. In other words, the general manager. of the mine, whose knQwledge and competence to judge of these matters has been admitted by each speaker this afternooll~ gave notice of the dismissal of 51 miners. who, if the strict principle of seniority had been adhered to, would not have bern dismissed at all. The result of that, and -of the other dismissals, was a protest on behalf of the miners. It was suggested that, in the case of those 51 men, they were not inefficient; and there was a further suggestion made that, if any of them happened to be inefficient, the principlp. of seniori ty was nevertheless the princi pIe that should have prevailed. There were also protests in relation to other men who had been put off. At that stage the Railways Oommissioners decided that they would constitute an informal Board which wouJ..l operate as an Appeal Board, and which would give these dismissed miners the <>pportunity of a second hearing.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-A thing which probably no private enterprise would hav'! done.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood).On a point of order, I should like to inquire, Mr. Speaker, whether it is not thp. usual practice, when an honorable member objects to something that has been said by another member of the House, for


that latter meJll,ber to withdraw his objecti.onable statement, as a matter .of ~Qurtesy?

The SPEAKER.-In this case, b.oth parties may have been misinf.ormed. The hQn.orable member fQr W.onthaggi charged the :.Minister .of Railways with stating that which was n.ot the truth. Subsequently the h.onQrable member cQrrected that -charge by saying that the Minister mnst have been misinf.ormed. That is the PQsiti.on.

Mr. MENZIES (Minister .of Railways). ·-1 think it may n.ot be a bad idea tQ C.olltinue tQ debate the questiQn which I r.ose tQ debate.

1\1r. TUNNEcLIFFE.-OverloQking the usual cQurtesies .of the H.ouse.

}.Ifr. MENZIES.-If the Leader .of the Opp.ositi.on thinks that members .of this H.ouse are gQing tQ withdraw statements which they have mado merely because they :are c.ontradicted, he is seeking to intrQduce a new d.octrine.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-N.o, it is all a mat-ter .of c.ourtesy.

Mr. MENZIES.-The Leader .of thn OpPQsitiQn wants me, because anQther member .of this H.ouse has c.ontradicted a statement I made, t.o brand tw.o .of my officers as liars. I refuse t.o do it. The statement was made t.o me as a statement of truth.

An HQNORABLE MEMBER.-YQU shQuld have withdrawn .out .of cQurtesy.

The SPEAKER.-The PQint is that -when .one hQnQrable member charges .an.other with having stated an untruth, that statement must be withdrawn. But with respect t.o what has just .occurred, it is a case .of what sQmebQdy else has said .or dQne, and that is entirely different.

Mr. McKENzIE.-May I ask the Minister if he is saying that I have made a mistake .or tQld an untruth?

Mr. MENZIES.-I have never suggested it.

Mr. McKENzIE.-Inferentially, yQU are dQing SQ.

Mr. MENZIES.-This is becQming PQsitively humQrQus. The hQnQrablp. member f.or WQnthaggi was nQt present at this Board, and, theref.ore, cannQt make any .observations .of his .own kn.owledge as tQ what .occurred there.

Mr. McKENzIE.-Any mQre than yQU (lan.

Mr. MENZIES.-Precisely! But I have had made t.o me a statement by two resPQnsible .officers .of a Department whif!h I administer, and I accept their state· ment.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-The h.on.orable member fQr WQnthaggi has had his infQrmatiQn frQm two resPQnsible citizens.

Mr. McKENZIE.-JUSt as resPQnsible as yQur .officials.

Mr. MENZIES.-Well, we shall have tQ apPQint a tribunal, prQbably, tQ determine whQ is right. N .ow this Appeal B.oard, SQI much criticized, met and prQceeded tQ deal with appeals by a great number .of men whQ had been dismissed. The BQard heard altQgether SQme hun-dreds .of appeals; but, in relatiQn t.o the men whQse case has been particularly ven-tilated, whQse dismissals were made .out .of their seniQrity, appeals were heard by this BQard. ThQse 51 men had received from the management .of the mine nQtices .of dismissal. They were 51 men whQ had been selected by the general manager as beiIlg disqualified frQm cQntinuing in the service .of the mine by reaSQn, primarily, .of inefficiency. What happened when this BQard, which has been SQ much criticized, had dQne its wQrk? The results are very interesting. They were these: Of the 51 men dismissed under thQse circumstances the dismissals .of .only fifteen were cQnfirmed by the BQard.

Mr. McKENzlE.-That shQWS the management was at fault. I have already stated the facts in regard tQ the dismissals.

Mr. MENZIES.-I allQwed the hQnQrable member tQ make his statement with.out interruptiQn, and I expect him tQ allQw me tQ make my statement in my .own way.

Mr. McKENzIE.-I cannQt allQw yQU tQ get away with everything.

Mr. MENZIES. - The hQnQrable member's speech was listened tQ very attentively by .other hQnQrable members. He had every QPPQrtunity .of putting his case. He put frQm his PQint .of view a very gQQd case, which makes it all the mQre desirable that I shQuld answer it. Of the 51 cases in that grQUp 25 have been prQmised a further trial up t.o a maximum peri.od .of three mQnths, partly .on aCCQunt .of IQng service, partly .on aCCQunt .of dQmestic circumstances, and partly because it was

1714 State [ASSEMBLY.J Goal Mine.

found on investigation that the' amount of pay involved was, in many cases, very small. Seven others were promised employment, not as miners but as wheelers, 01' labourers, or in some other capacity. Two were ill, and appeals in their cases were deferred. One man was wrongly shown on the inefficiency list, and fifteen dismissals were con:firmed. In other words, had it not been for the erection and functioning of this very Appeal Board, now challenged, there would have been 51 effective dismissals. As a result of the operation of that Board there arc fifteen, and yet we are told that it is tho existence of the Board which is the obstacle to a resumption of work at the State Coal Mine.

Mr. :McKENzIE.~Which is quite true. Mr. l\t£ENZIES.-We have only to

examine the facts to see how unreal that ground is as a ground for the suspension of the operations of a coal mine and the throwing of an entire town into idleness. Now we come to the next step. After tho Appeal Board had continued its operations for some little time-at a time before the State Ooal Mine Industrial Tribunal had made an award at all -the Board was attended, as I have said, by two representatives of the men. As from the 25th of August, the tribunal ordered a 20 per cent. reduction in the wages then being paid. From that time the position altered. From that time stop-work meetings were held. They wero held almost daily at the beginning of September. What were the stopwork meetings about? They were about the 20 per cent. reduction in wages. They started after the order was made for tho 20 per cent. reduction. They were provoked by it. The men felt-and I am not criticizing the men for that-that they had a tremendous grievance over this order made by the tribunal, and stop-work meetings were held. The meetings became so chronic-if I may use that expression-that the management was forced to say, "Very well, unless the men go back to work we sb all have to close the mine."

The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Peacock).-The time allowed the ho~orable gentleman has expired.

On the motion of Mr. McKENZIE (Wonthaggi) the Standing Orders wem

suspended to enable the Minister of Railways to continue his speech.

Mr. MENZIES (Minister of Railways). ·-1 am obliged to honorable members for extending my time, because I am dealing with a matter of great importance, and I naturally want to make the position as clear as I can. I was saying that stopwork meetings occurred as the immediate outcome of the reduction of wages ordered by the State Ooal Mine Industrial Tribunal. From the time tha.t these stop-work meetings began-from the time that that 20 per cent. reduction order was made-the representatives of the men ceased to attend the meetings of the Appeal Board, which then had to carryon without their assistance and \\·ithout their advocacy. As a result of the deliberations of that Board, the dismissals nreviously ordered were, as I h ave shown, substantially mitigated. In the meantime this much more serious trouble of the 20 per cent. reduction in wages had arisen, and, as all honorable rrlembers know, the mine has remained closed ever since.

Now ] et me say this: In the first place the State Ooal :Mine Industrial Tribunal which was at>pointed to investigate wages ar,d conditions of the miners at W onthaggi, was duly constituted by this Parliament, and to its constitution and its personnnel no objection was raised by anybody in Parliament. On the contrary, I think that every honorable member agreed that the tribunal was a reasonably-constituted one. It is quite true that a great number of honorable members took the view-I quite understand it-that the men should never have been cut out of the Oommonwealth Arbitration Oourt. But, assuming that they were taken out of that Oourt, then everybody agreed-the honorable member for 'V onthaggi among them-that it was a well-consti tu ted tribunal.

Mr. McKENzIE.-It was better than tooth and claw.

Mr. 1fENZIES.-It was not only better than tooth and claw, but, to quote the honorable member's own language, "it was a fair thing to the men." The honorable member went on to say-

I think, as a whole, the representation .is particularly fair. I wish to say how satIsfied I am personally with the prol?osed chairman.


'.that was the tribunal, and it made its order. I am not in a position to say whether its order was right or wrong. I do not think any member of this House is in a position to say whether the order was right or wrong. The fact is that after prolonged investigation the tribunal made its order, and it was the proper authority to make an order. I mention that fact because the honorable member for W onthaggi has thought fit to refer to an interview which occurred the other day bet,veen certain representatives of the miners and myself, and as statements have been made about the il'terview-as, unfortunately, statements seem to be made about all interviews, whether public or private-I think it would not come amiss if I stated precisely what I gleaned from my interview with these men. We had a perfectly reasonable discussion, and the primary request which was made to me was that I should take some action to' suspend, or set aside, or alter, the award made by the State Coal Mine Industrial Tribunal. I asked a question specifically of those representatives. I said, "Is it not the 20 per cent. reduction in wages that is the real trouble at V\T onthaggi," and the answer was, "Yes, it is, and that is what we are here primarily to talk to you about. V\That we are asking you to do is to exercise some power-if you have it-to set aside this award." I had to say to these men that Parliament had set up the tribunal to attend to certain matters, and, I added, "I am not going to exercise any l\1inisterial power which I may possess, in order to set aside the decision of that tribunal."

Mr. McKENZIE.-You could not possibly do it.

Mr. MENZIES.-I quite agree. It would be an act of grave misconduct on my part if I were to endeavour to substitute my opinion-uninformed or i11-informed as the case may be-on a decision arrived at by a properly constituted tribunal. When that matter had been disposed of, and it became apparent that the order was going to stand, and that the only people to deal with it were those who constituted the tribunal itself, I was told about those other matters-they did not assume the importance of the 20 per CEnt. reduction in wages-which were

said to be of a pin-pricking character, and that it would be very desirable to remove them. I have mentioned these facts because my statement is this-and I think the chronological order and all the facts support it-that this stoppage is a strike against the reduction order. It is certainly not, in my opinion, a strike against the operations of a Board which has reduced 51 dismissals to fifteen. I cannot believe for one moment that the men would be so misguided as to call a strike as a protest against the existence of a Board which has helped them to the extent that this one has. It is suggested· to-day that the simple way in which to end this dispute is to abolish the Board. The miners have never said so.

Mr. McKENZIE (Wonthaggi).-I rise to a point of order. The Minister has made an absolutely incorrect statement in saying that the miners have never said that the dispute would be ended if the Board were abolished. I read a resolution to the House to that effect. To ernphasize my point of order, I will again read the resolution to the House. It was carried at a meeting of the men on the 5th of September, and is as follows:-

That this meeting determines that the management be notified that the organization is prepared to resume work immediately in seniority and the alleged inefficient men to resume work, and all cases to be reviewed before the management.

That resolution does not mention 20 per cent.

Mr. 1b"lNZIEs.-Is this a point of order 01' a speech? •

:Mr. :McKENZIE.-The resolution wa:5 submitted to the management over the telephor~, and the proposal contained in it was refused. The point of orde~ is that the :Minister has made a statement that is not correct. He said the 20 per cent. reduction iR the bone of contention. 'The resolution is proof that that is not so. The 1Iinister js misleading the House, and has no right to do it.

The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Pea.~ cock).-The honorable member must not say that the Minister is misleading the "ROURU. lIe has not raised a point of order, but has denied a stlatement made by the Minister. There is a difference between his interpretation and the Minister's interpretation of the resolution.

1716 State [ASSEMBLY.) Goal Mine.

:Mr. BLACKBURN (Clifton Hill).On the point of order, I wish to say that I understood that the Minister said that the men had never said they would return to work if the alleged pinpricks were removed.

Mr. MENZIES.-No. I said the men never said they would return to work if the Appeal Board were abolished, and that is amply corroborated by the resolution the honorable member for Wonthaggi has just read.

The SP}~AKER.-There is no point of order.

Mr. MENZIES (Minister of Railways). - When the point of order was taken, I waR engaged in saying, and I will repeat it for the sake of emphasis, that we aru told here that thn abolition of the Board would mean a resumption of work. I stated that the men have never said so, and I repeat that statement. The men have never said so.

Mr. CooK.-That is only playing with words.

Mr. PRENDERGAST (to Mr. Menzics).Is not that a bit slim?

Mr. MENZIES.-It is written in the plainest of plain language in the resolu~ tion. If the honorable member is unable to follow the meaning of the resolution, I am unable to assist him. What the miners say-I shall paraphrase their resolution, and I invite the honorable member for W onthaggi to contradict me if I am wrong--is, " We will go back to work if you abolish the Board, and if you allow l.alI the men to resume work, including those who have been dismissed out of their seniority."

Mr. McKENzIE.-That is so. Mr. MENZIES.-That is a very dif

ferent story. The proposition that was put to me by the miners' representative~ after we had our discussion about the 20 per eent., was just that. They said, "Abolish this Board, allow the men who have been dismissed for inefficiency to go back to work, and everything will be all right." I wish to say to, honorable members that while I am Minister I am certainly not going to give any order to the management of the mine that it must take back into 'its service men found, not only by the manager himself, but by the Appeal Board, to be inefficient.

Mr. PRENDERGAsT.-In spite of the ruling custom all over the world.

Mr. MENZIES.-There is no 'ruling custom anywhere in the world that inefficient men shall be kept on in any job. It would be a very queer custom if it existed. There is a custom in the mining industry everywhere, as far as I know, that as a broad general principle, you adhere to the rule of last on, first offin other words, the principle of seniority -but that principle, like every other principle of that kind, has to give way to special circumstances, and I suggest that it would be a preposterous thing if any management had to keep in its employment, men found to be inefficient-men not competent to do the job. This management does not propose to do that. Themanager himself was prepared to dismiss 51 men. He was induced by the mitigating operation of the Appeal Board, to reduce the number to fifteen, and now we are told this residue-fifteell men-must go back to their places in the mine and. resume work, and that that is the condition on which the stoppage is to come toan end. If that is the condition on which the stoppage is to come to an end, as far as I can see, the stoppage will never come to an end.

Mr. McKENZIE.-Your troubles! Mr. MENZIES.-It will be a very

serious trouble for the miners, and for the town of W onthaggi, too; but if we are being challenged to a bandon the first principle of management, if, in effect, the miners are challenging the management that it must give up all its ordinary rights to keep inefficient men off its pay-roll~ that chall€:nge will be taken up. But, as a matter of fact, I believe that, so far as the rank and file of the miners are concerned, they are not going to throw out any such chall&nge. I do not believe for a moment that they have entered into the strike on u. point of that sort. It would be an insult to their intelligence to believe for a moment that they had done so. I believe the strike commenced as an understand able 'strike-a protest against a very severe cut in the wages of the men, not a cut in their earnings, because, by the process of dismissal referred to, if the men went back to work to-day, their fortnightly cheque would be bigger than it was before the 20 per cent. cut was made.

Sttl,i,e [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Goal Mine. 1717

They would be given more work to do. have become less efficient, and we will put They would have ten or eleven shifts a you off and obtain a younger man in your fortnight instead of five or six. I be- place." When the Minister says that the liev~ that the st~ike started as a protest _ seniority rule must give way, he merely agamst the cut m wages, and, unfortu- means that the rule does not exist. I nately, it has drifted on past a point at consider that the calamity that has which every man at W onthaggi must occurred at W onthaggi must be deplored, have realized that to strike against the hecause one of the largest towns in the law of the country contained in the Act State is on the verge of ruin. The men of Parliament passed by us, and against are fighting for what they regard as a the decision of the tribunal appointed vital principle. The Minister has told under that Act, was hopeless, and must be the House that the dismissals are in the hopeless. A. strike of that kind cannot interests of the men and that, if the succeed; and I believe that when it is inefficient men are put off, the best men realized that it cannot succeed, the strike employed will obtain more work and will end, and work will be resumed. better wages. It is obvious that the men

Mr. BLACKBURN (Cliftun II ill).- who are ~oing to ~enefit by the dismissals I do not think that the strike which now are fightmg agamst them. They are exists at Wonthaggi is a strike against fig~ti~g for what they regard as a vital the 20 per cent. reduction in wages. 1 prinCIplez and they ?ught to be ho~oured do not propose to go into my reasons for for fightIng to retaIn other men In en;tforming that opinion, but I am strongly ployment when t~ey. would be~efit If of opinion that the strike is at present a those ~~n were dIsmIssed. In ~lS heart strike against the departure from the the Mmister must approve of theIr stand. rule of first on last off or last on first They have said that if this principle is off. The defen~e for departing fro~ that restored and t~e dismissed men aro rule is that the men who are dismissed replaced, they WIll return to work. are inefficient. It seems to me that the In my opinion, no avenue of possible whole question becomes one of what is settlement of this tr?uble should be left meant by the word "inefficient." Ob- une~plored. I cer~aInly. regret the comviously, of course, the men are not abso- plexIOn t~at the dISCUSSIOn has assumed lutely inefficient because no man in- on both SIdes of the House, and I hope capable of work' would ever have been that the vi~w. will not be accepted that employed at the mine. What is meant th~ troubl~ IS Incapable of solutIOn. The is that, compared with and relatively to mmers WIll ~eahze ~hat th~y cannot other men employed at the mine, the dis- s~ccessfully dIsp.u~e In a sIngl~-State missed men are inefficient. That is to dIspute the deCISIOn of the trIbunal, say, they are less efficient than the other and the only reason for disputmen employed at the mine. For that ing it on an Australian basis reason the mine manager desires to would be to have it taken to the get rid of them. It was to pre- Commonwealth Arbitration Oourt for vent dismissals by reason of rela- review. I believe that, if the seniority tive inefficiency that the seniority rule had not entered into the trouble, the rule was devised. The rule would be men would be at work now. I am con-unnecessary if there was not a difference villced that the Government is making of efficiency among the men. . If all the a mistake in refusing to recognize the men were equal in efficiency, the manage- principle of seniority, and I hope that ment would naturally tend to keep on the it will not consider it dishonorable to older hands. The rule has been devised loetire from the position that it has taken in order to induce the management to up. . retain the old hands, who, in the course Mr. PRENDERGAST (Footscray).-of time and because of increasing years, I should not have entered into thl1 have become less efficient than the discussion if the Minister of Railways younger men. The rule is a protection had not made a certain statement. There for the men who have become less efli- is a difference of opinion between those cient for that reason. It is also a check who represent the miners and the Goon the management, which, in the absence vernment, and the Minister made a of the rule, could say to a man, " You certain assertion when he contradicted a

Second Session 1932.-{64]

1718 State [ASSEMBLY.J Coal Mine.

stutement of the honorable member for W ()llthaggi. There are two minor matter5· in dispute, but the Minister brought in another matter, which. is that the miners will not go back to work because of the 20 per cent. cut in their wages'. That matter was not introduced into the discussion by the honorable member for W onthaggi. If the Minister fJf Railways is correct in his statement, why does he not tell the men to go back to work. at the redu.ced rate of wages, and dle Government will grant them the oo11ditions which are the subject-matter of the dispute? The" first on, last off" rule applies generally to the coal-mines in Australia and New Zealand, and also in Gre'at Britain and other parts of the world. The honorable member for W onthaggi rightly said that it is a worldwide custom. Can the miners at Won~ thaggi be expected to forfeit this principle at the behest of a non-expert Board? The miners have taken up this stand: They do not want to see some of the men ont of work, and they are prepared to ration the:ir time, which means lower wages for them, so that all the miners will be ke}Jt in work. The wisest course for the Government would be to deal with the men il'l a conciliatory spirit instead of in n spirit of defiance. The Minister is well versed in the law, and he has appeared in cases in the Commonwealth Arbitration Court and ju arbitration cases in the civil Courts. The policy of the Goyernment should be to use conciliatory methods instead of those that intensify the trouble. The miners want the worldwide l'ule of "first on, last off" restored at W onthaggi, but the Government is taking the advice of a nOll-expert Board. TherH is in charge of the mine at the present time a man who has not receiyed t.he whole of the confidence of the miners in the past, but, despite that, the miners want that man to be allowed to act as the Role judge of the whole position.

!1:1'. MENzIEs.--;-He has judged it. Mr. PRENDERGAST.-On a Board

with two other men, and when he was in the minority.

Mr. MENZIEs.-He has confirmed everyone of the dismissals.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-A compro~ mise has been suggested that the case of every man dismissed should be reCOll-

sidered, and that could be done by putting the men back to work, and if, in the opinion of a competent judge, they were inefficient, they could be dismissed. Is there anything unfair about that method ~ It appears to me that it is the desire of the Minister to humiliate the miners. If such a spirit animated one· of our Judges, he would be promptly put off the Bench, and rightly so. The J\1:inister is adopting the attitude of an unjust judge, and I do not expect that from him. I have always adyocated the extension of educa· tional facilities to the people and the encouragement of brilliant students, so that we shall haye more educated men in the community. I realize that the people will have a better chance of obtaining fair play and justice when their problems are handled by men of broad education. The Minister is a highly-educated man, he has engaged in a deep study of the law, he practises in the highest Courts of the land, and he is recognized as a leader in his profession. We find him adopting the Yiew that the miners must be humiliated before he will give any consideration to the questions in dispute. The miners have not said they will not go back to work. On the a ppearance of the case as presented, they are ready to resume. If that is so, why should that question be brought in ~ The other matters could be settled by arbitration. If they were settled by arbitration, and the miners did not go back to their work there would be very few Labour members to defend them. I am defending them to-day because I belieye that the Government ought to give them fair play, and deal with the matters actually in dispute. One question to which reference has been made is not in dispute, and on the evidence it should not haye been brought forward in this House. A man who is wise and tolerant would feel that he is dealing with a dispute that is affecting a population of about 14,000. He would not adhere strictly to definite lines of procedure, but would give way a little, especi. ally if it accomplished a good deal in the interests of the miners. I had expected more of the Minister of Railways. He could with honour'retreat from his present

. view-point, and settle the dispute which has been so disastrous. You, Mr. Speaker, were a member of this House when the State Coal Mine. was established

State [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Goal Mine. 1719

because Df trDuble in New SDuth Wales, and the increased CDst Df the cDal that was brought into Victorilt. Coal fDr use on Dur railways was transported by bullock teams. The penalty paid at that time was nDt cDnsidered tDD much fDr the purpDse Df keeping our railways in operation. But now the GDvernment will not give the Wonthaggi miners the benefit Df thDse facilities which have been accepted as the custom in the CD aI-mining industry for centuries. As the hDnDrable member fDr WDnthaggi said, they have been in Qpera-tion in other parts Df the world fDr many a year, and have been regarded as beneficent,. No. emplDyer has questiDned them. I urge the Minister to. bend nDt necessarily to. the miners but to this House. I hDpe that in the interests of the industry at W onthaggi and the pDpulatiDn the~e, he will nDt stand upDn ceremony, but wIll introduce the means to settle the difficulty without delay. He will find that the miners will go. back to. work. The Minister is a man of knDwledge and educatiDn, and well versed in the law. That. law lends itself to. the making Df great men in this cDuntry, men who. are nevertheless gentle in tileir manner tDwards those with whDm they are associated. I hDpe that the Minister will yet decide upDn a CDurse of action which will be Df much greater advantage to. the peDple concel'ned than would be the case if he had his o~n way in such a matter.

Mr. SLATER (Dundas).-I think it can reasonably be said that the unfortunattl Dccurrence which has been the subject of debate can be narrowed down to one matter. It seems 'obviDus from the resDlutions Df the men's Drganization that they are prepared to resume work immediately if consideratiDn is given to. what after all is a principle that is very vital to that DrgamzatiDn-the maintenance of the seniority system. I regret the interlude that occurred in the debate, because I thDught that the hDnorable member for W onthaggi presented his case very reasonably and fairly, and without heat. When he interjected and projected SDme heat into. the debate, I eQuId quite under-stand a man in his position having on a prDblem of this nature very deep feelings indeed. No man in this HDuse is in clDser tDuch with the cDal mining indus-try than is the hDnorable member for W onthaggi. No man knows better the

nature Df that industry in all its phases. No. man senses the tragedy of the present trDuble more than he dDes. I think that to. a large extent aCCDunts for the interludes and interruptions which Dccurred ~hen the Minister Df Railways was speakmg.

I trust that this very seriDus calamity can be overcome in a spiri t of sweet reasDnableness. The Minister said that only fDr the Appeal BDard, 51 men would have been dismissed instead Df 15. The hDnorable member fDr OliftDn Hill admira bly put to. the House the very grave danger that COIlfronted the maintenance of the dDctrine Df seniDrity if at whim the management had the right to. dismiss Dn the alleged inefficiency of the respective wDrkers. "'\Vhat do the miners say shDuld be the test fDr determining whether a man is or is nDt

inefficient? It is a matter of extreme difficulty for a non-expert tribunal. I do not know upon what material that tribunal bases its findings, but it was certainly a non-expert tribunal which determmed these questiDns. The hDnDrable member for W Dnthaggi, with his knowledge Df the various phases of the industry, indicated that all things are nDt even in the. State ODal ~1:ine, Dr in pDint Df fact in any cDal mine. He pDinted out the possibility of men, because Df the chance of the cavel, facing very pDDr seams fDr a lDng time. Is it possible fDr men who. are thus buffeted by chance to. be put Dn the same basis as men who have had the good fDrtune to. face better seams as the result of- the cavel? I ~ould suggest that these men should be given an oppDrtunity to. wDrk on a reasDnable seam, and if that were dDne in a very shDrt periDd their efficiency or inefficiency cDuld very readily be determined. I think that it wDuld be a calamitDus pDsitiDn if the doctrine of brute force should prevail. I am of the DpiniDn that the- trDuble nDW is -centred around a matter which can easily be determined without harm Dr humilia· tion to. either side. Is that not the proper approach to such a matter? When we 10Dk at the .industries and vocations in which men are engaged, we realize that we have often to gauge their temperament frDm the nature Df that employment. Is there any Dccupation in the world more hazardous, more tragic in the fatalitieti which have flDwed frDm it, than th~

1720 Business of· . [ASSEMBLY.] the House.' .

industry of coal mining ~ Coal miners certainly su'fIer in their industry, which is a very different industry or occupation from those which honorable members of this House engage in. I appeal with all the force that I can to the Minister of Railways and his colleagues in the Government to take a reasonable stand in this matter. I say to the Governmentas I say to the miners also-that if reasonableness prevails on both sides then a settlement of the dispute will be imminent.

The motion for the adjournment of the House was negatived.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and

Treasurer).-I move-That so much of the sessional order as

gives precedence to private Bill business and general business on every third Thursday and limits the hour for calling on fresh business on each sitting day be suspended for tho remainder of the session; that Government business shall take precedence of all other business during each sitting day;. and that fresh business may be called on at any hour on each sitting day.

Mr. :MENZIES (Attorney-General).I second the motion.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood).It is not my intention to oppose this motion. I recognize that the' Government must be feeling much concerned at its inability to get any work done this session. The House met in June, and althoul~h a long adjournment followed, the Government is still making no serious effort to pass any legislation. The Notice Paper is crammed with proposals which have been brought up and postponed, partly because the Government is Hot courageous enough to face the barrage of its supporters. The Government has brought down a measure affecting mortgages, and it has spoken about a transport Bill and about soldier settlement. It has talked vaguely and largely upon a number of subjects, but it has made no serious effort to do anything. The Government cannot complain that it has received opposition from this (the Opposition) side of the House. We have been pliant and have co-operated with the Government. We even asked the Premier when he wanted a Bill passed, and we promised to agree to its being passed at the hour stated, and w~

kept our word. Last night the honorable gentleman said he would be very pleased to have· a certain measure agreed to by 10 o'clock, and we let him have it passed then. The truth is the Government is not able to handle the House. That has been proved on various occasions during the last two or three months. The schism in the Cabinet is rendering the Government incapable of dealing with any problem of major importance. Measures of which the Ministers have talked glibly have not been submitted to the House, and now the Premier submits a motion so that he can take Government business at any hour. He has not been called UPOll to have a decent all-night sitting. Last Thursday the Government was hard put to keep the House going at all. Although it had the Notice Paper crammed with Bills, it simply allowed the House to dawdle with grievances. When' honorable members said they did not wish to discuss grievances, the Government put up its whip to scourge them. It scourged them well on both sides until some were inspired by interrogation to cogitate and to get.. up 'and keep ~he House going until 3 o'clock in the afternoon. There is no hope of a transport Bill being introduced now, nor of legislation affecting soldier settlement. There is no chance of a number of other important proposals being brought "down, but the Government can safely offer this pretence and throw dust in the eyes of the public by making it appear as though Ministers wanted to do something.

Mr. HOLLAND.-What about the bulk handling of wheat? .

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-That is another subject on which the Government has dallied. I have no objection to the I>remier submitting his motion. I should like him to have Rll the power possible so that he will do something, because I realize that the more he does the more he will destroy his chances of continuing to represent the people of this State.

Mr. PRENDERGAST (Footscray).-Several weeks elapsed after the elections before the House met. Then a few more weeks went by and Parliament adjourned. We have not sat a long time since then. I recollect that when Mini~terial supnorters were On the political platform they talked ahout the necessity

Income [19 OC'l'OBER, 1932.1 Tax Bill. 1721

of passing legislation to save this State from something or other, but as soon as the Government got into office, its members appealed for time in which to prepare measures that they previously said they had ready. Generally speaking, I -object to the taking away of the rights of private members, but there will be plenty -of opportunities for us to speak. The :consideration of the Estimates has not yet been completed, and honorable members 'Can also move the adjournment of the House to discuss matters of public importance. I am opposed to the abolition

()f private members' days, especially when a dilatory Government seeks to blame honorable members for delaying the business, when in truth it has no business to submit to the House.

The motion was agreed to. (At 6.19 p.m., the sitting was suspended

'Until 7.37 p.m.)

INCOME TAX BILL. The debate (adjourned from October

~) on the motion of Sir Stanley Argyl~ (Premier and Treasurer) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-This o short but important measure consists of threll -clauses. The main principles of the Bill are contained in clause 2. Each year all income tax Bill is brought in for tho purpose of enacting the tax rates to be imposed for the current financial year. New principles have been included in this measurlJ- principles which are quite apart from the recognized taxation proposals of Governments in previous years. I intend to devote my attention to-night, more particularly, to the new principles which give effect to the policy of the Government. Notwithstanding the dedaration of the Ministerial party at the last election that there was to be no increase of -taxation, every taxpayer-the 110,000 who are already paying income tax, and upwards of 300,000 who are to pay income tax as the result of the redllction of the statutory minimum-will make a greater contribution to the revenue this year than last year. Those taxpayers who have been paying unemployment .relief tax and income tax will make a larger contribution to the revenue this year than they did last year, and a large l1umber of people who have not had to

pay income tax in past years will be brought into the field because of the reduction in the amount of statutory minimum from £200 to £100. The Governmen t' s argument is that it is wise to adopt this new principle so that some responsibility will be cast on people who have not been taxpayers in the ordinary sense of the word. I intend to deal with that aspect later. In the statement made by the Treasurer, it is estimated that the revenue will receive this year approximately £1,650,000 from the 110,000 taxpayers who contributed last year in income tax £2,060,000, and, as a result of the extension of the scope of the income tax legislation to approximately 300,000 additional taxpayers who will pay about £245,000, it is estimated that the total revenue this financial year from income tax will be approximately £1,882,000, or, in round figures, £180,000 less than was received last year. I point out that, in addition to the lowering of the statutory minimum from £200 to £100, the. exemption stopped at £500 under previous legislation, but it is now proposed that the exemption will gradually disappear at amounts of taxable income from £501 to £550, and it is estimated that this concession will cost the revenue about £13,000. Under the present system a man whose taxable income is £501 did not receive the benefit of statutory exemption, but the new proposal provides that the exemption will be allowed on a gradually-reducing scale on incomes from £501 to £550 per ann urn. As a resul t of the concession there will be a loss of £13,000, which reduces the estimated increased yield of £245,000 from the new taxpayers to £232,000. The Treasurer also estimates that approximately one-half of the increased revenue will be obtained from. new taxpayers, by which I presume he means the 300,000 additional persons who have not been called upon in the past to pay income tax, but who will now be roped in.

When one examines the printed table prepared by the Treasury setting out the total amount of tax that will be paid by a married taxpayer with two children, one notices that the last column shows that in every case the combined taxes will reach an amount higher than the amount

1722 Tncome [ASSEMBLY·l Tax Bill.

paid last year. That shows that the Government will obtain a little more taxation from taxpayers despite its election declarations.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-There was no such declaration. Point out to me where in my policy speech I made such a declaration.

Mr. CAIN.-Every Nationalist candi-date opposed increased income tax.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-YOU are wrong. Mr. DREW.-Wrong about another. Mr. OAIN.-It would be interesting to

study tho speeches made on the hustings by the honorable members. It is well known that the Premier's party advocated no further reduction of wages and no increase in taxation. That was their policy. Notwithstanding that declaration, when they took up office they introduced legislation. reducing the amount of pension payable to persons receiving a pension of less than £2 per week, and by this means they saved an amount of about £30,000. The Premier stated that the Government estimated to raise an additional amount of £232 000 from the proposal contained in the 'Bill in relation to new taxpayers. Is that not an increase in the income tax ~ It seems so to me. What concerns me par-

. ticularly is that the Government proposes t? reduce the rat.es of unemployment rehef tax by 1 ° per cent. I poin tod out that that redurtion would involve an amount of about £150,000, and the Treasurer remarked that it would be a little more. In moving the motion for the second reading of the Unemployment Relief (Taxation) Bill last night, the Premier stated that he estimated that the revenue to be obtained this year from the tax would be £1,300,000. Ten per cent. of that amount is £130,000, so that that is the amount which the Government will lose by reducing the unemployment relief tax rates by 10 per cent. That amount has been taken out of the Unemployment Relief Fund and put intu general revenue.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Not so. Mr. OAIN.-It must be so, because

I do not think that the Treasurer will contend that it is possible to raise the additional income tax revenue of £232,000 without taking into consideration that amount of £130,000. The average of this tax, spread over the whole field of taxation.

will not be a large amount. The Treasurer's argument was that the Government had taken off 10 per cent. from the unemployment relief tax rates, and, therefore, could afford to introduce a super income tax at the rate of 6s. in the £100. The result is that the taxpayer is to pay a little more. He is paying more, but not sufficient to make up the £232,00'0. The Government proposes to relieve the taxation in respect of one fund, but to impose additional taxation of another character. The result of that will be that a sum of approximately £130,000 will. be taken fro,p:!. the Unemployment RelIef Fund and put into general revenue to balance the Budget.

Sir S'rANLEY .ARGYLE.-If the whole of the unemployment relief tax was taken off, it would not benefit general revenue one shap.

1\11'. CAIN.-But if the Government abolished the unemployment relief tax, and imposed in its place ordinary income taxation to a similar amount, that would benefit general revenue.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Yes. Mr. CAIN.-That is what the Govern

ment is doing. It is taking 10 per cent. from the unemployment relief ·tax, and is imposing a super-income tax of somewhat greater dimensions. I do not believe that une.mployment is diminishing at the rate at whICh the Government thinks it is. When the:y are 'published, the figures relating to reglstratlOns at the Go.vernment Labour Exchange will not be very different from those of last year.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-YOU must not forgot the refund of more than £300,000.

}III'. CAIN.-I appreciate tho fact that the Government has to consider a sum of £328,000 in the way of refund which we had to provide last year, and which has llOt to be provided this year. But the revellue from unemployment relief taxation last year was considerably more than £1,300,000, and with the amount outstanding last year's revenue approximates £2,000,000. This year, after the reduction of 10 per cent., the Government esti .. mates a revenue of £1,300,000 from this source.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-We estimate a sum of £1,800,000 with the carryover.

Mr. CAIN.-That is true. What I desire ··to point out to the House is than.

Tncom,e [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Ta~ Bill. 1723

while Ullemployment relief taxation is reduced by £130,000, income tax will be incrcased by £230,000, a difference of £100,000. It has been stated that we have reached saturation point in COll

nexion with taxation, and I should like to give very briefly the rates of tax in the respective States, with reference to iucome tax and property. I shall quote from H ansarcZ, which contains a table that was presented to the House in N 0-

vember, 1930, by the former member for Essendon, Mr. Drakeford. The figtlres are authentic, and can be vorified. Although they are perhaps somewhat 01\1, the incidence of taxation has not materIally altered in the respective States since. that time. When one looks at the table it clearly indicates that this State, more particularly so far as the big income taxpayers are concerned, is the lowest taxed State in Australia. We recall that at the Premiers' Oonference, at which the famous Premiers' plan was constructed, and which was held in another part of this building, the experts, including Professor Giblin, suggested that it was possible for two States to increase taxation hy a pproxima tely £1 per head. He referred to Western Australia and this State.. When we look at the figures and take an averag'e for Australia we see the justification for the statements made by the economists at that time. The table to which I have referred gives a comparison of taxation payahle in the various States by a married taxpayer with two children in receipt of £1,000. In Queensland he paid £60, and in New South Wales £25 18s. 4d.

Mr. LINToN.-On what income? Mr. OAIN.-On £1,000. In South

Australia on that income the taxation amounted to £44 lOs. 7 d., in Western Australia £lS 1s. Sd., in Tasmania £24 16s. 2d., and in Victoria £29 15s. 10d.

Sir STANLEY AIWYLE.-Is that State income tax?

Mr. OAIN.-Yes. Sir STANU~Y ARGYLE. - The present

taxation on an income of £1,000 works out at £36 19s., hefore allowing for wifo and children and statutory exemptions.

Mr. OAIN.-There are no statutory exemptions operating in this State on incomes above £800. On an income of £5,000, £7S0 was paid in taxation in Queensland. In New South Wales the

taxation was £506 16s. 6d., in South Australia £752 17s. Sd., in Western Australia £479 ISs. Id., ill Taslllania £314 5s. 4d., and in Victoria £210.

Mr. DREw.-A tribute to a long succession of non-Labour Governments in this State.

Mr. HOLLAN D.-Tha t IS a wise remark!

Mr. OAIN.-It is. Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The actual

taxation of this State last year in respect of an income of £5,000 was £252 12s. 6d.

:Mr. OAIN.-I know that a 7·i· per cent. increase must be taken into consideration.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-When you make a comparison with South Australia please remember that no unemployment relief taxation is included in the Vic· torian figures.

Mr. OAIN.-The figures I am quoting for South Australia are for unemployment relief tax and income tax combined, and I think that in all the other States the two taxes are separate. I am prepared to admit that if good government in this State means preserving a low rate of taxation for the man with an income of £10,000, then good government has succeeded admirably. That is due, howeyer, not to this House, or to the votes of the people, but to the institution over which the people have no power, namely, the Upper House. There we have the reason why taxation in this State has possibly remained in the invidious position shown by the figures. I wish to say to my friends op. the Ministerial side of the House, and particularly to the enthusiastic member for Albert Park, that regard should be had to the taxatiol~ imposed by the Commonwealth Parliament, where there has been a long succession of Nationalist Governments.

Mr. OOYLE.-They have kept taxation down.

Mr. OAIN.-It is interosting to See how they have clone it. On an income of £10,000 taxation in Queensland amounted to £1,680, in New South Wales to £1,646, in South Australia to £1,546, in Western Australia to £1,316, in Tasmania to £709, and in Victoria-good government I-to £453. For an income of £20,000, the taxation in Queensland was £3,480, in New South vVales £4,021, in South Australia, £3,109, in Western .L'\..ustra.lia

Income [ASSEMBLY. ] Tax Bill.

£2,650, in Tasmania-the little povertystricken State-£1,417, and in Victoria -good government again !-£921. If the honorable member for Albert Park thinks that it is good government to preserve low income taxation on people with incomes of £5,000 and more, he is entitled to that opinion. If he talks in that way in Albert Park sufficiently long, he will be conspicuous by his absence later.

Mr. 13oND.--Have you figures which will give a comparison of the rates on the lower ineomes ~

Mr. CAIN.-I could get them. It would be shown that people who earn up to £500 in this State have to pay as much ill income tax as people having the same range of incomes in any other State. If we look at The Taxpayer-the official organ of the Taxpayers Association of Victoria-we., see how the various systems work out. I have no doubt that honorable members will take the opportunity of looking at this publication. In Victoria, a flat rate is in operation on incomes of £l,f)OO and over, but, in New South Wales, a man on an income from £2,001 up to £2,500 pays 2s. 4d. in the £1, and on an income from £1,501 to £2,000, 2s. 3d. in the £1. A man with an income of £4,000 pays 2s. Sd. in the £1, and. exceeding £4,500, 2s. 9d. in the £1. Mutual life insurance companies pay 2s. in the £1. I am sure that the honorable member for Albert Park will not dispute these figures. According to The Ta.xpayer, a man on an income from £1 to £500 pays 6d. in the £1 in Victoria, and a similar rate prevails in New South Wales. In Victoria, a man receiving from £501 to £1,000 from personal exertion pays Sd. in the £1; from £1,001 to £1,500, 9d.; and from £1,501 and upwards, 10d. in t,he £l.

Mr. DREw.-How do the figures compare with New Sout.h Wales ~

Mr. OAIN.-The system is different in some of the other States. In Queensland, it IS worked by a progressive method on what is called a curve system. For instance, it is provided that where the taxable income does not exceed £4,000; the rate on each and every £1 of taxable income shall be 6d., plus as many times 6-1000d. as there are pounds in the taxable income. Only an accountant can work those details out. In every other State, and in the Com.monwealth, there is the same graduated

system, but in Victoria there are rises by steps of Id. from 6d. to 7d., 8d., 9d., and lOde in the £1. There is a flat rate on incomes of £1,500 and. over, and it is scientifically unsound. When the honorable member for Footscray was the leader of the Government in this State, he submitted a. Budget proposal to adopt a more equitable system. Whether we agree with high or low taxation, the incidence of taxation should with every justification be altered. I do not see any reason for a. man on £1,501 a year paying the same rate of taxation as the man on £5,000 or £20,000. The principle has been observed to some extent by this Government. In the Bill it is proposed that the special emergency tax shall be 6s. in the £100 until £1,000 is reached, when the tax is raised progressively to 12s~ 6d. in the £100 over £2,500. That is the principle that has been adopted in every other State. Even this House has been prepared to follow the curve system, but it is not due to this Chamber that the plan is not in full force in this State. Unfortunately there is another place where are found the teal defenders of big incomes and of the wealth of the community. The members of that place are immune from attack by the electors owing to the electoral system, and they are able to protect the wealthy people of the community. r do not know whether the Young Nationalists are any acquisi tion to the old Nationalists. J udging from the result of the Benambra byelection, the matter is open to doubt. However, if there is any radicalism left in the young men who have entered a. Tory political party, the time has come w hen they should be prepared to adopt the principle of the incidence of taxation recognized by every State in Australia, and by the Commonwealth, irrespective of Governments, and also by practically every other sensible country.

Mr. L'REw.-The United States of America has not adopted the system.

Mr. CAIN.-rhat country may be backward. No Labour party is in politics there. The Federation of Labour which functions there as the representative of the workers has decided to dissociate itself from politics, and to endeavour to attain ItS objects by hargaining with the tWO political parties, and the result is, as the honorable member says, tha& there is in force' a different type of taxa-

· Income [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 . Tax Bill.

tion from that adopted in every country where the radical section has adopted political action, and has made every effort to bring into operation a sane and sensible principle. Let us consider the taxation -on incomes from property. On an income ()f £1,000 a year from personal exertion and property, a man pays £70 in Queens-land, £32 in New South Wales, £58 in South Australia, £18 in Western Australia, £31 in Tasmania, and £41 in Victoria. In the case of incomes of about '£1,000 a year, the Victorian taxation is a little above that imposed in Western Australia and Tasmania, but it is not as high as that of the other States. When the .higher incomes are reached, a fall takeR place in the Victorian taxation. On an income of. £5,000 a year from personal exertion and property a man pays £780 in Queensland, £622 in New South Wales, .£829 in South Australia, £479 in Western Australia, £363 in Tasmania:, and .£292 in Victoria. On an income of '£10,000 from personal exertion and property, a man pays £1,680 in Queensland, £1,799 in New South Wales, £1,701 in South Australia, £1,316 in Western Australia, £800 in Tasmania, and £656 in Victoria.

Mr. MALTBy.-Does not the lower rate ()f taxation play an important part in making a greater amount of money available for industrial purposes?

Mr. CAIN.-If Victoria has all the virtues alleged by the honorable member, we may well ask how does the number of its unemployed compare with that of the <>ther States. It has been said that fifteen years of Labour rule ruined Queensland.

Mr. l\!f.ALTBY. -It is a primary produc-ing State.

Mr. CAIN.-So is Victoria. Mr. MALTBy.-No. :.M:r. CAIN.-New Zealand is a greater

primary producing country than Queensland or Victoria. In Victoria there is low taxation on big incomes and high taxation on low incomes, In Queensland there is high taxation on big incomes. The argument of the honorable member for Barwon is that high taxation destroys the fund that otherwise creates employment. That argument is used by the Nationalist JJarty. New Zealand is a primary proQucing country, and from the point of view of the honorable member, has had a capable Government. No Langs and no Theodores are there.

An HONORABLE MEMBER.-And no Cains.

Mr. CAIN.-No. Labour has not been in authority in that country.

Brigadier BOURCHIER.-Have you any figures dealing with the taxation per head?

Mr. CAIN.-I shall give them directly. Mr. MALTBY:-You are getting away

from my questIon. Mr. CAIN.-New Zealand has not suf

fered from any of the disabilities alleged to have been responsible for the troubles in Australia. It has been said: Let us get rid of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court and of the Wages Boards. Well, New Zealand has !!'ot rid of the arbitration system, and according to the Nationalist party it has had sound government, yet that country, which has a population of 300,000 less than that of Victoria, has an army of unemployed of approximately the same number as this State .

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Why? Mr. MALTBY.-It cannot get rid of its

pri~ary products. SIr STANLEY ARGYLE.-Tbat is the

answer. Mr. CAIN.-Queensland has high

taxation. The honorable member says that high taxation on big incomes-

lVIr. lVIALTBY.-Drives out capital. Mr. CAIN.-In Queensland a persoll

with an income of £20,000 a year derived from personal exertion and property pays £3,480 in taxation, but a Victorian with a similar income pays only £1,300.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Do you think there are any persons in any of the Australian States who earn £20,000 a year from personal exertion?

Mr. CAIN.-Yes, there are. Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I should like to

meet them. Would not their incomes be .derived from property ~

Mr. CAIN.-Well, let us deal with income from property. Does the honorable gentleman mean to tell me th.at there. is no company in this community which is earning- an income of £20,000 per annum?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-YOU are talking of a.company now.

Mr. CAIN.-Then I shall speak of firms such as MacRobertson's. That firm is not a company. It is run by one man. Does the honorable ~entleman mean to tell me that Sir MacPherson Robertson's income does not amount to £20,000 per

1726 Income [ASSEMBLY. \ Tax Bill.

~mnum? I venture to suggest that it does. The Premier might ask Mr. Chenoweth, who is in attendance here tonight. I suggest that there are in this State a number of individuals earning £20,000 and over, that there are a number oarning £10,000 a year, and that there are a big number earning £5,000 a year.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Where does the great proportion of the money raised by taxation come from?

Mr. ClAIN.-From persons earning the lower incomes. But there is no reason why we should not adopt progressive methods of taxation. However, I want to revert to Queensland. In th~t State, with all its high taxation, there is less uD:employment than there is in Victoria with its low taxation.

Lieut.-Ool. KNox.-That is because Queensland is not an industrial State.

Mr. CAIN.-That may be so. New Zealand is not an industrial country. It has been sanely governed by N ati9nalists. Yet there is an army of unemployed. there fo..~ great in proportion to population as there is in Victoria, if not greater.

Mr. DREw.-Unfortunately, New Zealand does not grow sugar-cane.

Mr. OAIN.-Honorable members may t1Se all these arguments.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-New Zealand has not the variety of products that Queensland has.

Mr. OAIN.-Honorable members on 1he Ministerial side have been saying that the effect of increased income tax on high incomes is to cause capital to flyaway.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.--There is no doubt ~bout that.

Mr. OAIN.-I do not call a tax of £3,480 on an income of £20,000 a high intome tax. But I do say that in Victoria We have a ridiculously low income tax 011

high incomes. When we compare the tax im-posed On a man earning £500 in this State with that imposed on men earning £10,0{)Q and £20,000 a year, we must surely see that there is a great disparity in fa\"our of the people with high incomes. So I say there is no real virtue in the Government's proposal to 'spread the field of ta.xation so as to bring in all these n'ew people on low incomes. The Government is proposing to take £130,000 out of the pockets of the wage-earners of this community in the shape of. a super-tax. If that s-u-m is not taken from the wage-earne:rs

it will be spent on the 'everyday requirements of life. Noone can dispute that. The effect win be the same as in the case of the Oommonwealth Government taking 2s. 6d. away each week from the old-age pensioners. It will mean that the 2s. 6d. cannot be spent, as it has been. The Oommon'wealth Government may argue that it is saving a large sum by reducing the old-age pension to 15s., but the effect will be actually to take £1,000,000 out of immediate circulation.- On the other hand, if such a sum were taken from the big income-earners, it would not be taken directly from their pockets; it would not be taken from the money that they have in hand to buy the necessities of life, but it would be taken out of their hank accounts. The sum of £1,000,000 is to be taken from the small individual possesbions of aged pensioners, who spend e'lery sixpence they receive, and often spend it before they receive it. If by some other p~ocess that amount of £1,000,000 were collected from the highly-paid. people in the community, it would not be taken from the sources on which they draw to purchase their' every day requirements. The effect might be to deprive a man of' an opportunity of purchasing a motor car.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-And to make him employ less labou~.

Mr. OAIN.-As for the aspect of its effect upon the labour market, the vast amount of employment is provided by the production of the necessary commodities of the people, and no~ so much by the production of expensive motor cars and luxuries of that sort.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-! thought that machinery was doing 1111 the work now.

l\fr. OAIN.-Machines are t~king much work away from the wage-earners, but they are not yet milking all the cows and killing all the sheep. There are still some slaughtermen about to spend their wages on necessru"y commodities,. Members on the Ministerial side of the Honse are inclined to attach too much imp.oxtance to the matter Gf taxation. There is a reasonable attitude which may be taken. The incidence of taxation in some of the States may be too high, but there is a middle course. The income tax has this virtue-that nobody pays it unless he has an income.

Income .[19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Tax Bill. 1727

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.--: Yes, it has to be paid on last year's income.

Mr. CAIN.-Let us examine the rates of taxation in the yarious States. In . N ew South Wales, the average rate per head of population is £14 8s. 6d.; in Victoria, it.is £12 8s. lld.; in Queensland, it is £1.4 9s. 7 d.; in South Australia, it is £15 17s. 6d.; and in Western Australia, it is £12 8s. 3d.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Are those figures in respect of the total taxation from all sources, including State, Federal, and municipal ~

Mr. CAIN.-I ·would not say that they include municipal taxation.

Sir STANJ~EY ARGYLE.-I make the total taxation per head in Victoria from all sources £14 odd. The amount is within a few shillings of the average rate in Great Britain.

Mr. CAIN.-The fact is that the taxation per head in this State is considerably less than in any of the other States except Western Australia. That matter was stressed at the Premiers' Conference in Melbourne last year by the economists. The average rate of taxation per head of the population of the whole of the Commonwealth is £13 19s. 11d. That is considerably more than £1 higher than the average rate for Victoria.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-If we raised another £1 a head from the present Victorian taxpayers we would collect only £110,000.

Mr. CAIN.-My figures are on the basis of the average per head of tLe population, and not the present taxpayers.

Mr. MALTBY.-Are you lamenting that our taxation is lower than in other States ~ Can you not rejoice ~

~1:r. CAIN.-I am lamenting. I am not lamenting over the poor people, but exclusively over the fact that the taxation . is so light, relatively, on persons earmng over £1,000 a year. If the honorable member for Barwon is rejoicing o'Ver the fact that taxation in Victoria is low on persons in receipt of £20,000 a year, I am sorry for him.

Mr. MALTBY.-YOU cannot put t.~lOse words into my mouth.

~{r. ·CAIN.-If the honorable member is rejoicing that he "has been able to keep taxation on the big incomes down to a low level with a view to exploitin~ the POOT people, he may do so. I would rejoice if I had the opportunity to

alter the illcidence of taxation in Victoria along the progressive lines which have been adopted in the Commonwealth, in most of the other States, and ill most of the countries of the world .

Sir STA~LEY ARGYLE.-By imposing a 10 per cent. super tax?

Mr. CAIN.-I do not mind how it is done so long as the incidence of taxation is fair. I have presented figures to emphasize that all the talk about our having reached saturation point in this State is not altogether a fact. It is true that a man whose income is £500 a year is being called upon to pay approximately the same income tax as others who are earning the same amount elsewhere in Australia. A man with a wife and two children who is earning £400 a year is required to pay in Federal income tax £1 ls. Bd., whilst the State tax is £2 lOs. 10d.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The present tax is £1 6s. 10d.

Mr. CAIN.-I am quoting from the Premier's own figures. That amount of £2 lOs. 10d. is based on the proposals in this Bill.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-You are taking the proposal under the Bill?

}Ir. OAIN.-Yes. On a personal exertion income of £500 the present Oommonwealth income tax is £4 2s. 7d., and the present State income tax £4 Os. 7 d. The State income tax on an income of £500 under this proposal will be £5 lOs. 7 d. If we take an income of £600 the present Commonwealth tax is £8 7s., and the State income tax £6 14s. 4d. The State income tax, including the proposed emergency tax, will be £8 lOs. 4d. When we get to an income of £800, the present Commonwealth income tax is £20 6s., and the present State income tax £21 Is. The State income tax will be increased to £23 9s. A man on an income of £1,000 a year pays Commonwealth income tax of £32 6s. 10d., and State income tax £36 19s. Under the proposed taxation he will pay £39 l~s. When we get up to an income of £10,000, the Commonwealth income tax is £2,451 1s. 10d., and the State income tax only £543 2s. 1d. Under the Govern· ment's propos~l the income tax on this huge income will be £605 128. 1d. Taxation could be made higher on the big in-comes, but should not be increased OU"

small incomes.

1728 Income [ASSEMBLY.] . Tax Bill.

The party to which I belong intend to oppose the proposal to extend the field of taxation over a large .number of small taxpayers. It has long been the established practice to allow exemptions. The Government's proposal is to impose the super-tax on all persons earning £100 and over. We shall fight that proposal at every stage. The Government wish to rope in 300,000 people who are not at present paying income tax. They are asking those people who are least able to bear taxation to carry the burden. I hope tha t the Government will agree to a modincation of their proposal. If the burden is to be increased, it should be increased on people with large incomes, as has been done in every other State in Australia.

The motion was agreed to. The ·Bill was read a second time, and

committed. Clause 1 was agreed to. Clause 2-(Declaration of rates of

duties of income tax (other than unemployme.nt relief tax) for the year ending 30th June, 1933).

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer).-I should like to point out that the Bill has only three clauses in it. Clause 2 contains a lot of matter, but up to the end of paragraph (f) there is no new matter. We have merely a re-enact-ment of the existing tax up to that point.

Yr. YCKENZIE.-Without any alteration at all?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.- Yes. Paragraph (g) of clause 2 is the paragraph in which the emergency tax is first mentioned. Following on paragraph (g) are provisions dealing with the emergency tax. If honorable members will recollect that, it will save a lot of discussion on these paragraphs. Paragraph (a) reenacts the existing rates on all income derived by any person from personal exertion. Paragraph (b) re-enacts the existing rates on all income derived by any person from the produce of property. Paragraph (c) provides for the existing super-tax on incomes of over £800 which was imposed in 1924,' and for increasing the basic rates by certain percentages at various stages. Paragraph (d) reenacts the existing rate of tax on companies. Paragraph (e) makes the usual special provision for mutual life assurance companies. Paragraph (f) sets out

the further additional tax, whi~h was imposed last year, of 7-1 per cent. on the then existing rates of tax.

Mr. DIFFEY.-Up to the end of that paragraph we have merely a re-enactment?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-We have a re-enactment and nothing else. Paragraph (q) contains the special tax provisions. It is divided into two parts·. The first part sets out the rates of tax, which are very small indeed, commencing at a rate of 6s. per £100 for all incomes under £1,000, and rising by various stages until the rate is 12s. 6d. per £10() for incomes of £2,500 and over. The second portion of the paragraph defines "taxable income," and provides for the disallowance of the statutory exemption, concessional deductions, &c. The" taxable income" for the purpose of this special tax will be almost identical with the taxable income for the unemployment relief tax. The deductions that are permi tted in regard to the ordinary income taxation are not allowed under the unemployment relief tax, and are 110t allowed in this special tax. For the purposes of paragraph (g) "taxable income" means the amount of assessable income (whether from personal exertion or the produce of property or both) remaining after the deductions allowed under sections 23, 28, 30, 31, 32, 37, and 38 of tho principal Act. I will explain what those deductions are. Section 23 allows deductions for losses and outgoings incurred in gaining or producing the assessable income, and gifts to charities of £5 and over. ·Section 28 allows deductions for calls to a company in liquidation. Under section 30 the loss in one business is allowed as against the profits in another where the taxpayer carries on more than one trade. Section 31 allows as a deduction payments by an employer to a pension fund for his employees. Under section 32 a loss in business is allowed against income from property. Section 37 allows a deduction of cost of sustenance of employees, and section 38 J'elates to deductions in respect of depreciation of machinery. These deductions are allowed, but certain exemptions under section 21 of the principal Act, para.,. graphs (e) and (j), are removed. Those

Income [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Tax Bill. 1729

exemptions are dividends from. companies, and the general exempt~on of £200. An individual who receIves a dividend must pay this special taxation. The general exemption of £200 is removed and £100 substituted. Deductions not allowed include rebate of tax on farm income allowance for wife, allowance for children, allowance for medical and funeral expenses, allowance for life insurance premiums, concessional. dedu~tions allowed first from property Income, general exemption allowed first from property income, deductions allowable against personal exertion or property as Commissioner thinks, payments to superannuation fund, and exemption of beneficiary in trust estate of interest from State Savings Bank stock. All those deductions are not allowed as such for the purposes of the special tax.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-No, but the emergency tax is being introduced to meet a state of emergency.

Mr. FAIRlIAIRN (Warrnambool).-I desire first to refer to. the wide margin between the rates of income tax on personal exertion incomes and property incomes. Every section of the, H?use, I should think, is in agreement wIth the view that what is needed more than anything else at the present time is a supply of cheap money for the use of those who are engaged in primary and secondary industries. One of the best ways of encouraging the supply of cheap money is to reduce the wide margin between tl.e rate of tax on person~l exertion and the rate of tax on property incomes. In almost every .case the rate of tax OIl

income derived from property is double

Mr. MONcuR.-That is the tax~

that on personal exertion income, and I emergency consider that it would be a very wise

policy for the State Government and the Commonwealth Government to take the necessary action to reduce the margin. I can see no reason why there should be such a difference between the rates tlf

tax on the two forms of income. P03-

sibly, the original idea was ~o encouru6e people to put money to actIVe use, but sl!rely money is being put to active use when it is expended by a person who lW8

horrowed it from somebody else. I do Tlot wish to embarrass the Government at a time like this, when it needs crery penny that it can raise by ~axation, by moving an amendment reducmg the rate of tux on property incomes, but I think that the Premier would do a great service to those who wish to borrow money if he gave an undertaking that the Go'vernment would take steps, next year, to reduce the rate of tax on property incomes. Anyone can realize what a!l incentive it would be to the farmer or the man in business who borrows money. The other point on which I desire to touch relates to the exemption granteJ in the case of donations to charitable objects. Probably the most effiqient cb8ritahle organization in this State is .the Salvation Army. At the present time there is no organization doing more than the army to reli~ve those people who are in distress, and it is a great pity that persons s~ould be disc~uraped. from making donations to that mstltutlOn because

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Yes. Mr. MONcuR.-Why is it called an

emergency tax? Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Because it

has been introduced to meet the state of financial emergency. It may be removed next year or when the financial circumstances of the State permit. In this state of emergency the ordinary deductions are not to be allowed for the purposes of the special tax but it is not conceivable that that state' of affairs will remain inde'finitely.

Mr. MONcuR.-The exemptions will be allowed for the purposes of ordinary income tax?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Yes. That portion of the clause, from paragraph (g) onwards relates only to the emergency tax. Th~ paragraphs preceding paragr~ph (g) provide for re-enactment of the eXI~tbig provisions. Honorable members wIll realize, of course, that money expe~ded in obtaining income cannot be taken Into consideration for the purposes of the special tax or income tax, because if that money were not expended there ",,:ould. be no income. The emergency tax IS beIng introduced because the Government considers that it is nece~sary to meet the st.ate of financial emergency by an emergency tax.

M'r. MONCUR.-You are not admitting the principle that everybody should. be taxed in normal times ~ .

1730 Inc(Jme [ASSEMBLY.] Tax Bill.

they are :tlot allowed an exemption from income tax on their donations.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I think they are exempted.

Mr. FAIRBAIRN.-A donatiOli iR exempted if it is given to the army directly for the purpose of assisting in the relief of distress. If the donation is made to the general fund of the Salvation Army it is not allowed as an exemption.

Sir HAROLD LUXToN.-Get over. the difficulty by putting it through the Lord Mayor's fund.

Mr. FAIRBAIRN.-I do not know why a charitably-minded person should have to do that. With due respect to the present Ilord Mayor, and past Lord Mayors, I desireio express the opinion that there' is no charitable organizatio.n which expends money so efficiently as does the Salvation Army. Money donated to the genera.l fund of the army should be treated in the same way for income tax exemption as amount's donated expressly for the purpose of relieving distress. I should like the Premier to consider favor~bly an amendment to the effect that all moneys donated to the Salvation Army, no matter for what purpose, should be allowed as exemptions.

Lieut.-Col. KNOX ( Upper Yarra).I take it that this measure imposes on property incomes a rate of tax which is practically double the amount levied on personal exertion incomes.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That provision is contained in existing legislation, and this Bill merely re-enacts it.

Lieut.-Col. KNOX.-Two or three years ago I voiced a protest in relation to this matter, and I shall reiterate it. I suppose the principle is sound that people who do not labour to produce income should be taxed at a higher rate than those who obtain their incomes by personal exertion, but there are certain anomalies in the system in the case of small incomes derived from property. I may mention that I brought thIS! matter under the notice of the previous Government. :Mention of the word "property" conjures up in some people's mind the possession of great wealth, and the person who derives income from property is often re~rded as a bloated millionaire, and fair ~e for the taxation authorities. Thousands of small incomes are derived from the investments of worthy citizens

who saved money and, invested it wisely. Since those citizens died, their widows and families have been in receipt of a small income from the investments. In many cases the annual income is only £200, £300~ or £400, and many widows depend on these small returns for their livelihood. These women, who have been good wives and mothers, cannot work in their old a:ge, and they are left entirp,1y dependent on the proceeds of their husbands' estates, which were built up by careful investment of savings. These women have no chance of augmenting their small incomes, and they have no other means of livelihood. Yet they ara charged double the rate of income tax compared with the rate on personal exertion incomes. There is something very wrong.

Mr. LINToN.-They have been thrifty. Lieut.-Col. KNOX.-I am instancing

the case of a widow whose husband left her money to be invested in certain securities from which she derives a little income. We impose upon her double the taxation that we do on a man who is in perfect health and earning in a good job a similar income by personal exertion. Like the I last honorable member to speak, I do not desire that the Government should be embarrassed in a time of stress, but I hope that the Government and Parliament as a whole will keep this matter in mind, and that if Treasurers are inclined to impose this taxation my protest will be taken into consideration and the anomaly will be removed. I desire to know whether subclause (2) of clause 2, which is annotated thus :-" Rates of duties of income tax when total amount of income from personal exertion and property exceeds £500 "--contains a new provision.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-It is the existing provision for deciding the rates when income is received from two sources and it is not new. '

Mr. CAIN (N01·thcote). - The Treasurer has gone to some trouble to try to explain to honOI'able members the effect of special. taxat~on and the reasons why no deductIOns WIll be made. I know this is a difficult problem for the Government because at the last election they and thei: supporters promised the community that there would be no increase in taxation. The exemptions could not be altered in

Income [19 OCTOBER, 19'32.1 Tax Bill. 11-31

the way that wag proposed without affecting every taxpayer receiving between £200 and £800 a year. Consequently the Government put the ta..'{ation officers to work to formulate a new proposal, and they evolved a super tax, or an emergency tax, as it has been called. The Treasurer has told us that it is modelled on the unemployment relief tax, and I am more convinced than ever that all that will be done by this legislation will be to take £130,000 from unemployment relief taxation and put it into general revenue. As one honorable member has interjected, it amounts to that.

Mr. COYLE.-It is to balance the Budget.

Mr. OArN.-All that the Treasurer has told us is that no deduction will be allowed under this part of the legislation except in the case of a person who, for instance, has a horse and am'ay 01' a lorry and is earning money. He has to be allowed deductions for his expenditure in earning that money. But there will be no deductions for the man who spent £150 at the last election either to retain or obtain a seat.

Mr. LrNTON.-.A_ssuming that he did spend £150, if his income was at a certain rate it would cost him about lOs. in extra taxation.

Mr. OAIN.-The honorable member is suggesting that in certain circumstances the cost would be 6s. for every £100. That is an easy way to argue the matter. I remember the honorable member originally proposed a wages stamp tax of Id. in the £1. It was said that that would provide £1,000,000 which the people would never miss. In the ordinary course of things, this emergency income taxation proposal allows no exemptions. No exemption will be allowed to the -ordinary taxpayer for wife and children) and contributions to charity.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Contributions of £5 or more to charity are taken into account.

Mr. OAIN.-I think that possibly that was allowed in respect of unemployment relief taxation also.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Yes. Mr. CAIN.-I did not know that thau

allowance was included. At any rate, all other exemptions have disappeared. As the Treasurer has stated, the impor-

taut part of the Bill commenoes in parAgraph (g) of sub-clause (1) of clause :2, which provides, inter aZi~

In the case of any person (not being a eom· pany) whose taxable income within the mea;ning of this paragraph exceeds £100, there shall be payable (and whether or not in bis case there is also payable the tax, additional tax, and further additional tax, 0'1' any of them chargeable unde!' the preceding provisions of this section) a special tax on the whole of tlle said taxable income of such per: son as hereinafter provided, that is to' say:-

(i) Where the taxable income does not exexceed £1,000-

the rate .per £100 payable on the taxable income shall be 6s.

(ii) Where the taxabJe income exceeds £1,000 but does not exceed £1,250-

the rate per £1{)0 payable on the taxable income shall be '76.

The prmrision continues to set out the rates per £100 until the taxable income reaches £2,500. I should like to move for the deletion of paragraph (g) so far as it includes incomes up to a certain level.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-You want to delete the whole of the emergency tax.

Mr. OlUN.-Yes. The only other method -would be to omit" £100" where it is first mentioned in paragraph (g) and insert in lieu thereof "£200." That would meet the situation from my poillt of view. I move-

That in line 3 of paragraph (g) "£100" be omitted with the view of inserting "£200 ".

Mr. COYLE.-Is there anything left in the Bill?

Mr. CAIN.-Yes. The honorahle member is left in. After what he saId last night he should be. He is such a candid critic of the Government. I am sure that the Government will derive some pleasure in bringing some honorable members within the scope of its taxation. T'hat amendment will have the effect of increasing the limit at which the special taxation can be imposed from £100 to £200. The men with incomes of £200 and over will pay the emergency tax, and it will place the worker in a much more advantageous position thim he otherwise would be. What the effect on the finances will be I am not able to indicate.

Sir STANLEY .dRGYLE.-Nor am I! Mr. OAIN.-If the amendment is

agreed to, I intend to m-ove to have a pro· gressive increase in taxation on the higher incomes so as to make up any

1732 I'Mome [ASSEMBLY.] Tax Bill.

deficiency that may be incurred. The rate per £100 payable on a taxable income which exceeds £1,000 but does not exceed £1,250 is set out as 7s. I suggest that we make it 9s. or lOs. The Government could discuss the proposal with its experts. I do not wish to deprive the Government of revenue. I am concerned about getting the progressive principle in taxation. We have failed in this State to do so, and have adopted from time to time a more or less flat rate. The only progressive tax has been that for unemployment relief. I think the progressive principle ceases at £2,500. It ceases with the ordinary Victorian income tax at £1,500. On incomes from £1,501 and upwards, the rate is the same. I wish to relieve men on incomes between £100 and £200. A t no stage will the tax be high. I am satisfied that with a small increase from £200, we can obtain the same revenue.

Sir ST,ANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Trcasurer).-I cannot possibly accept the amendment, because to do so would destroy the principle which is underlying t,he alteration in the Income Tax Act. The fact that only 110,000, out of more than 1,000,000 adults in this State, are payiI1g any form of income tax except unemployment relief tax is one that the Government thinks cannot be allowed to continue. .A.II people enjoy some benefits from government. Provided they are not asked to take too great a burden on their shoulders, it seems the right policy that all should contribute something.

Mr. CAIN.-Either in an emergency, or other·wise?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I am dealing with the state of emergency. If the State carries out the principles of my Budget it will still be £900,000 short in its revenue. Some people seem to think that if we carry this year's proposals, we shall have a balanced Budget, but we shall be nearly £~,OOO,OOO short.

Mr. MONCUR.-Why do you call it an emergency tax?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-It is a serious thing for the State to be dependent on somebody else t·o carrv on. We are carrying on by the grace of the Commonwealth Bank and the associated banks. That is It nice position for the State to be in. Until we get clear of that position, a state of emergency exists.

Mr. MONCUR.-YOU say that every citfzen should subscribe to the cost of government.

Sir STANLEY ARG YLE.-I do not say that I would start at this level in normal conditions. In a state of emergency everybody has to put his shoulder to the wheel. A man who has a wife and children and is earning £104 a year will be· expected to pay 6s. 3d. under this tax. He will pay £1 11s. 7d. under the unemployment relief tax, or a total of £1 17s. 10d. for all taxes. He is not taxed by the Commonwealth. Actually the increase that he will pay will be 2s. 9d.

Mr. BOND.-YOU admit that he has very little left.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-A man earning £2 a week is in a position to pay something.

Mr. BOND.-I do not know how he can pay one penny.

An HONORABLE MEMBER.-He will spend more in smokes.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.r-Such a man is actually paying £1 15s. Id. under the unempl@yment relief scheme, and I ask him to pay 2s. 9d. more.

Mr. CAIN.-You ask him to give something to the Consolidated Revenue.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The Consolidated Revenue gets 6s. 3d. from this man. The amendment destroys the whole principle on which we are trying to work.

Mr. BOND (Port Fairy and Glenelg). -I regret that the Treasurer has seen fit to indicate that he cannot accept the amendment. He remarked that the amendment destroyed the underlying principle . of the Bill. Surely the Treasurer will not admit that the principle of the ~lleasure is to levy taxation on the lower Incomes.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE".-The principle is to spread the burden of the maintenance of the State.

Mr. BOND.-A number of people have said they agree with the principle that the cost of government should be spread as widely as possible over all sections of the community. I ask, are not all persons, by means of indirect taxation, already contributing very materially to the cost of government?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-N ot to the COf:t cf this Government.


Mr. BOND.-They are contributing to the cost of government, whether it is Commonwealth or State. Not a person can escape taxati9n. Take the Customs duties -they are all passed on to the people, and so not a man esc a pes his financial responsibility to the State. This Parliament should not ask persons on very meagre incomes to contribute to the cost ()f government in the form of direct taxation. This Government asks the worker to contribute taxation in the form of :stamp duty on his wages. Other governmental economies are placing increased 'burdens on such people. When I say that., I have in mind the education reforms contemplated by the Government. This Government is transferring to the small income-earner a very severe burden, although other persons in receipt of higher incomes are in a position to meet the obligations necessary to enable the Government to carryon. I do not wish to embarrass the Government in its ·~rffO)·t3 -to obtain more revenue. I realize that certain financial responsibilities must be met, but they could be met by asking those who can afford to pay to do so.

Mr. LINTON (Boroondara). - There nas been considerable criticism of certain -€conomies proposed by the Government. Dne wonders how the Gover~ment will maintain the essential social services of the State if it does not make provision to 'meet the expenses. The Income Tax Bill .does not make adequate provision to cover the cost of these social services. The estimated revenue to be derived from the Income Tax Bill is £1,982,000, but the cost ,.of the principal social services for this .:rear is estimated to be as follows:~

Education .. Police, charities, and hospitals Labour Department :Public Health

£2,297,477 1,674,62;;

27,O~1J 128,443

£4,127,631

.As the estimated amount of income tax is ~1,982,000, there remains £2,145,631, to -be collected from somewhere. The Trea:surer has no fairy wand, but he has to jind that money, and it is a big sum. Two years ago, 154,000 people paid taxa

-tion, but last year only approximately '110,000 paid taxation. I listened with :great interest to the well-reasoned sper('h .aelivered by the hono-rable member for :N orthcote, but I wondered whether he

was enunciating the policy of his party. Did he express the view of all the honornble members sitting behind him? I am justified in quoting from a speech delivered by the honorable member for W onthaggi on the 6th of October of last year, when speaking on the Hogan Government's Income Tax Bill. On that occasion he said:-

The suggestion of the Leader of the Opposition that the field of taxation should be extended is worthy of consideration, because then the burden would fall less heavily on the few than it does now. Exemptions could be provided for ldw-paid workers with dependants. I feel that single men earning good wages, who do not pay tax now, should be brought. within the field of income taxation. It is said that there should' be no taxation without representation. If that doctrine is sound representation in Parliament should be accompanied by taxation. There is plenty of logic and equity in the argument of the Leader of the Opposition, and I think it is time that the Taxation Office examined the question of those members of the community who are having a good time, and many of whom, to my knowledge, are getting off scot-free from taxation. I am bold enough to express the opinion that the worker would not mind being brought into the field of income taxation. He does not want anything for nothing. The willingness with which he shouldered the stamp tax on wages is palpable evidepce that he is prepared t·o shoulder his share of taxation to enable· the government of the country to be carried on. My employe€s did not resent the introduction of the stamp tax on wages, and when I indicated that it was likely to be increased the consensus of opinion amongst them was that they were fortunate to be in a job, and they did not mind paying a small tax to help the fellow who was out of a job. The same principle would apply in relation to income taxation.

That speech was delivered a little more than one year ago, and those remarks of the h<:>llorable member for Wonthaggi apply to this Bill; for it is not intended to penalize people wilfully, but only to ask people who are working in these times to c.ontribute to the upkeep of the State and its essential social activities. We have to consider very carefully the ability of the people to pay. The best index to which we could turn to ascertain the ability of the people to pay is to be found in the annual report of the State Savings Bank Commissioners. I propose to read a few extracts from the last report-for the year ended the 30th of June, 1932. On page 4 there will be found particulars of the total amount at credit of the depositors at the 30th of June, 1931. That amount is £51,138,000 approximately. The deposits received during the year

1734: . Income [ASSEMBLY.] Tax Bill.

amounted, in round figures, to £37,{)85,000. Withdrawals during the year totalled £37,461,000, and the balance to de-positors at the 30th of June last was £58]581,000. The total number of deposItors at the 30th of .J une last was 1,253,434, whilst the number of depositors at the 30th of June, 1931, was 1,250,873 -an inerease for the year of 2,561. The report proceeds to show the growth in the number of depositors and the amount at their credit in three periods of ten years, as follows :--

1912 641,736 £19,662,466 1922 970,431 46,726,918 1932 1,253,434 58,581,403

Those are not bad fi.gures for a State having a population of less than 2,000,OO() persons. The State Savings Bank Oommissiolll~rs follow those figures with a very iD1Portant statement-

11he Bank's long and prosperous career, oovering 91 years, has secured for it a firm footing in every. centre of population in Victoria, as shown in succeeding pages of this report, and its efforts to inculcate hab~ts ?f thrift ha,ve had fruitful results. DepOSIts 1D brR.nches in industrial localities, some of which arp ment.ioned below, serve to show how wagee~rners have responded to the advice, unceasingly tend~red to save portioJl of their income for 'a reserve against their needs in times of adversity :-

Metro},)olitan Pistricts.

Fit.zroy and Collingwood Brunswick Prahr*"n

Amount at Credit of Depositors at 30th June,

1932. . .. £2,421,589

South and Port Mel1:iourpe N oriihcote and Preston North Melbourne and Ken-

2,022,291 1,786,209 1,598,603 1,490,227

sington Footscray Richmond

Country Districts.

1,302,115 1,257,4&~ 1,128,483

Geelong 1,847,842 Ballarat 1,796,885 Bendigo 1,295,800

And then the Commissioners show, in anothe-r nortion of their report, the numbers of depositors in those centres. Those figures are also well worth perusal. In some instances the total number of deE,9sitors in those areas exceeds the number of people on the electoral roll for the districts concerned. These figures do not include the Savings Bank accounts of school children. I emphasize the posi-tion disclosed in this report, because, in the matter of spreading the income tax over a wider field for emergency purposes,

Mr. Linton.

we must take into consideration the aspect of the ability of the people to pay. It has been pointed out to honorable members that the taxation increase asked for· nnder the Bill approximates 28. 9d. in the case of a person in receipt of £104 a year, 48. Id. in respect of those receiving £156 a year, 5s. 6d. in cOllnexion with earnings up to £208 "a year, and 6s. 10d. in the case of people whose salaries amount to £2uO a year. Those sums are not too much to ask in these times from people who are in work, and a big proportion of whom possess these large amounts wruch are disclosed in the report of the State Savings Bank Commissioners.

Mr. CAIN 1 (N orthcote ).-1 t is true, as the honorable member for Boroondara. has said, that this taxation measure is based on the capacity of the people to pay. Perhaps I should say that that is the basis on which the Government is working. The interesting thing about this legislation is that there is to be no option so far as the poor worker is concerned. He must pay.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-So must everybodyelse.

Mr. CAIN.-But the poor worker must pay in advance. By the end of February, in the course of the financial year, every wage-earn~ in this community who is earning up to and including £5 a week will have paid in the total amount of his tax for the wholle year. But by that same date, namely, the end of February, not 5 per cent. of the assessments for the tnxpayers in the community will have been issued. The worker is to be called upon to contribute the whole of the tax due by him in advance. The Government will have the use of his money. That is where the savings are to come in for the Government. Another taxpayer whose salary is £1,000 per annum win have cOJltl'ihuted only 5 per cent. of his income tax if he pays over the whole of the financial year. That comparison is very unfair to the man on the low mark. I want to emphasize that my amendment will not in any way destroy this legislation. I SllggBst that, instead of the Government starting to impose the s'pecial tax at £100 of taxable income, the start should he made at £200. If that is agreed to, I shall suggest that, in respect of higher incomes, an increase should begin on taxable incomes of £500, and become progressively heavier


up to incomes of £2,500 or more. If that is done, the Treasurer will be able to raise just as much money as he expects to do under the Bill as it has been drafted; and, as the honorable member for Boroondara has pointed out, the Treasurer will be getting the tax from the people whose capacity to pay it is relatively much greater than that of a man whose taxable income is £104. Many taxpayers, earning between £100 and £200 of taxable income, unfortunately entered into obligations when the values of property were much higher than they are to-day. Thousands of working men undertook the obligation of buying homes at from £700 to £800. Those obligations remain, though wages have been reduced from 30 to 35 per cent. A man whose income is under £200 is much less able to pay the tax than is a man whose earnings are between £200 and £300 a year. the amendment is a very reasonable one. I thought that the Premier believed in the principle of no representation without taxation. Now it seems he only believes in it for emergency purposes.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I aid not offe1' an opinion on that.

Mr. CAIN.-My opinion is that the Government will continue this e~ergency taxation. The present mi:qimum is sufficiently low.

An HONORABLE MEMBER.-You do not agree with the honorable ~ember for Wonthaggi.

Mr. CAIN.-The honorable member for W onthaggi wants exemptions for men with wives aud families, but is of opinion that single men might. be called upon to contribute more. There is nothing contradictory in his argument of twelve months ago and my argument to·-night. I do not believe that the poorly-paid worker can stand up to more taxation. It is true that he may have a small banking account, but heavy demands are made upon that, and anyway the average amount of deposits in the State Savings Bank is only £60 or £70. 1 know men who had saved £200 or £300, and have had to spend it during the last two or three years in order to sustain life. The Treasurer is not correct in saying that if the minimum is not brought down to £100 his whole scheme will he upset. It would simply mean that

we should ha ve a better incidence of taxation.

Mr. LIN'l.'ON.-Your Government regarded £100 as a taxable income.

Mr. CAIN.-The IIogan Government introduced the unemployment relief tax. The average working man is quite willing to contribute towards the relief of unem· ployment. The Government are taking £130,000 from unemployment relief taxation and are paying it into general revenue. _

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That is not so. Mr. CAIN.-That is the effect of it.

The working man's tax, instead of going into the Unemployment Relief Fund, out of which he might get something, is going into general revenue. The Government are interfering with principles that have been fought for over half a century. Their first interference was with the miners' phthisis fund. A gratuity of £6 a quarter was allo·wed to the miners suffering from this dreadful complaint. The Government took 50 per cent. off the amount allowed for that purpose, thus reducing the amount to £3 a quarter. The saving thus effected was £18,000. They then imposed a tax on children attending picture. shows and football matches. Their next proposal was to abolish scholarships. The scholarship system has been built up over many ye.ars, and has been a source of great encouragement to many brainy young m~n and women. The next proposal was to charge school fees. This hit workingclass people who aspire to give their children a petter chance in life than they had themselves. Those are a few of the things done by this Government in the effort to save mon~.

Mr. FRosT.-There was also the superannuation !cut.

Mr. LINToN.-The Hogan Government reduced pensions and wages, and other things last year.

Mr. Cl~ .. IN.-We did not reduc~ pen· sions of less than £2 a week, nor wages of less than £4 a week. This Government comes along and makes a saving of £30,000 on pensions. The whole effort of the Government, as shown by the Budget, is to make the poorer sections of the community make a greater sacrifice than the better-to-do sections. The super-tax will, for the most part, hurt people who earn less tha.n £4 a week.

1736 Irwome [ASSEMBLY . .! Tax Bill.

When we make a comparison of taxes payable by a married taxpayer with two children in this State and in the Commonwealth sphere and in other States, we cannot but regard the position as alarming. I have already shown that a man earning £10,000 a year will pay only £605 12s. ld. State 'income tax as against his payment of £2,451 ls. 10d. Federal income tax.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-The man on £10,000 a year is almost an extinct animal. '

Mr. CAIN.-There are a few. In 1930 there were, in Victoria, 71 persons and 305· companies who earned incomes of more than £7,000 a year, and there are;, many Dersons with incomes of £3,000, £4,000;, and £5,000 a year. Those persons pay considerably less income tax in the State sphere ~han they do in the Commonwealth sphere.

~ Mr. MANIFOLD.-They have to pay both taxes.

Mr. CAIN.-Yes, but the incidence of the State tax is distinctly unjust. The CommQnwealth system of taxation is more scientific.

Sir STAN.LEY ARGYLE.-Would you call the 10 per cent. super-tax scientifi'c ~

Mr. CAIN.-I was not referring to that. We have heard· a lot about equality of sacrifice, but what equality of sacrifice is there in interfering with social services that have been built up over many years? The man on an income of £700 or £800 is certainly not extinct. I should like to say for the benefit of the honorable member for Oakleigh and those who think that taxation is high in this State, that they should take the man on an income of £800 a year. The man receiving an income of £800 will pay £16 5s. 10d. If I received that amount of income I would rather pay a 50 per cent. increase in the tax than that my unfortunate comrades receiving £104 per annum should have to pay taxation on their small income.

Mr. McLACHLAN (G'i,ppsla.nd North). -The present depression followed a period of abnormal and what might be termed fictitious prosperity, . extending over a long period, when practically everybody-Iand-holders, business people, and working people-had plenty of money. Millions of pounds were ex-

pended by Governments for developmental purposes, and millions for purposes that were not developmental, and we know nowthat a great deal of that money was used. in such a way as to leave a heavy burden. on the people of Australia. I consider' that it is a fair principle that in normal times all citizens should pay their fair· share towards the government of the country. I have always held that belief. The present is an abnormal period, and thepeople who are to be brought into the field of income taxation by this Bin are suffering more than any other section of the· community. That is a matter we should take into consideration. The Premiers" plan was devised for the financial rehabilitation of Australia. At that time it was considered that there should be in powerin the Commonwealth sphere and in the· States Governments representing all parties. We have not got that condition in this State. The dut.y of initiating action. under the Premiers' plan for the rehabilitation of Victoria devolved on the previousPremier. When the memorable Premiers) Conference which formulated the Premiers' plan discussed the whole situation) no mention was made of extending the. income tax to the poorer sections of thecommunity. These people have had their wages reduced, and they have felt thereduction. They have been required to' pay unemployment relief tax, and they pay it willingly. That was an additional burden cast on them. Now another burden is to be inflicted on them, because they are to be required to pay income tax. I do not consider that that is fair in these· abnormal times. I should be in favour of it if times were normal, and when normal conditions are restored I shall support a. move in that direction if I am still a: member of this House. Since the present. Government came into power it has imposed additional burdens on the poorp,r'"' sections of the community, and there is fr.

threat that another burden is to be imposed by the raising of high school fees,. concerning which there is a great outcry throughout the State. The people who.· send their children to State high schoo]~ are not well-to-do. Well-to-do people sendl

:

their children to the public schools and. colleges. The threat of the Government to increase high school fees has had the.· effect, in my district, of some scholar~ being withdrawn from the high schools ...

I'flCO'ffl£ [19 OCTOBER~ 1932.1 Tax Bill. 1737

I do not think that the Government should extend the operation of the income tax legislation to the poorer sections of the people during the present depression. They have already suffered enough, and I do not consider this is the right time to impose taxation on a large body of the people who are least able to bear it, and who are bearing very heavy burdens.

The Committee divided on the question that" £100" proposed by Mr. Cain to be omitted stand part of the clause (Mr. Everard in the chair)-

Ayes 33 Noes 17

Majority against the amend-ment 16

Mr. Allan " Angus

Sir Stanley Argyle Mr. Austin " Bennett

Brigadier Bourchier Mr. Bussau " Coyle " Diffey " Drew

Dunstan " Ellis " Fairbairn " Holden " Hollwfly " Kent Hughes " Kirton

Mr. Blarkburn Bond Cain

" Cook " Cotter

Dillon Frost

" Hogan " Keane

Mr. Cleary " Gray" " Michaelis " TQutcher.

AYES.

Mr. Lind ., Linton

Sir Harold Luxton Mr. Macfarlan

Manifold " McDonald " Menzies

Moncur " Old " Pennington

Vinton Smith " Wettenhall " White " Zwar.

Tellers: Lieut.·Col. Knox Mr. Maltby.

NOES.

1\1 r. McKenzie " McLachlan " Prendergast

Dr. Shields Mr. Slater " Tunnecliffe.

Tellers: Mr. Jewell " Lemmon.

PAIRS.

1

MI', Murphy " Barry " Holland ,. Hayes.

Sil- STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer) .-In the sub-paragraph dealing with the calculation of taxable income for and the assessment of special tax, there are the following words :-

As if sections 22, 24 to 27, 29, 33 to 35, and 41 of the principal Act were omitted.

I move-That" 33 fo 35, and 41" be omitted, with a

view to inserting "and 33 to 35."

As will be seen; these references are to sections in the principal Act, and section 41 was wrongly put into the Bill. That section deals with those who have invested in Treasury bonds, Savings Bank debentures, and the like. Ther~ are no Treasury bonds now, as all have become Commonwealth oonds. The portion of the clause referred to deals with Savings Bank investors, and they are exempt from ordinary incom,e tax. We propose to exempt them from the tax imposed by the Bill.

Mr. CArN.-Are you excluding absentee .holders of Savings Bank stock ~ . Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-They are

not included. The proposal refers to the local investors.

The amendment was agreed to. The Committee divided on the clause

as amended (Mr. Everard in the chair)-Ay~ 35 Noes 15

Majority for the clause 'as amended 20

Mr. Allan " Angus

Sir Stanley Argyle Mr. Bennett :Brigadier Bourchier Mr. Bussau " Coyle " Diffey " Dillon " Drew " Dunstan " Ellis

Fairbairn " Holden ,. Hollway " Kent Hughes " Kirton

Lieut.-Col. Knox

Mr. Blackburn " Bond

Cain Cook

" Cotter Frost

" Hogan Jewell

AYES.

. Mr. Lind " Linton

Sir Harold Luxton ~lr. Mackrell " Maltby " Manifold " McDonald " Menzies " Moncur " Old " Pennington

Dr. Shields Mr. Vinton Smith

" Wettenhall " Zwar.

Tellers: Mr. Austin

" White. NOES.

Mr. Keane " McLachlan " Prendergast

Slater ,~ Tunnecliffe.

Tellers: Mr. Lemmon " McKenzie.

PAIRS.

Mr. Cleary I Mr. Murphy " Gray " Barry , Michaelis " Holland

" Toutcher. " Hayes.

Olause 3 was agreed to. The Bill was reported to the House with

an amendment, and the amendment was: adopted.

1138 Adjournment. [ASSEMBLY. I Adjournrne'l11.

~ Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and 1'rea.sul'e:t') .-1 move-

That this Bill be now read a third time.

The House divided on the motion (Sir Alexander Peacock in the chair)-

Ayes 36 Noes 15

Majority for the motion 21

Mr. Allan • " Angus

Sir Stanley Argyle M'r. Austin ,. Benll(ltt

:Brigadier Bourehier Mr. Bussau

" Coyle " Diffey

Dillon Dnnstan

" Ellis " Everard

Holden " Hollway " K.ent Hughes " Kirton

Lieut.-Col. Knox Mr. Linton

~1r. Blackburn Bond Cain Cook

" Cotter Frost

" Hogan Jewell

AYES •

Rir Harold Luxton :Y.J:r. ~1:acfarlall " Mackrell

:Maltbv Manifold

" McDonald " M'enzies

Moncur " Old " Pennington

Dr. Shields 111'. Vinton Smith

Wettenhall " 'White " Zwar.

'l'eUers: Mr. Drew " Fairbairll.

NOES.

::'IIr. Keane " 1\1 r LaC'lthm " J'rNJdergaHt " Slater " 'l'unnecliife.

'l'ellers: Mr. Lemmon " McKenzie.

PAIRS.

Mr. Clen.ry I Mr. Murphy " Gray , Barry " Michaelis " Holland " Toutcher. " Hayes.

The Bill was read a third time, and ordered to be transmitted to the Legislative Council.

ADJOURNMENT.

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF: WORKS IN

COUNTRY DISTRICTS: DECENTRALlZING

REGISTRAJTIONS - UNFUNDED :C'EBT:

ISSUE OF TREASURY-BILLS-RAILWAY

DEPARTMENT: CARRIAGE OF WOOL.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer).-I move-

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr. KENT HUGHES (Honorary Minister) .·-Last night, on the adjournment of the House, four honorable members complained in regard to the allooation of the unemployment relief :funds.

The honorable member for Gippsla.nd North began the attack, and s-aid that in the distribution of the money whic'h was settled. by the Employment Council his district had been neglected. Of course, it is known to everybody that the Employment O()uncil takes no note of the parliamentary representation of the districts when it allocates money. I now wish to point out that since the present Government took office the follQwing allocations have been made for unemployment relief in the electoral district of Gippsland North:-

Location of Work.

Public TV orks DepaTt-ment-

Avon Shirc Bairnsdale Shire

Maffra Shire Forests Oommission-

Stratford.. .. Oountry Roads BoCtl'd

Avon Shire

Maffra Shire

Oharities B~ardGippsland Hospital,

Sale Mines Depanment-

Dargo lUver ..

Nature of Work. Amount of Allooation.

£

Road and reserve works . 295 SWimming pool and 1,10!)

road works Road works

Forest works 0

Lindenow - Meerlieu 1,600 Road

Bundalaguah Road .. 7M Licola Road 1,500

Building purposes . . 5,000

Clearing of mining 30 tracks

13,125

Mr. FROST.-Were they unconditional grants?

Mr. KENT HUGHES.'-Some are actually loans, but the list shows the amount of money allocated.

Mr. CAIN.-How much has been spenH Mr. KENT HUGHES.-It is money

allocated since the Governmeillt t~ok office, but I cannot say how much has been spent. All the works are on the recom~ mendation of the Emplo,yment Council. The main work about which there has been a difference of opinion was in regard to a proposition put forward by the honorable member for Gippsland North in April, 1931, when he asked for £500 for the construction of 7 mil~s of road from Seaspray to the Wabash, along pq!tion of the Ninety-mile ,Beach. He pointed out that the Wabash was a picturesque spot, and an attra'ction to tourists. The applica.tion was not approved by the Unemployment Relief W Ol'ks Board owing to the lack of funds. One of the gr0unds u1'ge'd in: support df

Adjou.r~me?i/,t. [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Ad.iournment. 1739

the application was that it would benefit rabbit trappers and fishermen. Recently the honorable member u,rged the 0011-

stru-ction of the same road in the interests of a large number of landholders and tourists. The application was considered by the Employment Council, but an allocation was not recommended. The honorable member appealed, but the council upheld its original deCISIOn. The Country Roads Board reported on the project for the infOi'mation of the Employment Council and said the work was desirable from the point of view of making accessible for holiday purposes a further length of the Ninety-mile Beach, and for providing Ilccess to certain Crown allotments, but the Board pointed out that the construction of the road would not cause any further· land to be brought into cultivation. That is the main application that has been turned down. I have not gone into particulars in regard to the otheT districts that may have been unfortunate.

Mr. SLATER.-I invited you to do so. Mr. KENT HUGHES.-I repeat that

I resent the inference that was drawn by honorable members in regard to the matt~r. Honorable members know that the Employment Council recommends the works, and that each work must pass its judgment. The honorable member for Dundl:\-s, the honorable member for Warrenheip and Grenville, and the honorable member for Port Fairy and Glenelg drew attention to a loan of £6,000 granted to the Yarra Bend National Park Committee.

:Mr. SLATER.-I did not say anything about it.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-Hansard has not yet been published.

Mr. SLATER.-I know what I said. Mr. KENT HUGHES.-Then, two

members mentioned it-the honorable member for Warrenheip and Grenville and the honorable member for Port Fairy and Glenelg. If the honorable member for Dundas did not refer to the subject, I am pleased to acknowledge his correction. This particular subject was picked out, and I should like to mention the facts. In July, 1928, the Hogan Government lent £1,500 to the 'Yarra Bend National Park Committee, and the amount has been repaid with interest. Another loan of £2,400 was promised

by the McPherson Government, and the promise was honoured by the next H.ogan I

Government. Further, the Hogan Government made two free grants-not loans-one of £1,500, and the other of £1,250.

Mr. COOlc-Were they for the golf links ~

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-Those two free gJ.'ants were. The second gift was from the Commonwealth Relief Fund; and the present Government, on t.he recommendation of the Employment Oouncil, recently authorized a loan of £6,000, t~ complete the golf links, at 41 per cent. mterest) and 2! per cent. sinking fund.

Mr. BO:ND.;-To whom is the course onen?

!fr. KENT HUGHES.-To the public, on payment of green fees. There is no club; anyone can pay and play. The park is far more pODular now than ever before, as a result of the construction of the golf course. Seei~g that the facts are ;1S I have stated th(3m, it is extraordinary that the honorable member for W ~rrf)nheip and Grenville should have made any mentio]1 of the subject, as to whether or not that advance of £6,000 by way of loan was ;ustified. As a matter of fact, the loan will furnish work for 100 men for about six months; and the work will be .~'eproductive, in that the course is a paying proposition, and that both the loan and the interest on it will be paid.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-It is all guaranteed by the members of the committee.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-That is the case. The other statement which I desire to make in connexion with unemployment is of considerably more importance, because even as recently as this evening the honorable member for Dundas has referred . to th~ peak figures of unemployment, Inferrmg that the figures were still rising. Some time a~o I stated that the numbers of registratIOns at the central bureau were 20 per cent. in excess of the actual' number of people unemployed. Recently: we ~aye b~en instituting Il.

change In admll1lstratlOn, decentralizing the system of unemployment registration. We have been sending the records out to various local centres, but the change-over has taken some time, because we want~d to install an effioient system which could

1740 Adjournment. [ASSEMBLY.] Adjournment.

be carried on from the time of inception. So far we have had reports only from one ;suburb: that is Fitzroy. There. are in Fitzroy, in round figures, 1,600 people registered for work and sustenance; and there are 204.who are registered for work only; that is, they are not drawing sustenance but are registered as unemployed, for work, making the total just over 1,800. In addition, there were 966 extra registrations on the central bureau list which, when checked with the local list, were found to be faulty registrations. That is to say, there were 966 faulty registrations in a total of about 2,700 at the central bureau. That shows that my reference to 20 per cent. was considerably out. The figures for Fitzroy reveal that the percentage should have been more nearly 30 ver cent. If that basis proves to be true, so far as concerns the whole field of the investigation, when our decentralization project has been put into effect, we can take off from the total of 54,000 names at least 20 per cent., and probably 25 per cent. as the actual number of unemployed.

Mr. (:lAIN.-How many of the present total are registered in the metropolitall area?

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-About 44,000. I think the total for the country is nearly 11,000.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-In addition, there are nearly 18,000 women.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-We have not a separate registration of unemployed women. We have 1,400 names at the girls' work centres at the present moment, but we nre receiving complaints every day from such sources as registry offices and large employers that they cannot obtain girls either for domestic service or factories; they cannot obtain answers to their advertisements. We are doing our best to train those whom we have for jobs which are apparently open to the girls.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-How many women .are registered as unemployed in Victoria?

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-As I have just said, we have no separate registration ~howing the total number of unemployed women. All I know is what I have just 'Stated, and there are these complaints ·every day that answers cannot be obtained to advertisements calling for domestic :servant:3 and factory employees.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-The report. whi.ch I 'have before me states that, in addition, at the 30th of June, 1932, there were

:fP~~:im~~%:n~;' ~~o~:ma~~~e~~~ist;::l~ bourne.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-Since then the bureau has been more or less deregistered, and the persons concerned would be dispersed.

Mr. McLAcHLAN.-I should like to learn whether it is usual for the Employment Oouncil to inform Parliament with respect to the grants that are made.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-The particulars are all published in the press. Each member of Parliament would not be informed. An individual member would not be provided with the information unless a particular application for a grant had reached the Employment Oouncil through that member. The general rule ~s that the body applying for the grant is mformed whether the grant is made or the application rejected. I am sure that if individual members of Parliament desired any particular information concerning grants they could always obtain it by application· to the secretary of the Employment Oouncil. The information

. is available; there is nothing secret about it. I do not think, however, that it is the business of the secretary to the council to send out notifications to every member of Parliament concerning what has bee~ done in connexion with every applicatIOn for a grant.

Mr. McLAcHLAN.-Did not the Premier suggest last week to honorable members that if an application were made it might be considered?

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-Yes, if an application is forwarded through a member of Parliament the reply from the council would go to that member.

Mr. HOGAN.-I mentioned last night that I had rece.ived a letter yesterday from the Buninyong Shire Oouncil stating that an application had been made for a grant three months ago, but that no reply had been received. That council usually consists of people of the Honorary Minister's own political faith' so I say to him, " You are hurting your ~wn people."

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-We do not know any people of any political faith in

Adjournment. [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Adjournment. 1741

eonnexion with unemployment relief. I can only say to the honorable member that if there has been anything wrong in the matter of the application by the Buninyong Shire Council I shall have it investigated and a reply furnished. I do not know whether some mistake has been made somewher-e, but the honorable member himself made a horrible mistake last night when he took up one particular item amongst the loans made available by the Employment Council and criticized it.

Mr. HOGAN:-I shall give the House the whole of the facts about that.

Mr. VINTON SMITH (Oakleigh).I realize that this is not a very popular hour at which to rise to discuss a subject of importance; but in view of the very important meeting of the Australian Loan Council, to take place next week, I should like to bring before the attention of the House a matter which the Premier might perhaps see fit to raise when he attends the meeting of the Loan Council. It is in relation to Treasury-bills now held by the banks. The Argus this morning published particulars as to the ·total unfunded indebtedness of Australia and dissected that information, showing the 'amount owing in London and in Australia. I think that the total amount of the unfunded indebtedness is, in round figures, £85,000,000, of which from £45,000,000 to £50,000,000 is held in Australia. The 'Victorian portion of the former total is, roughly, £15,500,000, and of the la tter held in Treasury-bills £9,500,000. I had intended to mention this matter in the course of the debate on the Income Tax Bill, but I did not wish to delay its passage. However, as taxation is necessary to pay not only for our social services but our interest obligations also, I think that my reference to the subject is quite appropriate at the present stage, in view of the fact that the details of the Income Tax Bill are still fresh in the minds of honorable members.

During the crisis the banks came to the assistance of the Governments of .A.ustralia, when interest rates were high. They helped the Governments by lending them money on Treasury-bills at 4 per cent. That was a concession on the part of the banks, and I am certain that

they gave tremendous assistance to Australia in its hour of need. But since that time the prices of our Government securities have risen until now our longdated securities show barely 4 per cent. Consequently, the -banks put out their surplus funds at 4 per cent., practically at call. Private people cannot get better than 3 per cent. for their money at call; and I would suggest, ·if it is possible for the Premier to carry this matter to the Loan Council, that these Treasury-bills,. which in the past have been available only to the banks, should be made the subject of open-market operations. To-day, we could probably get private people to take

• up Treasury-bills at three months at from 2! per cent. to 3 per cent. The effect would be that, on £9,500,000, which is the proportion of the Treasury-bills in relation to Victoria, there would be effected a saving; if there were a reduction of 1 per cent., amounting to £95,000. If the issue were at 2! per cent., which would be a reduction of 1! per cent., there would be a saving per annum of £137,500.

Mr. SLATER.-They would be taken up at 2 per cent.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-At any rate, we could try the issue at 2! per cent. I do not think it would be wise to try at 2 per cent. first. The bills could be issued at 2i per cent., and if there were put out £30,000,000 worth over the whole of Australia there would be a saving in interest at the rate of £450,000 per annum. If the bills were readily taken up they could be re-issued in three months at, say, 2 per cent. I know that the banks· to-day find 4 per cent. on their surplus money a very attractive investment, particularly if they- put their money out at advance and get 5 or 6 per cent.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Would there not be a great danger in holding a lot of money at short call?

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-On 4 per cen t. Treasury--bills the banks pay 1 s. 40.. in the £1 taxation. In Victoria the total taxation would be roughly 5s. 3d. on incomes earned from advances. I am not speaking disparagingly of the banks. All I say is that I think the time has arrived, now that our long-da.ted debentures are at par, for Treasury-bills to be put on the open market, either tendered for, or issued

IJ4:2 Adjournment. [ ASSEMRLY·l Adjournment.

at a lower rate than 4 per cent., in order that' thE~ taxpayers of AustraHa may be relieved of the considerable burden they are now carrying.

1\ir. HOGAN.-Does the honorable member know what Tre'a~llry-bills were taken up for in England? .

Mr. VINTON SMITII.-At about 88. pe.r cent.

Mr. :HoGAN.-The lowest I heard was lOs. pel' cent.

:M:r. VINTON SMITH.-I think it was first 8s., and then lOs. per cent. At any rate, I have only made a suggestion. I think the banks have done a wonderful work. The way in which they have carried On has been a source of wonder to ~ financial people in the United States of America. I know that the taxpayers can be saved a great amount by these bills being put on to the open. market at a lower rate than 4 per cent.

Mr. McLACHLAN (Gippsla,nd North). -I appreciate the statement made by the Honorary Minister, but I would remind him again of the complaint made by the, Bairllsdale Council on the 12th of October, only a day or two ago. The Bairnsdale Council wrote me-

l have been directed to express through you the disappointment of this council that the application for a grant for the relief of unemployment was refused lJy the Employment Council.

That is the statement of the council of a most important centre. The whole of the shire is not in my electorate. There may have been a considerable sum of money spent in the shire, but certainly not in the portion that I represent. The council consider that a certain amount should have been made available. They take the view that as the unemployment relief money is collected from all the people, their people contribute their full share, and are entitled to some return. That is a sound argument. A Government that does not administer unemployment relief money fairly is not entitl~d to rule this country. The Bairnsdale Council is disappointed because its applications have been turned dowIl.

Mr. DIFFEY.--.:Do you know what the conditions under which it was prepared to spend money ·were ~ .

~Ir. McLACHLAN.-The conditions were submitted to the Employment Coun-

eil. Unemployment relief taxation is paid by residents of the shire, and 300 people there are registe:red as unemployed. Bairnsdale has not received from the Employment Council what it is entitled to get. With respect to MaHra, reference has been made to a road leading into the mountains, a road which is already made and w4,ich is attended to by the Country Roads Board. The Premier frequently travels over that road, and knows all about it. Maffra contributed this year to the State, through its beet sugar factory, the sum of £58.000. Last year it contributed a sum of £52,000. Very little thought 011 the part of the Government win lead them to the conclusion that there must be a fair number of men in the locality who will be unemployed when the factory closes down at the end of June. There is an interval of some months between the time when the factory closes down and when work is resumed. No money has been set aside by the Employment Council for the extension of channels and the employment of men in the l\1affra district,

Sir STANLEY l~RGYLE.-YOU realize that 'ther~ are other parts of the State, do you not?

Mr. Iv[cLACHLAN.-1 do. A grant of £16,000 was made to Werribee and Bacchus Marsh for irrigation pur~ poses. The amount of the grant to the Avon shire is so small as to . be scarcely worth mentioning. I now come to Sale. Sale has taken on a very big project-a base hospital~and is discharging a charitable duty which standi to its credit. It has an exceptionally ]]eavy burden to carry. Without some consideration from the Charities Board it would be impossible-to maintain the hospital. The Honorary Minister says that £5,000 has been given to the hospital. For that the committee of management is thankful. But that was only a part of the duty of the Government. Vlith respect to these four places-Bairnsdale, l\1affra, Avon, and Sale-the Employment Council, which is the Government--

Sir STANLEY ARGYI,E.-1t is not the Government, and you have no right to say· it is. .e-

Mr. McLACHL1~N.-=--~111· these items ha ve to be scrutinized by the Premier after the Employment Coun-

Adjournment. [19 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Adjournment. - 1743

cil, which contains two l\1inisters (the Hon. G. L. Goudie and the Hon. J. P. Jones) have made their recommendations. The Premier looks over the items, and either approves or disapproves of them. Only the other day he said that if an application were put in it would receive consideration. That is only part of his duty. Unfortunately we have not on the Employment Oouncil a representative of a large section of the people who are out of employment at the present time. I pay a tribute to the Reverend Mr. Oain, who is a very able mall, but I do think that the Trades Hall Oouncil or the Labour party should haye a direct representative on the Employment Oouncil.

I made an application for a grant for a road. The application was turned down. I renewed it, and it was turned down again. The application related to the continuation of a work begun by publicspirited men years ago. I was with those men at the time. A great amount of labour was put in in grubbing and clear-iug 14 miles of road from Sale to Seaspray. The Oountry Roads Board eventually took oyer the road. There is also a road to Lett's Beach, which IS 20 miles from Seaspray. Between Lett's Beach and Seaspray rabbits abound in thousands. The rabbits cross the dry lake and spread over the whole country. There will be a plague of rabbits in that district if the Government does not come to the assistance of the land-owners there. At this particular spot 50,000 fish were caught last year with rod and line. }"'rom the point of view of land-owners, tourists, fishermen, and unemployed the claims of that road were worthy of consideration, but nothing came of the application. That iR the road the Minister refers to-from Seaspray to Lett's Beach. I am glad that thi~ subject was ventilated last night, because it shed some light on the general question. I hope that in future these p]aces will obtain the consideration which they deserve from the Employment Oouncil.

Mr. MAC KRELL ( Upper G oulburn) .--I desire to refer to the large quantities of wool that are being brought to Melbourne by road, and I appeal to the Government to do something to get t'hat traffic back to the Railway Department. I travelled oYer the ptincipalroads in the

north-eastern part of the State recently, and I was staggered to see the quantity of wool that is being carried by road. I have discussed the matter with woolgt'owers, men with from 50 to 100 bales, and I find that they are very determined iu their attitude to the Railway Department. They say, "The railways be damned. We stuck to them year after year, and we are getting no concession from them. We have to pay three times as much for the carriage of our wool as wheat-growers pay f0'r their wheat." These wool-gTowers will not send their wool by rail because they cannot afford to pay the freight rate. The Railway Department should take the matter in hand and see if something cannot be doneto help the wool-growers. Some people think that the wool-growers are better off this year than they were last year. I haye sold wool this year, and I know that wool is no better this year than last year, and that the wool:' growers are still having a bad time. The Government should do something to assist these men, and so prevent them from getting their backs up against the Hailway Department. Recently the Railways Oommissioners granted concessions to holders of all-lines passes, and the commercial houses in Melbourue benefited to the extent of a total amount of £14,500 on a 27 per cent. reduction in the price of the tickets. Wool-growers do not object to the reduction in the price of the tickets, but they resent the granting of this concession when the Oommissioners will not extend a concession to the wool-growers. I feel that a great deal more wool will be brought to Melbourne by road unless something is done by t.he Railway Department. It is all very well to say that the wool-growers should be patriotic and support the railways. They are the most patriotic men in Victoria. They have played the game until they can play it no longer, and they are determined to send their wool by road. What -will the Government do ~

:r.Ir SLATER (Dundas). - I suggest that I ,vas justified last night in making certain obserYatiolls regarding the action of the Employment Oouncil in making work available in country districts. Those observations drew a heated remark from the Premier, but I maintain that there

1744 Adjournment. [ASSEMBLY.] Unemploymer.t Relief:

was no justification in my remarks for his statement that my observations were a filthy insinuation that the Employment Council had not acted impartially. I .directed attention to the fact that in the western part of the State very little or no work had been provided for a great body" of men who want work and not sustena,ncf'. I shall continue to raise my voice in this Ohamber in order that these men will get their fair share of the work that. is being made available. It is apparent that thH investigation~ of the Honorary Minister who is in charge of sustenance into the schedule of relief works showed that no work has been provided for the unemployed in the electorates of Dundas and Port Fairy and Glenelg.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I understood the Honorary Minister to say that he had not time to investigate what had been done in regard to .those electorates.

Mr. SLATER.-Then I withdraw my remark!!. I doubt whether any substantial amount has been provided for works in that part of the State. I am not unmindful of the difficulties facing the Government, but my intention last night was to support the remarks of the honorable member for. Gippsland North and to point out to the Employment Oouncil that there are men in all electorates who are eager and willing to work rather than remain on sustenance.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - There is no doubt about that. I took exception to the statement that you made last night.

Mr. SLATER.-If the Premier continues in that vein I shall refer him to the Hansard report of my speech.

Sir STANLEY ARGYJ"E.-There was an insinuation that there had been political bias on the part of the Employment Council. That is what I resent, and not the statement that no work has been made available in your electorate.

Mr. SLATER.-The Labour Government tried to spread the work over all parts of the State, but it is singular that no work has been provided by the Employment Oouncil in the electorates of Maryborough and Daylesford, Bendigo, W onthaggi, Dundas, and Port Fairy and Glenelg.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - That is not correct. There was work provided' in some of those electorates. Ask the hon-

orable member for W onthaggi what I did for unemployed men in his electorate.

Mr. SLATER.-He has told me about it. It was a genuine gesture' on the Premier's part and of great assistance to the miners. The honorable member for W onthaggi is grateful, and so am 1. I was guided in making my remarks last night by the schedule of works that was submitted to the House last week by the Premier.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Which are recommendations of the Employment Council and not of the Government.

Mr. SLATER.-It is the common desire of members, I think, that the Employment Oouncil should appreciate the fact that there are men in all districts eager and willing to work, and that the council should make the distribution of work as wide as possible.

The motion was agreed to.

The House adjourned at 10.46 p.m.'

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. Thursday, October 20, 1932.

The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Peacock) took the chair at 11.6 a.m., and read the prayer.

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF.

TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON SUSTENANCE. Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and

Treasurer ) ~-When replying, on V\' ednesday, the 12th of October, to a question asked. by the honorable member for Gippsland North-and, by the way, there were about half a dozen questions at the same time-I stated that the amount paid out of the Unemployment Relief Fund for sustenance to the 30th of September last was £2,029,056. The honorable member for N orthcote interjeoted-

Can you tell us how much has been paid thi8 financial year-the first three months 1. The £2,000,000 to which you have referred IS over the whole period.

To that I replied, "Yes; for the twelve months." Later, I said, "It may ho eighteen months." I desire to clear that up. I did so at the time, but Hansard did not get the correction which I made,

Farmers [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Relief Bil~. '1745

.and it appears in Hansard that I said that the amount of about £2,000,000 which had been spent had been spent iu eighteen months or twelve months. I now .{lesire to explain that the sum of £2,029,056 represents the expenditure on .sustenance from the inception of the fund, in June, 1930, to the 30th of September, 1932. I may add, in reply to the honorable member for N orthcote, that the expenditure on sustenance for the quarter ~nded the 30t.h of September, 1932. waf:! £325,400.

F AR1\{ERS RELIEF BILL. The debate (adjourned from October 5)

()n the motion of Mr. Dunstan (Minister .of Lands) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. SLATER (Dundas).-The measure which has been brought down by the Min~st~r of Lan cIs is unquestionably wise, and It IS really complementary to the original legislation. It is very interesting now to find, apparently, an entire change of front on the part of some members sitting on the ::Ministerial side of the House, who, when the legislation was first submitted two or three years ago, took the most seri'O?S objection to it. I wish to refer partlCularly to some' observations of the present Attorney-General, who was very hostile in his criticisms last year. lIe then made certain comments which make very interesting reading to-day. Whil~t I d.o no~ object to this measure at all, but heheve It to be absolutely essential, it i.s well to remind the Attorney-General of his attitude a year ago, and, particularly, of his attit~de generally towards the matter of sanctIty of contracts. On the 20th ()f :May last year, speaking on the Unem· ployed Occupiers and Farmers Relief Bill, the honorable gentleman said-

So far as Part II. is concerned that contains provisions very similar, although over an extended area, to those of the Farmers Relief Bill which was before the House last session anti noth.ing would .be gained by my repeating 'wh:.tt I saId at the tIme. I spoke against the second reading of that Bill, and I largely based my -opposition on the view which I then held and which I still hold, that if it went into oper~tion it . would be absolutely the death-knell of all prIvate rural credit in Victoria. 1 believe the 'same thing about Part II. of the Bill which is now before us.

Further, the honorable gentleman RaidIf we pass Part II. of the Bill, we simply

announce to investors, both here and elsewhere,

~hat . if t~ey invest money on a rural property III Vlct'ona they always stand a strong chance of Par liament coming along and saying, "~ell, you must stand out of your money." I t IS not as if we were providing some means for improving the position of the mortgagor, and with it the position of the mortgagee. 'Ve are not .

I am not quarrelling with those views. I suppose that they have as much validity and force to-day ~s they had when the honorable gentleman expressed them-

All that we are doing by Part II. is damming back the tide. The tide is there, and in hundreds of cases it is moving in. As I have said, we are damming it back, and the only effect of doing so is that, when at long last we release it, it will be a bigger tide than it was before, and it will much more certainly sweep the mortgagor out of existence.

I saw an interesting interjection made by the Minister of Lands on the 7th of May, 1930, when he was in Oppositi~n. The then Minister (Mr. Bailey) had said in respect of the Farmers Relief Bill, which was then before the House-

Parliament passed this class of legislatlOn in 1927 and again last year.

The report of the debate shows that the present Minister of Lands said-

And that legislation was entirely wrong in principle.

It is very interesting to find, in view of that statement, that--

Mr. DUNsl'AN.-··The legislation of 1927 was not similar to that introduced last year.

Mr. SLATER.-The honorable gentleman did not distinguish between any of the legislation. He said that the legislation was entirely wrong in principle, and that remark was in reply to Mr. Bailey's statement that Parliament had passed the particular class of legislation in 1927 and again in 1929. :My friend the Minister cannot get away. He realizes, as all who have any knowledge of farming communities realize, that not only in this country, but throughout the civilized world, those communities, through no fault of their own, have a burden of debt which it is impossible for them to liquidate in view of the depressed prices that obtain for the commodities which they' produce. That is the justification for this legislation being sub~itted to Parlian:ent in 1927, in 1930, III 1931, and agaIn to-day. I have not

1746 . Farmers [ASSEMBLY.] Relief Bill.

the slightest objection to it. I support it to the full, and I trust that the House will readily pass it. I believe that the proposals which are embodied in the measure now be£ore the House import only three new principles. I think that the House ought to invite the Minister to explain more particularly than he did in his second-reading speech the nature, the effect, and the possible consequences of the introduction of those principles, with particular reference to the third, the effect of which will be to place settlers who are under the State Rivers and Water Supply Oommission and the Oloser Settlemen t Board in the hands of the Farmers Relief Board, as opposed to their l>eing in the hands of their respective State authorities as at the present time.

This legislation is 'abundantly justified as. I have said, by the extraordinary phght of the farming community in this country, as well as in other countries of the world. r had the opportunity of hearing an address delivered by Mr.' A.. O. Davidson, the general manager of the Bank of New South Wales, and I have recently read the address in the form of a paper. It was the Joseph Fisher Lecture in Commerce given to the University of Adelaide in June of this year, and repeated in the University of Melbourn(~. Mr. Davidson submitted some very interesting graphs, and also read some very interesting figures. They e)t· pressed more forcibly than anything else the present plight and the tragedy of the farming community. I ask honorable members to take note of the world prices of .Australian exports in the years 1929 and 1932. The sterling and gold prices allowed in March, 1929, for wool were 16.67 d. per lb. The sterling prices in May, 1932, were 5.18d. per lb., the gold pl'ices-which were lower still for the same month-being 3.92d. per lb. The sterling and gold prices of wheat in :March, 1929, were 5s. 3td. per bushel. In M.·ay, 1932, the sterling prices were 2s. Sd.. per bushel and. the gold prices 2s. per bushel. The sterling and gold prices for I(!ad in March, 1929, were £25 JOs. per ton. The sterling prices in May, 1932, were £10 15s. 5d. per ton, and the gold prices £8 3s. per ton. I am only dealing, as Mr. Davidson has dealt, with

M:r. Slq,ter.

our principal exportable commoditiles. The sterling and gold prices of zinc in March, 1929, were £27 3s. 6d. In May,

'1932, the sterling prices were £12 lis. ld. per ton, and the gold prices were £9 lOs .. per ton. What possihle chance is there for any farmer loaded down with debts which were contracted at the time when the sterling and gold prices for his exportable commodities were at a comparatively payable level, when they have been reduced, as these figures show, in some cases five times below the level of those prices? The farmer is faced with a position which makes it a physical impossibility for him ever to meet his liabilities and to get rid of the burden which ig pressing so heavily upon him. After all, that is not the position of the farming industry in this country alone. It is the position, the plight, and the tragedy of the farming i11dustry all over the world.

Mr. BussA.l;.-They a:t:e marching on to the capitals.

lVIr. SLATER.-The honorable member has anticipated what I was about to touch upon. I saw an article in The N af:ion) an Amm'ican journal. It was headed" The Farmers' Rebellion," and it indicates the mass of discontent-natural discontent-prevailing in those communities which are engaged in primary industries in south and west of the great United States of America. The article refers to the point suggested by interjection by the honorable member for Ouyen-rebellion expressing itself on the part of the farmers there by the use of the method which I thought was used only by the employed section of the community. They were using the strike weapon, and endeavouring to bring into line the more radical elements of the farming community in these southern and 'western States by competing with farmers whose activities were generally tending to depress the condition of the jndustry. There are references in the article to the extraordinary prices which the farmers in the United States of America are obliged to take for some of the essential commodities. Here is a reference to one farm-

. I own a farm near Boone. My share of the oats crop from 24 acres on this farm was 40 dollars. My taxes on this same land amounted to 44.16 dollars. Before prices took a jump, I

Fct'rme:rs [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 ReUef Bill. 1747

could buy a 400-1b. packing sow for 90 rents n hundred, or 3.60 dollars. At the same time I went to, the meat market and pric'ed a 20-lb. smoked ham. It was 3.20 dollars. I 'bold them to go to hell; I'd buy a whole hog and cut off n. ham.

There are other more iliteresting references to the prices that the farmers have been obliged to take in an effort to stabilize their industry if they can, and to bring to it a return which would make their enterprise profitable, and which would at least bring to them their actual cost of production. .

I wish to address some observations, while I have the opportunity, to members of the Country party. I do not object seriously to their claim, on behalf Qf the farming community, that the I costs of production should be lowered, but I do object to that very general idea, and the looseness of it, if it assumes that the lowering of the costs of production is merely going to be expressed in the lowering of wages. A.gain referring to ]v.[r. ])avidson in his Joseph Fisher lecture, I find the following interesting refer-ences :-

Our present position is, I suggest, precarious. The trend of sterling, as well as of gold prices has been again sharply downwards, and w~ cannot count on the indefinite continuance of the run of good seasons and exports at new record volumes year after year. The pending stabilization of sterling at a low rate at some fut-ure date, the decline in 1110ney rates in ,London, the recent central bank policy of America, and the remarkable success of the British conversion loan offer gome hope that this downward trend of prices is coming to an end. But the recovery required to place Australian export production on a sound basis is 60 great that we cannot hope for immediate relief from this source. A mediocre season would work havoc among the marginal wheat-farmers and pastoralists, who have hung on at the cost of some deterioration in their properties and of growing indebtedness. Nor is there wanting evidence of the declipe of profits in all businesses. The severity of the depression in our main industries would lead one to expect this.

On page 20, there is this statement-The new effort which will be shaped at the

present, or at subsequent conferences of the Premiers, may be expected to broaden and straighten out that way. But the events overseas since June, 1931, have warned us against too heavy a use of the method of reduction, of f?rcing down. To .bring and to keep Am;trahan costs below pnces that are continually falling would require continual cuts in wages and ill interest. Such a process would condemn business to the depressinO' prospect of further falls in prices. As costsO fell, the desperate competition to maintain turno-vers would

mean further price reductions and further cost~ of-living adjustments. The result would be a vicious spiral into abysmal and indefinitely prolonged depression. For employment cannot revive so long as every enterprise must fare the sale of its products at pl'ice levels constantly undermined by further Cllt~.

o.n page 23, this statement appear&--The sugge.stion which I am supporting is

that we should follow up that hint as to the way out. To seek a more profitable basis for Australian industry by reductions alone would condemn us to falling prices, insolvencies, furtller forced conversion of the internal debt, and an all-round writing-down of obligations.The end would be chaos. Industry and investment would remain paralyzed. 'l'he time-lug of costs above falling prices would mock each successive cut.

I suggest to the farming community, particularly that section which believes that the industry will be improved by cutting salaries and wages, that they are making a grave mistake. The whole body of economic thought throughout the world is opposed to that suggestion, because it would mean a reduction of the spending power of the people. I do not suggest that the farming industry is not labouring under costs which might be reduced, but, in the event of an effort being made to reduce costs by an attack on the wageM and salaries of the wage-earning section of the community, the farming community will find that the best market for the consumption of its products will be very seriously impaired, if not ultimately destroyed.

I agree entirely with the proposal to extend the existing legislation for farmers' relief, and I understand that th~ Bill expresses the views of the Farmers Helief Board. Three new proposals are contained in the measure, and, leaving those proposals out of consideration for the moment, I think that the Bill makes the existing legislation more workable. The first of the new proposals is the diminatioll of the police magistrate ill determining an application by a farmer for a protection certificate, the proposal being that the application f<hall be dej;p'Tmined by the :E'armers Relief Board instead of by a Oourt of Petty Sessions.

!1:r. D1:NsTA~.-Pl'ovided that no objection is lodged by the farmer's credi. tors.

Mr. SLATER.-That is an important qualification. In cuses ·where creditors object, it is essential, in view of the impediment that is placed on their l'e,medies

1748 Farmers [ASSEMBLY.] Relief Bill.

by this legislation, that the applicati01~ should be referred to a Court of Petty Sessions instead of to the Board. In those circumstances, I think this new principle will improve the legislation.

'The second proposal is one which might bp. the subject of discussion. It is that, instead of the farmer being limited in the amount of produce that he may sell in a month to £5, that limit may be increased to £25. I do not think that the proposal is objectionable so long as the obligation is placed on the farmer to remit the proceeds of the sale immediately to the Board. I accept the argument of the Minister that the present limitation has in ma.ny instances operated harshlj' against the farmer. There are occasions when a farmer has the opportunity to sell a small number of sheep or pigs, or a small quaptity of produce, and if he has to wait for the approval of the Board, he may lose a good opportunity of disposing of the stock or produce. In view of the fact that the farmer is really a trustee for his creditors, the obligation should remain on him to remit immediately to the Farmers Relief Board the proceeds of the sale. With that condition retained, I do not think that therE. can be any objection to the proposal.

The third proposal has not been ex·· plained by the Minister. It is that the affairs of settlers at present under the control of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission, or the Closer Settlement Board, and who have obtained protection certificates, should be transferred to the control of the Farmers Relief Board. I hope that when the Bill is in Committee the Minister will furnish the reasom~ which prompted him to propose this change. I am aware that the Closer Settlement Board and the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission were opposed last year to this proposal, and I want to know the reason for the change. The Orown is the principal creditor in these eases, and there must be some good reason for the new proposal.

With the Minister, I regret that this legislation, important, drastic, and farreaching as it is, must be re-enacted. There is no hope of the farming communit:y meeting its obligations, even ,in part, whilst its members are obliged to sell their commodities at prices which, in almost' every instance, are below the

Mr. Slater.

actual cost of production. I do not think that there will be any hope of recovery for this section of the community until there is a definite increase in price levels above the cost of production. The Minister of Agriculture seemed to regard the Ottawa Conference as a magic wand that would bring relief to agriculturists, but: I share the pessimism of the Ministel' of Lands that the Ottawa Conference was doomed to failure in so far as its capacity to exercise any influence on a general rise of world's prIce levels. Apparently, we must hope and wait for the position to change. My opinion is that there will have to be a revolutionary change in monetary policy. I have in my posses .. sion material suggesting how such a reform could be introduced, but I shall not use that material now. I think, however, that the stage has arrived when Governments should investigate thoroughly the whole questioIJ of cur .. rency and monetary reform. The Commonwealth Government is apparently dis ... regarding the activities of a number of bodies which are pressing for a reform of monetary policy. The Monetary Reform Association is non-political, and its members have given weighty consideration tl) the case for monetary reform, and have pressed on the Prime Minister the need for the Commonwealth Government appointing a committee to examine the question of currency and monetary reform. I regret to say that the Prime Minister has apparently thought these matters of so little moment that he has ilisregarded the association, and declined to meet its members.

Mr. FRosT.-The question is too big for him.

Mr. SLATER.~It is, perhaps, the biggest question to be faced by Governments, and it is closely allied with unemployment. Violent fluctuations of price levels bring in their train' serious disturbance and loss to the farming community, business people, and many other sections of the community, and I do ,not think that there is much hope of recovery until price levels are increased and stabilized. I support the motion for the second read· ing of the Bill.

Mr. BUSSAU (Ouyen).-I endorse the sentiments of the honorable member for' Dundas. Relief to the farmers ·was' absolutely essential at the time when the

Farmers [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Relief Bill. 1749

Unemployed Occupiers and Farmel's Relief Act was passed, and is even m?re essential to-day. Instead of there bemg an improvement in the financial position of the primary producer, matters are ('ven worse, beeause another year has gone by during which he has had to IIl'oduce at less than the cost of pl:oductiOl1. I venture to say that there IS not a business coucern in the city which would (~ontinue to operate year after year if run at a loss. I know of no manufachuer who would sell his goods at half the cost of production, and continue to do so oyer a period of years. I know of no merelull1t "\yho would continue to seli his goods at· lower prices than they ('ost him veal' after year. But thp. farmer has'" been compelled, during the last three years, to sell his products at less than the cost of production. HE\ is ~ompelled to do so because, owing to the nature of his enterprise, he has to prepare his land two years before the crop is taken off. In preparation for the crop that is going to be reaped in two years' time he has to fallow his land 110"\V. The farmer is compelled to accept the prices offering two years later than the time at which he began his preparations. Few honorable members realize the actual position of the primary pro-ducer to-day. He is in an absolutely tragic position. Not only is the situa-tion tragic to the primary producer, it: iH tragic also from the point of view of t.he State and Commonwealth. I see no hope for the stabilization of the finances of the State and the Common wealth until the :6.11aneial position of the primary producer is stabilized. From the moment the primary producer ceases ttl produce the wealth on which the country is dependent, we, as a nation, become insolvent. There is a danger that a big proportion of producers in this State:.md, of course, in the other States--will have to cease production unless adequate protection is given to them. This measure is designed to give temporary protection to the producer, but it does not gu quite far enough. It is necessary t hat we should delete the proviso iTI paragraph (c) of sub-section (10) of section 21 of the principal Act. Section 21 deals with the application by a farmer for a pro-

Second Session 1932.-[65]

tection certificate. The side note to sub-section (10) of section 21 reads-

On gazettal of certificate a('tions, proceedings, executions, seizures, &c., against farmer not to be commenced, &c., and pending ones to be stayed.

The proviso in paragraph (c), which I desire to have eliminated, reads-

Provided that any such mortgagee vendor person lessor grantee of a bill of sale holder o'f a lien owner purchaser or other grantct! may at any time prior to the issue of a protection certificate giye to the farmer one month's notice in writing of his intention to exercise any remedies ayailable to him and the farmer shall not be entitled to a certificate thereafter unless he applies for the same within one month after his receipt of such notice.

:Mr. SLATER.-That ,-ras put in by the Legislative Council.. .

:M1'. BUSSAU.-It IS an obnOXlOU8 provision. Notices have been sent out to numbers of farmers in the ordinary way demanding payment of certain .moneys. The farmer, in the ordinary course of events, takes no notice, because he is unable to pay. It is impossible for him to liquidate his debt. It may be that he will be able to liquidate his debt twelve months hence, but if he does not apply for a protection certi:6.~ate within one month after his receipt of the notice, he loses all his remedies lUlder the Act. .

:Mr. SLATER.-The farmers do not understand the significance of the notices.

Mr. BUSSAU.-That is so. It often happens that a farm~r is ~way harves~ing when the notice IS delIvered at hl~ house. His wife probably receives the letter, which may be put on one side. The farmer may not see it at all, but after the expiration of one month froJ? the receipt of the notice he loses hIS remedies. He is compelled to make application for a yrotectio? certific~te within one mouth If he deSIres to claIm relief. I regard that proviso as very obnoxious.

}'fr. COYLE.-In whose interests was it inserted in the Act?

:Mr. BUSS.A .. U.-In the interests of mortgagees in Melbom:ne, I supnose.

:Mr. LINToN.-What is the remedyan extension of notice?

}'fr. BUSSAU.-The remedy is to eliminate the proviso altogether. It has been one of the flaws in the Act, which otherwise has worked smoothly, and has

1750 Farmers [ASSEMBLY. ] Relief Bill.

given relief to many people. The provision relating to an objection which is taken by a single creditor to the Farmers Relief Board dealing with any application should be amended. I think provision should be made for objection to be taken by a percentage of creditors-10 per cent. or 20 per cent. After all, every man who is engaged in any industrial pursuit is liable to come into qonfl.ict with a creditor at some tim.e. It is not right that if one creditor objects to the hearing of an application. by the Board, it should then have to be heard by a police magistrate. I think 10 or 20 per cent. of the creditors should have to object.

Mr: FRosT.-Every man has some enemIes.

Mr. BUSSAU.-No doubt. If my proposal were agreed to, we should .confer a real benefit on the farmer.

Mr. LrNToN.-Do you mean 10 or 20 per cent. of creditors, or of liabilities?

Mr. BUSSAU.-I would say of numbers and value. Will the :Minister agree to an amendment along these lilles when the proper time comes?

Mr. DUNSTAN.-What is your sug· gestion?

Mr. BUSS.l\U.-That there should 1m an objection by 20 per cent. of creditorH -in numbers and value-before an application has to be heard by a police magistrate.

Mr. VrXTOX S~nTH.-;\. man might have a lot of small creditors who would llOt take any action, and who might represent more than 20 pel' cent. Your proposal would be hardly fail'. You ought to make it 20 per cent. of the value.

Mr. BUSSA U.-I want to make it 20 per cent. of numhers and value.

Mr. LrNToN.-If one creditor repre· sented 50 per cent. of the liability, he would still have his rights.

Mr. BUSSAU.-If he were agreeable there would not be any objection to tlH! issue of a protection certificate.

Mr. (JOYLE.-YOU could make it 20 per cent. of the creditors, or 20 per cent. of the value, at the discretion of the Board.

M:r. BUSSAU.-I think my suggestion is worthy of serious consideration. If we are going to give relief at all, it must be substantial relief.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-We can deal with all these poiu ts in Committee.

Mr. BUSSAU.-Amendmeuts win he necessary.

Mr. COTTER.-If an unemployed man on sustenance in Melbourne gets a notice that work is available for him, and doo~ nut immediately respond to the notice, he is struck off the register . Would you be in favour of giving that man relief by extending the period of notice?

Mr. BUSSAU.-I am not objecting to the principle. The principle I would apply to the farmer I would apply to the unemployed man on sustenance.

lVIr. OOTTER.-We will test the sincerity of your stutement at a later stage.

Mr. BUSSAU.-When the Bill is ill Committee, I shall move amendments along the lines I have indicated.

Mr. COYLE CWaranga;).-It will be recollected that when a similar measure was before the House on a previous occasion, I took an active part in endeavouring to make a success of it. I want to say that the 4-ct has achieved the object which \ve set out to achieve. It was unfortunately in my district that the first efforts to obtain relief were made. A distinct method of application was applied to each farmer, and every man was treated differently. J shall repeat the opinion that I expressed then-that although the Act gave relief it was incomplete, and did not give power to the Farmers Relief Board to enable it to render full and effective help. If a farmer was in arrear with the payment of his interest and had no stock, the Board was not ahle to stock his land. Some men did not have any feed, and some of those who had tractors could not obtain fuel. There were Instances where farmers were enabled to obtain stock through the generosity of other people. The Farmers Relief Board was much disturbed as to its powers, and felt that they were limited. The Board is composed of men represent· ing different activities, and I wish to acknowledge its effective work. It rO!1e to the occasion, and it assumed responsibilities, although the Act did not givp, i~ the right to function in the way it did. The members of the Board showed good sense and foresight, and enabled farmers to get stock. In my district farmer~ obtained a good deal of stock, and they were able to run it as if they w:ere in a


state of affluence. This was done in efforts to re-establish the farmer, and to enable him to earn an income that would he sufficient to allow him to pay his i11-terest to the mortgagee. The Act primarily sets out to effect that purpose, and in many instances in my district the int.erest will be paid. The fear was expressed that hardship would be imposed on the mortgagees, but I believe that almost everyone of them will receive an effective proportion of his interest. When the measure was first introduced they beheved that they would be estopped from any proceedings, and would receive no interest. I hav.e mentioned my experience of the workmg of the Act up tOI date. V\T e had the idea that the measure was to be of a temporary character. I looked up remarks I made last year when I expressed the opinion that we were turning the cornel', that we were on the eye of better prices, and that everything de-pended on the seasons. Unfortunately my prediction has been oul:v partly borne out. We are on the eve of the most wonderful season Australia has seen, but unfortunately lower stock prices are prevailing. Last week the prices were down to those obtained in the Melbourne markets before any export business was done. When we non sider that fact, and the amount of shipping available now, we can under-stand the serious position of the producers. We must re-enact the measure, and give the people a further provision of relief. .

The honorable member for Ouyell

section 10 of section 21. If that proviso is omitted, the firms will not com-plain. As I pointed out before, they have their title to the machinery, and they have to recognize that they will get some· thing for the machines. If it were not for these steps the market would be more limited than ever. In answer to a deputation that waited on the honorable member for Dundas when he was Minister of Agriculture, he promised to bring in a Bill dealing with stock m.ortgages to secure to people who provided farmers with stock an effective title to their property. That title does not exist to-day, and the measure was never introduced.

Mr. SLATER.-Y ou have better opportunities now.

Mr. COYLE.-I do not know that 1 have. .

:Mr. SLATER.-YOU apply peaceful persuasion to the Governm.ent, and I am sure it will gratify your wishes.

Mr. COYLE.-If such a measure was essential then, it is more so now. The Farmers Relief Board is doing something which it has no legal power to do, and it should be protected. People have stocked land out of generosity and with a full knowledge of their liability. I wish to ask the Minister to incorporate in the Bill an amendment that will make provision to cover effectively stock that is being put on the land out of pure good nature. I wi1'h to join with the honorable member for Dundas in his doubt as to the wisdom of splitting the control. I should like to hear the Minister make a definite statement concernin~ the attitude

referred to machinery firms. I agree the State Rivers and Water Supply Com-that that difficulty should be removed. mission takes regarding the removal of its The firms will have a title of posses- stewardship. I have not ascertained the sion to their machinery, and under views of the Farmers Relief Board, and the measure they will enable a man to I do not wish to rush in and impose some farm his block and to get some income. I obligation on t~at body that it may not say this in fairness to the machin~ry firms. wish to shoulder. There is a similar Last year I accused them of charging 10 problem in connexion with the land setper cent. interest under the hiring agree- tlement legislation that I understand will ment. I waited on the ma'hager of one of be brought before the House at an early the leading firms, and I was definitely date. Before the Bill reaches the Comassured that as the result of a special con- lnittee stage I should like the Minister to ference on the subject, the firms were not make a clear statement on the point raised, chargin&, 10 per cent., bU,t had wiped ?llt otherwise we may embarrass the Governall the Interest charges In order to gIve ment when we wish to assist it. the men a chance to recover. I have been Mr. DCNsTAN.-I shall make a state-informed tha t the machinery firms are· ment. doing this. Therefore we have nothing Mr. CAI:x.-The last thing that the ho.nto fear f~om ~hem, by the striking out of urable member for Waranga wishes tc:: Q.o the pro'Vlso m paragraph (c) of sub- is to embarrass the Government.

1752 Fannl'rs [ASSEMBLY.] Relief Bill.

Mr. F.FwsT.-Benambra is doing it. Mr. COYLE .-It is a sound policy to

endeavour to keep people on the land, and the. measure is a means of effecting that pohcy. In my district, there is not a block of land vacant to-day. All the blocks which had been deserted, because the people who had been on them could ~ot r~main under the pressure of existIng cIrcumstances, are producing some wealth for the State to-day by having been stocked by some one or other. That is what is happening now in the cases' of p~ople of means, or :who are able to provIde stock perhaps wIth the help of facilities from the banks or the wool compani.es. These people are doing a great serVICe to the State, and it is that kind of thing which is producing such a wonderful wool clip. This legislation is keeping every farm in the hands of the people who. have been running it. We may have to say to certain persons, "You have not been a success'" but at any

d . , ,

rate, urmg the operation of the farmers' relief legislation, the land has been successfully held. But for the legislation, very many people would have been thrown on the State, and it would have been the last straw for the farmer to have beeh c9mpelled to seek sustenance. He does not want that. He wants to be left in the position he is now in, and if he can obtain a little more assistance he will continue to retain possession. '

I as~ the House to treat the Bill syllJ.pathetICally. Its object is to keep for th~. mortgagee the 100 per cent. asset whICh he now has in the fact that his mo~tgagor is keeping going and is producmg returns. It is far better for the mortgagee that that should be the case even if he has to wait twelve months OJ! two years, and must take a little less interest as well, than for him to have to say eventually, "I have lost 40 per cent. 0; more of my security." I hope that we may be able to amend the Bill in some directions to make it more effective and so as to give a little more relief, thUS' keeping the popu~atio~ in the country, for the people of Vwtona have. to look to the country to preserve theIr metropolis and its secondary industries. '

Mr. OLD (Swan J[ill).-When we· passed this legislation last year, I think that most members of this House had in

mind that it would affect probably a far greater number of persons than the total who have actually come within its SCOptl.

But I am strongly of the opinion-which is shared, I think, by all members-that, but for this legislation, there would have ~een. exert~d wholesale pressure on people m dIfficulties. The very fact of the existence of the legislation enabled people tu make amicable arrangements without coming withill the scope of the provisions for the issue of protection certifi· c~tes. The Minist.er of Lands has proVided the House wIth much useful information regarding the effect of the legislation to date. We find that there were 187 protection certificates granted by the Oourt; that in 57 cases applications for certificates were refused; that the number of cases in which applications wera opposed by creditors was 102; and that the number in which creditors did not oppose applications amounted to 140. The percentages of good, bad, and indifferent cases amongst the farmers were also stated by the Minister. In the opinion of the Board, the good case~ amounted to 41 per cent. These men are reasonably certain that they will be able to meet all their obligations. Fair cases were 39 per cent., and indifferent Cflses 20 per cent.

The necessity for this farmers' relief legislation is just as great to-day as when we passed the 1931 Bill. I am pleased th~t the G?vernment has brought down thIS amendmg measure. It is true that the previous legislation was found in the course of its operation, to possess' certain disabilities, but these could only have become apparent in practice. One of the principal disabilities was caused by the fact that Parliament, in its wisdom-in this ca~e, in its unwisd.om, I should saydetermmed on a certaIn definite form of repayment. Section 32 of the principal Act laid do"vn that a farmer's returns should be distributed in a particular way.

((I,) Firstly:-The allowance to the farmer (if he continues his operations as a farmer on his farm) of an amount which, in the opinion of the Board, is a living allowance for the farmer, his wife, and such of his children (if any) residing on the farm, or engaged in essential production and working on the farm a8, are not paid wages. . . .

Farmers [20 OCTo.BER, 1932.1 Relief Bill. 1753

Ho.norable members will recall that the honorable member for Hampden succeeded in having an amendment inserted in Oommittee which enabled a certain sum, at the discretion of the Board, to be paid to storekeepers who had . assisted the farmers throughout many years, and who, by the Bill as it had been brought down, were placed pretty low in the apportionment list. As I have said, the amendment was agreed to in Committee, but, unfortunately, the original provisions of the Bill were re-inserted at a subsequent stage. I do not know whether or not any instructions from the Government were given to the C10ser Settlement Board, 'but that body adopted the scheme af di~· tribution laid down in the Act as it was eventually passed, and applied it· to. the returns of all settlers who. were under the cantrol af the Board. Owing to that, all starekeepers throughout V ictaria were adversely affected, and were placed in a position which, I am sure, if this House had cansidered the possibility oi vile gClIel'al application of the principal of apportionment by the Baard, they would nat llave been placed in. It would not have mattered much if t.he principle had applied only to those 187 cases in which protectian certificates were granted by the Court; but when it was given general application, it became a very serious 1l1attel'. I strongly urge on the Minister the abandonment of the scheme of distribution laid down in the Act as the general procedure in apportioning the assets of all settlers receiving relief. Otherwise, we shall be forced to make an amendmen t so. that we shall not impose hardships on people who. do. nat come under the Act at all. A mistake was made by the Closer Settlement Baard in accepting the scheme as the general and considered apinian of Parliament with respect to the way iu which the returns af all farmers under lien should be allacated.

Mr. McKENzIE.-There was nothing (lIse for the Board to do, in view of the wording of the Aet. .

Mr. OLD.-That is so, except that the Baard need not have applied the principl~ in a general sense. It could have done ~o only so far as related to the 187 cases in which protection certificates were granted. However, the principle' was ac~epted, and applied generally. The ap~ portionment scheme was the only scale of allocation set forth in any Act, so far as I know,

Mr. :NIcKE.l' . .lIE.-The Board took it a~ a precedent.

Mr. OLD.-It did; but the precedent was very unsound, and the result has been that the whole of the crop proceeds from all the farmers under the' direct control of the Board were allocated in accordance with the principle. Thus, practically all local storekeepers were precluded from benefiting from crop returns. Shire cauncils also were precluded from sharing, because their position was so low down on the list of apportionment. The outcome was that practically the whole of the crop proceeds was handled by metropolitan interests. If the principle of apportionment is to be continued, if the Board is to apply it as it has been doing, we shall need to amend the Act, and do away vvith the precedent on which the Board has been working. The Oloser Settlement Board has some justification for adopting the scheme of distribution, considering that it is the only one in any Act of Parliament which I can find dealing with the allocation of the cro.P proceeds. I would strongly recommend the Minister- seriously to consider either amending the scheme of distI'ibution, or else making a statement that it is not to apnly in a general sense.

Another point on which I wish to touch is the question of the reasollable living allowance to the farmer. III connexion with the interpretation of that, we find certain cases of distinct hardship. I have a letter from a gentleman who, through sheer streHS of circumstallces, was compelled to make applica·tion for a protection certificate. He was granted that certificate, but he now finds himself in the position of not being able to get a living allowance. It is a wheat and wool proposition, and the crops are in on the property. No return can he expected until after the harvest, and, although provision is made in the Act that allowances may be granted, there does not seem to he any fund from which such allowances can he made. I am not quite sure on the point, but I think that the holder of a pl'oteetion certificate is entitled, wit·h the approval of th~ Farmers Relief Bo.ard, to obtain advances under the Cultivation Advances Act. Certainly some prOVIsIOn should be made-if it is not already in existence-to. permit advances to be made

]754 Farmers [ASSEMBLY. ] Relief Bill.

hy somebody to enable the man to carry on. It is true that in the Act it is laid down that any person who make~ advances to a farmer for the purpose of carrying on essential work, with the approval of tlie Board, will be placed in II preferential position when it comes to an allocation of the crop proceeds. The trouble is that nowadays it is part,icularly bard to get credit even when the best of securities are offered. Some farmers :find themselves in an exceedingly difficult position. The farmer to whom I was referring wri tes-

I am wdting tlO you regarding my protection certificate. Protection certificate was granted on the 20th of July, and an application has been lodged for living allowance and duplicates, and also for wages for the boys to get clothing.

He says that, up to date, he cannot get any satisfaction from the Board, which simply says, in effect, "If any of your local storekeepers are prepared to give you an advance, we will guarantee the repayments, provided the harvest is sufficient for the repayments." The writer of the letter states further-

1t is impossible to carryon without some a.llowance; also in regard to getting stock from the agents, which agents will not advance stock unless tlley receive the first payments out of sales, which is only fair.

That opens up another question. In the Aet we laid it down that when a :firm of stock agents supplied stock to the holder of a protection certificate they were entitled to repayment for that stock, but a first charge was made for a reasonable amount for agistment of the stock. In my opinion, that is entirely wrong. The first payment should be to the auctioneer or whoever supplies the stock. Out of the profits made by the stock transaction the estate under the protection certificate should be protected to the extent of agistment.

I should like strongly to support the honorable member for Ouyen in his protest regarding the one month's notice. I think that it is an absurdity. I know a case where t.he holder of a hire-purchase agreement in relation to a machine actually served notice on the farmer that he jntended to repossess himself of the rna,chine, or else force the farmer to apply for a protection certificate. It so happened t.hat the property was mort-

.M'r. Old.

gaged, and the mortgage deed contained the landlord and tenant clause. The interest being in arrear, the mortgagee, to protect and retain the farming plant 011 the property, seized the implements. The result was that a' compromise was immediately made, and the machine was allowed to be retained. The farmer did not have to apply for a protection certificate.

In clause 6 of the measure there is the following provision:-

] n sub-section (5) of section twenty-one of the principal Act for the words "first day of May, One thousand nine hundred and thirtythree" there shall be substituted the words "firp.t day of October, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-three".

I know that is is really a matter for Committee, but what I am trying to ascertain from the Minister is the reason for suggesting an alteration of that kind. Being a practical man on the land, the honora ble gentleman knows well that harvest returns are obtainable only after the harvest period, say, on the 1st of February. I cannot see any virtue in extending the period from the lst of May to the 1st of October, because that is the maximum period for which a protection eertificate may be granted. I suggest, if a protection certificate is in such a form as permits the farmer to put in a crop, surely it is right that the certificate should be extended until such time as the crop is harvested. I cannot see the advantage of altering the extension date frOID the 1st of :May to the 1st of October in the same year. It cannot possibly be of any advantage to the holder of a protection certificate. I direct the Minister's attention to this fact, and ask him to make the extension to the 1st of Febl'uary, 1934. That would enable the owner of the protection certificate to continue his operations and reap the crop which he had put in. I do not think that any objection could be taken to that proposal. The measure contains an extraordinary prOVISlOn in this connexion, and I do not know why it was included. With the observations that I bave made, and subject to the amendments t.o which I have referred, I heartily approve of the prineiple of the Bill, and hope that it will have a reasonably.speedy passage .

Farmers [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Relief B'ill. 1756

Mr. McLACHLAN ( Gippsland North). -I cannot see that there can be any material difference of opinion in respect of this measure, particularly when we realize that the Government is made up of representatives of two parties, and what those parties are. The Bill does not affect the Gippsland district to a very large extent, although the settlers there, it is true, are having a struggle, and from time to time representations have to be made ·with a view to granting those settlers concessions in the nature of extensions of time. The introduction of the measure itself indicates that we are still do·wn in the depression. No matter what the newspapers .may say, or what is in the public mind, on the question of our having tl,lrned the corner, having regard to all the circumstances, including even the fact that we have enjoyed very good seasons in the last year Or two, there is no definite indication that we l]ave turned the corner. One has only to look at the figures quoted in this morning's papers to get a further indication that there is no material change in tUEsituation. We are affording relief to necessitous farmers, and I think that while we are doing that we should endeavour to afford relief to our unemployed. We should be able to devise a scheme by which these people can be lifted out of their depressed condition. There are innumerable cases of boys who ~lre not farmers, who really know nothing, hut who are spending their time on farms. Under present conditions they are not developing into the best of men, and they constitute a problem to which we

nlight well devote a good deal of our time very soon.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was read a second time, and

ordered to be committed.

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands) })resented a message from His Excellency "the Lieutenant-Governor, recommending that an appropriation be made from the Consolidated Revenue for the purposes of the Bill.

A resolution in accordance with the l'ecommendation was passed in Committee and adopted by the House.

The House went into Committee for the <!onsideration of the Bill.

Clause l-(Short title).

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands).I am very pleased with the reception that the Bill has received. Ther~ was no adverse criticism concerning the principles of the measure, but two or three impor .. tant points were raised, and further information was sought on them. The first was the question by the honorable member for Dundas as to the reason for the proposal to transfer the control of settlers holding protection certificates from the control of the State Rivers and Water Su pply Commission on the one hand, and the Closer Settlement Board on the other band to the Farmers Relief Board. I shall explain the reason for the change. The Farmers Relief Board is a com.petent body which was set up to control the affairs of farmers who obtain certificate~, and it is devoting the whole of its time to the work of superintending the operations of the farmers holding certificates, and assisting them to make good and pay their way. Only one settler under the control of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission has obtained a protection cer-tificate, and the Commission docs not take ~ny exception to the proposed change. I have been in touch with the Chairman of the Closer Settlement Board in relation to the matter, and he has told me that he cannot see any logical objections to the new proposal.

Mr. CAIN.-Do you intend to introduce this principle into the Bill dealing wi~l soldier settlement?

Mr. DUNSTAN.-I shall deal wit.h that Bill when it comes before the Honse.

Mr. CAIN.-Do you think the principle a good one ~

Mr. DUNSTAN.-It is one which W~ must accept under present conditions. As I said, the Farmers Relief Board is a competent body. The chairman is COllnected with the Lands Department, and he has had a great deal of experience in dealing with settlers. The Board has the full control of the affairs of settlers who obtain protection certificates, and I think t.hat that work can be carried out mOt'e satisfactorily in the interests of the se~tIers by the Farmers Relief Board than if it were undertaken under the divided COIl-' trol of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission, the Closer Settlement Board, and the Farmers Relief Board. I consider that the best plan is to place all

1756 "[ASSEMBLY.] Relief Bill.

protection certificate holders 'under" th:: control of one Board, and I am sure that, the Closer Settlement Board will be glad to be relieved of the responsibility.

Another matter referred to hy the honOl~able member for DundJts related to the amendment' of the principal Act, by which a settler holding a protection certificate will be allowed to dispose of stock or pro~ duce to the value of £25 in one month instead of a maximum of £5 per month as provided for in the existing legislation. The Government considered that this alteration was necessary in order to givl~ the farmer greater freedom of action in the disposal of his produce. It might be necessary for a farmer to dispose of, say, Jambs, sheep, or hay ,quickly when the market was favorable, and time might be lost in his getting into touch with the 'Board and obtaining its approval.

Mr. CAIN.-The lambs would die if he had to wait for the Board's approval.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-There may be a fair amount of delay which would not be to the farmer's advantage and for that reason the Government considers that the farmer must be given some freedom of action if he is to have a fnll opportunity of making good. If a farmp.f is an undesirablt! man so far as his farm-ing methods are concerned, he has no right to be sheltering under a protection certi-ficate. It is important to note that in the event of a farmer disposing of stock or prod.uce to the amount of £25 in any one month the full proceeds of the sale m~ust be paid to t.he Board, because it handles the 'whole of the income from the farm. Therefore, the farmer's creditors will not be placed at a disadvantage, anti their claims will not be jeopardized.

MI'. CAIN.-What is the total amount owing now to the Farmers Relief Board?

Mr. DUNSTAN.-I cannot say, because the Board is dealing with every case on its merits.

Mr. CAlN.-What is the total amount ef advances made by the Board?

Mr. DUNSTAN.~The Farmers Relief Board does not make advances, but' may guarantee payment out of any proceeds. For instance, if a farmer holding a proteetion certificate :finds it essential to obtain, say, a eertain piece of machinery to enable him to carryon his operations properly, the Board guarantees the payment of the amount. charged for the maehine, but

when further income is received from tlle farm the Board is recouped from the proceeds.

The honorable member for Ouyen raised a question which concerns a provision in the principal Act relat.ing to mortgagees, holders of liens, &c., and which sets ont that when mortgagees, holders of liens, &e., give a farmer one month's notice of their intention to exercise any remedies available to them, and the farmer does not apply for a protection certificate within one month of the receipt of such notice, his rights and privileges under the far~ mel'S relief legislation automatically cease. I admit that there is a good deal of logie in the argument advanced by the honorable member for Ouyen, because there might be cases in which the farmer ,yould not have sufficient time in one month under existing conditions to determine whether it would be the best course for him to apply for a certificate, and once he allows the period of one month to elapse without making an application, he is debarred subsequently from doing so. On the other hand, it must be borne in lllind that if the provision in the principal Act were deleted, a farmer could apply for a protection certificate six or twelve months after having received the notice. I think it is necessary in the interests of the creditors that there should be some specified time.

Mr. BussAlT.-If the farmer does not apply for a protection certificate, the creditor has his remedy.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-There are cases of vanishing securities where the security quickly disappears.

Mr. CAIN. - The securitiel? have vanished already.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-We are referring to cases where securities do exist, and we should protect the interests of the creditor as well as those of the farmer. A man may be using machinery, which greatly depreciates ill value. I think that in the interests of creditor and farmer alike some period should bt~ specified in which the protection certificate may be obtained. Otherwise, legislation of this nature will not pass another place. I do not want the Bill to be cast aside. Therefore, I hope that the honorable member for Ouyen will not insist upon the deletion of this provision.

Mr. CAIN.-The Nationalists have got you in the bag.

Far'iners [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Relief BiU. 1751

Mr. DUNSTAN. - Do not worry about that. If the honorable member for Ouyell is prepared to move an amendment extending the period beyond that ()f one month, as specified in the Act, I shall be prepared to give favorable consideration to it.

Mr. Sr,ATER.-We ought 110t to be deterred by what another place may do. We ought to have the courage to stand up to our own convictions. , Mr. DUNSTAN.-The honorable mem

ber did not say that last year. This legislation IS of an excep-tional kind, as the Minister who was in charge of a similar Bill 011

a previous occasion rightly pointed out, and we owe a duty to creditors as well af; to farmer debtors. We do not want to insert in the legislation anything that will protect the farmer to the absolute detriment of the creditor. I think it. necessary to extend the period in which ~( protection certificate may be obtained after notice has been given, beyond Que month, but it is inadvisable to delete the provision altogether and to allow the npplicant to make application six months after the receipt of a notice from his creditor. It may be possible to meet the desire of the hOllorabh! plember ill some way.

Mr. CAIN.-I think you have modified your views a little.

1Ir. DUNSTAN.-Not at all. This Bill is more far-reaching ill its consequences than was the Bill which was introdu<.;ed by the Hogan Government .. It. ca~not be said that I am modifying my VIews when I present a Bill on the lines of the present one.

.:.vIr. BLACKBURN. - The Minister's favorite view js the view from the Treasury windows.

Mr. DUNST.A.N.-This legislation has gone much beyond the point that any l'arliament would have contemplated some years ago.

}.tIl'. CAIN.-I appreciate that. ~Ir. DUNSTAN.-It is very excep·

tional in its ch.aracter. . }.tIl'. SLATER.-That might be said of

other legislation. Mr. DUNSTAN.-That is quite true.

It applies to legislation we have already passed and to legislation that we shall have to pass in the near future.

Mr. TlJNNECLIFFE.-What do you mean by the near future!

Mr. DUNSTAN.-Within the llext" week or two. In this legislation we are endeavouring to hold the scales in such a way as to deal out even-handed justice. It is easy to strike a popular note by emphasizing the necessity ot doing everything we can to protect the farmers. At the same time we have an. obligation upon us to prot"ect creditors. Oreditors are not all avaricious. Quitp a number of them are fair-minded meIl, anxious -to do the right and proper thing. 'Ve require this legislation in order that we may deal with those creditors who are ltot prepared to act fairly.

The honorable member for Ouyen also advanced an argument to this effect: That if one creditor objected to a protection certificate being granted to the farmer by the Farmers Relief Board, then that objection would be valid, and· the matter would have to be referr~d to a Court of Petty Sessions to be dealt with. We have to bear in mind that this amending Bill has gone a good deal further than did the measure which was before Parliament on the last occasion in that regard. It was made necessary for all applications to be made to a derk of Petty Sessions, and the cases had to be heard in Court. Under this Bill all applications will be made to the secretary of the Farmers Relief Board, and all certificates will be issued by that Board, provided that creditors do not lodge allY objection. Where a creditor, or creditors, lodge an objection, then, under this amending Bill, the matter has to be. referred to a Court of Petty Sessions to be dealt with. The view is held by the Government-rightly, I think-that the Farmers Relief Board, although qujte eompetent to carry out its adrninistratiye duties, is not a legal authority, and legal points may be raised in regard to objections. A Board so constituted may not be in a position to go into the pros and cons of a legal point. A Court would be in such a position. The Board would have some difficulty in determining the legal pointR. involved in cases where objeotions are lodged.

Mr. BussAu.-The Farmers Relief Board know the position of the farmer better than a police magistrate could possibly knof it.

1758 Fa,rrners LASSEMBL Y. ] Relief Bill.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-We cannot expe~t a Board of this nature to be in a POSI

tion to determine legal points. The honorable member for Swan Hill

pointed out that in connexion with the distribution of the harvest proceeds, the utorekeeper is placed well down the list. :Ie is, in fact, among the "also rans." He has not received much consideration. I would point out that the Bill relates only to those persons who are sheltering under protection certificates. There js no intention on the part of the Government-at this stage, at any rate-to make the provision regarding the allocation of the proceeds from the farm apply to all closer and soldier settlers and thos8 who are obtaining advances under the Oultivation ~\.dyances l~ct, and I do not think it advisable-at this stage, at any rate--to interfere in any way with the order of distribution and allocation as laid down in the Bill.

The clause "was agreed to, as was clause 2.

Clam.e 3 was postponed. Clauses 4 and 5 were agreed to. Clause 6 was postponed. Clause 7-(Preliminary protection of

applicant for protection certificate, &c.) Mr. BUSSAU (Ouyen).-I wish to

have eliminated certain parts of clause 3, which would involve consequential amendments in this clause, and so I should like to have this clause postponed.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood) .-May I point out the inadvisability of the Government trying to push the Bill through Committee at one sitting. Such u procedure does not give an opportunity to honorable members to circulate their amendments. Of course they can only do so after the second reading. The Government would be wise to give honorable members an opportunity to prepare their amendments.

Mr. SLATER (Dl,mdas).-In fairness to the Minister, I" wish to say that we dis~ cussed the question of allmving the Bill to go into Committee. I did not express the view of other honorable members. I wish to debate clause 7.

Mr. DUNsTAN.-The amendment will be ready after lunch.

Mr. SLATER.-A new principle has been discovered, and it must be watchedcarefully. Under the present legislation,

the creditors get some notice of an applicant's intention to apply for a certificate, because he has to advertise in two Melbourne newspapers and in a local newspaper. From the moment of the publication of the last advertisement, all the creditors' remedies are stopped. Now this clause proposes that, on the lodging of an application for a protection certificate, the creditors's rights are stopped. Of course the Minister may reply that what the Farmers Relief Board does is done with the consent of all the creditors. So long as there is that safeguard, I can see creditors being put in a difficult legal position. They might proceed to exercise their remedies, since they would not have had notice of the creditor's intention, as they now have from the advertisements. The creditors may be holding a sale, and the Farmers Relief Board may say to them, "You cannot go on, because the applicant has asked for a certificate."

Mr. BLAcKBuRN.-A man wanting a certificate may not be able to wait until his application is advertised.

Mr. SLATER.-The point is that we: must do a fair thing for both parties. This legislation affects the rights of creditors, and they should not be swept away. I do not stand for such a thing. This legislation has been necessitated by the unreasonableness of individual creditors, who have taken precipitate action and obtained an advantage over other creditors. In some cases, such action has forced the farmer into insolvency. As I say, it is largely the unfair attitude of . single creditors that has made this legislation necessary. There is something in the point raised by the honorable member for Clifton Hill. Before giving relief to a farmer, we have provided an opportunity to all his creditors to know their rights by insisting on the insertion of advertisements in a local newspaper, as well as in the l\1elbourne newspapers~ There is no difficulty about the latter pub~ lications, but there is when a country newspaper goes to press only once a week~ I wish to see the scales of justice held evenly between the creditors and the debtors. The creditor is put in difficulties because of the relief granted to the farmer. I wish to hear what the Minister has to say concerning this matter depending on the unanimous consent of all the creditors. If that is

Farmers [20 OCTOBER, 1932. i Rei-ief Bill. 1759

so, I have no serious objection, but if it is possible for some of the creditors to get notice of the applicant's intention, and to be told afterwards that they cannot proceed, it provides a position to which! object. .

Mr. LINToN.-The consequences will be serious. You may interfere with the credit of the country.

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands).The object of the clause is to meet the position as it is now. There have been a few cases where some hardship has been involved. Under the Act, it is now necessary that publication of the farmer's intention to apply for a certificate shall be made in two Melbourne newspapers, and also ill a country newspaper. ~ome of the country newspapers are issued only once a week, and protection is afforded to the applicant only from the day following the last day of the pUblication of the advertisement. There have been cases where advertisements indicating the intention to apply for certificates have appeared in Melbourne newspapers and been lodged with country newspapers, and some of the creditors have hopp.~,d in, and the farmer lias not been protected because of the delay. For that reason, we thought it necessary to provide protection from the time he lodges his application.

Mr. SLATER.-But what if a creditor has seized goods under a judgment, and has sold them? How will you restore the rights of the parties?

111'. DUNSTAN.-We realize that in such a case it would be difficult to restore the rights of the parties. We cannot, perhaps, absolutely protect those rights, though we are trying to do a fair thing. Anyone who requires a protection certiD.cate should be protected from the day of the lodging of his application. That is necessary also for the protection of all the creditors·. The fact that he applies does not mean that the certificate will be granted to him. If objections are raised to the application, the case must

. be heard by the Court. . Mr. SLATER.-But if a creditor has

seized goods and sold under a warrant of distress?

Mr. DUNSTAN.---.-After the appliea. tion has been lodged?

Mr. SLATER.-Yes. Yr. DUNSTAN.-When the applica

tion has been lodged, all the creditors

will be notified, and proceedings musi cease.

Mr. COYLE.-They will be estopped by the making of the application.

Mr. DUNSTA,N.-All the creditors will be immediately served with a copy of the application, and no creditor has a right to hop in.

Mr. SLATER.-! agree with you; but I wished to hear your explanation.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-! do not think that any hardship will be inflicted by our proposal. ! appreciate the fact that two parties are concerned. The Government has no desire to bring in legislation that will press hardly on either party. We wish to preserve the interests of the. farmers by this exceptional legislation.

Mr. COYLE (Waranga).-The immediate effect of this legislation is to prevent any dealings whatever i:l the farmer's property, and the essence of the Bill is to preserve the interests of the two parties-to protect the equity of the mortgagor of the land, and to protect the assets for the creditors. This legislation gives the creditors an opportunity of getting what they would not have got if the farmer had walked off the land, or if some of the other creditors h~d been allowed to hop in, as the phrase goes. I appreciate the point raised by the honQl'able member for Dundas. If a seizure of the farmer's property were made by one creditor, other creditors would be at a great disadvantage. It 'will be all right if the position is clear that proceedings are barred immediately an application is lodged.

Mr. DUNsTAN.-The amendment of the law provides for that effect immediately an appli0ation is lodged.

~[r. OOYLE.-I understood that that was the position before.

lVIr. DUNSTAN.-No; it followed the pUblication of the last advertisement appearing in the press.

lir. COYLE.-We wish the measure to be passed. I can understand the position of the honorable member for Ouyen, who is new to this House. He does not understand all its forms, and he is not supported in his efforts to frame amendments. Parliamentary procedure is intricate. No matter how smart a man may be in other walks of -life, he can easily be puzzled by parliamentary procedure,

-Fil,rmers [ASSEMBLY.] Relief Bill.

and he may lose a right that· cannot be restored to him to-morrow or next year. J suggest that after . lunch we should resume OUt' consideration of clause 7.

(At 1 p.m., the sitting '10M s'ltspended .unt'il 2.4 p.m.)

The dause was agreed to, as were elauses 8 to 15.

Clause 16-(As to powers of Board being exercisable by the State Rivers and Water Supply Oommission or the Oloser Settlemen t Board).

Lieut.··Col. KNOX (Upper Yarra).-· There is a reference in sub-clause (2) of this clause to regulations made in connexion with the matter of farmers' relief. I wish to take the opportunity of emphasizing that members of Parliament should he made fully acquainted with all regulat'ions proposed to be made bearing on this legislation. As parliamentary procedun~ becomes more complicated, and as Acts of Parliament become more and more numerous, we are apt to forget that Parliament governs the country rather than that the Ministry of the day does so. We are apt to forget that the chosen representativlls of the people are sent here to pass the laws of the Jan(l. Regulations made in con .. nexion ,vi th those laws are part and parcel of them, and it is just as necessary that members of Parliament should examine. and, if necessary, deal with proposed regulations as that they should examine and deal with the Bills brought down by Governments. I hope that provision will be made in this Bill so that it will be compulsory for copies of regulations under the legislation to be sen t to mem l)("r8 if Parliament is not sitting, and to be snecifically brought under their notice in ParlialIlent if the House is in session.

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands) .--1 recognize the advisableness of honorahle members bei1lg supplied with copies of regulations, and, although I do not think it will be neCeSSlll'V to make provision for that in this dause, I will undertake to see that honorable members are supplied with any additional regulations that may te deemed to be necessary.

The da nse 'was agreed to. Postponed clause 3-(Amendments of

section 21). Mr. BUSSAU (Ott.ven).--Sub-clause (2)

o.f clause 3 proposes to amend the principal Act in certain directions. Section 21

of the principal Act has to do with applications for protection certificates, and 8U'",

section (3) provides that where there is-an objection to the Board hearing an application for a certificate the application may be heard by the Oourt. Sub· paragraph (iii) of paragraph (a) .of sub-c1ause (-2) provides -

At the end of the said sub·section (3) ther~ shall be inserted the following words:-

and may contain a statement to the effect that the creditor objects to the application being further considered by the Board.

,,7here such account contains such a statement the Board shall canse the application and all documents in connexion therewith in its possession to be forwarded to the Court, and the application sha.11 thereafter and in accordance with any rules in that behalf, be heard and determined by the Court, and the clerk of petty' Re!'sions shall notify each creditor specified in the application that the application h8.& been forwarded to and received by the Court and that the Court will proceed on or after a specified date to consider the same;

I move-That the words, "where such account con

tains such a statement," be omitted with thO' view of inserting the words, "where such 3-

statement has been made bv creditors the· aggregate of whose aceounts is not less than· 25 per centum of the total accounts rendered.'·

I have previously enunciated my reasons, for submitting this amendment. The desirableness . of appointing the Board instead of the Court is that we may do away with the necessity for Oourt proceedings, and permit of application to a· body of men who will be more familiarwith the occupation of the applicant than u Court would be. A magistrate very often is a cool, calculating individual whoknows nothing about practical farming,. whereas a Board composed of practical men will dispense justice sympathetically, and with equity. Some decisions arrived at by police magistrates have been to the· detriment of settlers, and the public· generally have marvelled at the judgments given. Where the majority of thj3 creditors do not offer objections to a. Board dealing with such cases, surely the creditors themselves will be the judges 01 whether an applicatio1l should go before-.. a Court or a Board. If the Board is not administering affairs sympathetically and: to t.he benefit of the creditors generally, 25 per cent. of the creditors could, under' the ameudmellt, object, and the Court;

Farmers [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 &lief Bill. 1761

would have to be appealed to. I would prefer the Board to consider all cases, but, in order to carry out the intentions of the Bill as introduced by the Government, I have provided for the proportion of creditors to be 25 per cent. If that proportion objects, the application would have to go before the Court.

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands).--: I ~m not quite satisfied with the wording of the amendment that the honorable member for Ouyen has submitted. I should Ifot object to meeting him on the matter if he sought to include an amendment the effect of which would be that there would have to be a financial interest on the part of the creditors who object to the extent of at least 25 per cent.; or, in other words, to the extent of 25 per cent. of the total liability. Twenty-five per cent. of the accounts may not necessarily mean 25 per cent. of the sum involved. The Chief Secretary has suggested an amendment to take the place of that which the honorable member for Ouyen has moved. The Chief Secretary proposes the use of the words "where such a statement has been made by creditors the aggregate monetary total of whose accounts is not less than 25 per cent. of the monetary total of all the accounts rendered." That would be good, and would meet what the honor-

. able member for Ouyen desires. If he is prep3;red to move an amendment along the hnes suggested by the Chief Secretary, I am prepared to accept it. There is only a slight difference in wording, and I think that the same object would be achieved.

By leave, the amendment was ,~ithdrawn.

Mr. BUSSAU (Ouyen).:-I move-That the words "where such account con

tains such a statement" be omitted, with the view of, inserting the words "where such n statement has been made by creditors the aggregate monetary total of whose accounts is not lesA than 25 per cent. of the monetary total of all the accounts rendered.:'

Mr. DILLON (Essendon).-In connexioll with th~ amendment, I desire to ~ake two or three comments. The honorable member for Onyen, from a statement that he made this morning, seems to be quite sure that the majority of honorable membf'l's of this lIouse do ilOt understand the plight the farmer is in. I would suggest to him that the way

in which the Bill has been received, and in which the clauses have been dealt with up to the present, clearly indicates that not only do honorable members under .. stand the plight of the primary producer, but that honorable· members on all sides of this Cham bel' are particularly anxious to assist in making the burden of that plight slightly less than it is to-day. I could not help wondering, as did the honorable member for Richmond by way of interjection, about the difference between the treatment that has been meted out to t.he " city farmer," who is having just as bad a time as the country farmer, and that meted out to the primary producer who is being assisted by Parliament. While I am in sympathy with the Bill and with the particular clause under discussion, I believe that the statement of the honor~ able member for Ouyen as applied to the metropolitan representatives might be applied with double force to the country representatives as regards their knowledge of the plight of city workers. I am wondering just what the difference is between the position of. the primary producer and the position of the man referred to in an interjection by the honorable member for Richmond, who asked, in effect, what was the difference between the primary producer, in relation to the notice of one month to which reference has been made, and the unfortunate man who receives notice from the Sustenance Department to report for work and, when he fails to do so, is immediately struck off the list. We could just as reasonably plead that the city worker did not receive the notice -that he was out looking for work. We could do that as reasonably as could the representative of the primary producer when he states that the producer was away harvesting or fallowing, and did not receive the notice. I am disappointed that the Government has meted out such different treatment to the unfortunate metropolitan resident ~ho is in straitened circumstances from that meted out to those men i.vho are referred to as the backbone of the country-the primary producers.

Recently the honorable member for :Melbourne asked questions regarding the attitude and the action intended to be taken PY' the Goverllment as regards the sweating that goes on in the metropolis.

1762 1!armers [ASSEMBLY.] Relief Bill.

The Chief Secretary assured -honorable to direct the attention of honorable memmembers that within a few days action bers to the conditions of employment would be taken by the Government to under which the men are engaged in this prevent the evil. A Bill has been brought industry, but out of deference to your down but everybody will admit that it is ruling, Mr. Chairman, I shall postpone frightfully disappoiI~.ting. . my remarks on the subject.

Mr. SLATER.-It IS very controversIal. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. DILLON.-Instead of becoming Mr. BUSSAU (Ouyen).-I move-

less the sweating evil in Melhourne is , I That the followi~lg new sub-paragraph be

fast becoming considerably worse.. 3:111 inserted at the end of sub-paragraph (vii) of very disappointed that the promIse, d.ls- sub-clause (2):- . tinctly made to this House by the ChIef (viii) in paragraph (0) of sub· sectIOn S h t b 1· 1 t even ( 10 ) the words- • ecretary, as 110 eell Ivec up 0 Provided that 'any such mortgagee ven-in the ~leasure which was discussed by dor person lessor grantee of a bill of sale the Government and presented to Parlia- holder of a lien owner purchaser or ment. All that the amending factories other grantee may at any. time pr~or to

. S d the issue of a protectIOn certIfic~te legislation will do IS to prevent un a1 l7ive to the farmer one month's notIce work in one particular industry, and, If in writing of his intention to exercise that is'considered to be sufficient answer to any remedies available to him and the the requests that the Government shou. Id fai-mer shall not be entitled to a certi·

ficate thereafter unless he applies for take some action to stamp out the sweatmg tho same within one month after his evil I cannot agree. I have sworn state- receipt of such notice-me~ts from people who are interested in aro hereby repealed. this particular work. vVithou~ going into In explaining the amendment, I direct the question of hours and partlcular days, attention to the proviso to paragraph (c) the statements refer to the firm of Ing. of sub-section (10) of section 21 of the L. Benini, of 211-215 Cardigan-street, principal Act, which is set out in the Carlton. The registered shareholders of amendment. The operation of the Act the company are Benini, his wife, and one has been nullified in cases in which the of their countrymen, who took out a total farmer failed to apply to the Court of 2,000 shares. The compan:y was· within a month after notice was given formed for the purposes of carrymg on by a creditor. The notice may have the manufacture of electrical equipment been sent to the farmer during harvest and imitation marble materials. It is at time, and his wife or daughter may ha~e present engaged in manufacturing chains. received it when the farmer was out III

and the men in that particular fclC- the fields, and failed to give it to him tory--- when he returned home. He would not

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard).-The know anything about the notice, and honorable member must adhere more' h0cause he did not apply for a protection closelv to the amendment. He is enter- certificate within one month he would be ing i~to the discussion of other matters. debarred from obtaining a certificate P~rhap.3 he does not know the particular thereafter. subject under discussion. The question Mr. COTTER.-Suppose the creditor under consideration is an amendment R0nt him a registered letter. moved by the honorable member for Mr. BUSSAU.-The trouble is th8.t Ouyen and I ask the honorable member if the debtor farmer does not apply for to confine himself to that. a certificate within one month after the

Mr. DIJ..JLON.-I thank you,' Mr, notice has been received, the creditor Chairman for having advised me of the retains all his legal remedies against. the purport of tJhe amendment. I think that debtor. Why should the debtor lose his I can COlmect these chains with the right to take advantage of this l~gisla-

. amendment. They are used ou reapers tion if he fails to apply for a' certIficatp. and binders and other machines, and within a period of one month? I do these will represent in many cases at 110t know why the proviso was included least 25 per cent. of the farmer's pro- in section 21. perty, and the firm:s W hich use these S· Th h H • Mr. LATER.- e ot er ouse In· oh.ains will be included amongst the creditors of many farmers. I want ~erted it.

Farmer, [20 OCTOBER, 1932.] Relief Bill. 176~

M.r. BUSS AU. --If the proviso were removed the creditor would not be deprived of any remedies, but the debtor would be protected against the rapacious creditor. The provision contained in the proviso has been used as a weapon to force the debtor to apply for a certificate, the creditor not wishing to use his legal remedies against the debtor. In many cases the debtor knew that if he did not apply to the Oourt within a month he could obtain nO relief under the Act, and therefore he was forced to apply. What I want is the repeal of the useless provisQ in paragraph (c) of sub-section (10) of section 21 of the princinal Act.

Mr. LINTON (Boroondara).-It 11) more than two weeks since this important Bill was explained to the House, and members have had an opportunity during that period of giving some consideration to the preparation of amendments, and their circulation in the ordinary way. Members are placed at a disadvantage now. Amendments are being moved, but there are no printed copies available. This procedure is dangerous, because we should be afforded the opportunity to give every amendment the consideration that it deserves. I am not opposing the amendment now before the Ohair, but I think -that in fairness to themselves honorable mem· bel's should insist on amendments being printed and circulated so that they might have a means of examining them.

Mr. COTTER (Richmond).-I do not want it to be thought that because I am It suburban farmer I am opposed to amendments moved by country farmers. The honorable member for Ouyen seemed to convey the impression that the average farmer is a stupid fellow, and that if a h·tter js p03ted to him he does not receive it., I am satisfied that any Department that is dealing with a farmer and wants him to receive an important notice takes. care to register the envelope containing the notico. According to the honorable member for Ouyen,_ the farmer might be out harvesting when a letter arrived at the farm house, and because of that h<!J night llot recaive it. I flUppOS~ the farmer retu.rns home at ni~ht. Surely he does not go out harvesting at night.

Yr. OLD.-N 0, but some of your con-3tituents do.

Mr. COTTER.-I am dealing now with the average farmer. I have been long enough in this House to know that the farmer is not a stupid nerson, and that he does receive letters posted to him. The honorable member for Ouyen cannot make excuses for the farmer in that way. Suppose a letter is sent to one of my constituents instructing him to report at the Government Labour Exehange to answer a call for work, and he does not put in an appearance. The excuse that he did not receive the letter i& not sufIicjent.. His name is struck off the list. A firm that sends an important notice to a farmer will take care to register it so that there will be a receipt proving that the farmer received the notice. I do not want to do anything that will be detrimental to the interests of the farming community. In all the years I have been a member of this House I have never voted against road, bridge, or other proposals in which the farmer has been interested. But I am getting sick and tired to death of listening to country members, who have been pulling the strings of every Government since I have been here. The present Minister of- Lands was formerly the chief among them. When he sat in the corner during a former regime, he dictated the terms laid down by the Farmers Union party, and when he declined to sit after 11 o'clock at night, the Government had to give way, and he went home. I do not want to injure the farmer in any way. Though I am a metropolitan member, I give as much consideration to the farmer as I give to the worker in Richmond. But I do want country members to be fair, and to show some interest when we have a matter before us affecting metropolitan interests. Country party members will Dot help metropolitan members in any way, but they expect us to help' them. This morning I sat and listened to most stupid apologies on behalf of the farmer. We were told th:e farmer might not be at home when a certain notice was received; that he might be away harvesting; that his wife might get the letter, and he might never see it. Surely the wife would hand the letter over to her husband when he returned from his harvesting. In any case, the honorable member for Ouyen should have been prepared with a reasonable am.endment.

·1764 Farmers [ASSEMBLY.] Relief Bill.

Mr. B1JSSAU.-Your Government should not have put the proviso in the 1ast Bill.

Mr. COTTER.-Honorable members in the :Ministerial corner do not display much intelligence when they reply to an argument put by the Opposition, " Why did not your Government do something," or "Why did your Government do something." The present Government has a majority of 40, and the honorable member for Ouyen is included in that majority. The Hogan Government had a direct following of only 30 members in a House of 65. We never had a firm Ihold on the Treasury-bench. . Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-This Government has not too firm a hold, either.

Mr. OOTTER.-The Hogan Government had to do the best it could. The honorable member for Ouyen ought to get up in caucus next Wednesday and bring pressure to bear on the Governrnen t to do what he wants them to do.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard)~There is nothing about that in the amendment.

Mr. OOTTER.-I did not know that there was an amendment. I thought we were simply asked to omit a provision for which no substitute has been offered. I am not prepared to knock anything out unless something else is substituted for it. The honorable member should tell us what he wants in place of .it.

Mr. BUSRAu.-We do not want anything in place of it; we want the proviso to go out altogether.

Mr. COTTER.-I think I shall vote with the Government.

Mr. OLD (Swan Hill).-I take exception to the remarks of the honorable member for Boroondara. That honorable member charges other honorable members with incapacity when he says that, inasmuch as the Bill was introduced by the Government a fortnight ago, honorable members should have come to the House to-day prepared to submit whatever amendments they desire. The honorable member for Boroondara has not been in the House as long as some other honorable members. When he has been here a little longer, he will understand that, in the course of a second-reading debate, objections to a Bill are set out by the various speakers, and that it is always wise to wait until the· second-reading

stage has been concluded before the framing of amendments is undertaken. Apparently, outside the Oountry party, members are not sufficiently interested in the Bill to bring forward any amendments. Let me now deal with the objections raised by the honorable member for Richmond. That honorable member is always fair in his statement of a position ..

MI'. TUNNEcLlFFE.-And he is always interesting.

Mr. OLD.-I. readily admit that. I have never known him to give a vote against the interests of the man on the land unless the circumstances were such as to induce him to vote against his better judgment. He told us that the hon-0rable member for Ouyen desired the proviso in paragraph (c) of sub-section (10) of section 21 of the Unemployed Occupiers and Farmers Relief Act to be eliminated because the farmer, upon whom a notice had been served by his credito-rs, might be away from home and the notice would be received by somebody else. I do not think that a majority of honorable members understand the situation. The position is that there are very many holders of hire-purchase agreements, and a swarm of them may, through their agents, descends upon the farmers with notices in respect to 90 different implements, with a view to regaining possession of them, ~nless the farmers make an application within one month for protection oertificates. They make it a practice to send out notices wholesale, and thereby to force farmers to seek the protection of the Court ~ Why is this done ~ It is because, in the allocation of the crop pro": ceeds, Parliament unfortunately placed the manufacturers of implements and some ot.hers in a favoured position. If the suggestion of the honorable member for Ouyen is adopted, these people will not have the same opportunity of forcing farmers to seek protection certificates.

:Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-May I suggest to the honorable member that if his party will vote with the Labour party, we will carry the honorable member for Ouyen's amendment~

Mr. OLD.-I am pleased to have t.hat assurance from the Leader of the Opposition. I have stated why we object to the proviso in parag~aph (c) of sub-section (10) of section 21 of the principal Act. It does seem to me that either that


proviso shoilld be wiped out altogether, or it should be amended in such a way as to operate fairly to the farmer.. I Ull

derstand that the proviso was inserted in the principal Act in another place, and was agreed to by this House under pressure. There was a fear that if it were not agreed to we would lose the measure.· Wa are now reviewing the legislation which was passed last year, and it is our bounden duty to frame the present Bill in the best possible way. I suggest to the Min· iater that if he will' not agree to the deletion of the proviso altogether, he might favorably consider a proposal to extend the period in which an application must be made for a protection certificate, from one month to six months.

Mr. BLAcKBuRN.--.-That, or any other old amendment.

Mr. OLD.-I do not say that. I want to be fair. If the Minister will agree to give the farmer six months in which to apply for a protection certificate, we will aot reasonably if we accept such an amendment. Suffice it to say, the provis(, in the principal Act is objectionable, and the Ministry has shown no desire to alter it in any way. It is, therefore, incumbent on the honorable member for Ouyen, and other honorable members who are sufficiently interested in the distressed farmers, to take whatever steps are nenessary to bring the matter definitely before the Minister. I hope that the Minister will agree to review the legislation in the light of experience, and to extend the period in which an application for a protection certificate must be made, from one month to six months.

Mr. SLATER (Dundas).-The statement made by the honorable member for Swan Hill as to the circumstances under which the proviso in paragraph (c) of sub-sectioll (10) of section 21 of the principal Act was inserted, is accurate. This provision was inserted by another place. At the time it was difficult to understand the reason for its insertion except that another place was seeking to put the f:eeured creditor in a position where he could enforce his rights and compel the mortgagor to apply to the Court for a certificate. What has happened sinc3 the provjsion was inserted is exactly what the honorable member for Swan B ill has Raid-that in the northern parts

of Victoria people having hire-purehase rlgreemellts over the implements of many farmers have been able to invoke this provision to force their hands against t.he farmers. I think the whole working' of the provision instead of being helpful has been adverse to the interests of the farmers. I hope that the honorable member f(II' Swan Hill will not persist in his suggested compromise. The principle is bad whether the term be one month Cl" three or six months. If he adopts the suggestion of six months, we may as well leave the proviso as it stands. It is unreasonable, and it has acted against the farmer, because it has compelled him to apply for a certificate and risk his application. He has to invoke the machinery' of the legislation when the interests of the secured creditor have Hot been in jeopardy. I suggest to the honorable member for Swan Hill and to the honorable member for Ouyen that they persist with their amendment seeking the 'Jntire omission of the proviso. The proviso will be just as objectionable if the time is enlarged from one month to three or six months. When the proviso was inserted by another place, I found it difficult to discover reasons justifying it. We were compelled to agree to it in order to get the Bill passed, and we have found during the last twelve months how adversely it has worked to the farmers' interests. For all of these reasons I trust that the Committee without any party alinement will support the amendment, and agree to omit the proviso.

Mr. LINTON.-Will the Minister read the original section?

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands) .-Section 21 of the Unemployed Occupiers and Farmers Relief Act provides, among other things, that on the gazettal of the certificate actions, proceedings., execu· tions, seizures, &c., against a farmer are not to be commenced, and pending ones are to be stayed. The last part of paragraph (c) of sub-section (10) .of the section l'eads-

Provided that allY such mortgagee vendor' person lessor grantee of a bill of sale holder of a lien o\vner purchaser or other granteamay at any time prior to the i:,<sue of a protection certificate gi \'e to tho farmer one month's notice in writiug' of 11is intention to exercise any remedies available to him and the farmer shall not be entitled to a certificate thereafter unless he applies for the same \\"itllill one month after his receipt of such notice.

1766 Farrners [ASSEMBLY.]

r regrpt that I cannot accept the amendment nor can I accept the suggestion made by the honorable member for Swan Hill. The effect of the amendment would be to repeal the proviso that I have just read. I point out that the proviso deals only with action on the part of the creditors prior to the issue of any protection certificate. It places a responsibility upon creditors, mortgagees, and holders of liens, to give ,the farmer one rr~onth's notice of their intention to enforce their remedies. In other words. it gives the farmer one month in which to make up his mind whether he win apply for a certificate or make other arrangements. It is only a questio'n whether one month is sufficient or whether he should have a longer period to decide whether a certificate is essential in his interests. I do !lot object to meeting the points raised by honorable members who have interested themE'elves in this matter, and I will agree to the extension of the period from one month to two. If a creditor gives a farmer two months' notice, the latter ought to be able in that time to ascertain whether or not it is in his interests to apply for a certificate. That extension gives a 100 per cent. advantage over what the present Act gives, and I appeal to those interested in the welfare of thefarmers not to jeopardize the passage of the Bill. A number of farmers are awaiting the enactment of this measure, which will liberalize the conditions. Instead of a farmer having to suffer the indignity and humiliation of Oourt proceedin!!s, he will be able to make nis application to the Farmers Relief Board, and it will determine the matter. That l:rovision will be of great advantage to t.he farmers who do not like the stigma of the Oourt proceedings.

Mr. SLATER.-That can be secured only by the consent of the' creditors.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-We have inserted a nrovision that creditors in respect of 25 per cent. of the farmer's debts must lodge an objection to the Farmers Relief Board dealing with this matter, otherwise the Board wiJl determine the question. In the interests of the speedy passage of the measure, and of those whom the legislation is designed to serve, I appeal t~ honol'able members to accept two months'

notice. The proposal is one that wilt meet with general approval. I am sym-

. pathetic. to the principle of the amendment, but I want the Bill to pass both Houses. It is easy to move amendments, but,. after all they do not get anywhere unless we can get them agreed to by both Houses. We may insert an amendment that may be of advantage to one section, but of disa:<lvantage to another. In this legislatIOn we have to cater for the creditors Hnd to some degree meet the requirements of the farmers. We ha-\re to consider the interests of both parties, and to hold the scales of justice between them.

Mr. ANGUS (Gunbower).-It would be an improvement if the measure provided that a registered letter must be sent to the farmer. No matter what tim.e is decided OIl, the forwarding of a regIstered letter should be insisted on. I do not wish to stress the question at all.

Mr. BUSSAU (O'u,yen).-In reply to the honorable member for Richmond I , am concerned about the Bill, not only from the poor farmer's stand-point, but also from that of every elector. I am dealing with the measure on its merits. The whole of the intention of the Bill to give relief to the farmers is defeated by this clause. A month after a debtor receives a notice, he is debarred frorrreceiving protection, and it is not fair. If we are going to give protection to one man we must give it to everyone. It has been said that we must protect th:..~ rights of the creditor and of the debtor, but by eliminating this proviso, we shall D;ot take away any of the creditor's legal r1!!hts. If the proviso remains he will have rights that he should n~t have. We say that it is absolutely unfair 'in the first place to compel a man to seek protect jon, and that if he does not do so all his rights to obtain protectio~ are taken flway from him. Under this provision, fir~s have deliberately issued wholesale notIces upon all arid sundrv.

Mr. DILLON.~Would you prefer the issue of a writ? .

Mr. BUSSAU.-N o. If the 'farmer does not apply within the month he cannot apply in future for a protection certificate.

Mr. DILLON.-Suppose that, instead of a notice being sent, a Wl'it is issued. What is the difference ~ .

Farmers [20 OCTOBER, 1932.J Ret'iej Bill. 1767

Mr. BUSSAU.-The farmer could obtain a protection certificate. ~he parties moving against the farmer do not Issue a writ because they know that pub]i(' opinion would be against them. They send him a notice to compel him to obtain .a protection certificate. There are, how.ever, any number of men to-day who cannot now obtain certificates because thej' .did not apply within a month of receiving notice.

Mr. LINTON.-What action can we take to compel farmers to apply within a. month ~

Mr. BUSSAU.-That is not the point. Parliament frames legislation to give pro· tection to necessitous farmers. If at a particular per~od they do not require pro-tection, why should they be compelled to go to the Court, within one month after receiving a notice, to obtain a protectioh certificate ~ But if they do not go at that time they cannot go afterwards. They are debarred from all protection under the Act.

Mr. SLATER.-Hear, hear! That is the most serious point.

:1\11'. BUSSAU.-The whole situation is absurd. I shall stick to my amendment.

Mr. OLD (Swan Hill).-I do not think honorable members understand the clause. As the honorable member for Ouyen has pointed out, if a farmer who has obtained an implement under a hire-purchase agreemeJlt cannot meet his obligations he may be served with a notice. The parties serving ·the notice may even send him, with it, a copy of the section of the Act undei' which he may apply for protection. The party who has provided the farmer with the implement under the hire purchase arrangement may represent only onefiftieth of the farmer's creditors; but unless the farmer, within one month of re .. <:eiving the notice, applies for a protection certificate he' is debarred from doing so, no matter how seriously his circumstances may develop, for as long as this legislation stands.

Mr. McKENzIE.-He can be sold up. Mr. OLD.-There is no need for the

Act to specify a time limit. As the honOJ'able member for Ouyen just said, the situation is absurd.

Mr.·DUNSTAN (lfinister of Lands).With re.spect to the matter' brought forward by the honorable member for Gun-

bower, there is a good deal to be said in favour of providing for notices to be sent by registered letter. The fact that the farmer, or some one else on his behalf, on taking deli v'ery of the registered lette:r, must give a receipt for it, would prove eOllclusively that the farmer had obtained snch notification. Therefore, I agree that there should be some provision made along those lines .

With respect to other points raised in the course of the debate on this clause, I fail to see the force of the arguments that have been advanced. First, it is laid down in the Act that a mortgagee Q}'

creditor nlust give notice to the extent of one month. After that month has expired he will enforce his rights. The honorable member for Ouyen said that a farmer who has been given notice, and has not applied for protection within one month, will have no right henceforth to make application. Of course, he will have no such right, because his creditor has given him one month's notice of intention to foreclose or take other action. I am prepared to extend the period in which the farmer may take steps to protect himself, say, to two months. It is easy enough for the honorable member for Dundas and other members of the Opposition to criticize now, but there was no anxiety displayed on their part, when the Labour Government was in office, to provide a farmer with more than one month's grace in which to make up his mind whether or not he would go for a protection certificate. It must not be forgotten that this mea-sure has to be passed by both Houses of Parliament. It will avail us nothing if we do certain things in this House and the other House refuses to concur in them. As I have said, I am prepared to provide for two months' notic.e to 11e given, instead of one; but I would wnrn honorable members that, if the clause is deleted as suggested by the amendment, the Council may not be prepared to accept it, and the matter will end by the clause being passed as it now .stands.

The Committee divided on Mr. Bussau'8 amendment (Mr. Everard in the chair )---

Ayes 19 Noes 27

:Majority against the amendment 8

1768 Farmers [ASSEMBLY. J Relief Bill.

Mr. Bennett Brigadier Bourcbier Mr. Bus~,au " Cotter " :Frost " Hoga.n

Holland " Keane " Mackrell

¥"cKenzie

Mr. Allan " Angus

Sir Stanley Argyle Mr. Austin " Coyle " Diffey " Dillon " Drew " Dunstan " Ellis " Fai:rbairn " Holden " Hollway " Kirton

Mr. Barry " Bond " Cain " Hayes.

Mr. DUNSTAN I move-

AYES. 'j Mr. McLachlan

" :Moncllr " Murphy " Old " Prendergast

Slater " Tunnecliffe.

Tellers: Mr. Jewell " Lemmon:

NOES. Lieut.-Col. Knox Mr. Linton Sir Harold Luxton Mr. Macfarlan " Manifold

McDonald Menzies

" Michaelis " Pennington

Wettenhall Zwar.

Telle1-s: Mr. Gray " Maltby.

PAIRS. (Mr. White I " Lind

I " Kent Hughes Dr. Shields.

(Minister of Lands).--

Tha.t the following sub-paragraph be inserted at the end of paragraph (a) of sub-clause (2) :--In paragraph (0) of sub-section (10) for th.e words "one month's notice" there shall be inserted the words "two months' notice," and for the words" one month" there shall be substituted the words II two months ".

That simply has the effect that any mortgagee, vendor, lessor, grantee, &c., will have to give the farmer two months' notice and, if the farmer does not apply for a' certificate within two months of receiving such notice, then he will not have the right to make application after that period. The amendment is designed to help the farmer. It gives him two 1ll0nths in whioh to make up his mind to complete other arrangements. IT nder the last proposal of the honorable member for Ouyen, the farmer may not have received any notice whatever, and the creditor would have been at liherty to step in at once. The amendment which I have moved protects the furmer for two months, whereas, if the provision which the honorable member for Ouyen sought to have removed had been taken out, the farmer may not have received that protection.

Mr. SLATER (D'l1ndas).-I rise to rebut tho observation of the Minister that

the farmer will get nrotectioll for the period of two months. The same objection to the principle remains. The service of a notice. upon a farmer by a chattel mortgagee or the owner of goods subject to . a hire-purchase agreement compels the farmer within two months. to apply to the Board for a certificate. It would be all right if the matter rested there. But we have to consider the consequence of the failure of the farmer to apply for a certificate. That will, as the honorable member for Swan Hill and the honorable member for Ouyen have pointed out, deprive the farmer of the relief which he is entitled to receive, and that will be the case no matter how necessitous the circumstances, and no matter how deserving he is. It is nnreasonable for the Minister to suggest that under theamendment a farmer will be placed in a better position than he would be in if theproviso were not in the Act. The farmer's position is this: If the proviso were not there, and any of the creditors proceeded to enforce their rights against the farmer, and he made an a.pplieation and obtained relief from the Court or the Board, that would be all right. If he failed to do that, he would know what the consequences ot his failure would be, and that the creditor could pursue all his remedies.

Mr. DUNsTAN.-This provision compels. the creditor to give two months' notice.

Mr. SLATER.-It does more . than that. It compels the farmer to apply for a certificate under peril for all time if he does not do so of being. disqualified from any relief under the provisions of the legislation. Theowner of some farming implement worth only £20 can be the means and the instrument of completely depriving a most deserving farmer of the benefits of the le~islation. The Minister can apologize as much as he likes, but the amendment will not put the farmer in any better position. It exposes him to all the danger and all the peril, as has been pointed out by the two honorable members to whom I have already referred. I ask the Committee to hesitate before it places farmers in a position in which so many have beeu placed in the past, ~s the result of the activities of owners of birepurehase implements who have forced


farmers, willy-nilly, int.o making applicati.ons t.o the C.ourt. Owing t.o the attitude .of s.ome .of these pe.ople in f.orcing the farmers in that way, we had t.o create special machinery and special C.ourts in the n.orth-west in .order that the applicati.ons eQuId be heard. I think that between 30 and 40 were listed because .of the .owners .of hire-purchase implements f.orcing the farmers t.o g.o to t.he C.ourt f.or pr.otecti.on certificates, or else be deprived f.or all time .of relief. I r.ose t.o rebut the Minister's c.oncluding observati.on, which d.oes n.ot disguise the fact that if his pr.op.osal is agreed t.o many farmers will be placed in a p.ositi.on of peril.

Mr. DUNsl'AN.-Y.ou will admit that my proposal gives twice as much time as the Labour G.overnment gave under its :8ill.

Mr. SLAl'ER.-N.o. I p.ointed .out that the Lab.our G.overnment did n.ot 'value this pr.ovisi.on. In fact, it was h.ostile t.o it. N.ow that the Minister has prov.oked me int.o doing s.o, I shall explain the .origin .of the pr.ovision. The pr.op.osal was submitted t.o me by a firm '.of s.olicit.ors in Melb.ourne, and I rejected it, because I did n.ot think that it was fair. When the Bill went through an.other place, the provisi.on was inserted there, and the G.overnment was obliged to accept it rather than lose the Bill. Surely the H.ouse is entitled to resiet the retenti.on .of this provisi.on.

Mr. DUNSl'AN.-Y.oU did not mention the matter in y.our sec.ond-reading speech.

Mr. SLATER.-I did n.ot want t.o delay the sec.ond-reading. The honorable member f.or Ouyen, and the h.on.orable member f.or Swan Hill, have been 'brought int.o cl.os~r t.ouch with this pr.oblem than I have. Many.of their c.onstituents have had experience of this legislati.on, and th.ose tw.o members are familiar with the subject. I h.ope that the C.ommittee will n.ot be misled by the c.oncluding .observat.i.on .of the Minister.

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands).I intend t.o· submit the amendment in an altered form, and theref.ore I ask leave to withdraw it.

By leave, the amendment was withdrawn.

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister .of Lands).I now move-·

That the following new sub·pal'agraph be inserted at the end of sub.paragraph (7). subclause (2):-

( ) In paragraph (0) of sub·section (10), for the words" one month's notice in writing," there shall be substituted the words" two months' notice in writing by registered letter," and for the words "one month," there shall be ~ubstituted thE' words" two months."

Mr. FAIRBAIRN (lVarrnambool).-1 regard the Bill, as intr.oduced, as satisfact.ory t.o the farmer, and als.o t.o many pe.ople wh.o are trustees, and wh.o h.old m.ortgages, because it relieves them of il g.ood deal of resp.onsibility that they would have t.o take .on themselves in deciding what relief they sh.ould give t.o a m.ortgag.or. Dealing with the amendment, I desire t.o say that I consider that one m.onth's n.otice was to.o sh.ort, as was p.ointed .out by the h.on.orable member f.or Ouyen. A large number .of farmers who live in towns and villages are away fr.om home f.or a c.onsiderable peri.od during harvesting time, and the limitati.on .of notice to .one m.onth might be very inc.on· venient in their case. The extensi.on .of the peri.od .of n.otice is wise. In legislation of this s.ort, the m.ost vital thing is t.o av.oid delay. If a man is t.o be pressed for a settlement with the view .of taking over the property .or re-p.ossessing an im· plement, the s.o.oner the matter is settled the better it is f.or all c.oncerned. In New S.outh Wales, legislati.on .of this s.ort is very drastic. I have had experience of its w.orking, and I shall .outline .one specific case in .order t.o p.oint .out the necessity of av.oiding delay. A farmer whom I had assisted .on his farm s.old .out at a very g.o.od price. The purchaser f.ound that the debt that he had taken .over was more ihan he c.ould carry. He had no h.ome to g.o t.o, so he t.ook advantage .of the moratorium Act, and remained .on the farm. He was s.o disheartened that he did n.ot put in a cr.op. My friend tried to re· p.ossess the pr.operty, becauf;o he saw that there was no chance .of the purchaser carrying it .on successfully. The New South Wales Act entails a great deal of delay in any acti.on .of this s.ort, and seven or eight m.onths passed before my friend g.ot possession .of the pr.operty. By that time, the arrears of interest on tbe

1770 Farmers [ASSEMBLY.] Relief Bill.

mortgage, rates, and other charges, had mounted to a considerable sum. No fallowing had been done, and, therefore, my friend could not put in a crop that year, and thm'e was no hope of his gettin.g any return from the farm until 1932. His case was hopeless, and he had to walk off the property. Thus two farmers were I'uined, when only one would have been ruined if there had not been so much delay. I was able to arrange for the second farmer to obtain financial backing for a considerable sum, but he said it was hopeless for him to carryon. In Jealing with this legislation, we should be careful that we do not agree with any provision that will cause undue delay. If a farmer is to obtain relief from the Farmers Relief Board:, the sooner he gets it t'he better. Then he can carryon with confidence. If a man is to lose the property, the sooner that happens the better, because the man who takes possession of it can get to work. I agree with the amendment.

The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, was adopted.

Postponed clause 6, providing inter alia,-

In sub-section (5) of section 21 of the principal Act, for the words "first day of May, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-three," there shall be substituted the words " first da.y of October, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-three" .

Mr. OLD (Swan IIill).-This clause provides for the extension of the maximum term of operation of a protection certificate from the 1st of May, 1933, to the 1st of October, 1933. ~f this provision is agreed to, a certificate may be granted to carry a farmer up to the time when he had put in a crop. It is most necessary, I think, that the farmer should obtain protection until the crop is harvested, because he would then be able to sell the crop for the benefit of his creditors. I think this matter must have escaped the attention of the Minister. It is obvious that if the farmer is to be prQtected. up to the time he sows his crop, he should be carried on until the harvest. I move-

That the words "first day of October, One tlJousand nine hundred and thirty-three" be omitted, with a view to .inserting in lieu thereof -the words "fii:st day of March. One tho,!~and nine hundred and thirty-four".

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands).-I am willing to accept the amendment. I may inform the honorable member, h@wever, that the object of extending the operation of t.he present Act to the 1st of October only, was to bring the second jJart of the Act into line with the first part, which automatically expires Qn that date. It was never intended that tha t would be the final word on the BU bject. The intention was tlhat the Government~whatever GQiVernment it might be -would review the whole position next session, and extend the legislation for a further period. It does not matter how long the Act is in force, creditors and others have always got the right to apply for the cancellation of any certificate. !herefore, their rights are not prejud~ced. 1ll any way.

The amendment was agreed to, as wern consequential amendments, and Ithe clause, as amended, was adopted.

The Bill was reported to the House with amendments, and the amendments were adopted.

On the motion of :.Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Lands), the Bill was read a third time. .

FIN ANCIAL EMERGENO)' (MORTGAGES) BILL.

The. debate (adjourned from September 27). on the motion of Mr. Menzies (Attorney-General) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. SLATER (Dundas).-I think it will be agreed that one of the major problems facing the Government and the State at the present time is a problem which is involved, very substantially, in the legis·. lation that is now before us, and I would invite the consideration of the House to it. For some considerahle period during this year the Government has been J:,ressed by various organizations anlt mterests to continue the relief which to D large extent is embodied in the financial emergency legislation-in other wo~ds to extend, particularly, the moratOrIum provisions 'of that legislation. The Government has been urged by

. var~ous interests to remedy many of the CbVlOUS .and patent defects of the existing legislation. The legislation which ~a~; passed last year was new and experimental. It was demanded by the Go-

Financial Emergency [20 . OCTOBER, 1932·1 (Mortgages) Bill. 1771

vernments that ·were then in power, and by their expert advisers in connexion with the attempt to rehabilitate the finances of the country, and it is quito true that it cut across very wellrecognized and long-esta~lished principles of contract and of rIghts. ~hat has surprised me is the changed attItude of the Attornev-General. I listened with a very great deal of interest to him last year when he made one of t~e fin.est contributions ever made to a dISCUSSIon in this House, and what puzzles me today is to understand why the AttorneyGeneral is giving any countenance to the proposal to extend for even ~ day the principles which did such vIOlence to his well-considered views on contracts :md contractual obligations. I know he will pardon me if I read an extract from the very notable speech which he made last year.

Mr. McKENZIE.-It is not fair to quote old speeches. I think we ought to burn llansard.

:Mr. SLATER.-I do not wish to du anything unfair. The Attorney-Gener~l was of opinion that this new and expenmental legislation was a most dangerous thing, and, as I have said, he made a notable contribution to the debate upon it. His statement of the case was a splendid one. It was one with which, if the world were normal and we were living in ordinary times, I would not for a moment qnarrel. But we are not living in ordinary times, and many of our beliefs and conceptions which might have substantial validity in ordinary times, are shattered by the realities of world conditions to-day. When th~se identical proposals were before ParlIament last year, the honorable gentlem~n, speaking to them at the second. readmg 8Lage of the Financial Emergency Bill, said-

I ha.ve dealt to some extent with the business implications of this private interest s(']lfme, but I want to go a lIttle deeper, and to as~~ the Honse to consider how far any Parliament is ~m:ifo.ed in going into the arena of private" husiness an<! J)l:ivR;te relations and taking up contracts WlllC.l eXIst and forc·illly nIh'ring them. Is ~hat one of the func· tions of Parliament! Does any honorable member on this-the Opposition--bide think tllnt it is? It is one of the principles of tho political philosopl1Y of members on this

side of the House that it is no part of the legitimat~ functions of government to impair the sanctity of contracts between citizen and citizen. I can imagine nothing more repugnant to my own views.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-Is not that to be done under the moratorium Bill?

Mr. :MENZIES.-I criticized the Bill on. that basis; but while a moratorium postpone& remedies, it does not alter them.

That is the view which was put se forcibly and in the clearest of languagE> by the Attorney-General last year. It i~ interesting to find the AttorneyGeneral now submitting to this House for its acceptance proposals which cut across those principles which are, or which were, so dear to him.

·Mr. MENZIEs.-But these proposals are the necessary result of last year's legislation.

Mr SLATER.-The honorable gentleman says that these proposals are the result of last year's legislation. If the proposals were so repugnant last year, are they not equally repugnant to-day ~ I hope that the proposals contained in the measure will not represent the last view of this House or of another place, because they very inadequately attempt to deal with the serious problems that are facing such a large section of the community at the present time. I trust that, when the proposals finally emerge from this House and another place, they will be in an entirely different form from that in which honorable members 11O"\V see them. I shall direct my efforts to altering the legislation so that it will be made more effective than it can be made by t.he imperfect and inadequate proposals that the Attorney-General submits to us. Getting back to the fundamental objection of the Attorney-General that the proposals cut across well-accepted lines

, of contract, I say that WIP have to realize that we are living uncleI' world conditions the like of which civilization has not known. We are confronted with monetary problems that are pressing on tho debtor classes, both public and private. In view of these extraordinary conditiong, is it not expedient and desirable that we should consider those problems in the light of the existing world facts ~ Earlier I quoted from an address delivered by Mr. Davidson, manager of the Bank of

1772 Financial Eme·rgency [ASSEMBLY,] (Mortgages) Bill.

New South Wales, and in clear language he justified this violation of contracts because of the extraordinary circumstances that prevail. He delivered thp. Joseph Fisher Lecture in Oommerce at the Adelaide University, and repeated it at the :Melbourne University. According to page 13 of the report of his lecture, he stated-

Equity ~lUggested that this cut in real wages should be balanced by corresponding reductions in interest and in rents. But it is obviously dangerous to break into contracts save under the clearest mandate of national necessity.

I wish to emphasize those words. That is what justifies in these days the violation of principles that are just as acceptable to me as to the Attorney-General as to the ordinary rule of the undesirability of violating contracts and contractual obligations.

I wish to refer to the international attitude towards internati,(mal indebtedness. The world is suggesting that one country-the United States of America-should bear the whole burden of relief so far as international indebtedness is concerned. It is suggested that that country should be prepared to forgo its indebtedness because of its great strength and its paramountcy in world affairs, and because of the great mountain of debt owed to it by Great Britain and other nations. That is the claim made by all the nations except the United States of America. I hope the claim will be voluntarily realized by the United States of America, and, if it is not, that that country will be forced to grant it by the incapacity of the debto'r nations to pay. That statement indicates the international aspect of public indebtedness. It is becamm of the plight of people whom this legislation is designed to benefit that not only this Parliament, but every Parlia·· ment in Australasia, has had to give

-- SterliItg and Gold, March, 1929.

Wool .. .. .. 16' 67d. per lb .

consideration to this problem, and is violating well-recognized and deeplyrooted obligations of contract. Although this legislation benefits certain people, it does no serious injustice to those whose interests are affected. What are the proposals in the present Bill 1 They are, to my way of thinking, entirely inadequate. The major proposal is to extend the existing moratorium relief for another year. I dismiss as comparatively insignificant the provision dealing with trustees. The other proposal enables the Court to give relief where there has been a breach of covenant which, in its opinion, is only of a minor or technical nature. These are the two major prOVISIOns of relief contained in the legislation. It has taken the Government from May until llOW to present these proposals to deal with one of the outstanding problems facing the community.

Mr. MENZIEs.-You realize that the Government had to consider a great number of other proposals and reject them.

Mr. SLATER.-I am sorry that the Government has made its decision and has chosen these proposals, and has deliberately submitted them, although they inadequately attempt a solution of the present problem. We get back 'to the question of the capacity of the people to meet their obligations. I harp on the question of the capacity to meet contracts. Take two of the debtor sections of the 'Community. Does the Attorney-General suggest that the farming community is in a position to meet the intolerable burden of debt that has fallen on it! Let us examine the prices that the farmer has received for his commodities. Surely his capacity to meet his obligations is determined by the return he gets from the things he sells. Let us look at singularly recent figures. Mr. Davidson, in his lecture, quoted the following world prices of Australian exports:-

Sterling, ~Iay, 1932. Gold, May, 1932.

5·18d. per lb. 3' 92d. per Ib: Wheat .. .. .. 5s. 31d. per bushel 28. 8d. per bushel 2s. per bushel Lead .. .. .. £25 lOs. per ton £10 15s. 5d. per ton £8 3s. per ton Zinc .. .. .. £27 3s. 6d. per ton . £12 lIs. Id. per :ton £9 lOs. per ton

Mr. Slater.

Financial Emergency [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 (Mortgages) Bill. 1773

I point out that the 1932 wool price does not take into consideration the exchange advant.age to t.he producer. Is it possible for the farming community to meet obligations which 'were incurred at a time when t.he prices were three and, in some instances, four times higher than they are now ~ Can it meet the payments of interest and principal in the terms of the original obligations? It is a matter of impossibility for the farmers to do so. What is the position of many home purehasers? Many wage and salary earners have had their incomes seriously reduced by the general basic wage reductions and the cost of living reductions. There is still another section of the community who, because of the entire lack of employment, are alsQ deprived, through means over which they have no control, of meeting in these abnormal times, obligations entered into in normal times. I was much interested to read a speech made hy Mr. Winston Churchill, in the course of the debate on the British Budget in the House of Commons on the 20th and 21st of April last. He was referring to the extraordinary monetary changeH which have so seriously affected the relations of debtor and creditor all over th~. world; and the argument he advanced i'3 . the very argument I have put to-clay to the Attorney-General and to those who think 'with him as to the wisdom of compelling the recognition of contractual obli·· gations in the face of the very unreal cireumstances existing at the present 6me. Mr. Churchill said, speaking of the r~_storation of the gold standard-

The price of gold has risen since thell 1)'y more than 70 per cent. That is as if a 12-inch foot rule had suddenly been stretched to 19 or 20 inches; as if the pound avoirdupois had tmddenly become 23 or 24 ounces insteau of-how much is it1-}(i. Look at what this hu." meant to everybody who has been compelled ~,n execute their contracts upon this irrationally rnhanced scale. Look at the gross unfairnehti of "uch a distortion to all producers of new wealth, and to all that labour and science and ~nterprise ca~ give us. Look at the enormouHly increased volume of 'commodities which have to be created in order to payoff the same mot'l., gage debt or loan. Minor fluctuations might well be ignored, but I say quite seriously thal t.his monetary convulsioll has now reached a pitch where I am persuaded that the producers of new wealth will not tolerate indefinitely so hideous an oppression.

That is a most striking statement by one of t:he most prominent political leaders ill

the Old '\T orld. It strongly supports my argument in justifying this legislation, it.s initial introduction, its extension, and its substantial extension along lines that go very much farther than those indicated by the Government in the proposals now before the House. I do not think there is any doubt as to the plight of the world largely because of the monetary problems that confront us. }'fr. Winston Churchill c:ontinues-

We shall then have reached the end of these a.bsurd nightmare years, in which the plenty springing from the enterprise of science seems only to lead to privation; in whieh generolHoj harvests are dreaded like the plague; and in which all man has done and has yet to do is limited by the chance discoveries "and relea~e& of a single metal.

It" is the world's greatest and gravest paradox. N ow I shall quote an extraordinary statement of Sir Auckland Geddes, in thecour'se of a speech which he made jn America-

In Europe we know that an age is dy1ll6' Here in America it would be easy to miss tho signs of coming change, but I ha,:e little douht that it will come. A realization of the aimlessness of life lived'to labour and to die, having achieved nothing, but avoided starvation, awl of the birth of children, also doomed to the 'Yeary treadmill, has seized the minds of millions.

::..\Jr. DREw.-That kind of thing was said just after the Napoleonic wars.

l\fr. SL.ATER.-I do not think Silo Auckland Geddes could have said it then. but I do know that his is one of t.h~ keenest minds in the Olel World. ",Ve cannot liken the present age to the pm;tN" apoleonic era.

Mr. MENzIEs.-There is a good denl that is in common:

Mr. SLATER.-There are many poillts of dissimilarity. Since the Napoleonic wars I-here has been an extraordinary revolution in the methods of production. What has become of the lVralthusian doctrine to the effect that so great ·would become the pressure of the population of this earth on the means of subsistel1ce that the time was not far eljstant when the earth would be destro'yed by that very pressure, on the then knOVi'11 means of maintaininglife 1 The last 120 years have witnessed revolution in every direction in connexion with all forms of production. To-duy there exists in almost every country abundant mechanical means, applied to raw resources and to the land generally, t.o·

1774: Fina'ncial Emergency [ASSEMBLY·l (Mortgage.,;) Bill.

provide a population probably twice as numerous with everything it needs, in abundance, and calculated to give a full and happy life to every individual being. That brings me to an observation made bv Lord D' ..t1.bernon. Honorable member9 will appreciate that I am not quoting men of- revolutionary thought, but thinkers of world renown who may be dassed as being on the side of politics renresented generally by Ministerial supporters.

~1:r. 1.fENzIEs.-Lord D'Abernon is very heterodox on this point. 0'

Mr. SLATER.-I shall ask honorahle members to listen to his words and to judge for themselves--

All essential circumstances-except finandal wisdom-favour an era of prosperity and well-being. Crops are more abundant than ever before; science has developed production beyond all :precedent; inventiveness has discovered new processes. But the capacity to adjust vehicle to burden, and means of payment to requirements, has brought about a crisis, so that many are starving in a world of plenty. The explanation of this anomaly is that the machinery for handling and distributing the products of labour has proved quite inadequate.

When the honorable member for Albert Park suggests that similar statemer!ts were made after the Napoleonic wars, I can only express the opinion that thero is very' little point in that observati.ol/. These extraordinary changes have oc-curred, and the world is faced to-day witl) problems the magnitude of which lias never before heen known or anticipated. It is essential then, that many of our COIl'

ceptions with respect to contracts and contractual obligations should under-go serious reconsideration. That is wh'y the economists suggested at the Premier3' Conference last year that the burden of sacrifie~ should be made as nearly equal as possIble. It was felt that it would he unreasonable to ask the wage-earning sec· tions of the community-many of whom had no opportunity of obtaining employment and very little chance of securing the means of living-to make serious sacrifices whilst those people who enjoyed fixed money claims, no matter how theymight be secured, escaped any additional burden at all. A factor which must not be lost sight of in this relation is that tl1e c~t!aordinar'y fall in prices of commo· dItIes ga ve to all those holding fixed money claims infinitely greater purchasing power with their money. They should

.Mr. Slater.

have been called upon, therefore, and should not have hesitated to undertake the sacrifices which the extraordinary times demanded. Just as sacrifices were demanded and have been applied so far as the wage-earners and bondholders, too, are concerned, so to-day we insist that those people who, because of their economic power and strength, have the money to invest in the forms of securities affected by this legislation, should be compelledit is useless to expect them-to act voluntarily-by legislation more far-reachin~ than the provisions of the Bill now before us, to bear their share of the sacrifices, that are demanded of all.

Not many weeks have elapsed since this House called upon a section of the community to make, what was for them, !l very substantial sacrifice indeed. I refer to the legislation brought down, reducing the payments made under the contributor'y pensions scheme. If ever there was a violation of contract which there would be great difficulty to justify, that was a violation indeed. Yet these men in the community have had their pension payments, which were normally anticipated to be £2 a week, reduced to 37s. a week. Parliament has demanded that sacrifice of them, and is it unreasonable to say that other individuals in the community, particularly those who are not covered by these proposals-and in this connexion I refer to the case of renewed and fresh mortgages entered into after the passing of the legislation-should not be brought into the area of sacrifice, and to that are at present making no sacrifice at all, and the proposal of the Government will not touch them. I t will not bring them into the arena 9.£ sacrifice, and to that extent these proposals are entirely inadequate, and should be amended by Parliament.

I am a little surprised that the Cabinet -Ministers in the Oountry party have lent themselves to these proposals. I am not surprised at the Government, or at the attitude of my friend the Attorney-General. I know his point of view, and I know the grounds upon which he seeks to justify it. But I am not a little surprised at the attitude of the Country _ party members so far as this legislation is concerned, because they know the e~pression of protest that was registered very strongly and emphatically at the

Financi(tl Emefgency [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 ( Mortgages) Bill. 1775

Goornong meeting. Some of them were present at that meetin~, as was the honOJ'able member for Waranga. I repeat that they kno\y the force of the protest that was registered at that meeting, and they know the force of many protests that have since been made by farming eommunities scattered widely ove! this State, demanding in the first place some degree of protection, some degree of Hp.curity, and some relief from the burdens that have fallen upon many of them because of the anomalies in the existing legislation~ Despite their knowledge of those facts we find those honorable members lending themsehres entirely to the Government's proposals. I believe that the Attorney-General is reported to have said at Wodonga last week that these proposals were the unanimous view of the Cabinet, that is to say, they represent the unanimous view of the Cabinet on this very vital legislation. All that I have to say is that the House ought to consider very seriously whether the last word has been said on this problem, and whether the measure represents the true wisdom of the House, or of this Parliament upon this problem. What are the farming sections of the community trying to do? They are trying to reconstruct their industry. Therefore, is it asking too much that the farmers should be placed in a position whereby that reconstruction can be carried out, having in mind the opportunities that were afforded the banking institutions of this State, which in the crisis of the nineties took advantage of the legislation that was passed, to reconstruct themselves, with advantage to the banks, but with considera.ble disadvantage to some of their shareholders and depositors? Because of t.he extraordinary crisis at that time, Parliament realized that it was essential to do those things. I contend that the present crisis, so far as the farming community are concerned, is deeper and more widely spread than any other that has been experienced in the history of civilization. That applies not merely to this State, but to countries all over the world. It applies to farming communities, irrespective Of the fiscal conditions of their country. The tariff barriers of the world, and the ever-increasing height of those barriers, have inevitably impeded free movements of trade, and,

to a large extent, have creat.ed a burden for the farming industry. But, nevertheless, in all countries, the position of the farming communities is so serious that it warrants the most earnest consideration being given by this Parliament to the industry. Every effort should be made to rehabilitate it, reconstruct it, and give it some reasonable opportunity of security. I read an interesting letter that appeared in the Arqus on the 11th of October. It was written by a legal manager, and was headed, "The Case for Cheap Money." The letter stated-

Sir,-Mr. Menzies fears that any restriction on lenders would result in all mortgage money being withdrawn and invested in Government securities. He forgets that this form of in\'estment is now yielding less than 4 per cent., aud that a demand sufficient to take up 10 per cent. of the money employed on mortgage would Im:sen the return to the cheap English levels. hi addition, lVIr. Menzies appraises. such stocl<B as first-class security much more highly than do the managers of the big lending houses, who in the main adhere strongly to the oldfashioned idea that a first mortgage on broad acres comprises the best of all security.

I come now to that part of the letter to which I wish to direct the attention of honorable members particularly-

The long list of mortgagees' sales advertised in the A1'gUS of Saturday, repl'esenting who knows what blasted hopes and ruined lives, constitutes an eloquent appea.l for cheaper money while the price of our rural products remains below the cost of production. Failing a measure providing that interest, rates on rural lands should not exceed 5 per cent., 1 suggest, for revenue purposes, the ::!teep taxing ()f interest in excess of this rate.

Mr. MENZIEs.-That would be a great way to keep interest rates down!

Mr. SLATER.-I do not agree with the point of view expressed, but it is a notorious fact that in every Saturday issue of the Argus for some time past, there has appeared a long list of mortgagees' sales, which perhaps tell more than words the tragedy of the farming industry in this State. It is because we want to give to that industry some security that we have to pass legislation of thiF. character.

That bl'ings me to the question whether or not these proposals are adequate. The House knows very clearly that the proposals that are submitted by the Government only extend the legislation for a year. I do not think for a moment, having regard to the depth of the crisis, that that is at all sufficient to help the farming industry. I think that at least the

1776 Financial Emergency [ASSEMBLY.j ( Mortgages) Hill.

period of moratorium protection should depends upon his industry. If his attibe. two years, and that this legislation tude of mind is made one of uncertainty, should be extended until the 1st of Oc- and of anxiety, the tendency will be to tober, 1934. militate against his industry, and to do

Mr. BUSSAU.-SO do we. everything to destroy it. Mr. SLATER.-I am glad that we are Mr. MAcKRELL.-Prices may rise.

in agreement. I hope that I shall get a Mr. SLATER.-One is extremely opti-similar echo of agreement fQr the next mistic if Qne believes that, under existing proposal that I have to' make. conditions in this country, 0'1' in Qther

Mr. DREw.-Will it not be time enough parts Qf the WQrld, there will be any sub-to think abQut that in -twelve months? stantial improvement in price levels in

I\ir. SLATER.-The very nature Qf the next year. the industry of farming is such that if a Mr. BussAu.-HQpe springs eternal in man knew that the extent of his release the human breast. by way of prevention Qf fQreclQsure Qn Mr. SLATER.-Yes; but from the part Qf his mortgagee WQuld be Qnly Ottawa, and the resolutiQns that were fDr a period of a year, he would ·have arrived at there regarding mQnetary matno certainty about the future, and tel's, Qne gains but few crumbs Qf cQmfQrt. there would be nO' incentive 0'1' encourage- There are a. lQt Qf sick hearts over these lllent for him to use his land to its maximum capacity. He would be agitat- proPQsals because Qf their inadequacy. ing his mind all the time that the legisla- Mr. DUNSTAN.-FQr what periQd did tiQn was operating for Qnly a year. your GQvernment prQvide fQr the exten-

M W H . . siQn Qf the legislatiQn? Was it nQt Qne r. ETTENHALL.- e IS In suspense. Mr. McKENZIE.-It breaks dQwn his year?

morale. Mr. SLATER.-Yes, it was experi-.Mr. MENZIEs.-The honorable member mental legislatiQn, and the present GQ

for Dundas forgets that there are thQu- Yernmellt has the oPPQrtunity Qf buildsands of mQrtgagQrs in the metroPQlitan . ing Qn the fQundatiQn that the Labour area. GQvernment cQnstructed. Our task was

Mr. SLATER.-I dealt with the farm- not easy. The present Attorney-General ing positiQn first, because I believe that made a very formidable attack on our that position is critical, and that the proposals, and· obtained substantial supwhQle structure of sQciety is dependent port from many of his colleagues on the l)l'imarily uPQn the maintenance of pri- OppositiQn side Qf the House. I know mary industry. But I dO' nQt want .the his attitude towards the problem, but I HQuse to' fQrget that my attitude as re- maintain that it is not justified by the gards the rest of the mortgagors in circumstances of life tQ-day. Those the community is no different from circumstances demand and compel a the attitude that I have adopted departure frQm thQse soundly-grQunded .in relation to farmer mortgagors. and traditional ideas which the honorable Their position, their ~ncapacity to gentleman hQlds. pay in the terms of their primary I dO' not want the view to be taken obligation, have been brQught about be- that beca~se I have stressed the PQsition cause Qf circumstances over which IlQne Qf the farming community I am not unof them has had any control. It has been mindful of the insecurity of many home brQught abQut because Qf the weakness of buyers in the cities because Qf the re·,our monetary system, and the collapse of newa] Qf their mortgages since the world prices, affecting, as it has, passage of the emergency legislatiQn, and emplo.yment III every country of in respect of whQm nO' relief is assured the world. I would remind my by this measure. The positiQn of these friend the Attorney-General immedi- people is almost as desperate as that Qf ately that I am just as much con- the farming cQmmunity. They have cerned with the PQsitiQn and the prQblem seen in the extraQrdinary mQnetary of the mortgagQr in the metrQPQlitan area changes Qf the last few years the dis-and particularly the unemployed mort- appearance Qf their life savings. Th~ir 'gagor--as I am with those of the farmer. I equity in their property has gone. It am only putt-ing the position of the farmer is Qne of the greatest penalties that has 'first, because the maintenance Qf Qur life ever been inflicted on thrift that the

F'inanc'ial E'mergency [20 OCTOBER, ] 932.1 (Mortgages) Bill. i771

savings of a life time should have been swallowed up in this way because of a calamity caused mainly by the incapacity of the credit machine to function efficiently in these times of stress and difficulty.

I feel embarrassed in continuing my remarks because of the lateness of the hour and the desire of country members to catch their trains.

Mr. OArN.-It was not fair of tho Government to bring on the Bill so late in the afternoon.

Mr. SLATER.-The ..Attorney-General agreed in one of his speeches wi th the view that some stability must be obtained by the adoption of a method of index numbers when money would rise and fall in value according to its purchasillg power, and it would not be subject to the ,riolent fluctuations that we have known recently because of the caprice of the only method in existence. Interestirlg comments on this phase are contained in an interesting work written by Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics, Yale U nivel'sity, and one of the most notable of the contemporary American economists. Its title is The .1~Ioney Illusion. The author deals with the desirability of introducing some method of stability hy which money movements could be regulated by index numbers based on tht movement of prices, and on page 17.:.l the following statement is made:-

No particular theory of money is implied. Even thmle who do not believe in the .. quantity theory" in any form will admit that every proposal described in this (as well as the preceding) chapter-with. the possible ex· ception of a managed fiat money-would at lE'aRt tend toward stabilization.

No new principle is involved. We havfl stabilized every other unit as fast as we have devised instruments for measuring and fixing them. There is now no excuse for failing to stabilize the one unit left, the unit of money; for now We have the instrument for measuring and fixing it, in the index number.

vVe can, at least, make a beginning. E\"erv other unit was crudely fixed at first. The yard is said once to have been the girth of the chieftain of the tribe, and called 9

" gird"; then it was the length of the arm of Henry I.; then of a bar of iron; now a fraction of a meter, which is a length of a bar of a Rpecial metal kept at a constant tem perature in the Bureau of Standards.

While we have fixed with great rigidity the standard of measurement of practi('ally every unit, there has been no similar standard of measurement fixed in con-

llexion with the essential medium of exchange money.

What would we think if to-day we were to go hack to the "gird," if our yard were the girth of the President of the United States? What would we think if carpet dealers, in terms of a yard RO defined, made contracts during the Taft administration and fulfilled them in the present administration?

Anybody having any knowledge of the dimensions of ex-President Taft and comparing them with those of Mr. Hoover, the present President, would appreciate the illustration.

<NIr. M.KNzIEs.-The book must h.ave been written in the time of Oalvin Ooolidge.

Mr. SLATER.-According to the pref ace, the book is based on lectures given in the summer of 1927 before the Geneva School of International Studies.

I desire now to indicate the nature of the amendments that I have prepared, and which I shall submit when the Bill is in the Oommittee stage. The proposals contained in the measure are absolutely inndequate to meet the existing problem, and ]n the first place I believe that the legisla~ tion should be extended for at least a period of two years, that is, to the 1st of October, 1934:. I believe, furthermore, that we should establish a new principle. We should not continue the existing pro·yjsions of the legislation which compel every applicant seeking relief to apply to u Oourt for that relief. My amendmen t, jf agreed to, will automatically extend all mortgages to thc 1st of October, 1934, whether thev were entered into before tho )Jassing of" the principal Act 01: since, without any obligation on the part of the individual mortgagor to go to the Oourt, but there will be provision enabling the mortgagee to apply to the Oourt for relief in cases which warrant relief. The mortgagee will have this right when the mortga~ol' is not complying with certain covenants of the mortgage or the security is diminishing in value or is being impaired by reason of any act or default on the part of the mortgagor. That would be an important alteration to existing provisions. It is changing the burden of satisfying the Oourt-a hurden which now falls upon the mort·· gagor and would, under the new proposal, fall upon the mortgagee. This is justified by experience of the existing legislation.

1.778 Financial Emergency [ASSEMBLY·1 (Mortgages) Bill.

In the first place, it will be conceded that the proposals would have been hopeless haq they only allowed a mortgagor to get l'elief in regard to interest reductions lipon application to a Court or tribunal. The value of the relief that has been given has been secured by reason of the fact that the relief provisions have applied. automatically and generally to the mortgagors of the State. Just as we have experienced success in this direction in the practical working of the legislation, we suggest that we might go a little further and still be successful. Legislation entitling mortgagors to relief is all right, but we should make provision for a mortgagee in a proper case to appl;v to the Oourt for relief. Other amendments will be submitted t.o apply this -legislation to all mortgages which were renewed after the coming into operation of the principal Act and to all mortgages, whether they have been renewed by deed of extension, or renewed in t.he creation of a fresh security. There is no reason why these obligations should not be the subject of legislation. Provisions that have been drafted very ingeniously by many legal gentlemen to get over the disabilities of legislation like this have not been lost sight of in connexion with the amendments which I wilL submit to the House when the Oommittee stage is reached.

Mr. MENzIEs.-Do you propose to deal with new mortgages altogether-that is to say, with the mortgage in relation to a new security~

Mr. SLATER.-An amendment will be submitted, I understand, by the honorable member for Olifton Hill which .will enable a mortgagor in such a case to apply to the Oourt for the determination of a fair rate of interest. Other provisions will be submitted in an attp.mpt to frustrate the desires of some mortgagees who, in the creation of fresh mortgage secul'ities during the last year, have resorted to very singular devices, in some instances demanding the redemption of a mortgage in gold or sterling in some foreign country: Many such proposals have been drafted during the last twelve months, and have fastened upon the mortgagors very heavy burdens. It is hoped by the amendments I have prepared to frustrate the wishes of these mortgagees.

Mr. MACI{RELL-Will it be made retrospective?

Mr. SLATER.-Yes. I have been at some little disadvantage in making my speech because of my appreciation of the fact that this is a very inconvenient time to address the House, as many members are anxious to catch their trains. I hope that the amendments I shall submit will receive the very serious consideration of t.he Government. I want the Government., not to rely upon its brutal majority, but to take a large view of the distress which has fallen upon so many sections of the community, and for whom real benefits will be secured if my amendments a.re agreed to.

Mr. MANIFOLD.-Are you not losing sight of one important point? How are you going to compel people to lend money in the future?

~fr. BusBAL-You cannot compel them to (10 so now.

Mr. SLATER.-We cannot compel people to lend money, but the view I take o.f that matter is this: :Money is not being poured into the sea, nor is it going out of the country. It is, largely, going into bank deposits. The bank deposits have risen to a higher level than they have reached for many years.

Mr. MENZIEs.-JYloney is going into bank deposits and gilt-edged securities.

Mr. SLATER.-The banks must make use of the money, and I should say that a lot of it ·would be lent on mortgage securities.

Mr. MENzIEs.-Treasury)bills absorb a lot of it.

Mr. SLATER.-That is true. While the question raised by interjection by the Honorary Minister (lVlr. Manifold) does suggest that we are going to dry up the stream of money available for mortgage requirements, the Bill does not touch the acute problems faced by the community at the present time, and offers no relief. The main problem that the State is confronted with is the preserving of some reaso11ab1e degree of security for those men who a.re engaged in production, and who. if some reasonable degree of security is offered to t.hem, can :manage to weather the storm and contmue to engage in production.

Mr. BussAu.-They will be induced to continue,. but they will still make losses.

Mr. SLATER.-In conclusion, I wish to express the hope that t.he Government

AdjoU'rnrnenl. [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Adjo'u'Y'n,ment. 1779

win allow reasonable time for discussion -of amendments in Committee. I do not wish them to be rushed through, and I certainly hope that the guillotine will not be resorted to. I hope that we shall approach this important subject in a broad way, dismissing preconceived ideas and facing the realities of the problemrealities that are evident to us all.

On the motion of Mr. WETTENHAL1.J ( Lowan ) , the de ba te was adjourned until Tuesday,- October 25.

ADJOURNMENT. UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF : WORKS IN

COUNTRY DISTRICTS.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General) ._0-J move--

That the House do now adJourh.

Mr. KENT HUGHES (Honorary Millistel').-In view of the fact that the

I Department. Location of Work.

Public Works .. Towu of Hamilton ..

honorable member for Dundas and the honorable member for Port Fairy and Glenelg asked me to ascertain what allotments of money for unemployment relief works had been made in their districts. I have had returns compiled gi ving particulars of the allocations, but I want it to be clearly understood that we cannot go on in this way and make out a return for each separate electorate. It would involve too much ,vork. However, in view of the fact that it was done for the honorable member for Gippsland North, I thought it only fair to do it for the honorable member for Dundas and the honorable member for Port Fairy and Glenelg.

The following is a statement of allocations made, since the present Government came into office, for the undertaking of unemployment relief works within the electorate of Dundas:-

I Amount of Nature of Nature of Work. Allocation. Allocation.

I

£ .. Concrete channels, 382 Subsidy

kerbs, &c. Forests Commission Parish of Bepcha (south of Hor- Forest works .. 1,050 Grant

sham) Country Roads Arapiles-Grassy Flat (Shire of Road works .. 1,000 Grant

Board Arapiles) Melville Forest (Shire of Dundas) Road works .. 200 Grant Dergholm-Elderslie (Shire of Gle- Road works .. 450 Grant

n9lg) Melville Forest (Shire of Wannon) Road works ., 1,500 Grant

4,582

The allocations for unemployment relief and Glenelg are as follow:-

works within the electorate of Port Fairy

Department. Location of Work. Nature of Work. Amount of Nature of Allocation. Allocation.

£ Public W orka .. Borough of Koroi t .. " Road works .. 75 Subsidy

Borough of Port Fai ry .. Improving parks and 20 Subsidy reserves I

Shire of Belfast ., .. Road works .. 145 Subsidy Portland .. ., " Jetty works .. 1,000 Grant

Forests Commission Heywood .. .. Forest works .. 3,150 Grant Country Roads Merino-Tahara (Shire of Glenelg) Road works .. 550 Grant

Boa.rd Condah-Macarthur (Shire of Road works .. 1,000 Grant Minhamite)

Drik Drik-Winnap (Shire of Port- Road works .. 1,500 Grant land)

8,440

1780 f ASSEMBL Y .J Adjournment.

J may add that £50,000 has been allocated . for the installation of a sewerage scheme at Horsham. The Borough of Horsham is in the electoral district of Lowan, but the putting in Laud of the work may provide relief for ~ome of' the unemployed workers in the north-eastern portion of the electoral \listrict of Dundas.

Mr. CAIN.-Horsham is a long way from the border of Dundas.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-The water scheme goes close to it.

Mr. SI.JATER.--It is 90 miles away. Mr. :KENT HUGHES.-The sum of

£65,000 has been allocated for the instalJation of a water scheme at Warl'nambool. The City of Warrnambool is within the electoral district of Warrnambool, but 1he putting in hand of the work may provide some relief for unemployed workers in the south-eastern portion of Port Fairy and Glenelg. It should have Home effect on the unemployed position ill Port Fairy, though I do not think there Hre many meu unemployed in that area. I wish to state that the Employment Council has definitely decided that there sha:ll be no mention of the names of honorable members representing any electorates when proposals for allocations are under discussion.

Mr. TUNNEC'LIFFE.-They are innocelJt ! . Mr. KENT HUGHES.-The Employ

ment Oouncil is a non-political body, and we do not intend to give further proof that no political pressure is being brought 10 bear on it.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-I should not have taken part in the discussion if it had not been for the desire of the Government to display a lot of innocence. Last Thursday we listened to the honorable member for Gippsland West referring to the need for help in the Koo-wee-rup district. We also heard the Premier sav that the Government does not interfe;e with the Employment Oouncil. The Government, the honorable gentleman said, m.a.kes no suggestions; they come from the Departments. At about 4 o'clock last Thursday afternoon the honorable memher for Gippsland West made an appeal to the Premier to spend money on the Koo-wee-rup swamp in order to clean out drains there. He argued sincerely and quietly th3;t he should get assistance. I do not know who took the matter to the

Employment Council, but he told me on Tuesday the Premier said he would get £22,000.

Mr. BENNETT.-I absolutely contradict that.

Mr. CAIN.-Did the honorable mem· ber get any assistance?

Mr. BENNETT.-N o. Mr. CAIN.-Did he get any motley

promised? Mr. BENNETT.-I distinctly deny that I

told the honorable member that the Premier had said that.

Mr. CAIN.-Did the honorable mem-bel' tell me that he would get £22,000?

Mr. BENNETT.-I told you that the proposal was made.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr. Everard). -Will the honorable member for N orthcote please address the Ohair? The honorable member for Gippsland West will have a.n opportunity later of speaking. i Mr. OAIN.-The honorable memuf:r told me that he got £22,000. If he has told me an untruth that is all right, h'..tt we shall find out from the Premier what amount was given to the honorable member's district. I am not concerned whether or not the honorable member got the £22,000, but I am concerned with tIJe Premier's statement that no suggestions are made by the Government to the EIhployment Council. I wish to know how the suggestion made last Thursday reached the Empl0'Yment Council so rapidly as to produce £22,000 or any other sum for the honorable member by Tuesday. I would not have raised the question if it had not been for the rather arrogant way in which t,be Honorary Minister said he would not worry about this matter of returns. I may say that he is not usually arrogant now, though he was some years ago.

lIr. KENT HUGHES.-YOU cannot beli~ve that the Government does not make suggesti on s.

Mr. O.AIN.-I can believe the h011orable gentleman, but I prefer the Premiel' to say how a request for £22,000 made on Thursday reached the Employment Council and the Cabinet by the following Tuesday.

Mr. MALTBY (Barwon).-I desire to voice my protest against the insinuations of favoritism made not only to-day but on previous occa.sions. I am' as strong a supporter of the Government as there is

Aiijournment. [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Aiijournrnent. 1781

ill the Chamber, and if any special favours were being dispensed, I imag~ne that I should get some of them. On the contrary, municipal councils in my electorate ha~e made applications which I have supported by letter to the Secretary of the Employment Oouncil, but not a single demand of those bodies has been acceded to. N or have I had access to any member or officer of the Oouncil. Some applications for grants have been refused, but the municipal councils have been offered money repayable under the terms of the Employment Council, and sllch loans have been accepted. Where grants have been made, they have been conditional on the municipalities finding £1 for each £1 provided by the Government.

Mr. CAIN.-Why does not a Minister reply?

Mr. MALTBY.-1 am not apologizing for the Government, but I am defending the Employment Council. I t is very pleasant for some honorable members to exercise their influence in a selfish manner: on behalf of their constituents, but it is refreshing to find that matters are being treated on their merits without reference to the persistency of the honorable members concerned.

:Mr. C.\IN.-Is that why £6,000 was given to Wodonga a day or two before the by-election ~

Mr. MALTBY.-Whatever money has been allocated to my district has bee.n given on the merits of the application, and it has not been due to my influence. That state of affairs is a great contrast to what prevailed prior to this Government taking office. I strongly resent the insinuations made, not only to-day, but on previous oocasions, about Government in-fluence being brouP'ht to bear on the Employment Council. I make no apolo,g:y, but I feel the statement made by the honorable member for N orthcote called for a reply from a private member. As a private member, I am concerned about th(; honour of my party. When the honour of the Government is attacked, I feel it is my duty to defend it and to mention my experience. The members of the Opl)Osition are more concerned about scorih~ off the Government than in makin~ out ~ true case. I suggest that my experience is typical of that of other honorable members. If money is to be allocated to the


Koo-wee-rup swamp, no doubt it will blj granted on the merits of the application.

Mr. MENZIEs.-The Opposition cannot understand that ~ort of thing.

Mr. :MALTBY.-The members of tho Opposition are so saturated with the old idea that they find it hard to imagine that we have reached the stage where there is fairness in the distribution of this money. I cannot allow the statement made by the honorable member for N orthcote to pass unchallenged.

Ml" CAIN (Northcote).-I made no insinuations. I made a statement of fact that I venture to suggest cannot be disproyed. I have asked for information.

Mr. :MALTBY.-YOU should apologize. Mr. OAIN.--I will not apologize at the

honorable rriember's request. If the Go .. vernmcnt had to rely on him for its defence, it would be in a bad way.

Mr. DUNSTAN'.-In the interests of which party was the £6,000 given tli

Wodonga? Mr. CAIN .-The Government parties,

I presume, but certainly not in the interests of the Labour candidate. The honorable member for Gippsland \Vest does not dispute that he asked for money last Thursday. He told me he got it, but now he says he did not tell me that.

:Ml'. BENNETT.-I have not got it. :Mr. CAIN.-The honorable member

has been promised it. If he has not got it, that mnkes my case better. I understood that he told me that he had it-that the recommendation had gone through the Employment Council. If it has not gone through the Employment Council, and t'he honorable member has been promised the money, it makes my case stronger. The Premier told us last Thursday that no suggestions were made by the Government to the Employment Council; the suggestions came through the Departments and were considered on their merits. The honorable gentleman also pointed out that after the recommendations were made, the Cabinet had the power of veto. If that statement is true, I wish to know by what miraculous process the request of the honorable, member for Gippsland West for £22,000 made at 4 o'clock on Thursday got to the Employment Council so that the 'honorable member had the information by Tuesday, without political influence.

1'82 Adjournment. [ ASSEMBLY·-f ~tljoumment.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-The case of the honOI'able member for Gippsland West is so good that he anticipates he will get the money. •

Mr. BENNETT ( Gippsland West).I was surprised to hear the remarks made by the honorable member for N orthcote, and I resent them, not only on my own behalf, but also on behalf of the Premier and the Government. Beyond the speech I made in this House when I put forward to the Premier, who was in his seat, the advisability of spending money on the drains in the interests of the Koo-weerup settlers and of production, I did not speak to the honorable gentleman or any other member of the Cabinet. So far as I know, neither the Premier nor any other Minister made any representations to the Employment Oouncil. For months I have been endeavouring to induce the State Rivers and Water Sunply Commission to get money in the interests of these men as well as the unemployed. I knew that a schedule was being prepared, but when it would be submitted I did not know. I wanted to impress on the Premier that if the scheme were carried OU1i, effective and reproductive work would be the result. I was informed afterwards that the schedule of the proposed work had been passed on. This was after I had been advocating for months that it should be put in hand. 1 did not see that schedule of work.

Mr. (JAIN.-YOU told me that. Mr. BENNETT.-I will tell the House

what I told the honorable member for Northcote. It was that the Employment Council had approved of works amounting to £22,000. I consider that what has been said this afternoon is a base insinuation against the Premier and the Government, and against myself.

Mr. CAIN.-I did not make any reflections on you. They are all on the Government.

Mr. BENNETT.-The Government is quite fully exonerated. I neither spoke to the Premier nor to any other member ~f the Cabinet. The Employment CounGil has done its work, and in my opinion iii did it well. It saw that the scheme was a good one, and that the work proposed to be put in hand was essential, and it had the good sense to approve of the schi3dule.

Mr. CA.rN.-Oan you tell us how the project got through betw'een la&t Th·tF]'!;-

day and Monday, although it had not bee:m put through after the months in w1n:ie.h you had been making efforts in that direction ~ I will tell you how it was. The Premier put it through.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr. Everard). -Order! I must ask honorable members to cease interjecting. We shall not get away until midnight if this kind of thing goes on.

Mr. CAIN.-We do not mind. Th.e gag cannot be put on us now.

Mr. BENNETT.-I just want to say, in conclusion, that there has been no Government pressure put on, so far as I am concerned. The Government has never done anything for my electorate. The Employment Oouncil recognized that the work I have been advocating was essential, and at the same time reproductive work, and, in its good sense, it recommended it. I only hope now that the Government, when the matter comes before it, will have the good sense to approve of it.

Mr. McKExzIE.-And I hope you get it.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).The honorable member for N orthcote is usually such a conspicuously fair fighter that I regret that he should have lent himself to the making of insinuations of the kind made here this afternoon. The allegation, stripped of its stlI'1"ounding persiflage, is that the Government, or the Premier, has given directions to the Employment Oouncil concerning what works shall or shall not be approved. That allegation I definitely deny, and with no mental reservations whatever.

Mr. CAIN.-My allegation was not concerned with works generally. I raised only one issue, and that was, the matter raised by the honorable member for Gippsland West last Thursday. This evidently went before the Employment Oouncil, and got through so rapidly that I was surprised, and wondered how it had got through.

Mr. MENZIES.-All I need to do fm'ther is to say this-and I think the House will believe it-that the Cabinet has never, direcdy or indirectly, submitted to the Employment Council any proposal for the expenditure of relief money on

Adjournment. [20 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Adjournment. 1783

works, with one exception. That exception occurred on account of a number of dismissals having been made from the State Coal Mine at W onthaggi, so that it became desirable that the Government should interest itself in the creation of certain unemployment relief works there. 'Vith that exception, I repeat, the Cabinet has not submitted any proposal to the Employment Council, and has not dealt with any proposal for the expenditure of money out of unemployment relief funds except on the recommendation of that body.

Mr. CAIN.-Is that true of every member of the Cabinet individually ¥

Mr. TUNNEoLIFFE.-No. The Minister is knocking down a straw man.

Mr. MENZIES.-I can only speak of the Cabinet, and I am speaking of Cabinet decisions and discussions. If it is going to be supposed, beyond that, that some individual member of the Cabinet has told the Employment Council what it is to do, then all I can say is this-and I do not require to mince words-that· it is a gratuitous affront to the council, the members of which are doing excellent work in an honorary capacity. It is an affront to suggest that that body is going to abandon its own views as to the merits or demerits of a proposal to take orders meekly, to accept suggestions or instructions, from. some individual member of the Cabinet. I do not believe for one moment that that has been done. So far as the Cabinet is concerned, it has not been done, and it will not be done.

Mr. TUNNEoLIFFE.-We are not responsible for the honorable gentleman's beliefs.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer).-I have not been present throughout the course of the discussion, but I have gathered, since entering the Chamber, that my name has been mentioned. The Attorney-General has denied the statement just dealt with by him, on behalf of the Cabinet. I give it absolutely emphatic and complete denial as Premier of the State.'

Mr. CAIN.-What are you denying?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That I have at any time approached the Employment Council.

Mr. CAIN.~I did not accuse you of that.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-When I say that, I wish to mention just the one exception that has been referred to already by the Attorney-General, and I want to say a little more about that particular matter. The honorable member for W onthaggi, accompanied by the mayor of Wonthaggi, 'waited on me and pointed out that between 300 and 500 men had suddenly been let loose in the town of Wonthaggi, and they wished to know whether I could do anything. I did two things. First, I got into touch with the Chairman of the ,Country Roads BOfl,rd to ascertain whether that body could do anything in the matter of providing work, because the Employment Oouncil had turned down requests by the W on-0aggi council for certain works to be put In hand out of unemployment relief money. Next, I had representations made with ·a view to money being spent a~ W ~nth~ggi so that the unemployment SItuatIOn In that town might be relieved. With that exception, I repeat that 011 no occasion have I attempted, either in the case of individual members of the Employment Councilor in the case of the council itself, in any way whatever to influence its decisions. ~r. McKENZIE (Wonthaggi).-I wish

brIefly to endorse everything that the Pre.~ier has. said with respect to the posItIon whICh arose at Wonthaggi. About 500 men were dismissed from the State Coal Mine without a minute's notice. The Wonthaggi council held a special meeting, and instructed the mayor and myself to proceed to Melbourne and ask the Premier, in face of the fact that th?se r;ten hU;d been thrown, without a mInute s notIce, out of employment, whether he would make some money available for their relief. Exactly what the Premier has said occurred did transpire.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Of course· it is a contradiction ~f what the AttorneyGeneral has saId, that the Government was not susceptible to influence.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-(By leave) I am sorry that the Premier was not present from the inception of the discussion. Wbat I said was in reply to a statement made by the Honorary Minister (Mr. Kent

1784 Adjournment. [ASSEMBLY.] Adjournment.

Hughes), who is in charge of sustenance, and who waxed eloquent about the fact that there had been no interference with the Employment Council. The Premier was present last Thursday when the honer able member for Gippsland West raised the matter ef the cenditien ef the drains in the Roo-wee-rup district. The honorable member then made a suggestion to the Government. The scheme for the improvement of the drains had been the subject of discussion and consideration, I understand, for a considerable time, but the honorable member had not succeeded in getting any money allocated fer thllt work. The honorable member fer Gippsland West teld me on Tuesday that the matter 'had reached the Employment Council, and that he had been promised the money.

Mr. BENNETT.-I could net have teld yeu that, because the council had not met.

Mr. CAIN.-That dees net matter. I want to know how this proposal of the honer able member for Gippsland West, after having been hung up for a couple of months, suddenly-between Thursday last and Tuesday of this week-reached the Employment Council in such a hurry.

J\{r. BENNETT.-The council had been going into the matter.

Mr. CAIN.-That may be so; but it conveyed to me, after the promise made by the Premier the other day, and substantially repeated to-day by the Atterney-General and made again by the Premier, that the Government-seeing that it had interfered in the case ~f the miners who were put off at Wonthaggipessibly theug~t that ~t w?uld be. justified in interfermg agam wIth a VIew to' having the Keo-wee-rup drainage werk carried eut.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-The whole point is that it has been revealed that interferenee has taken place.

Mr. CAIN.-It has been shown that it can be done. Evidently the honorable member for Gippsland West had only to make known his complaint here, and it was done again. The Premier, in his reply to the grievance of the honorable me~her.£or Gippsland West, when he en-

. tered the Heuse at the clese of the sitting last Thursday, stated that the matter would receive consideration.

Mr. SLATER.-And it did.

Mr. CAIN.-The honorable gentleman said-

n looks as if the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission has not been as alive to the possibilities of the situation as has the Forests Commission.

I suppose that somebody whispered into the ear ef the ceuncil that it was necessary for this matter to be attended to, and it evidently was.

Mr . .KENT HUGHEs.-What IS wrong ,vith the ceuncil ~

l~Ir. CA.1N .-1 am making no' complalllt agalllst the ceuncil.

' .. the D:t;PUTY SPEAKER (Mr. Everard). - The honorable member is making a persOllal explanatien. He has already speken OIl the questioll, and has been given a lot of latitude. I think we should end the discussion.

Mr. CAIN.-I will end the discussiell. I would not hav~ spoken, only the Honorary Minister, in his enthusiastic way, infe:~red that there was to be no pelitical interference, and it is interestmg to nete that when the honorable mem?er for Gippsland West made his request, It was attended to almost immediately.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and 1'reasurer).-Perhaps I may be permitted to try to clear away the doubts of the honerable member for N orthcete. I have not gone into the matter, but it is said that there was a notification that the request had been granted--

Mr. CArN.-The honorable member for Gippsland West told me that he was to get £22,000.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - The Cabinet meets on Mendays, and the Em-' ployment Ceuncil on Tuesdays. The council probably had decided en the matter before the honorable member for Gippsland West made his request on Thursday last.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-We wondered how the matter got to the Employment Council.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-It probably got to the council before the honorable member for Gippsland West spoke about it in the House. If it was approved by the Cabinet on the following Monday, it had probably been considered by the Employment Council some time previously .

The motion was agreed to. The Heuse adjourned at 5.14 p.m., until

Tnesday, October 25.

I nco me Tax Acts [25 OCTOBER, 1932.] A rnendrnent Bill. 1785

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. T1.tesday, October 2o, 193~.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Fl'ank Clarke) took t'he chair at 4.53 p.m., and read t.he prayer.

INCOlVIE TAX ACTS A~lENDMENT BILL.

This Bill was received from the Leglslative Assembly and, on the motion of t.he Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works), was read a first time.

INCOl\1E TAX BILL. This Bill was received from the Legis

lative Assembly and, on the motion of t.he Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works), was read a first time.

FARMERS RELIEF BILL. This Bill was received from the Leg~s

lative Assembly and, on the motion of t.he Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Water Supply), was read a first time.

INCOl1:E TAX ACTS A.MENDMENT BILL.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-I move- t

That this Bill be now read a. second time.

This is a Bill to provide for the payment by instalments in respect of taxes on income, and it also amends the law relating to income tax. The Bill contains an innovation in the method of collecting taxation in this State, and because it is an innovation, I propose to explain as carefully as I can its purport so that honorable members may have a thorough grasp of what it is proposed to do. In the first place, I wish to make it quite clear that this is not a taxing Bill. I want honorable members to make a special note of that. Another Bill, which it is intended to submit to the House later, deals with the rates of taxation. The exigencies of the financial stress make it compulsory for this Government, as well as other Government~, to explore every possible field of procuring revenue, and to make a careful examination so as to detect and stop up any leaks or escape holes in order that no one shall escape paying whatever taxa-


tion is imposed on him. or her, by Parliament. One of the important intentions underlying this Bill is to prevent some of the leakages that have been within the knowledge of the Taxation Office for some time. In giving consideration to that question, the Government examined various methods of collecting taxes. To this end, Colonel Paine, a very capable officer of our Taxation Office, was sent to South Australia to make an exhaustive investigation of the system that has been operating in that State for some time. After hearing his report, and after considering other methods of collection, the' Government eventually adopted the method provided in this Bill as being that which not only would enable the Department to more effectively deal with the collecting of taxes, but would also meet a need many people have felt for a considerable time, namely, some means whereby they could pay their taxes weekly or monthly, instead of having to pay them in a lump sum once a year. This proposal was examined very carefully, and discussed at very great length, and as far as it was wi thin the power of members of the Government to give consideration to every factor, I can assure honorable members that that was done. There can be no doubt that there is a good deal in the contention that a great number of people find the payment of their taxes in a lump sum to be very inconvenient, the assessment reaching them very often at a time when they have not the money readily available. In order to meet that position, certain people do, I understand, open a special income tax account at their bank, into which they pay some weekly or monthly amount as the case may be, s() that when their assessment does arriv~, they have the money available to mee\. it.

As I have s'aid, Cabinet ,considered every aspect of the question, and conferred with the Commissioner of Taxes (M:r. Chenoweth) and Colonel Paine. After an exhaustive investigation, we concluded that the proposals embodied in the Bill were the best that we could submit to the House for adoption. There aI". two important features to be considered. One is that the Bill will afford the very great convenience to taxpayers of whom I have spoken, and the other is that it

1786 Irwome Tax Acts [COUNOIL.] A mendment Bill.

will result in an increased return to the Treasury of, I am informed, £100,000 per' annum. Much of that £100,000 is represented by detection~if I may put it that way. I speak subject to correction, but I belie-ve that, in that regard, the dif.ference will be something like £40,000. The proposals contained in the Bill are designed, amongst other things, to reduce the arrears of taxation that normally accrue. That, of course, is going to mean a considerable increase in the returns to the Treasury for the first year, and to that extent it will come very comfortably to the State of Victoria during the crisis through which we are passing. The collection of the taxation from a very great number of taxpayers, weekly or monthly instead of yearly, will result in a very considerable decrease in arrears and in the carry-over, of which honorable mem~ bers are, of course, well aware. The Treasury will not only receive a more regular flow of revenue throughout the year, hut the fact that it will have that flow of revenue will obviously help it so far as its advances from the banks are concerned. In this period of deficits the Government have to search for revenue in order that they may do those things which will be of benefit to the State. I appeal to honorable members to examine the Bill from that standpoint, and, if possible, to get the same alinement of thought on the problem as is in the mind of the Government. I am sure that they do want to help the State; that they do want to render to the State every possible aid during the present crisis. I want honorable members to have the same feeling of responsibility in the matter as the Government have; and to examine the Bill from that standpoint. I am liot going to say to honorable members, "Even if you think this Bill is not a proper Bill, you ought to vote for it," but I do wa~t honorable members to examine the Bill from the same angle as I have examined it, and in the same atmosphere of thought, the thought that it will benefit the State, and if they come to the same conclusion as I have come to, that, in all the circumstances, the Bill is one which ought to receive the assent of Parliament, because it is necessary to help the State-then the House will pass the Bill.

Bon. J. P. Jones.

Owing to the fact that this Bill provides for an innovation in the method of collecting taxation, it becomes compulsory on my part to explain the technical side of the measure .. For that purpose, I want to remind members that, at present, the whole of the income tax assessments and unemployment relief tax assessments, have to be issued in the second six months of the financial year, and right up to the last days of May and June. It is therefore not possible to allow payment by in·· stalments from the dates of the assessment notices. A system of periodical payments in anticipation of the tax is therefore proposed in this Bill. Deductions will be made from incomes as they are received, with a final adjustment for making good any balance due from the taxpayer, or for a refund of any excess, by the Taxation Office. South Australia adopted this scheme with success. It has been in operation there for a considerable time. To-day I asked one of the leading officials from South Australia if he knows of any objection having been rfJ-ised to this method of collecting the tax, and he definitely says that he has not heard of any objection. His position is so high in official circles that he undoubtedly would have heard of objections had they been raised. In addition to that, there is a statement-to which I will refer later-that has been made by the Commissioner of Taxes in regard to the stamps question. The principle adopted is that the employers shall hand to' employees tax instalment stamps of equivalent value to the deductions made from their pay, and these stamps the em- .ployees will cancel and retain. When· each employee receives his notice of assessment. he will forward his accumulation of st~mps to the Taxation Office in payment, or part payment, of the amount of tax due. It will be incumbent upon the employee to paste the stamps in a book such as I have in my hand. When the employee' receives his assessment notice-as he will do in the ordinary way-he will transmit to the Taxatio~ Office leaves from the book to show how much he has actually paid during the year in the form of stamps. Honorable members will recognize the virtue in such a system. The convenience of the taxpayer will be met, and the Treasury, in

Income Tax Acts [25 OCTOBER, 19'32.] A mendment Bill. 1787

its turn, will get the benefit of a steady flow of revenue instead of having to wait untilthe latter part of the twelve months for the payment of the tax. I cannot conceive of any more convenient method of paying taxes than this. The taxpay,;r pays his taxation weekly, or monthly, as the case may be. It becomes a weekly or f. monthly outgoing. This is certainly less inconvenient to him than paying in a lump sum. At the end of the year when he receives his assessment notice, he will be in a position to say, "My taxation has been pa.;d." When the taxpayer. sends along his stamps sheet, it may be that he will be entitled to a refund from the Taxation Office, or it may be that he will be still indebted to a slight extent. I think that is the kernel of the principle. Many citizens will find that' the deductions over a long period amount ,to more than the tax actually due by them. To meet those cases the Cornmis.ioner of Taxes will issue certificates of exemption until the following 30th of June. For example, a man may have been unemployed for the twelve months ended on the 30th of June, 1932. He will, therefore, not be liable for any t:;tx for the financial year' ended the 30th of June, 1933. On this being proved to the satisfaction of the Commissioner, a certificate of exemption will be issued at once. The principle set forth in the Bill is practi· cally in operation under the so-called wage stamp system for unemployment relief for those people who receive less than £6 u week, so that employers and employees generally have become acquainted with the idea of stamp deductions from wages. In order to make that point clearer, I mention that a man can apply for a certificate if he has paid a certain amount in stamps, and a certificate can be granted, if it is found that he has paid an adequate sum to cover his taxation for the year. I speak subject to a further examination of the Bill. In order to obviate the individual· stamp work and the custody of stamps by employees, the Bill includes a provision for" group schemes" similar to those already in existence under the Stamps . (Unemployment Relief) Act. Under this arrangement deductions can be made In cash, and paid periodically to the Taxation Office so that the use of stam ps will be

obviated. Honorable members 'know that that is being done to-day. Instead of pasting stamps in books, large employers can come to an arrangement wi,th the Taxation Office whereby they will undertake to render a statement of accounts, and remit the amount of taxation due for each employee. Many taxpayers other than employees have protested against having to pay large sums in taxation at short notice, and the Government's proposals include facilities to enable them at their option to buy stamps and submit them in lieu of cash when the assessments are received. That proposal means that the principle of the Bill can be made applicable to persons other than wageearners. There will be nothing whatever to prevent a man who has an income from any other source than wages from purchasing stamps, and paying his taxation weekly or monthly, just the same aian employee does.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-In advance?

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Yes, if the . honorable member likes to say it is payment in advance. The question of the payment of these taxes in advance has also to be examined. Although a man's nei income is disclosable at the end of the year, it is received by him during the prevIOUS twelve months. There is no logi-cal reason why a man, paying, say, £150 a year in taxation, should not be permitted to pay £3 a week if he wishes to do so, it would, perhaps, be easier for him to meet the amount in that way than to ask his bank manager to lend him £150. The Bill relates to the collection of both the unemployment relief and tho income taxes, and so far as employees are concerned it takes the place of the existing Stamps (Unemployment Rel~ef) Act. It has been argued that penaltIes are to be imposed on employers for breaches of the law, which might be the result of their carelessnes~ or inadvertence. The main reason for the insertion of penalties is to prevent defaults, and to obviate collusi8n between the employer and employee as may easily occur in family businesses. A considerable number of difficulties present themselves to thQ collectors of taxation. I suppose it always will be so. No doubt so long as we continue to impose taxation on the community, we shall develop a condition of resistance which maItifests itself

1788 Income Tax Act, [COUNOIL.] Amendment Bill.

in various ways. One of the ways is collusion between the employer and the employee. I understand that the Taxation Office has had experience of a number of cases where difficulties have arisen through the employer "and employee seeking to evade the payment of the unemployment relief taxes, and it thinks it is essential to have in the Bill a provision which will prevent this collusion from taking place. The Government decided that that could be avoided only by making the employer responsible. It has been argued that there should be a limitation of salaries above which the compulsory provisions should not operate. To this the Government is unable to agree for various reasons. One reason is tha ~ the inability of taxpayers to pay the tax in a lump sum is not confined -to persons in receipt of less than £400 per .ann um. Experience in recent years has shown that both large and small taxpayers are unable to pay the full amount on the due date, and requests for extensions of time are made. I know that the Taxation Office is inundated with applications from people who wish to postpone their payment8 beyond the due date. Under this Bill there will be no necessity for such applications, because every individual will pay his tax as he receives his money. Notwithstanding the objections raised the Taxation Office is satisfied that, speaking generally, all employees desire to come under the. scheme. Another reason is that 1arge as well as small taxpayers evade their obligations. The compulsory deduction must be applied to all employees in order to catch all defaulters. Obviously this means that the defaulters do not "belong to one class of wage-earners. They are to be found among all classes of wage and salary-earners, as no doubt they are to be found in other fields from which income is derived. Because of that fact, the Government and the Taxation Office feel that the provision should be applied to all persons who receive wages or salaries irrespective of the "amounts, su that no special privilege will be shown to anyone class of persons.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Does this apply to the salaries' of members of Par" liament?

The Ron. J., P. JONES.-I should say it would.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN.-Who are the employers of members of Parliament ~

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I can assure Mr. Eager that he will not have to lick a stamp when he gets his salary. All these matters will be dealt with without his knowing an~hing about them. When his cheque IS paid into his account, he will notice .that his credit will be a little less than heretofore. There will be no queb-tion of adding to his amc:)Unt. .

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Of course, we only get re-imbursement of expen-ses.

~rhe Hon. J. P. JONES.-If the honorable member can put up a good case fOIllS, and enable us to escape the provision. I am sure we shall all be prepared to entertain him at a smoke night.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I am going tb apply for an exemption.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-The experience of the last two years in regard to the stamps tax for unemployment relief has proved conclusively that the adoption of different methods of tax collection for different incomes makes for duplication, con-fusion, and irritation. Sub-clause (5) of clause 6 is expressly included in the Bill in the interests of employees in receipt of large salaries. This subclause provides, notwithstanding the fact that the deduction of 1s. in the £1 per week is insufficient to pay the whole of the tax by the due date, such amount can be increased only with the consent of the employee. In the circumstances, if members of business executives are afraid that their juniors will be able to ascertain the approximate amount of tax payable by applying the appropriate rate of deduction to the weekly income, they may continue to suffer the inadequate deduction of 1s. in the £1 per week, and to pay the difference in cash when the assessments fall due. They call have it both ways, and either pay weekly or monthly, or else limit their payment to 1s. in the £1 per week.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-YOU mean the Government can have it both ways.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-The taxpayer can give both ways so long as he complies with the provisions, and pays the tax for which he may be liable. In every way the Government has endeavoured to mee~ the difficulties of the situation, amI at the same time it has kept to the general principles of the measure that has been so

Income Tax Acts [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Amendment Bill. 1789

successful in South Australia. Most of the higher executives of big businesses re-ceiving large salaries will probably come under the "group scheme" outlined in clause 13 of the Bill, under which there is no necessity for the use of stamps at all, deductions simply being made by cash, and the total forwarded periodically to the Taxation Office.. The assertion has been made that the Government's proposal amounts to a forced loan by the taxpayer to the Government. I do not think that any logical argument can be advanced to support that contention, because in the last analysis a man who obtains income from salary or wages paid monthly or weekly has no right to say that he will not pay his tax until the end of the financial year.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS., He does not owe the money until he is billed for it.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I suppose that technically that is the case, but under the law the Commissioner of Taxes can issue the assessment as soon as the rates Bill is passed.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-Usually it is not passed until nearly six months after the beginning of the financial year.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-In some eases it is passed earlier than that. The Commissioner can issue assessments as soon as the Bill is enacted.

The Hon. Dr. HIARRls.-But the new method of collection will tax people on the current year's income.

The Hon. H. 1. COHEN.-The taxpayer. will pay in advance income tax based on the previous year's income.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Theoreti-cally, the tax should be due at any ti~e in the financial year from the 1st of July -onwards.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-The Government will collect tax from the 1st of .J uly on a sum that will not be due until 1a ter in the year.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-It is the method of collection of the tax.

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-It is difficult to explain.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I do not think so.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-You have made it as clear as mud so far.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Perhaps the unofficial Leader will help me out.

Notwithstanding any argument as to the payment of tax in this way being a forced loan, or any objection on the score that the taxpayer should be allowed to pay his annual tax at the end of the year, the system embodied in the measure is undoubtedly one which has been asked for.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-Not this particular system.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-No. A large number of people have asked for the introduction of some method by which the payment of tax could be spread over the period of twelve months instead of payment being made in a lump sum. After examining several suggested methods, the Government adopted this method as being the one which it believes will be the most effective.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN.-Suppose a man contributes to the Taxation Offi:ce 5 per cent. of his salary for the whole year, and then finds that he is not taxable because of allowable deductions, what will happen ~

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I should say that the money would be refunded to him. We cannot stop the ship of State because the cook has toothache.

The Hon. H. 1. COHEN.-But this particular man might be "cooked" before the end of the year.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I shall now explain the clauses. Clause 1 is the title clause, and incorporates this Bill with the rest of the Income Tax Acts. Clause 2 divides the Bill into two parts. Part 1. deals with the instalment scheme, and Part II. with ordinary amendments to the Income Tax Acts. Clause 3 provides for the date of operation of the Act to be proclaimed and published in the Government Gazette. As the stamp tax on wages expires on the 5th of November next, it is necessary for the proclaimed date to be not later than the 6th of JVovember.

The Hon. H. I. OOHEN.-That is the day after Guy Fawkes tried to blow up Parliament.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I hope that another Guy Fawkes will not make the attempt. Clause 4 contains the definitions of various expressions used in the Bill. It is to be noted that directors of

179.0. Income Tax Acts [COUNCIL.] A mendment Bill;

companie8 are nO't to' be inCluded as emplO'yees. This is because CO'urt rulings have been given that a director is an employer, and' not an employee. Payments for work in lieu of sustenance will be exempt frO'm tax., ,

The B:O'n. C. H.' A. EAGE~.-Why i!, that? A person who receives sustenance during a portion of the year may be liab~e to income tax at the end of the year.

The B:on. J. P. JONES.-An amendment ,exempting pa!JIllents in lieu of sustenance from taxation was inserted in aIiother place. I do not think that any member would be in favour of placing a tax on a man who might have been on sustenance during a portion of the year.

, The Hon. -0. R. A. EAGER.-Those who pay the unemployment relief tax will have to pay income tax on their small wages and salaries.

The lIon. J. P. JONES.-Suppose a man is :receiving wages for work in lieu of sustenance, no deduction will be made from his wages as instalment of tax. That would not prevent the Oommissioner of Taxes from reaching him when he be~ came eligible to pay income tax.

The Hon. O. R. A. EAGER.-If the Commissioner could find him. I thought the intention of the Bill was to bring all these ki.nds of per~on into the taxation field.

The Hon. H. I. OOHEN.-I think that Mr. Eager had in mind a man who does work for sustenance for, say, three months in the year and works for wages for the rest of the year. The provision in question would exclude from taxation three months' earnings.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-That is so. We will have· to chew over that bone when the Bill is in Oommittee.

The :fron. O. H. A. EAGER.-There might not be much meat on the bone.

The Hon. J'. P. JONES.-Under thb provisions of sub-clause (2) of clause 4, the Governor in Council may specify certain classes of labO'ur contracts as being subject to the deduction. IIonorable members will understand the class of contracts whieh are being made nowadays; they are. i.n effect, the carrying out of the job not for wages, but for a total price, the rtltll rn for the price being labour only, or ~1.1bstllntially labour only. The Oommissioner must have wide powers in these cases in order to prevent evasion.

Olause 5 ,gives authority for the general deduction pending rates of tax being declared by Parliament. It is' necessary for such a scheme as this to be of advantage to taxpayers in making progress pay~ ments that it should be continuous, and that, after the 30th of June, the deductions should immediately recom-mence on account of the next year's tax. As a matter of practice, the rates are no~ enacted until some months of the :financial year have passed, and it is obvious that if the commencement of deductions is not to start until J anullry of the financial year, that any bene:fits under the scheme would be largely illusory. In the remote event, of course, of' no rates A.ct being passed, deductions would have to be refunded from revenue. Olause 6 makes compulsory the deduction from salary or wages at specified rates per week whenever paid. Paragraph '(a) of subclause (1) provides that where the salary or wages amounts to £1 per week, but is less than £2 per week, the deductions shall be ld. in the £1. In paragraph (b) it is provided that where the salary or wages is £2 or more per week, but not less than £6, the deduction is to be 6d. in the £1. In paragraph (c) the provision is that where salary or wages exceeds £6 per week, the sum of ls. in the £1 is to be deducted. Sub-clause (2) provides for the aggregation of separate 'sums payable in the same week to one em ployee, in order that the appropriate rate of deduc ... tion may be applied. Sub-clause (3)

-specifies a standard rate to be used for this calculation only for board and lodging when received in relation to employ~ ment, that is, at the _ rate of 15s. for bgard and 5s. per week for lodging.

The Roo. Dr. HARRIS.-Would not that be a good principle to apply in connexion with Arbitraiion Oourt awardR?

The Ron. J. P. JONES.-That may be so. A fair amount of consideration was nece~sary before the amounts mentioned were fixed.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-What' would be the position of a person who was living in a cottage rent free 1

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I have nodoubt that the Commissioner would have power to assess that taxpayer accordingly. When the latter received his aSSGssment he would :find that the Oommissioner had not overlooked the fact that he was living

Income Tax Acts [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Amendment Bill. 1791

in premises rent free, and he would be debited so much for that reason. In fact, that is the position to-day. Under the Stamps (Unemployment Relief) Act at pr'esent the stamps are affixed for cash actually paid, as no account can be taken -of board and lodging received by an employee. As a result, many thousands of separate assessments have had to be issued, under the unemployment relief taxation Acts, on the value of the board and lodging. I submit that a great number of persons escape, notwithstanding the diligence of the taxation officials. It ,,,ould be impossible to detect the thousands of cases of individual taxpayers who are liable to pay the tax, but evade their responsibility. Under this scheme, however, where the deduction is made by the employer on the payment of the wages, it should be almost impossible for a person who is liable to pay to escape his responsibility. Sub-clause (4) makes the employer liable to pay to the Commissioner any amounts which he has failed to deduct, but not exceeding the employee's tax. The responsibility is on the employer in making the deduction, and he should do so, of course; but unless some responsibility of this sort is placed on the employer he may easily become indifferent. The purpose of sub-clause (5) is to enable an employee who is in receipt of a large income, and whose tax is a large amount, to arrange for a greater deduction than Is. in the £1 per week, so that he can discharge his liability to tax more conveniently (lver his earning period. Clause 7 imposes on the employer 11he duty of delivering to the employee the adhesive tax -stamps denoting the amount deducted. Sub-clause (2) requires the employee to affix the stamps in a book, which he is to provide for his own use. The stamps are to be affixed only on one side of each page, This provision is made in the interests of the employee, who, for his -own protection, should write his name and address on the back of each page. These books, of which I have a couple of cropies available for inspectio'n by honorable members, have been prepared by the Taxation Office. It will be the re-sponsibility of each taxpayer to procure .a book, which probably will be sold for about 3d. As t'he book will last for three years it will cost the taxpayer only ld. a year. .

The Hon. W. ANGLISS.-If he loses it, what will be t.he position ~

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-There is provision for the taxpayer to write his name and address on every page of it.

The Hon. Dr. HARRI S.-There is no provision in the Bill to deal with the case of a book being lost.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-We are not going to encourage taxpayers to lose their books.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-In the case of the book being destroyed by fire it would be very awkward if a taxpayer were called upon to pay, say, £60 again.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-In such a case I should think the employee would have no qifficulty in saying to his employer, "I have paid so much of my tax by affixing stamps in my book for 20 weeks, but now I have lost my book."

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS. - The employer is responsible for the tax.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Quite so, but there will be means of making representations to the Commissioner of Taxes.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-What final solution does the Governm~nt propose in the case of a book which has been hOonestly lost ~

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I take it that the taxpayer concerned would have no more difficulty in overcoming that situatiOon than he would ha.ve to-day in conn ex ion with other problems arising out of taxation matters.

The HOon. Dr. HARRIS. - You mentioned just nOow that there might be collusion between empl.oyee and employer.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-We cannot provide for every emergency.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Cannot you provide for a statutory declaration to the satisfaction of the Commissioner ~

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-The regulations will cover all that sort of thing.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-No; there is not'hing in the Bill providing for its extension by such means.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Sub-clause (3) of clause 7 requires the emploYflc to cancel the stamps immediately. This action is necessary in the interests of the employee as he may lose the stamps. Can . celled stamps can be of no value to the finder, whereas uncancelled stamps may easily be applied towards the payment of another person's tax. Su b-cla use (4)

-1792 Income Tax Acts [COUNCIL.] A mendment Bill.

imposes a penalty fDr non-observance of the provisions of the clause. Subclause (1) of clause 8 requires the employee to' provide l1he book for the safe keeping of the stamps issued to him by his emplDyer. Sub-clause (2) provides that stamp books must be produced fDr inspection. Employees may not have their boO'ks available with them when the Dfficial calls, but they must present them within a reasonable time.

The HDn. W. TYNER. - What will these stamps cost tlhe Government of Victoria? I understand that they will have to be Dbtained from the CDmmonwealth Government.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-No, but we sha'!l use the machinery of the CDmmonwealth Department for the sale of the stamps. That is to' say, they will be purchasable at post offices.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-There is the matter of seeing that the commission charged by the CommDnwealth Department is nDt too. much.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-The stamps will be produced by the State Government Printing Office. Clause 9 imposes on the emplDyee a duty, after he has received his assessment, to produce to the Commissioner the pages of the book to which the stamps have been affixed, and under sub-clause (2) the CDmmissioner shall thereupon retain and deface the tltamps and credit the taxpayer with the amount Df their face value. 5ub-clause (3) provides for the adjustment of the tax due with the instalment stamps presented. If stam.ps are presented for face value of more than the actual tax due the CDmmissioner will thereupon ~efund in cash any surplus. Sub-clause (4) provides that if stamps deductions have not been sufficient, the halance of the tax shall be payable on the due

- date shown on the assessment notice. Olause 10 contains the provision for payment untier " grDup" schem.es, simiJar to the existing arrangement for" approved" employers at present obtaining for unemplDyment relief stamp tax. Where an employer and any of his employees agree that deduction may be made without stamps, the Commissioner lOOy recognize the agreement, and the monl~y shall be remitted periodically to the Taxation Office. I understand that there are over 600 of these "approved" employers under the present - stamps

system, and about 107,000 employees. It is expected that the whole of these will come under the "grou p" scheme. The Commissioner will probably require the lump sum to be forwarded to him monthly, with a statement of the amount of deductions made. Individual accounts will, of course, have to' be kept in the Taxation Office with regard to each employee, and efforts will be made to' issue the assessments of each particular group simultaneously.

Honorable members may have observed in t'he Herald of the 20th of October a report by the Commissioner of Taxes in South Australia with particular reference to this group system. This was in reply to the criticism of the president of the Victorian Taxpayers' Association that the group system had proved unworkable in South Australia. The South Australian Commissioner said that more than one-third of the total number of taxpayers in the State were under this system as distinct from the stamps system. He stated definitely-

The group system is an unqua;lified success, and the Taxation Department here has heard nothing but the highest praise of it. Em· ployers and employees welcome the system.

In Victoria it is anticipated that at least 130,000 taxpayers will be covered by the group system here. Sub-clause (2) makes the deduction, after it has been made by the employer, a debt due to the Crown, and requires the payment thereof to the Commissioner at intervals. Subclause (3) provides a penalty for noncompliance with this requirement. Subclause (4) gives the power to cancel any of these arrangements, which would not be done without good and sufficient cause, for example, the retention by the employer of the deducted moneys which are really Crown revenue. There have been cases, in connexion with the unemployment relief stamp tax, in which the employer has actually retained the money.There must be power to deal with a situation such as that. Sub-clause (5) is theprovision for refunds to the employee if the total of the deductions made, up to'· the date of the issue of the assessment, exceeds'the tax actually payable. Subclause (6) requires any deficiency of the· total deductions to be paid in cash on thedue date shown 'on the assessment notice. Clause 11 provides for arrangements:

Income Tax AQts [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 A mendment Bill. 1793

being made with the Commonwealth authorities for payment of tax by instalments by Commonwealth public servants if It is so desired. Owing to constitutional reasons, Commonwealth servants cannot be compelled to come under the scheme. Clause 12 provides for the issue of certificates of exemption from the compulsory deduction either for part or the whole of a year. Partial exemption will be granted in a case where an employee during the year finds that his total deductions already made amount to sufficient to pay his tax. On the tax being paid, a. certificate is issued, and t,he deductions, therefore, stop for the remainder of that financial year. There is also the case of the employee who did not earn a taxable income to the preceding 3{)th of June, and, therefore, need have no deduction made from his sala.ry during the current financial year. These certificates will, of course, extend only until the following 30th of June. On t'he 1st of Julv deductions will automatically recommence.

I think that clause 12 covers the case indicated by Mr. 1I. 1. Cohen. It deals with the position of a person who had no asses!IIable income for the previous year. In such a case he could go to the Commissioner and say, "I was unemployed all last year and had no income on which to be taxed." The Commissioner will not have any amount to deduct from the salary or wages of that person, seeing that the latter was not liable for taxation. Sub-clause (2) enjoins the employer to make no deduction, when the certificate is produced to him, until the date shown in the certificate, which ""ill be the 1st of July following. Sub-clause (3) sets out the offences of altering or imitating a certificate or pretending to be the owner of a certifioate, and provides for the appropriate penalties. Clause 13 is the provision for those persons who are not employees. It enables them to come under the scheme also, if they so desire, by purchasing stamps and following the same procedure as with ordinary employees. Sub-clause (2) authorizes the Commissioner to retain the stamps and destroy them after crediting their face value to the taxpayer's account. Sub-clause (3) provides for refunds to the taxpayer of any excess stamps which may have been

produced by him. Sub-clause (4) is a similar provision to that of sub-clause (4) of clause 9, and provides for payment of the balance of tax due when the tax stamps produced are less than the amount of tax. Sub-clause (5) makes the same provision as for employees, that any person purchasing stamps must keep the stamps in a convenient book, and must only affix the stamps on one side of the page of the book. Clause 14 authorizes the Commissioner to apply the face value of stamps towards the payment of any outstanding tax. In those cases where there is more than one tax outstanding and the fl!ll. amount of both .is not paid, the CommIssIOner may determme to which tax the stamps shall be credited.

Clause 15 defines liability where the employer is a company corporation, 01' partnership, in order to fix the personal liability for comp.liance with the appropriate proviSIOns C?f ~he Act. Clause 16 requires the CommIssIOner to have prepared and issued " the tax stamps. Each stamp is to bear the words "tax instalmen t " so as to distinguish it clearly from other stamps used fO.r stamp duty purposes. The stamps wIll be on sale at all post offices in Victoria, and at the Taxation Office. Subclause (3) applies certain provisions of the Stamps Acts. These are the provisions relating to offences in connexion with .stamps-forging dies or stamps, or markIng documents with any forged stamps, selling forged stamps, 'or being in possession thereof, and so on. Clause 17 makes it an offence for persons, other than those authorized, to sell tax stamps vI' dispose of them other than as provided. Sub-clause (2) prohibits also the purchase of stamps from any person other than from those authorized. Clause 18 makes it an offence to fraudulently remove from any book any tax stamp affixed therein, or to place in a book a stamp which has been removed from any book, and it provides for a penalty. Clause 19 is the general clause for offences not specifically provided for, and a penalty is provided not to exceed £20. The last three clauses are specifically designed to prevent trafficking in stamps by income tax defaulters. Clause 20 is the regulations clause, and gives specific power to be added to the powers already

•

1794 Income Tax Acts [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

given in section 96 of the principal Act to make regulations for the particular matters dealt with in this Bill.

The transitory provisions begin at clause ~n.· It would be impracticable to operate successfully a system of payment of inco:me tax by instalments in conjunction with the existing stamp tax for unemployment relief. As has already .be~n pointed out in the Budget speech, It IS, therefore, proposed to abolish the present wages stamp tax in the Une~ployment Relief Rates Bill, and to assess all persons on their income tax returns for both income tax and unemployment relief tax purposes.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN.-That is the difficulty. A man might be liable to pay unemployment relief tax and not liable to pay income tax, because the income ta~ is based on the previous year's income, and the unemployment relief tax is based on the present year's income.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-That is anothf3r bone we shall have to pick at.

The Ron. O. R. A. EAGER.-It looks as if there will be only a' skeleton left.

The Hon. J, P. JONES.-The matter is one that can be argued in Oommittee. Money raised by taxation for the relief of unemployment during the years 1930-31 and 1931-32 was collected by means of(a) a stamp tax on salary and wage~ of £6 per week, or less; and (b) an une~ployment relief ta-x calculated 0!l the ~ncome tax return of the taxpayer In recelpt of more than £6 per week. At the same time, taxpayers in receipt of income from sourees other than salary and wages of less than £6 per week were also assessed through their income tax returns. In order to ensure that no differentiation oCQurred in the amounts of tax payable by pe;sons in receipt of similar amounts of income, whether paid by stamp tax or throug~ ~~~ income tax return, th~ sta.mp tax raised f01' the relief of unemployment during the year 193031 operated from the 1st of July, 1930, to the 31st of August, 1931, and that for the relief of unemployment during the year 1931-32 operated from the 1st of September, 1931, to the 9th of July, 1932. As the sta.mp tax is still in force, although, as I have already pointed out, taxation for the relief of unemployment during the year 1932-33 rill be raised by assessin~ all per~.ons,

whether receiving more or less than £() per week, through their income' tax returns, honorable members will appreciate that those employees who will have paid stamp tax from the 10th of July, 1932, to the date of the coming into operation of the instalments scheme will be en ti tled to receive credit for the amount so paid. Olauses 21 and 22 will enable this to be done. Olause 21 also provides that unemployment relief stamps may be issued in lieu of tax instalments stamps until a date notified by the Oommissioner in the Government Gazette. This is purely a temporary arrangement p&nding the printing of tax instalments sta.mps and their distribution throughout the State. Olause 22 provides that the use of these unemployment relief stamps must be closely safeguarded. This clause requires employers to issue a certificate to any employee, on request, as to the amount lif unemployment relief stamp duty paid by such employee in respect of his salary or wages since the 9th of July, 19:52. Sub-clause (2) sets out that on a satisfa.3-tory cEll,tificate being so presented by the employee, the Commissioner may apply. the amount of money shown therein,. either in payment of the employee's tax or refund in cash any surplus. Subclause (3) of clause 22 provides for +he production of such other evidence as may satisfy the Oommissioner· in doubtful cases, mainly casual employees, where the obtaining of the certificate would be very difficult.

Part II. deals with ordinary amend. ments to the Income Tax Act. Olause, 23 is a special clause introduced to exempt from the scheme of the Act wages received. for work performed in lieu of sustenance· under the- UnemploYll1ent Relief Acts. Sub-clause (2) makes it clear that thisis to apply to all subsequent years. It is not often that the Commissioner of Taxes makes a concession, but clause 24-contains provision for a concession. Itdea~s with a matter that has been befol'~' Governments for some years past. The· clause affects· the statutory exemp-tion of £200, which at present ceases suddenly at a net income or £500, thereby causinrt~ the taxpayer' receiving a net income of £502 t.opay nearly twice as much tax as the taxpayer receiving £498. To remedy this. position, which is a glaring anomaly, the·

Income Tax Acts [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 . Amendment Bill. 1795

Government has agreed that the statutory exemption should be diminished gradually instead of suddenly. Under the scheme provided, the diminishing of the exemp· tion will be spread over the n~t income from £500 to £550, or as set out in subclause (1) of clause 23, the £200 will be diminished by £4 for every £1 by which the net income exceeds £500. This will mean a loss of tax of some £13,000; but, as mentioned in the Budget speech, thb Government feels that taxpayers are entitled to this concession owing to the harshness of the existing law and the encouragement to under-statement of income by those persons receiving just a little over £500. Sub-clause (1) substitutes a new provision for section· 33 of the principal Act, and re-enacts the existing provision as to the treatment when the deduction is to be made from an income from two sources, personal exertion and property; and proposed new sub-section (3) is also a re-enl\.ctment of the existing provision. Sub-clause (2) of clause 24 repeals paragraph (j) of section 21 of the principal Act; which deals with the existing exemption of £200, and is re-enacted as part of the new paragraph (a) of sub-section (1) of section 33. Sub-clause (3) makes it clear that this diminishing exemption is to apply for assessments for this financial year, and all subsequent years. Clause 25 reduces the penalty for late payment of tax from 10 per cent. to 8 per cent., and was included in the income tax rates Act passed last December. This is merelyare-enactment. It is included in the machinery Bill instead of the annual ra tes Bill, as it is a permanent reduction, and not fQr one year only. Clause 26 gives authority to the Commissioner in urgent cases to obtain returns of income at any time where taxpayers are about to leave Victoria, and to prepare assessments at such rates of tax as are existing at the time, notwithstanding that the rates for the particular year have not then been passed by Parliament.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-You won't a pply this to the English cricketers, will you?

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I cannot say.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN.-They would all be stumped.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-·They wouH probably no-ball the Commissioner. Clause 27 repeals sub-section (6) of sec· tion 71 'of the principal Act, which enacted that no assessment should be payable before the 1st of November of any financial year. It is considered that this provision is no longer required, and it is certainly unworkable, now that the instalments system is being introduced. Assessments must be issued sufficiently early during the financial year to obviate excessive deductions and to reduce refunds of tax to a minimum ..

I have given a fairly comprehensive and, I hope, an understandable explanation of the clauses. There is a good deal more that I could say on the measure, and probably I shall have to say a good deal more later on. There have been certaill criticisms of the Bill, as there must necessarily be of a measure of this description, and I am inclined to think that some of those criticisms have not been logical. I am speaking of criticisms that have been made outside Parliament. When we reach the Committee stage, I shall make reference to some of those criticisms if it is necessary to do so; but, in the meantime, I would ask the House to give the Bill a speedy passage. I ask honorable members to examine the measure with a feeling of friendliness, and that feeling of responsibility with which we must all approach such questions at the present time. I beliave that after having heard explanations when questions are raised,· and having given close consideration to the general principles of the measure, the House will come to the conclusion that it is a good one, that it is one that we really need, one that is in the interests of the revenue, and one that the House must pass.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (NorthEaster1'& Pro1Jince).-1 ask for an adjournment of the debate until the next day of meeting. Certain bodies of person~ have intimated to me their desire to express the feelings and opinions of different sections of the community, and up to the present, I have not met some of those bodies. It· is only fair that their views should be heard. I move--

That the debate be now a.djourned. The motion for the adjournment of the

debate was agreed to, and the debate was adjourned until next day.

1796 Farmers [COUNCIL.] Relk! Bill.

FIN.l\.NCIALEMERGENCY (MORATORIUM) BILL (No.2). This Bill was received from the Legis

lative Assembly, and, on the motion of the Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public W·orks), was read a first time.·

(At 6.17 p.m. the sitting was suspended until 7.5!2 p.m.)

FARMERS RELIEF BILL.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister 'of Water Supply).-I ~ove-

That this Bill be now read a second time.

The object of the Bill is to amend and continue the operation of Part II. of the Unemployed Occupiers and Farmers Relief Act. Honorable members are conversant with that legislation, and I think we all realized at the time when it was passed that the extraordinary conditions which existed in the primary industries of the State justified Parliament in passing it. During my experience, extending over about 40 years, of the primary industries of this State, more especially in regard to the production of wool and wheat, I have never known those industries to be in as bad a position as they are in at present. The price of wheat is very much below the cost of production, and I think I may pass the same remark in regard to the price of wool. 'rhe price of lambs has, I think, touched about as Iowa level as we have seen for many years. Notwithstanding the fact that we were fortunate in having a good season last year, and had a very large crop of wheat, so low was the price of wheat that wheat-growing was absolutely unremune~ative. As a matter of fact, the more wheat a man had put in, the bigger chance he had of being poorer by the time he sold the wheat.

The Hon. W. ANGLlss.-It was a liability instead of an asset.

The lIon. G. L. GOUDIE.-Yes. On account of the extremely low prices prevailing and the unfortunate position of the farmers, many of whom are bordering on insolvency, it is necessary that the legislation now on the statute-book should be continued, in order that the farmers may receive further relief in regard to some of their obligations. It is in that diref'tion that the· Bill proposes to assist

those necessitous cases. The measure can be dealt with more satisfactorily in Committee than in a lengthy second-reading speech, because it amends certain sectionsof last year's Act. Under the Bill, a farmer seeking a protection certificate will make application· to the Farmers Relief Board instead of to the Court, as is provided for in the Act, unless 25 per cent. of the financial interests concerned object to that procedure. Unless they do object, the farmer may an1)roach the Board and obtain a certificate if the Board is satisfied that a certificate should be issued to him.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN.-What do you mean by "the financial interests concerned "?

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-The farmer's creditors. If 25 per cent. of his creditors want the matter brought before the Court, the farmer must apply to the Court instead of to the Board.

The Hon. W. ANGLISS.--Is it 25 per cent. of the value of the debts or 25 per cent. of the creditors?

The Hon. H. I. COHEN.-The reference is to monetary values.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-It would seem that under ordinary circumstances it would be very much simpler for a man who needed assistance to make an application to the Board than to the Court, but, if objection is raised, of COlUse, he will have to go to the Court.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN.-The objection might be raised by only one creditor out of 50.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-The Bill provides that all applications for exten-sions and cancellations of protection certificates will be dealt with in future by the Board instead of by the Court, unless there is the objection I have already stated. The principal legislation would expire in May, 1933, and the Bill provides for an extension of the time until March, 1934. The idea of fixing that date is to give those farmers who obtain protection certificates an opportunity of disposing of their harvest and cleaning up the whole of the year's work before the legislation expires. That is the reason why the Bill provides that it should be extended until March, 1934. All certificates in force on the 1st of January, 1933, will automatically be extended until that date. Application~

Farmers [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 ~lief Bill. 1797

for cancellation could be dealt with by the Farmers Relief Board at any time. If that Board is satisfied that any of the men who came under its jurisdiction are not carrying out their farming operations in a satisfactory manner, or are not making a genuine at,tempt to carry on, it has the power to cancel any certificate that may have been issued. There are some cases in which men who have obtained protection certificates have made no attempt to meet their obligations, or to carryon the operations of their farms satisfactorily.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS.-Would the Board have power to refuse a certificate when applied to in the first instance ~

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-Yes. The Board has power either to grant or to refuse. It generally goes very carefully into the whole situation. The number of applications t'hat have been granted under the provisions of the last measure is 187. In 57 cases, applica. tions ha ve been refused by the police magistrates, possibly on the ground either that the men had no chance of making good, or that the applicants were unsatisfactory in o,ther ways. I may mention for the information of honor. able members that 102 of the applications made to the Courts have been opposed by creditors. No opposition was shown in respect of 140 applications; that is to say, the creditors apparently considered that the applicants were satisfactory and should have the protection sought. As regards those men who have received the protection applied for. the Board classifies the holders of th~ certifica~es as 41 per cent. good, 31 per cent. faIr, and 20 per cent. indifferent.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN.-Were those applications confined to particular areas, or were they general throughout the State'

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-I am not certain but I think that they were general. I do not know e~actly whether the applications have "been State-wide or confined mainly to certain· areas. However, the percentages which I have quoted indicate the e~perience of thp Board and how it has classified those who have received certificates.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS.-I should gay that 20 p&r cent. were totally bad.

The Hon. G. J.J. GOUDIE.-I should say that the Board had not too good information in respect of those cases.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS. That is "putting it mild."

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-Yes. Honorable members will recollect that in the last measure that was passed there was a dause which gave a farmer the right to sell £5 worth of his produce without reference to the Farmers Relief Board. The Bill proposes to e~tend that principle by permitting the sale of produce up to £25 without the consent of the Board.

T'he Hon. W. ANGLISS.-Does it mean one £25 sale or a number ~ A whole farm could be sold in £25 lots.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-I suppose that if a farmer sold in £25 lot! often enough he could dispose of all. But· he has to be responsible tOo the Board:' fol' anything that is done. He has to, render an account to the Board and pa.y. to it the proceeds of the sale.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-It is 8aid: that there are a lot o.f farmers selling:- .-, T'he Hon. G .. L. GOUDIE.-Possibly.

&uppose that a man had half-a-dozen head of cattle, and could get a. good offer for them from a butcher, for instance. If he had the right to sell £25 worth he co.uld say to the butcher "There are a few head of stock. What are you prepared to give for them~" Suppose that there were three or four head the butcher might quote £8 apiece, and the farmer could say, "You can take three of them." If he 'had not the right to sell to that e~tent he would lose the opportunity of the sale. I feel that the farmer sho.uld have such an opportunity. As I.have already pointed out, he is responsIble to the Board for anything that he sells, and as he has to forward the

. proceeds of the sale to the Board there is not much of a loophole by which 'he can trade on the permission granted.

The Ho.n. H. A. CURRIE.-What check would the Board have on the sale 1

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-I should say that the Farmers Relief Board tohrough the inspectors which the Land~ Department has in the various parts of the State, wo.uld keep fairly closely in touch with the operations of the farmers concerned-there are not a great many o! them-be~a use the Board has practically to aSSIst the farmer in the management of his undertaking. If the ~oard is disSa~isfied, following an inspect'lon or a. report that a farmer is not

J798 Farme:rs (COUNCIL.) Relief Bill.

"carrying on his undertaking in a satisfactory manner, then it endeavour! to direct that man's energies in the right way. In many cases the Board has assisted to place the men on a better line of farming than that on which they had previously been engaged, and has thus endeavoured as far as possible to be helpful. The Board necessarily has to keep in close touch with the operations of the

. farmers und~r its jurisdiction. . The Hon. H. 1. COHEN.-Has the one

~ Board been able to do all the work, or 'Je there a Board for ~ach distriot 1

'The Hon.· G. L. GOUDIE.-The bulk of the work has been t.hrown on one Board. There are three Boards in. existence, namely, the Closer Settlement Board, to which existing legislation gives certain powers, the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission, and t'he Farmers Relief Board. I underatand that very few cases affected by this legislation have come under the jurisdiction of either the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission or the Closer Settlement Board. I consider that the Farmers Relief Board has administered the large bulk of the cases that have arisen.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS.-Were there a good many ~

T'he Hon. H. 1. COHEN.-About 240 cases eame up for consideration. Was there any delay in hearing the cases?

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-I coulC) not say. I could possibly get the information if honorable members wish to look into that particular aspect. The report of the Farmers Relief Board is to the effect that the operations have been carried on in a very satisfactory way. There have l)een no complaints from men who have come under the jurisdiction of the Board. The Bill prO'Vides also that ill the event of an amicable arrangement being arrived at between credit.ors and the farmers concerned in a case il),- which the creditors may say, "We will relieve the farmer of some of his liability," trustees should be indemnified against any action taken. It is only right that they should be so indemnified' if they de·, sire that some arrangement of that kind should be made.

There is also a rather important provision in the measure, namely, that the applicant is to be protected from the time that he lodges his application with :the IJoard for 8, protection certificate.

It will be t'~coilected that in the last measure we paSsed it was provided t·hat .certain formalities should be complied with. A farmer had to advertise in metropolitan and oountry newspapers, and there was a possibility of a fairly long interval elapsing between the application and the notification in the Government Gazette. I understand that in some cases creditors in the meantime enforced their claims against farmerl5 .

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS.-Not from the time that they lodged their applications.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-The }jill provides that an applicant will be protected from the time he lodges his applioe.tion until the Board decides the qnestion. That is to say, a creditor must stay his hand until the- Board arrives at a decision.

The Hon. G. M. DAvIs.-That is inaccordance with the existing legislation.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-I do not think so. Under t'hat legislation, when a man made an application to a Court, there had to be certain formalities COJll

plied with; for instance, advertisements in country and metropolitan newspapers.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIs.-When once he lodged his application with the Court he was safe. No one could attack him.

The Hon. G. -L. GOUDIE. - That seems to be in contradiction to what t'he proposed amendment sets out to do. A certain time elapsed between the application and the notification in the Go-vernment Gazette, and the Bill proposes to secure an applicant from the time he actually lodges his application with the Board.

Another rather important point is that the Board will take over the whole of the administration of the legislation, part of which has been in the nands of the Closer Settlement Board and the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission. Speaking from my experience, I think that the Farmers Relief Board can deal with the prop6sition better than the other bodies mentioned, ,both of which are willing that they should be relieved of the responsibility. There is no opposition from either the Closer Settlement Board or the State Rivers and Water Sunnly Commission to the proposed change. I am quite satisfied that it will be bettp1" for the Board to take over the whole of


the administration than that it should be divided into three parts. I think that the proposed amendment of the Ac: w~ll simplify its operation, and that It WIll make it more effective from the standI1oint, not only of the Board itself, but of the man who is in difficulties. If we can make the existing legislation rather more effective from the point of view of the latter we shall be doing something, not only for that inGlividual, but in the inter~sts of the State itself. One of the most important of our responsibilities is to keep the primary producer on the land. We must continue to produce primary wealth or we cannot carryon.

On the motion of the Hon. Dl·. HARRIS (N oTth-Eastern Province), the debate was adjourned until next day.

INCOME TAX BILL. The Hon. J. P. lONES (Minister of

Public Works).-I move-That this Bill be now r6lad a. second time.

It is the usual measure to re-enact existing income tax rates for this financial year. It also includes part o! the ~overnment's proposals, as outhned In the Budget speech, to raise additional revenue. In view of the necessity to reduce the de· ficit in accordance with the Premiers' plan, it is essential that we should increase the sources of revenue, and for that purpose additional means are provided in this measure. The income tax revenue for the financial year ended the 30th of June, 1932, amounted to £2,062,000, and the revenue fo» this year at the existing rates of income tax is .stimated to produce only £1,650,000. This Bill is, therefor." introduced to provide for broadening the basis of taxation to produce additional revenue to partly make up this anticipated falling off of income tax collections as compared with last year's revenue. Addi· tional revenue is to be raised on the inc!reased taxation proposals of' £245,000, but against this is to be offset a loss of revenue due to the extension of the statutory exemption of £200 on a sliding scale beyond the £500, where it at present stops. This is proposed under another Bill which I have explained already to honorable members. The adoption of this dimini~hing exemption will involve a Joss of £13,000, ~o that the net gain to the revenue under the proposals will be

£232,000. The view has been taken, as outlined in the Budget proposals, that many more people should contribut~ ~o the cost of government. At pres.ent It IS estimated that if existing rates of tax were continued for this year there would only be 110,000 persons in Victoria as income taxpayers. It is expected that the num·· ber of taxpayers under this Bill will be increased to about 400,000. As honorable members have been informed, the Govern·· ment has see'll its way clear to make are-· duction of 10 per cent. of the unemploy· ment relief tax, and the adoption of thtt special tax will, taking the two taxes together, increase the existing taxpayer's burden by an insignificant amount. A schedule has been already circulated to members to demonstrate this.

More than half the increased tax. It fl!' expec~ed, will be contributed by entirely· new mcome taxpayers. To ensure this; the minimum taxable amount has been re-· duced to £100, and the taxable income" which will be assessed is to be calculated on almost the .same basis as has already been adopted for two years for the calculation of the unemployment relief tax. This special tax is set out in paragraph (g) of clause 2 of the Bill. The difference ~etwee~ the taxable income adopted for thIS speCIal tax and the taxable income adopted for unemployment relief tax is that the Government has decided to still exempt in full from this special tax as from ordinary income tax interest on State Savings Bank stock and debentures. Concerning these matters there has always been an understanding that they should Dot be liable to State income tax, and this understanding the Government is continuing to observe.

Turliling now to the Bill, Clause 1 is the title clause. Clause 2 is the imposing clause, and is divided into numerous pl:1ragraphs. Paragraph (a) of sub-clause (1) re-enacts the existing rates of tax on personal exertion of individuals. Pe.ragraph (b) re-enacts the existing rates of tax on property income of individuals. Paragraph (c) provides for the existing super-tax on incomes over £80~ which was imposed in 1924, increasing the basic rates by certain percentages at various itages. Paragraph (d) re-enacts the existing rate of tax for companies, ls. 9d. in the £1. Paragraph (e) makes the usual special provision for

1800 Income [COUNCIL.] Tax Bill.

Ihutual life assurance companies. Para'~l'aph (I) sets out the further additional tax which was imposed last ye,ar of 7! ;Per cent. on the then existing rates of tax. -Paragraph e.q) contains the speci~l tax provisions. Honorable members wIll see that it is divided into two parts, the first portion setting out the rates of tax, which are very small indeed, commencing at 6s. per £100 for all incomes under £~,OOO,

·and rising by various stages until the rates is 12s. 6d. per £100 for incomes of : £2500 and over. The second portion of .;ft~ paragraph-(i)-defines " taxable in-oome," and provides for the disallowance of the statutory exemption, concessional deductions, &c. The taxable income for the purpose of this special tax win be almost identical with the taxable income for unemployment relief tax. Then the next part of this second portion of paragraph (g)-namely (ii)--:-modi~es the exemptions allowed for ordmary Income tax by removing the general e.xemption of £200 and also the exemptIOn of dividends, thus making them liable to the tax.

As dividends flom companies will f01'111 part of the taxable income of the individual taxpayers, as is the case in unemployment relief taxation, companies will, therefore, not be liable to this special tax, which is regarded as purely a ta~ on i~~ dividuals. It was felt that thIs basIs should be adopted, because at present too few people contribute to the ordinary State revenues, and a basis has already been set for unemployment relief tax purposes. With regard to concessional deductions, it is proper that a married man flupporting a wife and children should re~ ceive some concession on his tax, but so far as the bulk of taxpayers are concerned 'It present, he pays no income tax, and it is felt that he should contribute something. The Government's proposals, as here outlined, are to meet this position. Sub-clause (2) of clause 2 re-enacts the existing provision for deciding the rates when income is received from two sources, personal exertion and property. Subclause (3) provides for the existing minimum of tax, 5s., on the existing tax. Sub-clause (4) makes the Act applicable to this financial year. Olause 3 is the usual clause providing for the duration of tbe Income Tax Acts until the 31st of Decem-

Bon. J. P. Jone3.

ber, 1933, so far as any liability is concerned under them. The Bill is commended to the House.

On the motion of the Hon. Dr. HARRIS (N orth-Eastern P1'ovince), the debate was adjourned until next day.

FACTORIES AND SHOPS BILL. The debate (adjourned from Octoher

11) on the motion of the Hon. G. I., Goudie (Minister of Labour) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY (Melbourne West Province ).-I was under the impression that the Bill would not be brought on to-night, and am somewhat unprepared to speak on it. However, on looking through the measure I think it is something like the proverbial curate's egg-· it is good in parts. The had parts, I am afraid, predominate. The Factories alld Shops Act has undoubtedly been productive of much good. In this connexioll I cannot allow the opportunity to pass of referring to the excellent work that was done by the late Rev. Mr. Edgar, the Rev. Dr. Strong, Mr. ~Iauger, and others. Up to the time that action was taken by them the sweating evil was prevalent ill this State. Unfortunately, from what we can gather there is still sweating in some of our trades, especially the clothing trade. Much of the sweating is alleged to be due to competition. There are conditions of labour which we should not tolerate for a moment. Only to-day I was talking to a manufac,turel' about. the low prices at which -goods are marked. I asked him what was the cause of it. If one goes down any of the principal streets of Melbourne one sees women's and children's dresses marked in the shops at very low prices. I was informed that m.anufaC:,turers have to sell at whatever prICes are offering in order that they may meet the wages of their employees as t'hey fall due As the result of the wave of unemplo,Yment, keen competition has set in. We have among us a large foreign element. Piecework is sublet and sublet again. To all practical purposes no control is exercised over this form of labour. Strict measures should be taken. The Minister. of Labour, when introducing the Bill, informed us that there has been a considerable decrease of unemployment. I do not know that the Government can claim

FactO'ries and [25 OCTOBER: 1932.1 Shops Bill. 1801

credit for that. The increase of employment is largely in seasonal occupations. At this time of the year more employment is always available in the country than during the winter months. The Government is not solving the unemployment problem to any extent. Money is being spent on unemployment relief from which we shall get no return, and which could be better used. The burden that the taxpayer has to carry is a very heavy one, and he has a right to expect some re turn for the money he has to part with. I received a communication to-day signed by the R.ev. )1r. Walkla.te. Other hon-0rable members have probably received copies of it. If honorable members will peruse it they will find that it touches closely on the proposals of this Bill. Ido not think it would be right of me to

. weary honorable members by reading it, but I trust that the Minister will peruse it, and that when we are in Committee :some of the suggestions contained in it will be given effect to. The Labour party is of opinion that some of the clauses in the Bill could be materially altered with advantage. One clause refers to electric power and machinery used in the manufacture of goods. We C011-

sider that that should be cut out, and that the Act should apply to all places in which the goods are manufactured. Our reason for that view is that in many cases there is a certain amount of hand power unCOllnected with machinery.

The Hon. M. SALTAU.-YOU consider that the Act, as it stands, covers the posit.ion in a better way?

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-We wallt to embrace all workers in the legislation. Piece-work is given out, and materials are made up by hand labour in persons hom.es. We want to cut out the reference to machinery, and to make the Act apply to all places in which work is done, whether by machinery or by hand. No Sunday labour should be allowed on any account.

The Hon. W. H. EDGAR.-YOU had better start with the Government then.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-I presume the honorable member is referring to SUll" day trains.

The Hon. W. H. EDGAR.-I am referring to Sunday labour.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-I agre~ with the' honorable member that it is wrong to allow S(mday lahour in any shape or form.

The Hon. II. A. CURRIE.-Many people would have to starve on Sundays then.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-I am referring to Sunday labour which is not necessary.

The Hon. M. SALTAU.-It is possible to get a permit for two months.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-I regard that as wrong. Unfortunately many factories, especially those in which piecework is carried on, are run on Sundays. I think very heavy penalties should be imposed in an effort to stamp this practice out of existence. There is one important clause which deals with the suspension of Wages Boards. The chairman of a Wages Bo~ud is to be allowed to adjust wages. I regard that as a very serious proposal.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-It is very economical. .

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-Honorable members of this House have fought to suspend Wages Board determinations and Commonwealth Arbitration Court awards, and have advocated round-table conferences. The proposal in the Bill is to give to chairmen of Wages Boards power to adjust wages.

The Hon. M. SALTAU.-U P or down. The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-To my

mind the fixing of wages on a bare cost-ofliving basis is very unjust. According to the ruling which has been given a man, his wife, and three chil~ dren have to live on a wage which harely covers the cost of living. It does not matter whether he has eight or ten children, allowance is made for only three.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-And it does not matter if he is a single man.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-I agree with Mr. Richardson, and I should rope in the single man. Consideration is now taken of the great reductions made ill house rents. Many landlords are not receiving any rent at all. Rents have fallen more than 50 per cent., and the cost of living is based on that fact. The Bill should provide that the cost of living will be adjusted every three months. The chairman of a Wages Board should not have the right to fix what wages should be paid.

1802 Factories and [COUNCIL.] Shops Bill.

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-The adjustments are made automatically under awards of the Commonwealth Arbitra-tion Court.

The Han. J. H. DISNEY.-We must be consistent. This House has suggested that round-table conferences should be held at which adjustments could be made. The unofficial Leader has supported the plan. When things are booming, no doubt, he will again suggest the roundtable conferences.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-Then the workers will get extra wages.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-The Bill gives the chairman too much power altogether. The Wages Boards should be called together.

The Jlon. W. ANGLlss.-The adjustment should be made automatically, as it is with other workers.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-I have noticed paragraphs in the press regarding the sweating in this State. The Age of the 13th of October, published an article over which were the headings: "Sweating Evil-Girls get 13s. 7 d. a Week." A large manufacturer told me that it was compulsory to speed up the girls. These conditions prevail, despite the fact that there is over-pr?duction everywhere in the State. Mr. DIllon, M.L.A., made a statement concerning certain contracts, but I will not read the comments to honorable members. Another heading that appeared in the Age was: "Slavery in Victoria." An honorable member of another place brought up the subject. It is a very bad advettiseme~t for Victoda when such items appear m the press.

The Hon. H. KEcK.-Who is respon-sible for their appearance ~ ,

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-I understand that the Anti-sweating League is doing excellent work in finding out these things. When the Bill is in Committee, I shall endeavour to get, some of the clauses altered.

The HOll. H. F. RICHARDSON (SouthWest/3rn Province).-I do not see any objection to the Billi which will assist, to a large extent, in the carrying out of regulations made under the Factories and Shops Act. In some instances, the proposals do not go far enough. I should like the Mini¥ter to agree to an amendment to clause 4 that covers time-books

for employees under Wages Boards. If an employee, after signing the timesheets, makes a claim for extra time worked, he ought to be under a severe penalty. I will give honorable members an example. Last Christmas a man applied for work at Erskine House, Lorne. He begged to be taken on, and said he had had no job for months. He was told ~e, would get two weeks' work. He was paid more than the log rates. That man returned to Geelong, consulted a solicitor, and claimed that he was working from 5 o'clock each morning. Ris claim was a deliberate lie. When the case came on,. the manager of Erskine House was asked: " Can you swear that the plaintiff was not in the kitchen at 5 o'clock in the morning~" The witness replied: "I was not up at 5 o'clock." Then the Bench decided the case against the defendant. The employee had no reason to be in the kitchen at 5 o'clock. Seven men were,employed there, and because the manager ctmld not say that the plaintiff was not in the kitchen at a certain time, the Bench gave judgment for the man. The man signed receipts stating that he had not worked overtime, and did not claim extra wages. Despite that fact, he obtained a verdict for about £10 from the defendant. The Labour Department realized that the case was a try-on, as did the plaintiff's solicitor. We could not bJame the legal gentleman. The case was put in his hands, and he had to do the best, he could to win it. I intend to move an amendment to prevent such men from getting at employers in this way. We must realiEe that there are people who will compel employees to work very long hours. In London, forEigners used to employ unfortunate men, women, and children in sweating dens, and we wish to prevent such things from taking place in Melbourpe .. I am pleased that this legislation ha.s been introduced. We du nut want any sweating to take place in this city. We desire to see the prescribed working hours observed, and we do not want people working on Sunday. I am pleased with the amendment to the principal Act proposed in clause 23, under w.b,ich, if a man makes a claim for extra ~oney, he must take action within two months. That proposal should meet with approval.

Factories and [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Shops Bill. 1803

The Hon. H. H. SMITH (lrldbourne Provin{;e ).-As members of this House, and the Chamber of Manufactures. know, this Bill will rectify many anomahe:'3. I have not had time to thoroughly dIscuss the legislation but there are several matters that I wi;h to bring before ho.norable members. There is no neces~lty for clause 2- paragraph (b) of whlCh provides f;r the insertion, after the word " accumulators" in the interpretation .of " factory" in section 3 of the prIncipal Act of the wo~ds " or e~ployed in any manufacturmg process JJ~~ volving the use of a compound of lead. I do not think that the danger of le~d poisoning in repairing accumulators )8

great. There was a case where a man was employed at the top of .a sh?t tower and could not get water for washIng purposes, and consequentl:y suffered f~om lead poisoning, but water IS now avaIlable to such an employee. I do not see how.we shall prevent an employer from domg his own work on Sunday. He may have to arrange diff~rent thin~s. I notic.e that the measure contams a pr~vIsion referring to the hours du~mg which hairdressers and tobaccolllsts' shops at Castlemaine, Eaglehawk, Sebastopol, and Kyneton are to b~ ~losed. Recently I introduce.d to the ~1111ster a deputation representing the haIrdressers .and tobacconists in Melbourne. They asked that the closing hour for their shops should be extended from 7 p.m. to 8 p.m. They have found that a .lot of illicit trading is done by occupIers of shops who sell sweets and other goods, these persons selling tobacco .until a lat~ hour at night. The tobacconIsts complaIn that this illicit trading is general because the Act is not being policed properly by the Department. It is important to n.ote that a price-cutting war h.as been ragmg in this trade for some time, and none of the legitimate tobacconists is making any Drofit. In reply to the d.e~utation which I introduced to the Ml111ster, I received the following letter:-

Sir, 19th October, 1932.

With referenee to the deputation from the Retail Tobacco Sellers' Association and others, which was introduced to the Minister. of Labour by you on the 3rd instant, and whIch asked for the extension of the closing ~our for tobacconists' shops in the metropolItan district· from 7 to 8 p.m., I have the honour,

by direction, to inform. yo:'! that the Minister has received several ObjectIOns to the proposed extension of hours.

In connexion with this matter, Mr. Goudie has noted that in most cases, especially in the suburbs both hairdressing saloons and tobacco:lists' shops are carried on by the same shopkeepers, also that prior to 1927 a variation in t·he closing hours for th.ese c~asses. of sh?ps led to considerable admimstratIve dIfficultIes.

In view of tIle foregoing, Mr. Goudie, after giving this request full consideration, is unable at present to see. his. way t~ propose an amendment in the dIrectIOn deSIred by the deputation.

Yours obediently, M'. H. STEVENS,

Secretary for Labour.

The deputation considered that the ~~tension of the closing hour would aSSIst tobacconists to overcome a great deal of the illicit trading. Their trouble is that nothing has been done to stop this trading, and for many years they had. to police the Act themselves. I should lIke to know whether the Minister proposes to take some step to minimize illicit trading.

The Hon. G. L. GouDIE.-The extension of the closing hour would not do away with it.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-I should like to ask the Minister whether he has allY proposal in mind to help the trade in this direction?

The Hon. G. L. GouDIE.-It is very difficult to detect illicit trading.

The Hon. H. H .. SMITH.-I am convinced, after having discussed the matter with the tobacconists association, that something should be done in that direction. The members of the trade are suffering a great injustice, and surely the Government should help the trade.

The Hon. W. J. WILLIAMsoN.-Did the deputation submit any constructive amendment to the Minister? .

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-The deputation asked that the closing hour should be extended to 8 p.m. I should like to ask the Minister how the Department intends to police the Act in this respect ~

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-W e may have to increase the licence-fee.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-I do not think that the tobacconists would object to· the payment of an additional licencefee if they obtained some guarantee that the .Act would be policed properly in their interests.

The Hon. Y. MCGREGOR.-YOU want them to have a monopoly.

18Q4 Factories and [COUNCIL.] Shops Bill.

The Ron. H. H. SMITH.-N either I nor Rny one in the trade wants to create a monopoly. Something ought t? be done to assist these traders, and I Intend to frame amendments with the object of helping them, and I hope that I shall have the co-operation of the Government and the House when I submit the amendment. I want the Minister to go into the whole matter with the Secretary for Labour, with a view to devising means of stopping illicit trading, and before the Bill is taken into the Committee stage I shall have another talk with the Minister. One other matter to which I wish to refer is the provision relating to the closing of chemis,ts' shops at 8 p.m. on Sundays. A good deal of delay and worry is caused to many people because ·of the difficulty in finding a chemist who resides on the premises and who will make up a prescription late on Sunday.

The Hon. G. L. GOuDIE.-Many chemists close their shops at 8 p.m. now, and the clause relating to this matter has been sought b:v the Pharmaceutical Society.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-I have heard doctors say that they had great difficulty In getting prescriptions dispensed on Sunday. Often they had to visit four or five chemists' shops before they found a chemist who resided on the premises.

buting to the solution of the difficult problem of unemployment. It is readily acknowledged, I think, that employers and employees are suffering under injustices inflicted / on them by factories legislation, and I believe that the amendments contained in the Bill will eliminate those injustices to a considerable extent. Ther~ are some I?erso~s who may think that It would be InadvIsable to interfere. with the principal Act, but I am not of that opinion. My surprise is that those controlling industry did not take action long before this to remove the anomalies ~hich undoubtedly do exist in the operat.IOn of the present Act. It is true thai one requires the wisdom of a Solomon and the patience of a Job to understand t~oro~ghly t~e F~ctories and Shops Act, wIth Its multIplIcIty of provisions. One of the clauses to whieh I should like to r~fer is that in relation to the precautIOns to be taken in regard to chaffcuttel's. This Bill proposes to put the responsibility on the manufacturer, t}H~ seller, or the agent. Some twelve months ago close to where I live a man bought a cliaffcutter. He had operated it only a

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-Would you compel the chemist to remain open on Sunday night ~

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-I think that more latitude should be given than the clause allows. I think the Government is to be commended for having introdueed the Bill, and I support it.

The Ron. A. J. PITTARD (W ellington Province).-In my opinion, the Bill contains a lot of interesting and important amendments which are long overdue. It seems to me that the measure is bringing us back to common· sense in matters of this kind, because in the past there has been too much lop-sided factories legislation serving one section of the eommunity but causing great dissatisfaction amongst other sections. I consider that the Bill will do incalculable good to b2th employ.er and ~mployee, and will result in makIng avaIlable a eonsiderable amount of work, thus contri-

few times-it was worked by horsepower-and whilst he was operating it his little boy came along, and the mother to get rid of him, sent him in to the chaff house. The boy went there while· the father was feeding the chaffcutter. and put his hand over, with the result that he lost his hand. ·The father was the responsible person, and had a prosecutio~ ensued it was the father who would have had to be prosecuted, though the manufacturer had delivered the chaffcuttel' minus the guard. The· Bill is framed in such a way as to put the responsibility on the manufacturer or the seller. It is imperative under the measure that he shaH see that there is a guard on· the chaffcutter when he delivers it. After that, of course, the responsibility rests upon the proprietor. I think it is also to the credit of the Government that it is making an honest attempt to stop Sunday work. I doubt whether there is Sunday work cllrried on to any degree at all in the smaller ?ities, but it undoubtedly does take place In the bigger cities, though I think it is almost solely confined to foreign malmfacturers. I consider that it is right for t?e Government to take every step it posSIbly can to stop Sunday work. The pro.

Factories and [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 Shops Bill. 1805

VISIon in the Bill relating to carting, I take it, is aimed at the regulation of road transport. Many men take on the road motor trucks, and travel by day and night and on Sunday to the detriment of the legitimate carter.

The Hon. M. SALTAu.-The clause in the Bill won't stop that.

The Hon. A. J. PITTARD.-The pro·· posed transport Bill. may deal with tha~ matter. I was about to say that probably provision is made to prohibit carting outside of legitimate hours through the medium of municipal by-laws, but I am afraid they are not enforced as strictly U8

they should be. The Hon. M. SALTAU.-Why do you say

that a man shall not start carting before 7.30 on a hot summer's day, so long as he wOl'ks only the prescribed number of hours?

The Hon. A. J. PITTARD.-I have not that man so much in mind as the mall who works to the detriment of the legitimate carter. The nrovision in the Bill which permits of paying employees by tLe hour instead of by the week is, to my mind, a very important one. I think that it will result in a considerable amount of good, and will give, if not constant work, at least part work to a considerable number of employees. Under present conditions a journeyman baker, if he desires to have a night off, has to forfeit, not only the amouut of wages he ordinarily receives-16s. lld.-but an additional amount, making a total of 22s. 9d. He has to lose that 22s. 9d. in order that he may have a night off. I take it that under the Bill if he, or a man in a similar position, desires to have a night off, and employ a substitute, he can do so by paying to the substitute exactly the wages he receives. The substitute will not be regarded as what might be called a casual worker. It is said that sweating conditions exist in many homes that are too small to require registration as factories. This may be so. It is extremely hard to prove that sweating takes place in such circumstances, and I favour the Government taking all the precautions it can to make it almost impossible for anything of this kind to assume what may be termed large proportions. The clause which appeals to me particularly is one to which Mr. Richardson made reference--clause 23, the last clause in the Bill. We know

very well that in the past some firms have been almost ruined through having to make to employees back payments oyer the long period of twelve months. It is now proposed to alter that period to two months, and I think that is altogether fair. The position is that the man who receives short pay invariably signs his name as having received the larger amount, but in the face of his having been a guilty party to that fraud, he is permi tted to go to Court and get his back pay. Although he was a party to the fraud, he is not punished in any sense, but instead is rewarded by getting the back money. I think that while the employer, on the one hand, is punished by having to make the back payments, the employee, on the other hand, should be punished for having been a party to the fraud. I think that on the whole the Bill is an exceedingly good one, and that it will meet with the approVlal, not only of the employers, but of all reasonableminded employees, because it is going to stop a lot of injustice that has been exercising the minds of a number of people for a considerable time. I highly commend the Government for grappling with the matter, and I hope that the Bill will pass ..

The Hon. W. TYNER (South-Eastern P1'o'vince) .-1 have given the Bill some consideration since it was introduced about a fortnight ago. It amends certain sections of the Factories and Shops Act, which contains about 250 sections. I feel that the Bill will be helT)ful in removing some of' the restrictions and shackles that are imposed on industry to-day. }fy main complaint regarding the measure js that it does not go far enough. I do not know whether it represents the considered mind of the Cabinet on the subject. I thought that possibly after the adjournment which the Government obtained some months ago a comprehensive overhaul "of the principal Act would be proposed. The Governm~nt has directed its major attention to the question of unemployment and providing work as far as possible in lieu of sustenance, but I think if it had directed more attention to a comprehensive amendment of the principal Act, it would have made provision, to some extent, at any 'rate, for private enterprise to function in connexion with industry generally. The Bin


proposes certain amendments which, I feel, will do something in the direction I have indicated. I notice that it is proposed in sub-clause (2). of clause ?- that the measure shall come Into operatIOn on the 1st of February, 1933. The amendments contained in the Bill are long ove!'due, and. I would ask what is the reason for postponing the operation of this bene:ficial measure until the 1st of February next. I think that a Bill of this kind should come into operation upon a proclamation being published in the Government Gazette.

The lIon. G. L. GouDIE.-I think there are some difficulties in the way.

The lIon. W. TYNER.-I shall be glad to hear from the Minister when the Bill gets into Committee if there is an objection to its coming into operation on its being proclaimed in the Government Gazette. I have always felt that the Factories and Shops Act is one of the most beneficial pieces of legislation that we have on the statute-book. Any amendment of the principal Act should be carefully considered, and whilst we had a complete overhaul in 1922, when industry was flourishing, the same conditions do not apply to-day as existed at that time. Certain major amendments of the Act were made then, particularly in regard· to the time wages section. It was thought that the provision then made would work very well, but it has been a failure, not only for the employer but for the employee. Our factories legislation dates back a good many years: The first Fa~tories ~ill was introduced In 1873 by MaJor SmIth, who was member for Ballarat in the Assembly, and it became law on the 1st of January, 1874. On the 17th of October, 1895, Mr. (now Sir Alexander) Peacock introduced a comprehensive am·endment of the factories legislation, when, I believe, Sir George Turner was Premier. The existing Act practically owes its inception to that particular measure of 189f;. The Factories and Shops Act has undoubtedly served our needs for a great many years. I believe that with some amendments it will contin:ue to serve our needs in respect of wage-fixing tribunals in industrial matters. To my mind, it provides a wage-fixing tribunal that is far superior to the Commonwealth Arbitration Court. I noticed in the report of the Chief

Inspector of Factories somt: very interesting information. In 1929, 366 factories were closed in Victoria, and 31,099 employees lost their positions practically owing to the closing of those factories. In 1931, there was an increase of 222 factories, and I am ver·y pleased to observe that there was an increase of 5,766 employees over the number in the preceding year." With regard to shops registration there was an Increase of 433 shops, but I am sorry to say there was a decrease of 4,690 employees.

There is one thing that I am very gl~d to note, and I feel sure factory owners In

. this State will also be pleased about it, because it does not often occur in connexion with such a Bill. I refer to the fact that there is no proposal to· increase registration fees, and that is unusual. Mr. Pittard, who represents Wellington Province, referred at length to the clause relating to chaff-cutting machines, and the unofficial Leader, in discussing this Bill-I have only a mental note of what he said, but I think that I remember it correctly-said that an auctioneer would be liable under the clause if he sold a second-hand chaff-cutting machine to which no guard was attached. I would take it that the auctioneer would settle with the person for whom he was acting, and this particular clause, to my mind, fortifies the existing legislation to a veTY great extent. In looking up the principal Act, I find that the operator of a machine and the owner are both liable if a guard is removed or the adjustment is not cor· recto It seems to me that very frequently it will be found that the owner of a machine is probably many miles away, and he has left some one else to work it. Unless an owner is knowingly guilty, I do 110t think that he should be liable. I would suggest that the legal minds of the House should look into the principal Act, the relevant section in which seems to me to bind the person who very often is not responsible. I support the proposed amendment as outlined in the Bill. We cannot be too careful on such matters. Certainly during the last tweive months there have been no fatal accidents, as far as I know, in connexion with these chaff· cutting machines. But in days gone by there were some awful accidents. It. is possible· that a mac·hine might be away from a factory. It might not necessarily

Factories and [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 ~hops Bill. 1807

be hired out, but a man might be chaffclitting on contract for a principal, and the adjusting guard might be removed in order to .cut a larger quantity. This might be quite unknown to the owner of the machine, and an accident may occur. In such a case the owner would not knowingly be guilty.

I think that it is section 145 of the principal Act which deals with time wages, and the Bill proposes to amend

. that section. On many occasions in this House I have referred to the necessity of an amendment. The section has not worked well, either for the employer or the employee. Of 187 Wages Boards, 38 have included a time wages clause in their determinations. I went carefully through the list, and found that among the 38 Boards there are several for rural industries engaged in manufa.ctures from primary products. It very often happens that in a country factory there is a break-down in the macllinery, or it may be that goods that depreciate very quickly are manufactured there, and the material is not available. As a consr,quence, the factory has to stop, and all the hands have to be put off. It is then the time wages clause operates, as it does in other cases. A draper, for instance, may desire to employ a man perhaps for one or two busy days of the week, such as a Friday or a Saturday. Suppose the wage rate was 15s. a day. If the Wages Board decided-as it could-that 50 per cent. m()re should be paid, the salaries would be increased to such an e~tent that it would be unprofitable to employ casual hands, and that casual labour would not be engaged. That is one of the restrictions which the Bill will remove. I intimated at the beginning of my speech that I had hoped for a comprehensive amendment of the Act, but we are not likely to have another overhaul of it for many a year. I feel, however, that the Bill will do something if it removes one of the glaring anomalies in connexion with the Wages Board system.

There are, as I have mentioned, 187 Wages Boards in this State, and they cover 162,500 employees. Of those Boards, 76 apply to the whole of the State. This means that the index figure is taken for Melbourne, and the wage

operates throughout the whole of Victoria. I know that country members do not like any sugge~tion of increasing Wages Boards so far as country districts are concerned, and I ha vn no desire to create new tribunals merely to add to the number already in existence. But where a Board's determination applies to the whole of the State, I certainly think that there should be a Board for the particular indu~try in Melbourne, the index or costof-living figure operating for Melbourne, while in places such as Ballarat and Warrnambool, where the index or cost-ofliving figu're is very much lower, a CC1untry Board ought to operate. I know that the . Minister has to listen to both sides of the question-that of the employers and that of the empl?yees. Possibly he can move by ExecutIve act. After he hears both sides, he will be able to make up his mind as to the wisdom' in cases where Boards apply to the whole of the State of splitting them up, so that there shall be a town Board and a country Board. . .... __

With regard to the 10 per cent. re" du~tioI1 in the cost-of-living figures, I do not know that any chairman of a Wages Board has provided for a 10 per cent. reduction unless with the consent of the parties. I believe that 39 Boards provided for such a reduction, but 1 understand that that was done by consent of the parties cQncerned, and not by a chairman on his own account. The list is too long, and I do not propose to read it, although it would be valuable information for the House to have on record.

I was sorry that I was not present during the early part of Mr. Disney's speec~, but I heard the later portion and his reference to the question of wages being fixed· automatically by the chairmen of the different Wages Boarls. I can see no diffi(!.ulty about that, except it be in a case where a margin of skill exists in connexion with an industry. Generally speaking, I think that the proposed. amendment in relation to this matter is valuable, and ought to operate with advantage to industry generally.

Sub-clause (4). of clause 14 provide~-The chairman of the Wages Board shall as

soen as practicable, make and cause to' be issued an' adjusted determination showinO' the adjusted rates and prices, and such adj~sted

1808 Factories and [COUNCIL'J _ lj·hops Bill.

determination shall be deemed to be made by the Wages Board, and to be for all purposes -the determination of the Wages Board.

I direct attention to the words " as soon as practicable." They are very vague indeed. I think that, as soon as the quarterly returns are issued by the Oommonwealth Statistician,the amended determination should be made available within so many days.

The Hon. G. L. GouDIE.-The words to which you refer are something like the words "as soon as may be."

The Hon. W. TYNER.-And that may be never.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-I suppose that it will be made automatic.

The Hon. G. L. GouDIE.-Really, it is .an automatic adjustment.

The Hon. W. TYNER.-With respect to the' amendment contained in -clause 16, gardeners were brought under the Wages Board system by virtue of the provisions of the principal Act within the last few years. The clause proposes a valuable amendment, but it does not go sufficiently far. It should refer specifically to those engaged. for gain or profit in some business. I do not think it should a pply to gardeners -employed in connexion with private houses at; all. Men so engaged may be working for portion of a day at gardening, and for the remainder of the day at another dass of work which would bring them probably under another wages d.etermina tion.

The Hon. G. M. DAvls.-The provisions should be suspended altogether in the case of men having work to do other than gardening.

The Hon. W. TYNER.-Yes. I think that the professional gardener is entitled to consid.eration. But a very large number of those men who apply at private homes for gardening work have had little, if any, experience as gardeners, and are not entitled to come under the provisions of the factories and shops legislation.

The Minister has provided in the Bill for juvenile workers. Their wages are not to he assessed on the princi pIe of age, but on that of experience. If the Minister of Labour believes that a large number of boys are likely to be absorbed in industry because of the alterations ,proposed to the Act by this amending measure, he must be a .superoptimist. The

Bill does not propose any amendment of section 191, which deals with improvers. I have here a publication entitled, Factories and Shops, compiled by the Secretary for Labour, Mr. M. H. Stevens. Before proceeding to quote from this production, I desire to expre8'S my appreciation of the splendid work of that official and his staff in connexion with our factories legislation. The utmost courtesy is extended at all times both to employers and employees. The Department has issued this valuable little publication, together with Wages Board determinations, at a nominal charge, as a set-off against the printing expenses. The booklet is invaluable to all parties concerned with Wages Board determinations . In this connexion, I venture the opin~n that the same principle might be extended to the issue of income-tax forms. At present, a taxpayer may obtain from a post office a bundle of these forms without charge. If there were a nominal charge, say, of 3d. for two sets of forms, the average taxpayer would be more economical, and there would be a substantial increase of revenue to the State. Subsection (1) of section 191 of the principal Act provides-

When determining any prices or rates of payment, every Wages Board shall also-

(a) determine the number or proportionate number of apprentices and improvers who may be employed iu any trade. . . . .

Sub-section (3) is as follows-In fixing the number or proportionate num

ber of apprentices the Board shall not fix a less number or proportionate number than one apprentice for every three or fraction of three workers engaged in the particular trade, and receiving the minimum wage, or earning at piece-work not less than the minimum wage fixed for the time by such determination.

Paragraph (a) of sub-section (1) refers to "the number or proportionate number of apprentices and improvers who may be employed in any trade." Subsection (3) deals with the fixing of the number or proportionate number of ap-prentices, but it does not mention improvers. I should like the Minister to consider the clause relating to juvenile workers side by side with the portions of the section which I have just quoted. The Minister hopes that a large number of boys will be absorbed in industry. I cannot see how that will be brought about

Factories and [25 OCTOBER, 1932.] SJwps Bill. 180~

if the matter is to be left to a Wages Board. The employees' side of the Wages Board is not favourable, generally speaking, to the employment of more improvers than can be possibly helped. There is no definition of "juvenile worker," except as one may read it into this legislation, but the definition of H improver" reads-

" Improver" means any person (other than an apprentice) who does not receive a. piecework price, or a wages rate fixed by any Wages Board for persons other than a.ppren'tices or improvers, and who is not over 21 years of age, or who, being over 21 years of age, holds a licence from the Secretary for Labour to be paid as an improver.

I want to know how the Minister proposes to increase the number of juvenile workers in industry. I grant that it is essential that some provision should be made for the large numbers of boys leaving school each year.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Will it be dono by increasing the proportion of improvers and apprentices who may be employed ~

The Hon. W. TYNER.-So far as apprentices are concerned, it seems to me that they are provided for.

The Hon. M. SAr~TAu.-But hardly anyone employs apprentices to-day.

The Hon. W. TYNER.-That is all the more reason why improvers should be employed. I trust that, when the Bill is being dealt with in Committee, steps will be taken to amend it in the direction of providing in a practical way for the absorption of more boys in industry. I have glanced at the summary contained in the departmental publication of the condi tions fixed by the Wages Boards, but I have not had time to examine the many determinations. In some industries, however, it appears that very few improvers are employed. For example, in the cigar-making industry, there is to be one improver to twenty employees. That seems to be a very wide margin. In the cordage industry also there is to be one to every twenty.

Another clause of the Bill has to do with the period in which an employee may sue an employer for back wages. I agree with the amendment proposed in that clause. I do not think it right that an employee should be allowed to go back ov€r a long period in the matter of suing

for arrears. I welcome this measure as an instalment. I do not suppose there will be a further instalment of such amending legislation for a considerable time. I appreciate what is being done in removing some of the restrictions from industry, but I regret that, whilst the Government had six or eight weeks in which to bring down a Bill to comprehensively overhaul this legislation, the opportunity was not taken to do so. A Bill to amend an Act of so very many sections requires to be introduced early in the session. It needs the attention of a Select Committee so that the whole matter may be gone into thoroughly.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-If we brought down such a comprehensive Bill, there would not be much chance of having it passed in one session.

The Hon. W. TYNER.-I thought the Government had a sufficiently big majority to put any such legislation through. Generally, I repeat, I support the Bill, but I hope to see it improved in the course of consideration in Committee.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yar1'a Province) .-1 propose to speak on two -perhaps three-points raised by this Bill. The first of them is the last clause in the Bill-clause 23-the purpose of which is to limit the back pay, which may be recovered by an employee, to two months instead of twelve months. .I doubt very much, if this amendment be passed, whether it will have the intended effect. All that clause 23 does is to amend section 237 of the Act, and all that section 237 does is this: that upon the hearing of any information for an offence with which the employer is charged, a Court of Petty Sessions, in imposing a penalty, may order that the employer pay to the employee any arrears of pay not exceeding twelve months' arrears. The clause proposes to reduce the period to two months. That is a very limited power given to the Court only when it imposes a penalty upon the hearing of the informa.tion. An earlier section-section 232-gives an employee his remedy otherwise than upon the hearing of an information. It gives him his ordinary civil rights, and under that section it seems to me that an employee will, notwithstanding the amendment which is proposed-even if it be passed-be still


able In many cases to recover the full twelve months' arrears of pay, whether . by way of overti~e or ordinary daily rates, because section 232 has nothing whatever to do with section 237. If the Minister will refer to a decision of His Honour, Mr. Justice Hood, given UpOl1 section 232 in a case referred to in the footnote to the statute, he will :find that the Supreme Court has said that, unless there is an attempt to evade the Factories and Shops Act, there is no need to give any notice limited to two months, and the Court can award all arrears up to twelve months' arrears. I would therefore suggest to the Minister that he will have to amend section 232 as well as section 237, if he wishes to pl'oduce the desired result. I am in agreement with the proposed reduction of the period from twelve months to two months for reasons which have been stated by honorable members. But may I reinforce the argument put forward by the Minister in support of the reduction, by this particular instance: A watchman in Ballarat some years ago was engaged to watch certain industrial works. There was a stipulated rate of wages under a determination of a Wages Board for watchmen. The watchman received from week to week the stipulated rate of wages without protest on his part, and the work went along without diffi·· culty. ~But after being employed for many years by the Ballarat company, the night watchman suddenly discovered that he had been working not only the prescribed number of hours per day, but, living as he did upon the works, and having occasion to get up in the middle of the night to let carters in, and to do other things, he had worked many hours of overtime. The watchman had a dispute with his employers, and he then found that he had worked hundreds' of hours of overtime-he had worked eighteen hours a day-and presented a bill for a large amount. He had a watertight legal case, but no moral claim. The employer was compelled, at the point of the bayonet, as it were, to give the night-watchman a large sum of money in s€:'ttlement of the case. That case does not stand by itself. Every man whu practises the law could cite a number of such cases. If this llmendment will get rid of stale claims which have technical

Hon. C. H. A. Eager.

legal merit, but no moral merit, then I think it will be a good provision .

The Hon. M. McGREGoR.-Many inspectors are able to settle claims on some such lines as you referred to. Many claims are not taken into Oourt at all. I know of scores of them.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Mr. McGregor says scores of claims are settled by inspectors. I know, from my own experience, tha t many claims. are made and settled in that way. We have to be careful to see that an unfortunat~ employee, who often is not a completely free agent, and who may work for lower wages under duress and compulsion, is 110t deprived of any rights which he might have. But with a Labour Department such as we have, and such officers as those to whom Mr. Tyner has paid a well-merited tribute, I do not think that any employee, who is careful of his own interests, will find those interests jeopardized very seriously. He can always make his representations to the Department, which will then take action. Tw~ months may be too short a period, for this reason: Suppose that an employee finds that for two months past he has not been getting the amount to which he is entitled, he goes to the Department, and sees the officer in charge. The officer may have to spend a week or so in making inquiries. In this way some weeks will elapse. We might make the period three months. However, that is only a small point.

The second point I wish to mention is this: The Bill proposes to put a very serious obligation upon the seller of chaffcutters-for example-which are not provided with proper guards. Mr. Tyner directed attention to that matter. No doubt if the clause is passed in its present form, it will be very stringent in its operation. It may be that even an innocent seller of a machine will render himself liable to a penalty. But there is this to be said in favour of it: that nnder the principal Act very severe penalties are imposed on hirers or owners of machines who fail to provide them with proper guards. The principal Act does not bother much about whether the owner or hirer of the machine knew that the guard was absent. It is said, in effect, "You must put a guard upon the machine, and you must maintain it.

Factories and [25 OCTOBER, 1932.] · Shops Bill. 1811

If you do not do so, you are guilty of an offence, and shall be liable ~o a. very heavy penalty." We should maIntaIn, as far as we reasonably can, the abs<;>lute obligation on the part of an employer to provide safety appliances for dangero~s machinery. Otherwise, we shall have thIs position: An employer will say, "I left this to my foreman, therefore I am. not guilty. I went away into the country for a few weeks and when I came back~

, h "w the safety appliance was not t ere. e have much the same position under our Licensing Act. Hotelkeepers are liable to heavy penalties for offences incurred in the running of an hotel. The proprietor of a busine.ss ~ust not be allo,!ed to escape his obhgatlOns by delegatmg his duties to subordinates. .

The Hon. }'L SALTAu.-The inspectors are constantly going through the factories to see that guards are maintained on the machines.

The lIon. C. H. A. EAGER.-That is a very good thing.

The Hon. W. TYNER.-The Act provides that the employee shall be liable to a penalty.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Both owner and employee may be guilty of an offence under certain circumstances. One would think that if the owner could prove that the guard was not on the machine because of a deliberate act by an employee, the employer would escape a penalty. I do not give that as a legal opinion, but I think he should escape a penalty.

The last point I propose to mention is this: Under the Act as it stands, regulations may be made of a far-reaching character. I will quote from The Law Relating to Factories and Shops and Other Industrial Matters in Victoria, as compiled by Mr. M. H. Stevens, Secretary f9r Labour-

23. The Minister may, at his absolute discretion, give such direction as he thinks fit regarding the convention or suspension of meetings of Wages Boards, and such direction when given shall be final.

The Minister may, therefore, in his absolute discretion, and as he thinks fit, give directions regarding the meetings of a Board. .1 now turn to another regulation, which rea'tls-

27. After the determination of any W Itges Board has been communicated to the Min-

ister such Board should adjourn sine die, and shall meet again only when (lOnvened by the Minister' of Labour.

Now look at the position we have as a result of the Factories and Shops Act and the regulations properly made under it. The Wages Board shall meet w hen t~e Minister requires it to meet, and when It has met and has made a determination, it has no legal authority to meet again until the Minister asks it to do so. That is open to grave abuse. A Ministry for the time being may say, when wages are at a high rate and the cost of living is being reduced-as evidenced by the cost of living figures as referred to in this Bill -" Well, the Wages Board has given a determination. It cannot meet again without the direction of the Minister, and we shall not direct it to meet." . That may have been done in the past. We do not know. Some Boards are slow in meeting, and high wages may go on. On the other hand, the Minister may say, "The cost of living figures have gone up. The determination was made when the cost of living was low. We will not direct the Wages Board to meet," and the low w~ges may continue. There we have both sides of the picture. It is a dangerous power to put in the hands of a Minister to prevent a Wages Board from meeting. The Bill contains no provision whatever to deal with the matter to which I am referring, and what I would suggest to the Minister is this: The Bill should contain a provision rendering nugatory the regulation that a Wages Board, having gi1'"en its determinati01i, shall not meet again until the Minister directs it to do so. It would be useful to make the clause say that in any financial year every Wages Board shall meet at least once. That would mean that at least once in a year the chairman and the other members of a Wages Board would have an opportunity of reviewing its determination. Suppose in 1927 a Wages Board for an industry had met and fixed a rate of wages, and S~Dt its decision to the Minister, and the decision was gazetted. That Wages Board could never meet again until the Minister directed it to do so. That is giving the Minister too great power. It may be power for evil, and it may be either to keep the wages up or to help to keep them down under 'a determination. The

1812 Financial Emergency [ASSEMBLY. ] (Moratoriftm) Bill (No.2).

Bill does not deal with that matter at all. It contains a provision as to the cost of living, so that a determination may go .automatically up or down. The Bill <loes not require the Wages Board to meet, but it gives the chairman certain powers. If the chairman said: " Our de·cision of five years or of twelve months .ago is obsolete and it ought to be revIsed," he has no power to call his colleagues. together until the Minister directs ·him to do so. I suggest that that condition of affairs ought to be remedied.

The Hon. H. KECK (Bendigo Pro· -vince) .-There has been a good deal of ·discussion concerning clause 23 which .amends the principal Act and allows a man not twelve months but two months 'in which he may SU1IlID1on his employer 'On a eharge of having paid him lower wage rates than those which were pre.scribed.. I suggest that there should be a penalty for the two parties-one for the -employer who paid the lower wages, and the other for the employee who accept,ed them. We have heard of the ca:;)9 of 0-

.man working several hours overtime ;simply by occasionally getting up in the middle of the night, and opening a gate. When he took action against his employers' it cost them a large sum of money.


-commi tted. Clause 1-( Short title, constructioh,

and citation). The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister or

Labour) .-During the second-reading de· bate, honorable members have taken a great interest in the Bill, and have sug~ gested imJ?ortant and relevant amendments, whICh require some consideration. In proposing an amendment, one needs to be sure that it is drafted in accordance with the Act, and I should like to have time to consider some of the proposals made.

Progress was reported.

FINANCIAL EMERGENCY (MORATORIUM) BILL (No.2). The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of

Public Works).-I move-That this Bill be now read a second time.

I wish to ask the House to agree to this little measure to-night. It is merely an

extension of section 28 of the Financial Emergency Act, which expires in a few days. When the general amendments to the Financial Emergency Act were being introduced in another place, we passed a short re-enacting measure so that this section would not lapse .. Honorable members are aware that the Financial Emergency (Mortgages) Bill is before another place, but owing to various important financial measures, it has not been possible to secure its passage, and, therefore, it becomes necessary to extend section 28 of the Act for another month, pending consideration by Parliament of the general amendments of the Financial Emergency Act. I am sure that honorable members will be in agreement with the proposed extension.'


passed through its remaining stages. The House adjourned at 10.~7 p.m.

LEGISLATIVE ASSE~fBLY. Tuesday, October 25, 1932.

The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Peacock) took the chair at 4.37 p.m., and read the prayer.

NEW MEMBER. The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Pea

cock) announced that a writ which he had issued for the election of a member to serve in the Legislative Assembly for the electoral district of Benambra, in the place of the late Mr. Henry Beardmore, had been returned with an endorsement showing that Mr. James Roy Paton had been duly elected.

Mr. Paton 'was introduced and sworn.

MEETING AT YALLOURN. COMMUNISTIC PROPAGANDA.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Oollingwo:od) asked the Chief Secretary-

1. If it is a fact that Dr. G. P. O'Day, M.B., Ch.B., and Mr. Ralph Gibson, M.A., were pn'· vented by the police from addressing a meeting in a public hall on the State Electricity Com~ mission's area at Yallourn on Friday, 30th September last; if so, by whose authority 1

[25 OCTOBER, 1932.] Asylum. 1813

2. Whether it is part of the Government's policy to suppress freedom of speech and absembly, and so prevent discussion by responsible citizens of matters of vital 'public concern?

3. If not, will he take the necessary action to restrain the police from interfering with public meetings which are being conducted in an orderly manner T

Mr. MACFARLAN (Ohief Secretary).The answers are-

1. No. The hall referred to, a.lthough on the State Electricity Commission's area, is under the control of local trustees on whose behalf the gentlemen referred to were advised that they would not be permitted to use the hall for the purpose of spreading communistic propaganda, whereupon they refrained from addressing the meeting.

2. No. 3. No action was necessary. The police in

the exercise of their duties are required to enforce the law, and the Government does not propose to interfere with them in the discharge of this duty.

ROYAL VISIT. MELBOURNE CENTENARY: SHRINE OF

REMEMBRANCE.

Lieut-Col. KNOX (Upper Yo,rra) asked the Premier-

If he will, on behalf of the Government, Parliament, and people of Victoria, extend a. loyal and cordial invitation to a member of the Royal Family to honour this State by his presence at the. Melbourne Centenary Cele· brations, and to open the Shrine of Remem· brance?

For Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer) Mr. Menzies (AttorneyGeneral).-This matter is receiving consideration along with other matters relating to the Centenary Celebrations.

KEW ASYLUM. PROPOSED REMOVAL.

Mr. BLACKBURN (Cl'ifton Hill) drew the attention of the Premier to a report appearing in the Age newspaper of 6th October (page 6), and asked-

1. Has the Government been asked to proTide money for the making of repairs and additions to the Mental Hospital at Kew?

2. What were the repairs and additions tor which money was asked!

3. What is the estimated cost of making those repairs and additions?

4. Does the Government intend to make anv of those repairs and additions; if so, what n;. ,pairs and additions does it intend to make?

5. Does the Government contemplate the reo moval of the ¥ental Hospital from Kew; if so, to what site?

6. Is the report ac<,ura.te?

For Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer) Mr. Menzies (AttorneyGeneral).-The answers are-

1. No. 2. See reply to No. 1. 3. See reply to No. 1. 4. See reply to No.1. The Government docs

not contemplate any expenditure on the existing buildings except what may be required for urgent repairs.

5. Representatives of the Kew City Council waited on me recently and urged that the asylum should be removed from the present site. I promised that the whole matter would receive consideration.

6. The report gives a very condensed account of the interview, but is in the main accurate except insofar as it relates to the expenditure of a sum of £40,000 on the existing buildings.

IlVIPORTED GOODS FOR STATE DEPARTMENTS.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer) ,in compliance with an order of the House (dated October 17, 1905) , presen ted a return of machinery, goods, and material manufactured or produced outside the Commonwealth and purchased for the use of the Public Works Department during the year 1931-32, together with totals of preference returns for the eighteen years prior to 1931-32.

FINANCIAL EMERGENCY (lVIORATORIUl\I) BILL (No.2). Mr. MENZIES (Attorney - General)

(By leave), moved for leave to bring in a Bill to further amend section 28 of the Financial Emerg'ency Act 1931.

The motion was agreed to'. The Bill was brought in, and read a

fir.st time. Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).

I move-That this Bill be now read a second time.

This is a short Bill designed to extend for a further period of one month the existing prO'visions of the Financial Emergency Act 1931 relating too mortgages in order that there should be no gap caused by the inability of Parliament to deal with the major amending Bill before the end of this month. As honorable members will recall, I introduced a few weeks ago a general amending financial emergency Bill dealing primarily with mortgages. That Bill is quite obviously, and, t suppose, naturally, a contentious measure, which will occupy some time in discussion in this

1814 Financial Emergency [ASSEMBLY.] (Moratorium) Bill (No.2).

House and in another place. It was pointed out by the honorable member for Dundas at the time that Bill was introduced t'hat it would be advisable to a void the running out of the present provisions. of the Financial Emergency Act, and the destruction of the present protection under that Act, by passing a short amending measure. I accepted that suggestion, and the House passed a Bill extending the existing protect.ion until bhe end of this month. Unfortunately, it is not possible to couelude the debate on the major Bill-the Financial Emergency (Mortgages) BiUin bobh this House and in another place before the end of this week. It seems reasonable to assume that the discussion in this !Iouse might occupy the beUer part of a week and, accordingly, to obviate the rather disastrous results that would follolV from the termination of the p-xisting law while the propos~d new law .was under discussion, it has been decided by the Government that t'here should be a further temporary extension o! the mortgage provisions of the FinanCIal Emergency Act on the lines of thn previous temporary. measure. This Bill is identical with the short temporary measure passed last month except that it substitutes the 1st of December for the 1st of November, as the date on which prot~ction exp~res. If this Bill is passed, It WIll be possIble for this House and ano~her place to give adequate c01ll.sideratlOn to the new legislation without there being any fear that there will be unfurtunate results because of the fact that section 28 of the :Financial Emergency Act had not been, extendod.

Mr .. COTTER.-Why are you sparrjI~g for wIlld on behalf of the Government 1

Mr. M:ENZIES.-The 'honorable mem?er does not need to spar for wind; he IS always full of it.

Mr. SIoJATER (Dundas).-This measure is unobjectionable, and I offer no opposition to its immediate passage. At the same time, I. ask the Government tc, arrive speedily at a decision on the major problem. At an unfortunate time la.te on Thursday afternoon the Government called on the Order of the Day for the second-reading debate of the Financial Ermergenc:y (Mortgages) Bill, and compelled me to resume t.he debate then. I wa! not fully prepared to do so, but rather ttf-an expose my party to the oharge that we were trying to delay the

passage of the measure~ I made my speech. ·r was surprised a few minute!/). ago to find. that ~he Bill ha~ been re~egated to second place on the .N <;>ti.ce· Paper, and that the Government' intfmds to proceed first with the debate OIl

the Unemployment Relief (Taxation) Bill. It is true, as the Attorney-Gent;;· ral suggests, that there is likely to be a,.

lengthy debate on the m~tion for the second reading of the Financial Emergency (Mortgages) Bill, and also much discussion in Committee, and I feel that the Government ought not' unreasonably" . to delay the further submission of the. legislation to the House. Very great uncertainty exists throughout the State as to what the Government's decision will ultimately be, and the form which it will take. He would be a rash man who would itazard a guess at this stage as to what the ultimate position will be.

Mr. COYLE. - Why not extend t.he existing legislation for two months 1

Mr. TUN~ECLIFFE.-Why not for twelve months 1

Mr. SLATER.-I do not want to oppose the Bill which is now before the House, because I think that it should be passed, but I ask the Government to realize the wisdom of coming to a' ~eci-. sion immediately on the major mea~ure. The Attorney-General, in his professional capacity, knows that there are uncertainty, disquietude, and unrest amongst mortgagors and mortgagees alike-;-and for this reason and other reasons the Go-' vernment should complete the legislation at the earliest possible date. It will be most undesirable if the House is urged to pass the" measure without the opportunity of adequate debate. After the action of the Government in calling on the Bill on Thursday afternoon I am opposed t? their switching the House on t"<? obher legislative proposals. to-day and. Illforn:ing members that, III the event of thIS short temporary measure being pas~ed, consideration of the major problem mIght be deferred. I hope that the J Government will proceed at an early date with the major legi!lation.

Mr. WETTENHALL (Lowan).-There appears to be no other course to pursue than to pass this Bill, because another place could not deal with the major measure this week. With reference to the interjection, "Why not extend the exist.ing legislation for twelve

Financial Emergency [25 OCTOBER, 1932.] (Moratorium) Bill (No.2). 1815

months," I pDint out that there ~re weaknesses in the principal Act w hlCh urgently demand amendment. The fact that the secDnd-reading· debate wa.s resumed Dn Thursday prDmpted a number Df members to. spend the week-end preparing speeches in the expectatiDn that the debate would be continued this afternDon. W~e find nDW that the HDuse is to' deal with anDther measure. The pDsitiDn is sDmewhat unfair to. SDme members. When the debate is resumed on t'he Financial Emergency (MDrtgages) Bill at an ea.rly. date, I hDpe that the HDuse will be allDwed to. cDnfine its attentiDn to. that measure and pass it befDre it deals with Dther business. It is necessary to. do. that in Drder to. relieve the suspense and wDrry that many I?eDple are experiencing.

:Mr~ TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood).I congratulate the GDvernment Dn being so. courageDusly cDwardly in cDnnexiDn with the intrDductiO'n Df this legislatIOn. It is well knDwn that Dne Df the urgent reaSDns fDr calling Parliament tDgethe:r earlier in the year was that it migh1 deal with important matters which were demanding attentiDn in the interests Df all sectiDns Df the cDmmunity. With reference to the pDsitiDn Df mDrtgages, the Government did "fly a kite" SDme time 'agD, but last mDnth, at the suggestiDn of the .hDnDrable member fDr Dundas, it intrDduced a temporary measure so. that t'he GDvernment WDuid have time to make a'djustments and marsh~ll its intellectual machinery in order to. bring dDwn legislatiDn which wDuld be acceptable to. the HDuse. A mDnth has passed since then. Late Dn Thursday afternDon, the GDvernment being stuck fDr business and wanting to' nJake a ShDW Df being in earnest, called Dn the Financial Emergency (Mortgages) Bill, for the resumptiDn Df the secDnd-reading debate and agreed to. the adjDurnment after Dne speech had been made. It was naturally thDught that the GDvernment had taken this CDurse so. that members wDuld have time during the week-· end to. prepare their speeches and present a cDgent case when the debate was resumed tD-day. N DW we find that the GDvernment's cDherence is still in'eDherent, and it is nDt prepared to. go. on with the Bill. It· suggests that the prDtectiDn prDvided fDr in the principal. Act shDuld be extended fDr anDther periDd

Df Dne mDnth. I suggest mildly that the existing law be extended fDr twelve mDnths but the GDvernment has nDt dDne this because of the vacillating tactics Df members in the CDrner Dn tlae Ministerial side who. are nDt sure w hether they want the majDr Bill pDstpDned Dr different legislatiO'n intrDduced. AccDrdingly, the GDvernment is being tDssed abDut like a chip Dn the pDlitical waves, nDt knDwing what it wants to. do. Dr what its erstwhile suppDrters will allDw it to. do. So. the GDvernment is maundering alDng delaying the matter and bringing odium on itself and discredit on the institution Df Parliament, while the peDple are suffering as a result. Members in the Ministerial corner pretend that they want to. give the people in the cDuntry districts relief. Perhaps I shDuld nDt say that it is pretence.

Mr. WETTENHALL.-Say anything YDU

like; we dO'n't care. Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-It is impDs

sible to say anything that will affect a man with a hide like a rhinocerDs. l\lembers in the :Ministerial CDrner want t-o play up to. their constituents, and pretend that sDmething shDuld be dDne fDr them. They raised a little dust in the CDrner late Dn Thursday afternoDn, and the GO'vernment called Dn the majDr 13ill for the resumptiDn Df the debate. . But members in the Ministerial CDrner are nDt decided -yet whether they want to. face a CDntest and bring pressure Dn the Government, Dr whether they want the GDvernment to act. Perhaps the GDornDng moven~ent may get a stranglehDld on these members and cDmpel them to take SDme step in the interests Df eDnstitutents who are labDuring under great disabilities. The Premier and the Attorney-General are sitting. tig~t; ~he~ are defending the big financIal mstltutIOns, and are satisfied to let things go. Dn as they have gDne in the past. The DutCDme depends Dn the members sitti~g in the Ministerial CDrner who. are afraId to. dictate to the GDvernment. Those members are coura C1eDUS in patches; for ininstance when \here is a thin HDuse Dn a Thur;day aft ern Don and there is no danger Df' the GDvernment being defeated Dn a vDte. For the rest. of the week, 't'hey are as cDwardly as i~ is pDSsible to. be. The GDvernment IS dawdling alDng aCODm plishing nDthing, and, when it is criticized by the OppDsitiDn,

1816 Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY.] (Taxation) Bill.

there is displayed the rhinoceros skin of the honorable member for Lowan who occasionally makes it appear that he is in earnest, and speaks to the Government in the mildest form of reproach that could emanate from any part of the House. I am a bit disgusted with the tactics of the Government, and still more disgusted with the tactics of that section who claim that they want something done, but are not prepared to see that it is done. I hope that this will be the last of this pifHing kind of legislation, prolonging existing statutes from month to month, and that the Government win take its courage in both hands and buck right in and do something, and then take the responsibility for its actions. The members of the Ministry seem to be afraid to do that kind of thing. They are the most vacillating crowd who ever occupied .'the Treasury bench. I am sure that the public outside are so disgusted that they either do not notice them, or are laughmg at their ineptitude.


committed. ., Clause 1 was agreed to. Clause 2-(Extension of period of re

striction of mortgagee's rights). Mr. WETTENHALL (Lowan).-Re

plying very briefly to the Leader of the Opposition, I just wish to say that if ever there was an illustration of Satan 1'eproving sin, we have had it this afternoon.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-I do not mind bp.ing Satan, if you accept the role of sin.

Mr. WETTENHALL.-The truth is that the whole of the speech of the Leader of the Opposition was humorous pretence, and nobody took him seriously.

The clause was agreed to. The :Bill was reported to the House

without amendment, and the report was adopted.

On the motion of Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General), the Bill was read a third time.

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF (TAXATION) BILL.

The .House went into Committee of Ways and Means.

'Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).-Through what will be described, no doubt, as the disgusting: ineptitude of

the Governm'ent, a printer's error occurred in a resolution which was adopted hy this House on Tuesday of last week. This was the resolution introducing the Unemployment Relief (Taxation) Bill, the resumption of the debate on the second reading of which measure stands as the first item of Government business in the Orders of the Day. Unfortunately, at the beginning of Part A of the resolut~on, the date mentioned as that upon WhICh the year should end during which this tax should be collected was stated to be "the 30th' day of June, 1932." As honorable members will see, the year should be "1933." I move-

That, in lieu of paragraph (1) of Part A of the resolution agreed to on the 18th of October, the folIowing be adopted:-

PART A. 1. That, subject to this resolution there

shaH be charged, levied, collected, and paid, for the use of His Majesty in aid of the Consolidated Revenue, for the year ending on the 30th day of June, 1933, a. tax upon income (hereinafter referred to as the "unemployment relief tax "), and that for the purposes hereof the provisions of the Income Tax Acts. so far as applicable and with all necessary a'da.ptations sha.ll be extended and applied. . ,

Mr. TUNNEcLIF~E.-Are you not going to read the resolutIOn? '

Mr. MENZIES.-I am not. It is as previously set forth, with the exception that the year 1933 has been substituted for the year 1932.

The motion was agreed to. The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard).

The question is: that I do report the resolution to the House.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood).I merely desire to direct attention to the fact that the resolution was not read by the Treasurer at the time when he moved it originally. I was not in the Chamber at that moment, or I should have asked the Treasurer to carry out the rules and read the motion, because only when it is read are honorable members able to appreciate its contents. The rules of the House were disobeyed; they were not carried out in their entirety. Therefore, a glaring mistake occurred which has now to be corrected. I trust that the House appreciates the position exactly. In future, I shall ask that motions such as that before us shall be read by the Ministers submitting them.

The resolution was report.ed to the House, and adopted.

Unemployment Relief (25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 (Taxation) Bill. 181'l

The debate· (adjourned from October 18) on the motion of Sir Stanley Argyle (Premier and Treasurer) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. CAIN (.Northcote).-~h~s meas~re proposes to re-enact the . orIginal relIef taxation which, unfortunately, has been in existence in this State for two years. In 1930, when this l~gislation was ~rst brought down, it was thought possIble that it might have remained in existence for one year only. Unhappily, it became necessary to re-enact the legislation last year, and it is necessGary again thi.s year. Now, however, the overnment IS proposing some slight alteration in the method of collection, but, apart from the proposed reduction of 10 per cent. on last year's rates, the Bill is identical with last year's measure. The' necessity for the continuance of this legislation is borne out by the army of unemployed which stiIl exists in this State, and, for that matter, all over Australia, and generally throughout the world. Much has been said by optimistic people of the possibilities of a revival in business generally, and the prosp,ects of diminishing the. army. of unemployed. I want to take thIS opportunity of examining: very ca:efully that particular aspect, WIth the '!lew of finding out whether the alleged Improvemen~ really is taking place.

The Government, of course, takes credit for having been able to reduce the number an the register of unemployed at the Government Labour Exchange. I do not propose to indulge in undue criticism of the Government. I want to take, rather, the broader view, and to examine the position fI'om the view-point of the co~munity, and of our general welfare. I want to see where we are going. I shall quote from the report issued by the Unemployment Relief Works Board, dated the 30th of June, 1932. That is the latest report available. I do not know whether the position is due to ineptitude or to lack of initiative on the part of the Government, but, although a report should have been available up to the end of September, it has nOot yet been issued. I understand that it has not yet been printed. So we have to fall back on the repo.rt dated the 30th of June last, despite all that was said by members of ·the present Government a year ago, "\J'hen they were


agitating for the issue of quarterly r~ ports. This document furnishes a comparison based on figures covering the rats' three years of registrations at the bureau. It does not include registrations in country districts, nor those dealing with women; but it summarizes the situation with respect to the men registered i~ the metropolitan area. Originally, all the· ttnemployed had to apply to the Gove~nment Labour Exchange, but now this wmtlt is. carried out-and, I believe, reasona,hI,. and efficiently-by the various municipal bodies. The report discloses a rise in tlJ.e number of unemployed, and, in quoting the figures, lshall take the peak period in each year. In June, 1930, the number of unemployed in this State registered at the central bureau was, 24,100. In the corresponding month of 1931 there were 39,005 registered, and in the corresponding month of this year 44,439, The peak period last year occurred in July, and then there was a gradual decline, the figures for October being 39,788, for November 39,828.., and for December 37,346. The decrease was more or less due to the engagement of men at seasonal occupations. This year the drop has been somewhat greater. The peak period was in June, when, as I have said, there were 44,439 registrations, and the latest figures I have obtained from the Labour Department disclose that on the 15th of October the number of registrations at the Government Labour Exchange was 34,799. To that number have to. be added 17,051 unemployed men registered in country districts, in addition to 14,000 or 15,000 unemployed women. Of course, at this period of the year the natural tendency is for there to be a decline in the unemployment figures, o.wing to persons obtaining employment in seasonal occupations. Possibly the decline is greater this year than it was last year, because the prospects are better than they were last year from an agricultural point of view. To instance one industry only the slaughtering and freezing indust~y is busier now than it has ever been in the history of the State.

Mr. OOYLE.-And prices were never . lower.

Mr. GA.IN.-We are not discussing prices now. That industry is absorbing more men to-day than it ever previously

1818 U 1l£mploymenl Relwf [ASSEMBLY.] (Taxation)· Bill.

absorbed. On the 30th of June last, 75,000 persons were 'une~J>loyed,. and I wish to compare the posItIOn as It ~hen existed with the position that obtalned on the 15th of October.· I have not been able to obtain the number of women unemployed on the latter date, because, fortunately or unfortunately-unfortun .. ately, I think-there has bee~ some change in the method of collating the figures relatin~ to unemployed women. The bureau that was established for the registration of unemployed women has, I understand, been abolished, and they are being registered now by the Sustenance Department. Not having yet got into the swing ·of matters, that Department is not able to furnish very accurate figures regarding the number of unem4

ployed women. On t~e 15th of October there were registered at the Government Labour Exchange 34,799 men, while there were 17,051 men registered on the 30th ()f S(~ptember in country districts. Assuming that there are still 14,000 women unemployed-,-and I ha ve no reason to doubt· that that is .the case-that makes the total figure for the unemployed army of this State 65,850. As I have stated, on the 30th of June the figure was 75,000, so there has been· a reduction. in that period of approximately 9,000. A statement recently made in the House by the Premier regarding works which had been put in hand by the Government disclosed that approximately 9,000 men had been engaged for various country works, such as forest works, water supply works, and other public works, for which a sum of £1,000,000 had been allotted. Add that number of men to the number of unemployed that I have stated, and you find that with all the alleged brighter outlook that is optimistically spoken of by economists and governments all over Australia, the figure is still very close to 75,000.

Mr. LIND.-Does not that prove that our unemployment legislation has failed ~

Mr. CAIN.-No; it does not prove . any thing of the kind. I should like ~he honorable member to take a broad Vlew of the matter. No one is entitled to criticize the present legislation unless he

. has something better to offer in place of it, and I should like to hear what the honorable member has to offer.

Mr. LIND.-Allow individuals to spend their own money.

Mr. OAIN.-I hope I shall be allowed to develop my argument in my own way. Is the so-called restoration of confidence in the Commonwealth, owing to a multitude of reasons, mostly f.).lleged to be poli,. tical, is the fact that our bonds have reached par, is the fact that we are . supposed to be in a wonderful position, reifleeted in the position that but for the employment by the Government, principally with borrowed money, of 9,000 men, the army of unemployed in this State would be as large as it was last June notwithstanding that we are in the flush' of one of the best seasons we have had ~ Last year there were 39,788 me~ registered as unemployed at the Government Labour Exchange at the end o~ October. This year there were 34,799 registered at the Government Labour Exchange in the middle of October. Owing to the fact that at this period last year the then Government felt that the stage had been reached when without borrowed money it would be necessary to conserve all the unemployment relief funds to provide sustenance, and for that reason work had been more or less eased, it was employing fewer than 2,000 of the unemployed on public works. In October this year the Government is employing 9,000 on such works. Desp~te that, the number of unemployed regIstered at the Government Labour Exchange in Melbourne is 34,000 in October this year as compared with 39,000 last year, although the official ~gures d~s:' close that there has been an lncrease In the number of factory employees. Las~ year there had been an increase of 6,0~0 in the number of factory employees In comparison with the previous year. Ill: Deceinber 1930, there were 104,000 persons empioyed in factories, and in December, 1931, 110,000. The number of unemployed men registered at the Government Labour Exchange rose from 29,000 in December, 1930, to 37,000 in December, 1931.

Mr. WETTENHALL.-Would not that be largely because of the fact that a number of persons who had. been unemployed but who had not registered previously were compelled to do so by pressure of circumstances ~

Unemployment Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 (Taxation) Bill. 1819

Mr. CAIN.-N o. What is generally forgotten is that an increase in the num~ ber of factory workers does not neces~ sarily mean fewer unemployed amongst the manual workers, because between 30,000 and 40,000 boys and girls leave school every year, and a certain number of them go into factories and swell the ranks of the factory workers.

Mr. GRovEs.-And others swell the ranks of the unemployed.

Mr. OAIN.-That is the worst feature of the matter. Many of the unem~ ployed men have their lives more or. less behind them, but the boys and girls are -facing the future, and the position for them is tragic. The figures indicate to me that, notwithstanding the alleged improvement in the general outlook, if it were not for the fact that the Government, with borrowed money, which we did not have last year, is able to employ nearly 10,000 men, the number of unem~ ployed registered at the Government Labour Exchange would be, at least, 40,000. The figures are very disquieting. One must feel that, despite the alleged improvement, the outlook is not bright. Let us look, not only at the position in Australia, but in other countries. I shall quote to honorable members some remarks by o~e of the ex-leading statesmen of the world, Mr: Lloyd George, contained in his book Reparations and War-Debts. In the introductory chapter he deals with the question of unemployment in a rather effective way. The problem is becoming more desperate and more acute each year, and we have not yet reached the bottom, as many people say we have. Mr. Lloyd George says-

The Economist Oommercial History and Redew of 1931 similarly declares that" In every industry and every country the picture is dismally similar. The story of 1931 is, in fact, a litany of woe and a commination service against increas·ing misfortune . . . Although Europe was the centre of the storm, it is possible to search the world outside without finding bright spots." In his Halley Stewart Lecture, on the II th of February, 1932, Sir Basil Blackett pointed out how, through t,he financial chaos and collapse of prices throughout the world, we had for the past ten years experienced in heartrending fashion how ., every kind of effort towards world recovery and reconstruction, both national and international, had been rendered abortive, often after showing great initial promise of success."

Unemployment in this country

He is speaking of England-has risen to the' appalling total of over 21 millions-this includes the partially unemployed. But we are not the only sufferers in this respect. In Germany, by January, 1932, the unemployed numbered over 6 milJions~a far higher proportion than ours. In France, the unemployed increased sevenfold during 1931, and by January, 1932, more than 50 per cent. of the workers in French industry and commerce were on short time. The Times Paris correspondent, writing on 12th February, 1932, computed that the wholly unemployed in France now numbered Ii million, and the partially unemployed Ii million. The aggregate is higher than the British figure-, and proportionally to industrial population much higher.

The totally unemployed in Italy numbered almost a million by December, in spite of Signor Mussolini's truly heroic efforts to find useful work for all. In the United States of America, the number at work in manufacturing industries has fallen. to less than. twot.hirds of those employed 10 1926. EstImates of the total workless in the States, on a c0n:tparable basis to that. adopted for tl~eIr enumeration here (full-tIme and short-tIme unemployed lumped t?g~ther) indicate a figure of round wboutJ 12 mIllIons. Those are some of the facts with which we are presented from all parts of t~e world. When I hear members of thu; Government, or some other Government in Australia, pointing out that we have reached a stage when it can be said that we are on the road to recovery, I submit that the figures both here and abroad indicate, unfortunately, that we have made very little progress in that direction. The Bill that is now before the House is intended exclusively to raise money. I know that there is another measure which deals with the questions of administration, and the provision of work. We have been spending out of a loan of £900,000, on half of which Wf!

have to pay interest. Then there is tho £1,800,000 emergency loan which the Government anticipates being able to spend this year. The expenditure of these moneys will involve the payment by. the taxpayers of this community of some interest this year and a greater amount next year. Ass~ming that we continue on the lines along which we are moving at present, it appears to me that we are gradually reaching a stage when we shall have this taxation permanently saddled upon us~ for the purpose of paying interest on money that has been spent in previous years. We have had enough evidenc~ in


this country. over the last few years to be at lenst a warning to us for the future. I remember the period between 1920 and 1930, and particularly early in 1921 and 1922, when this House was dealing with the question of soldier settlement. Against all the rules of the game, this House, year after year, refused to provide sufficient funds to pay the interest ()n soldier settlement. We refused to tax our people sufficiently to keep the project going, and we allowed the positioll to drift on until we have now arrived at a stage when approximately £1,000,000 is being lost every year on soldier settlement.

Mr. DUNsTAN.-It is a pretty awkward problem to solve.

Mr. C'AIN.-I suppose that no one knows that better than the Minister of Lands. It is a difficult problem, but successive Nationalist Governments in this State, with the object of keeping down taxation, and relieving the taxpayer, used capital moneys to pay interest. Now we have to face those obligations. The same remarks apply largely to water supply. On that account we have gone on :spending over the last ten years until last year our losses aggregated £960,000. 'The losses are increasing every year. It behoves those who are controlling the political destinies of this State-those who talk so glibly about reducing income tax, abolishing land tax, aDd handing the bu.rden on to posterity-to review the situation. We hear such statements in almost every public pronouncement made by certaiu politicians, and that has been the policy over a long period of years. We have by it handed On to posterity obligations that we should meet every day, as they arrive. I do not know 'what posterity will do.

An HONORABLE MEl\IBER.-Posterity will disclaim liability.

Mr. CAIN.-There will be every justification for that. It is interesting to consider the road which we are travelling in connexion with unemployment relief taxation. Assuming that the Governntent is able to borrow and spend £1,800,000 out of Forgan Smith's loanForgan Smith was responsible for initiating the proposal at the ·Premiers' Conference at Canberra-and out of the loatl of £900,000, £450,OnO is spent, on which interest will have to be pnid by Victoria

for every £100,000 bOfl'owed at 5 per cent. interest, amounting to £5,000 a year, will have to be met. This year the amount of interest may be £50,000, or it may be only £20,000. I do not know what sum the Treasurer has ear-marked. He has a happy knack of not disclosing sufficient information. I do not blame the Attorney-General in'- that respect at all. With the responsibilities of the Law Department, the Railway, Department, and the financial emergency legiala-tion-- .

Mr. MURPHy.-And the CountrI party. Mr. CAIN.-He has enough-in fact,

more than sufficient-at one time. But I do think that it is a reasonable request that we should be advised of what amount is likely to be required to meet

.. the interest obligations, payments which will have to come out of the U nemployment Relief Fund. We should know the estimated commitments to be paid out of the fund next year, and the following year, because such payments will reduce the fund very considerably. As I have already indicated, if we proceed as we are going, we shall rapidly reach the stage when this tax will be permanently fastened on the community to meet interest o~ligations over a period of, say, ten 01'

twelve years. I prefer the other policy both individually and collectively. 1 have heard Ministerialists condemn the man who lives on the time payment basis. I believe in the eound policy of paying our way as we go. Had we adopted that method some years ago in prosperous times, we should have been able, by increasing income tax slightly, to overcome all our difficulties relating to land settlement, because we should have met the losses as they accrued year by year.

Mr. WETTENHALL.-Oh, happy day!

Mr. CAIN.-The honorable member played his part in keeping in power those Governments which supported the policy of paving interest out of borrowed money:' .!. few days ago, I pointed. out that our State was the lowest taxed in the Commonwealth. I do not say that some of the higher taxed States were not wors~ than we have been in respect of living beyond our means. But the trouble that we are up against is that we are now setting out on a scheme of unemployment relief taxation that,: accord-

Unemployment Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932.] (Taxation) Bill. 1821

ing to all indications, will be with U!:9

for some years. Let us hope that theo

necessity for 0 unemplOYIp-ent relief will disappear before many years have :passed, but I am afraid that it will be ttecessary in the course of four, five, or even ten years to saddle the community with taxation to meet interest on the money that we have spent. It is impos'ilible to raise sufficient taxation to provide all with work, but we should be 'Warned about borrowing money, particularly at high rates. ]f we cdul'd get money at the same rates of interest as 'Was mentioned by some of our friends in the insurance companies, namely, 1 per cent., there would be another story.

Mr. MENZIEs.-I am afraid that that was advertising.

Mr. CAIN.-I should think there is a great deal of advertising in such proposals. When we have to pay 4: or 5 :per cent. for our money, it will soon eat up a large proportion of the fund, and :must act detrimentally On that fund in :the years to come. There is something about the Government's proposal which ;is somewhat progressive. There is a :schedule with which the Government is not interfering, and which compares favorably with those operating in New .south W ales, Tasmania, and Queensland. 1 have always taken exception to the incidence of general taxation in this State, and have pointed out how that -operates very harshly on the lower paid sections of the community, and very bene-ficially on those with the higher incomes. -Ours is the only State where there is no -progressive incidence of ordinary taxa-tion. In other States there are flat rates -for unemployment relief taxation, but ill the measure that is now before us we have -the nucleus of a progressive method of -taxation. The rates per £100 payable on the taxable incomes start-as set out in the schedule-at lOs., which will, by reason of the 10 per cent. reduction, be 9s. actually, and rise progressively until -the taxable income exceeds £3,000. On incomes exceeding £3,000 the rate per £100 is £5 18s. 6d., and to say the least oof it, that displays a reasonable method ,of imposing the tax, whereas in New South Wales there is a Bat rate of Is. in -the £1.

::Mr. LINTON.-It was nearly 5s.

Mr. CAIN.----It may have been, but that W'a~ not of or unemployment relief purposes.

Mr. LINToN.-Lang's original suggestion was 5s. in the £1.

Mr. CAIN.-For incomes of over £500. However, the rate is actually Is. in the £1, but I understand it is proposed to vary the incidence, and that it is the intention of the New South Wales Government to reduce the taxation to 6d. in th\l £1 on incomes of from £2 to £3 a week, 7 d. in the £1 On incomes from £3 to £3 lOs., and Is. in the £1 on higher incomes. There are only two grades in Queensland, namely, incomes of below £2, on which the rate is 3d., and incomes of over £2, on which the rate is 6d. In Tasmania, there were two grades, but an alteration has been made to provide for four grades on which there are rates of 4d., 5d., 9d., and Is. in the £1 respectively. On incomes up to £312, the rate is 4d., on the next £208 the rate is 5d.; on the next £980 the rate is 9d., and on the balance the rate is Is. in the £1. The schedule which the Government has included ill the Bill, and which was in the last measure, is at least the most progressive schedule in operation in any of the States that impose unemployment relief taxation. In Western Australia, there was what was called the hospital fund, which has, I believe, been reduced to some extent. It provided for a flat rate of 1 !d. in the £1 on all incomes. That is to- my mind undesirable and unfair. Our proposal discloses an effort on the part of Parliament to endeavour to allot the rates over the various incomes in proportion to the taxpayers' capacity to pay.

I have endeavoured to point out tht position as regards unempleyment. .I can see no very great evidence of relief, except that afforded by the Government in the employment of from 8,000 to 9,000 men on relief works. The most importallt thing-and the thing I am most concer~ed with-is the non-fulfilment of claIm.s made by members on the other (the Ministerial) side, and by others in the community. -Their claims may be expressed this way: "Let us have reasonable taxation; let us restore confidence; let us hav~ a Government that the people will feel satisfied with" so that we may stimulatfl industry, and men now unemployed will

1822 U n{3mploymentRelief [ASSEMBLY.] (Taxation) Bill.

get back to work." We. have all these things, or at least the p'eople think so; we have new Governments iIi both State and Commonwealth spheres; we have a buoyant bonds market ; allegedly confidellce has been restored; yet the official fi.kures disclose that the number of the unemployed in this· State IS

approximately th~ same this year as last year, allowing for the employment given to men on relief works. Evidently private enterprise is not absorbing the unemployed as my friends opposite contended, apart from the primary industries, which are more or less seasonal occupaiions, and which are naturally absorbing at present more men than usual. Otherwise, there is no big increase in general· employment. . It may be that factory employment figures will show a rise this year, because they climbed up last year by 6,000. If they go IIp

again this year, it will not follow that we have not as many .unemployed, because, unfortunately, from 30,000 to 40,000 young people, fresh from school, are available to enter the factories, thereby swelling the. list. It is interesting to know that whilst there ~as an. increase in persons employed III factorIes last year, there was a decrease -rather a big one-in the number 0f persons. employed in shops. Despite an increase of 433 shops, there was a decrease of 4,390 shop employees. That decrease almost set off the increase of factory hands. Oonsequently, the position, unfortunately, presenting itself to us to-day, is that, notwithstanding all the improved conditions, private enterprise is not at present-we do not know what the future holds in store-absorbing many of the unemployed. I suggest to the Government that they should take very serious care that a big proportion of the money raised by this taxation shall not, withill·a few years, be used to pay interest on money borrowed years before. No serious objection can be taken to this legislation. There has been a 10 per cent. reduction in the taxation. Allowing for that, the Government. will have more money this year than was available last year, when we had to make refunds to the amount of £338,000. With the 10 per cent. reduction, I understand that the income under this Bill will be approximately £1,200 000 which, with £700,000 carry-over fro~ th~

Mr. Cain.

previous year, will give the Government. as much money to spend as -the Government had last year. While the Government take 10 per cent off this taxation,. they will make up for it in another way. Approximately, £130,000 that otherwise would go into the Unemployment Relief Fund will this year go into general revenue.

Mr. MURPHY (Port Melbourne).I think a majority of the people have, ~:n far, been very much disappointed at the failure of the unemployment relief scheme. We were led to believe that,. with .more money to spend, there was a. great probability of many more men be-· ing found employment. We find that approximately 10,000 men out of some-60,000 or 70,000 men unemployed havebeen given work. Our anticipations have not been realized. I recognize that this Bill is necessary, but I do not agree with theincidence of the taxation. For instance, r disapprove of the taxing of a girl in domestic service earning 12s. or 15s. a ·week. To tax a girl on so low a ,vage is iniquitous. I would ask the question: Are we exploiting every means of providing employment for men? Could we do. better than we have done? r mentionedin the House some time ago th(~ fact that when in Queensland in August last, I found that the Minister of Sustenance had, with the consent of his Government, earmarked £100,000 for the purpose of enabling people who desired to make, improvements to their properties to obtain small loans. Money from this particularfund ·was expended· mainly on building purposes. The carpenter, the painter,. and the bricklayer were all given work to. do. .

Mr. LINTON.-Was that system continued, or was it dropped?

Mr. MURPHY.-I am informed that it has been continued. The Ministerwhom I interviewed told me that, though the system had not been in operation long,. a large number of applications had been dealt with, and that it would be possible to expend £300,000, repayable in ten yearsat 5 per cent. There are two· things in connexion with that system worthy of ourconsideration. Tn the first place, -the money that was liberated was not ex-pended on doles. Loans were given, re-payable in ten years. This was the meansof finding employment for artisans in a.

V nemployment Relief [25 OCT()BER, 1932.1 (Taxation) Bill. 1823

jobbing way. I asked that something of .a similar nature should be done in this State, but nothing has been done. If the 'Government, through t1;te agency of the :Employment Council, adopted the system, :1 have no doubt that thousands of appli;cations would be received from all parts 'of Victoria for loans up to a certain .amOUll.t to enable the carrying out of necessary repairs to. property. The .money would be repayable to the Govern:ment within ten years. The artisan, who "to-day is unemployed, would be able to ,get jobbing work, and consequently uneni,:ployment would be relieved. These are :matters that the· Government should pay .attention to;

Right throughout the world to-day, the consensus of opinion is that the only way to restore prosperity is to ,get men, 'now unemployed, back to work. 'Until that is done, no country will be :prosperous. It is more incumbent on Victoria, perhaps, than on some other coun·tries to do something in that direction, because of the losses we are sustaining 'from year to year on closer and soldier .settlement, and on our Water Supply and .Railway Departments. These utilities

. :account for our huge deficit. We have -only to realize the fact that on one 'institution, with a capital of over £22,000,000, interest is paid at the rate ()f £4 lIs. lId., whilst the money is earning only a little over 31s. interest .. In -()ther words, on that £22,000,000, 3 per -cent. is lost every year. We have the same thing in connexion with closer and soldier settlement, with a capital of -£25,000,000. We are told that £5,000,000 is to be written off. If an assessment were made of our assets on closer and soldier settlement, we should find that the .assets would not realize £15,000,000. We have had to face continual losses for a .number of years. No Government has tried in any way to make the conditions ,()f these utilities better than they have been in the past. There has been a continual drain on the finances of this country. Because of our heavy liabilities, the financial position is such that servant ,girls and others, who are earning from lOs. to £1 a week, are being called upon to pay taxation. I regard that as unfair. I want to impress on the' Government the 'necessity of further exploring the avenues ·()f employment. 1 read in this morning's

press a report of statements made by Mr . Baragwanath, a very efficient officer,- who is now Secretary for Mines. He gave it as his opinion that there is as much gold underground in this State as has been taken out of it. Thousands of men have been out fossicking' and prospecting. Those men have not been' recipients of the dole. The Government should encourage fossicking and prospecting, as it might lead to a considerable addition to the wealth of the country. It is for the

. Government to create more employment. So far, efforts in this direction appear to have been a failure.

Mr. HOLLAND (Flemington).-In a moment of weakness, I promised the honorable member for Gippsland North that I would keep the debate going until he had finished his dinner. I listened to the second-reading speech of the Premier and Treasurer on this Bill. The honorable member f.or Bendigo asked what proportion of the amount to be raised under the measure would be utilized for sustenance, and the Premier replied, " A great deal." The honorable member for N orthcote in'terjected that the whole amount would be required for snstenance. I do not know whether or not that statement is correct, or what kind of a prophet the honorable member for N orthcote is, but in view of the fact that all the Government hopes to raise under the Bill is about £1,800,000, I wonder what has become of the question of providing work. According to para.graphs in the press, the Premier has intimated on various occasions that he proposes to abolish the dole. Other IVlin-jsters have made similar statements, and I wish to give them full credit for their intentions. In any civilized country the governing body should entertain such a desire, but I am afraid that this Government does not realize the magnitude of the task, or how great the problem of unemployment it. The honorable member for Gippsland East expressed the opinion by interjection that the unemployment relief legislation had failed. If it is a fact that most of the money is to be utilized for sustenance, I begin to feel that consideration should be given to the all-important question of sustenance. According to l¥ ebster' s Dictionary "sustenance" is

," maintaining life."- It requires a great stretch 6f imagination to concede that the

1824 [ASSEMBLY.) (Taxation) Bill.

amount prescribed for sustenance is in any way adequate to meet the present situation. When I say sustenance, I include the provision of adequate fuel, clothing, and shelter. I do not expect the Government to give those who are deprived of employment the same st-andard of living as that to which they have beell accustomed. When, however, we realize that a -large number of people receiving sustenance are likely to do so for 'a considerable time, it is only right that the Government should give earnest consideration to'the important question of the 'standard of sustenance pre": ,,~ailirig in this community. No one will care to contradict me when I say that the amount now allowed is anything but ade-

'quate. It must be generally acc~pted

that the great bulk of the people registel'ed as unemployed 'will have no opportunity to obtain work under the provisions of this :Bill or under any other measure contemplated by the Government, and, therefore, we must give further considcl'ation to the matter of the standard of SUR

tenance. Medical men say that a person can go hungry and starve for a long time without dying. It looks as though a section of this community will have to go hungry and starve for a long time without dying. Although the United States of America, has not the system of sustenance that prevails here, the advisability was considered of issuing loans to the 'heads of families to enable them to adequa tely clothe their wives and children for the approaching Christmas. The opinion was expressed that as the Government had supplied untold wealth to banks to keep them a110at with possibly no hope of return, if it issued a loan to enable people to clothe themselves, a big percentage of the. amount wou!d be ret~Irned when prosperIty once agam prevaIled and the men ]'esumed work. It was felt there was just as much honesty among the bulk of the working people as there was in the financial institutions. The honorable member for N orthcote dealt with the question of providing employment. He said that the most our Government could hope to do was to give about 10,000 people work of short duration, but what will become of the other 50,000 unemployed people 1 ,We are in this position: As we send men away to the country, a similar number return to the eity after completing their

Afr, Holland.

short period of employinent. Judging by the register that confronts the authorities, and the fact that men who have been registered for two 'years are only just getting work, their prospects of a second can are -remote.

:Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-In, another tW()

years. -Mr. LINToN.-The same condition has

prevailed for the last two years. :Mr. HOLLAND.-That fact shows<

how colossal the problem is. ' Mr. LI}IlTON ,-You are not criticizing

this Government ~ -"' .. Mr. HOLLAND.-No; the system ..

'N 0 doubt the Government has the best of intentions, but no matter how the Minister shows there is duplication;' and that cer:.. tain people should not be registered, thereare 50,000 men and women in this com:munity for whom we can find no work.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-More than 50,ooa men and women of adult age, and tnell' there are children.

Mr. HOLLAND.-We can find noplace for these people in industry. It is disquietening and disappointing that, notwithstanding the millions of pounds expended by the Government, there has beeD! no stimulation of private enterprise. It. was expected that there would be a demand for clothing and other necessities of life as a result .of the Government expcn·· '. diture, but private enterprise has not ,been stimulated, and blas n~t accepted its re-8ponsibilities, notwithstanding all the talk of alleged prosperity. For every persOl:' that priva~e enterprise has engaged, it has discharged two. The only instrumentality giving work is the Government_ J'udging by the legislation introduced her" with the best of intentions, the Government is providing work for only a small section of the unemployed. Weare in 'an. extraordinary position, and we must facn it, though we shall not meet it by this. legislation. There has been talk about the return of prosnerity. Big heading~ have appeared in the press. We havebeen told that stocks have reached par~, and tha:t this' or that ,new plant has· started, but the returns showing the consumption of gas and of electric power indicate that there has been no return to-prosperity. It seems that speculators areonly seeking cover in order to invest theirsurplus oash in gilt-edged securities. It-, bitterly disflppoints me that the expectEd

.. U nemployme14t Relief

~timulation to private enterprise has not :materialized, and that private enterprise is not accepting its responsibility, but on the contrary has fallen down on the job. We must face realities and not theories, ;and we must admit that the legislation introduced by the Government will not meet the situation. We must realize what a -colossal problem that of unemploymen t is. I was interested to read a statement in the press made by the Governor of the Bank of England, Mr. Montagu N ormall.

Mr. TUNNECLI;FFE.-He has thrown in the sponge.

Mr. HOLLAND.-Yes. Only recently .a Melbourne newspaper published this great· man's history. He was described as a strong man, a man of iron, who was .always travelling incognito. A.s a matter -of fact, I find that when he travels he has p:reater publicity than an actor or a film star. He sent Sir Otto Niemeyer to this ·cou!ltry to put us on the right path. The .natlons used to tremble at the word of Mr. Montagu Norman, and politicians

. used to supplicate him for assistance, but he has proved to be a man of straw. He talked of frozen assets, but he seems to have a frozen head and frozen feet .. The British Empire used to hang on every word he uttered. He was responsible for 'Putting England off the gold standard.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-You described Mr. Norman as a man of straw. Why bother about what he said?

Mr. HOLLAND.-Mr. Norman har; found that the job is too big. He has been . hone~t enough to admit that fact, notwIthstanding that he has been one of the driving forces of the English monetary policy.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-Great men know their limitations; others do not.

Mr. HOLLAND.-Perhaps we arp. wea~ and are looking for leadership. Accordmg to a cable message published in the Age on Sat.urday last, Mr. Montagu Norman, referrmg to the world position said- '

Vast f.orces, includi!lg the herd instinct and -desperatlOn of people having neither work nor markets, had caused a series of events that could not be controlled by any man or government. 'It seemed impossible to get lJnited world action .

.. The difficulties are so vast, the forces so unlimited and 80 novel, and precedents 80

lacking," he concluded, "that I approach the !"hole subject in ignorance and humility. It 18 too great for me. I am willing to do my

. (Taxation) Bill. 1825

best. I see the- light at the end of the tunnel somewhat indistinctly, but· we have not yet emerged from our difficulties."

Mr. LINTON.-You have found the honest banker at last!

Mr. HOLLAND.-And we have had to wait a long time for the honest man to appear.

Mr. MENZIES.-I like to meet people who see the light at the end of the tunnel, bec!luse that shows that they travel by tram.

IVIr. HOLLAND. - Mr. lVIontagu N orman is beginning to realize how colossal the problem is. He has dec~ared his ignorance and humility-I lIke the latter word-and his statement should be a lesson to us. We must give serious consideration to this problem, and take every opport-unity to give expression to our views. The honorable member for N orthcote referred to the statement made by Mr. Crowley--

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Who is the oldest insurance manager in Australia. ,

~r. HOLLAND.:-He has made a sug~ gestlOn that the Insurance companies should lend £20,000,000 to the Commonwealth Government, or that that Government should urge the Commonwealth Bank to issue credit as was done during the war. It is said that great minds think alike, and evidently Mr. Crowley is·thinking along the same lines as did the late Sir Denison Miller, the first governor .of the Commonwealth Bank. In 1922, I think, Sir Denison l\Eller was askedwhether it was a fact that the Common· wealth Bank was able to create credit to the extent of £350,000,000 for the purpose of carrying on the war. His answer was yes, and he stated that if the war had continued for another four years the bank could, by the use of the same method of creating credit, have made another '£350,000,000 available. He· was then asked whether it was possible for the bank to do the same servic'e in the interests of peace and production. His answer was yes. Mr. Crowley is apparently thi~king along those lines. As Professor Copland stated in the press today, we are reaching a dangerous state when our Governments propose to raise a loan to redeem some of our Treasury bonds. He said that it was merely a

1826 17 nemployrrient Relief [ASSEMBLY.] (Taxq,ti~p) !Jill.,

temporary expedient. There is no doubt that we have reached the dangerous stage in our policy of borrowing . We are bor-rowing money to pay interest on borrowed money, and in doing so we are getting very close to a state of financial collapse.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-We have reached that stage, but many people will not admit it.

Mr. IIINTON (to Mr. Holland).-You will admit that 95 per cent. of the money borrowed has been spent on labour?

Mr. HOLLAND.-I will not deny it. This State has borrowed £75,000,000 for the construction of the railway system for the purposes of developing the country. Already the State has paid in interest an amount of £104,000,000, and the capital debt of £75,000,000 still remains unpaid. It is not possible for the railways to meet the inter'est bill unless a subsidy is received from the Government. That position would not have arisen if our forefathers had made some provision for the redemption of the loan, either by a sinking fund or the imposition of a betterment tax on the land which was enhanced in value by the construction of railways and roads. Some land received a tremendous enhancement in value, and the community which created the enhancement is entitled to some return from it. The honorable member for N orthcote referred to our water supply and land settlement sClhemes, and pointed out that we cannot continue to finance those schemes under the present methods. It is the duty of the Government to tell the people that the State cannot meet its commitments. I think that our leaders-both inside and outside Parliament-have lost their nerve. The job appears to be too big for them. We must adopt some scheme such as that suggested by Sir Denison Miller, and recently by Mr. Crowley so as to put ,back into work the 600,000 or

,7@O,000 Australians who, because of unemployment, are not producing any wealth for Australia. The question of unemployment is a very ,big one as we know it, but there are many avenues available which would provide work. By further development of the rural districts, the harbours, and streams, profitable employment could be made available for many thousands of unemployed,

and they in turn, by their work and the' circulation of their wages, would provide employment for other unemployed. The opportunities in this cQuntry are un~ limited, and our leaders should becourageous enough to take advantage of them. There is no doubt that the amount

, of money made available in sustenance to unemployed workers in Victoria is not adequate. Many of the unemployed are losing their morale, and are becoming desperate. W ehave read recently of trouble that has occurred in many parts of the world because the unemployed and' other distressed sections have been driven. to a state of desperation. There has beeu trouble in London, Belfast, and Sydney. There was the trouble in Washington caused by the "Bonus llrmy," and in. the. Provinces of Mallitoba, Saskatchewan" and Alberta, in Canada, armies of farmers marched on the capitals demanding more consideration for their class. In this State, members have had the experience of unemployed men and women a pproaching them and asking them i() use their representations with the SuStenance Department to obtain clothing for the unemployed.

(At 6.25 p.m. the sitting was suspender! until 7.37 p.m.)

Mr. HOLLAND.-I wish to emphasize the appeal which I have been making to the Minister in charge of sustenance that, in view of the inability of a large section of the unemployed to obtain work of any description under the schemes of the Government, further consideration should be given to the matter of providing clothing. I witnessed to-day a distribution of shirts and flannels in my own district. Unfortunately, the committee had only about 70 of these articles available, whereas there were about 400 per-

'sons surrounding the' depot, all of them anxious to obtain some of the goods abou.t to be allocated. In their wisdom, the ladies of the committee decided that the best plan would be to ballot the garments. That was done, and I noted that the clothing of very many of those who had attended the distribution was threadbare, and that they were in great need of clothes of all descriptions. The great majority had to go away disappointe~,. but some of the younger p.eopJe' amongst

U'I'temployment Relief [25 OCTOJiER', 1932.1 . (Taxation) Bill. 1827

them took their disappointment lightly, as I heard them' singing-

Oh shan't we all be happy"' When living like a Jappy. .. . ' ~Won't it be nice when we are hymg on rIce, And magenta stew for Sunday.

1 do not know whether those lines amount to a prophecy, but the tendency in these <lays of depression is to drive people down to the level of the coolie. In this (~()l.t1l· try, with its superabundance of everything necessary for .the welfare of ma:n, .:all have a moral claIm on the C~.1lUmU1llr.y to obt~in something more out of life t~an just sufficient to stave off starvatIO!-l' Every man has a right. to earn and obtam things adequate for hIS needs. But t?e utmost the Government can do under Its present projects is to give about 10,000 men work, leaving about 50,000 adults 'for whom no provision is being made. It is said that the Lord will provide for the unemployed. I suggest to the Minister in charge of sustenance not to let the Lord have it all on His own, but to come forward and take a little himself. It should he the responsibility of the Gov~rm:~le?t to see that no one in the communIty IS In want. Nobody should be on the verge of .starvation.in this country. I say, deliberately, that if we cannot provide work for the greater number of the unemployed, we must take steps to increase sustenance. If something of the ~i;nd is not done we may witness a repetItIon of the things that are taking place in other COUll

tries. There will be hunger marches, and, just as they are a l:wnace in America and in England, so wIll they be ~ menace in Victoria.

There are children going to school to<lay without boots or adequate. c~othing. An appeal was made to the MInI~ter of Public Instruction by representatIves of 1be women's committees in various districts for food to be provided for children attending the schools. The request wa" turned down simply because there harl been voluntary effort to a limited degree, in certain districts, to make provision fo; the feeding of school children. There is :a danger to-day of thousands of 0:ur people 'becoming permanently pauperIzed a~J. having to beg for food and shelter. ~,., 'Consideration is being exte~ded to those of our people who a:e old an~ in.fi\m. There is no one who IS more dissattsfie:l with unemployment than the unemplo)yed

themselve~. 'I do not altogether agi'ce with the following statement, whiCh \Vt,S

published'in the press the other day: -"The depression has shown up the average

Australian as a superstitious, socially maladjusted, politically naive, econom.ically unawakened immature, adolescent, crymg for the lost lollypop of prosperity, and pathetically incapable of doing anything fundamental or constructive about it.

The average person is so in~ifferent to what is going on all around lum that he does not realize how bad things are. Large nu~bers of our people are on the verge of starvation. Their children are growing up handicapped by malnutrit~on. The position is very grave, and t~ere IS a responsibi~ity on each of u~ to Improve the situatIOn. I do not thInk the measure which we are debating is adequate. Let us paaa it, and let the Government bring down something better calculated to solve the problem confronting us. &ome of the unemployed to-day have passed through their third winte~ of. unempl~yment, and 'they are detenoratmg phYSICally, mentally, and morally, because .of their privations and their dread of the In

security of their means of living. It is not only the unemployed who are druar:ling the insecurity of the situation. ..:\ woman called at my house and told W~ that her husband was employed in I,he railway workshops. He had been made a permanent officer late in lif~, so that he was required to pay heavily to the. supe!annuatiO'n fund. He :had to' pay hIS tram tares to and from Williamstown, Rll(t 1:.e h ad been rationed so severely that this woman on three days last week, wl;nt without food so that her children might have some. She pointed these things out tope, but she had kept them from her husband.

Mr. MlrnPHY.-She is only one of thousands.

Mr. HOLLAND.-It is a reflection on our civilization. As Mr. Montagu NO'rman has put it we can view prosperity at the end of a tu~nel somewhat indistinctly. This is only a makeshift way of endeavouring to' accomplish what we all desire. It is unscientific, wasteful, and expensive. If it is the in~,ention of the GO'vernment to throw the burden of taxation on to' the workers, then the wO'rkers are certainly entitled to more consideration The responsibility does not rest on the Government alone. It rests on

1828 Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY. ] . (Taxation) Bill.

this House and on each and everyone of us. None of us can escape the respon., sibility of endeavouring to contribute in. some way towards finding a solUtion. of .. our unemployment problem. The Deputy Leader of the Oppositionr~minded us that from 30,000 to 40,000 boys and girls leave our schools annually, for whom no positions can be found. In all our districts we meet youths of 18, 19, and 20 who have never yet done a day's work. As Mr. Crowley points out· in the suggestion he made to the Commonwealth Bank for the release of credit to the amount of £20,000,000, there are many publio works yet. undeveloped in Australia. In this ~tate we should concentrate on getting ready fOT

our Centenary Celebrations. Medical officers ,have reported on the uninhabitable conditions of many terraces of houses within a mile of this Parliament. The Government would do a splendid and necessary work if it undertook a housing ~Icheme at a cost of some millions of pounds. The honorable member for Upper Yarra has suggested that the. war memorial should be opened by a member of the Royal family. On Ii

former occasion a member of the Royal household opened the St. Kilda boulevard. We should ha ve something to boast of' if a substantial improvement in the housing conditions of the people formed 'part of the Centenary Celebrations. The A.ge recently had a leading article on the causes of the criminal element in the community. We shall not abolish that criminal element until we abolish the slums. We must one and all accept responsibility. The problem . is not too big for us to tackle. We have not lost our talent for leadership. We can accomplish great things if we set out. courageously and determinedly to do them.

Mr. McLACHLAN (Gippsland North). -This is mainly a financial session, and to a very large extent is is right that the bulk of the session should be confined to a consideration of finance. The depression has loomed largely before the public eyes for a long time now, but no real attempt has been made to overcome it. If ever there was a time when we should provide work rather than sustenance it J8 now when we have 100,000 voices calling loudly for aid in this hour of distress, and co~plaining that Governments

are unable, or unwilling, to provide per.manen-t· work. That is _ what the Governm.ent and ParliamEmt of this coun-

-try should be aiming at, and we should. 'not rest content until we have devised some scheme for providing ~he work. The unemployed are all of our own stock. They live among us, and though in their own country they are walking about amongst us imploring our aid,. we have reluctantly to confess that we cannot 'help them out of their trouble. That is apparently the attitude we have taken up. But have we really tried 1 I do not think that the House----:and I do not think that the Government-has, up to the present, done its utmost to find a solution of this, the greatest problem confronting us. Weare able to feed and clothe ourselves, and to enjoy some of the luxuries that we are able to make provision for through years of labour. The people who are out of work are entitled to as much. They are willing to work, but cannot get it, and naturally complain. They are in this position because the Government, up to the present, has apparently pursued the policy which is known as the survival of the fittest, for, after all, it is the fittest who are ill employment in cur cities and in the country. It is the duty of Parliament and the Government tOo set up opportunities that would make provision for all our people. ..

When a Bill of this character is presented to us, I, for one-and there are others in the House who think with meturn naturally to the central point of it. In reply to an interjection, the Treasurer, when introducing the Bill, said, with respect to sustenance-the money is collected from the people for unemployment relief-that a great deal of the money went in that direction. It ~s a pity that the head of the Government should have to make such an admission after unemployment relief has been in operation for three years. This system of sustenance is the greatest blot we have at present on our civilized life. The state of the finances of the country is bad enough, but to have so many men and women willing to work and unable to find work makes the position a thousand times worse. We know that idleness breeds disease. This idleness is going to cause no end of trouble in Victoria. It has been from time immemorial a dangerous

Unemployment RelUf [25 OCTOBER, 1932., (Taxation) Bill. 1829

,and disastrous ihing in any community. We know that from the reading of history. Whether a people be rich or poor, those who devote their lives, either compulsorily or voluntarily, to idleness, are, to a great extent, a menace to the community. Nations have decayed through idleness. Here we have a young country with immense possibilities before it, not one-tenth of which is populated; with a beautiful climate and wonderful opportunities; yet it has this blot of unemployment on its civilized life.

Let . us look at the position of those people who have been described as the new poor. I will take one case which is typical of thousands. It is that of the unemployed man who, until the depression came, was always in work, and was, to all outward appearances, happy and in comfortable circumstances in this great city of 1,000,000 people. As a result of the depression he was thrown out of employment. He has walked the streets of the city looking in vain for work. Finally he gives up the struggle utterly depressed and broken-hearted. He asks in despair, "Why was I brought into the world to endure such misery and shame in this cold and cheerless atmosphere 7" In what he regards as a hard world this man and his family are compelled henceforth to .live on charity. That is where sustenance lands him. The Government and Parliament must surely know that ~e have not reac~e~ the stage of agreeIng that the prOVISIOn of work is hopeless and that all that we can do for these men is tg provide sustenance. U nfortunately, that appears to be the attitude we have taken up to the present time. More money is being spent on sustenance than on temporary work, and those who are employed in temporary work have to return to sustenance as soon as the job has been completed. With what men are getting out of temporary work they are no better off than they would be under an old-age pension. In fact, I question whether, taking it all round, they receive as much money from wages under this Bche~e as they would get if they were p~nsioner~. . Sust~nance must bring dIsaster In Its tram. If we think at all, we cannot fail to realize the evil eff~ts of this barbaric sustenance system. It IS not a system that any intelligent people should carryon over a term of

yeaI's. We cannot calculate the 108s that it will ultimately entail to the State. This iniquitous system produces in the poor unemployed a deep-seated disease that silently spreads itself through society, breaking out at intervals in multi· farious aIliti-social fa,rms. Its victims have to be taken into some house of refuge or some place of correction, and either be cared for or punished by the· State. .

Does the Government need to be reminded of the danger facing us, or of what the ultimate cost of this sustenance system, if it is perpetuated, will be to the State 1 The Government has not made any rea~ determined and effective attempt to alter:the system. All have agreed that susten-ance instead of work has ~ demoralizing: effect on men. As the previous speakeJ:' said, it affects the individual morally spiritually, and physically. In thos~ directions, the unemployed citizen has started down the hill of life. No effort to save him has been made. No matter how great the sacrifices may be, we should enter upon a course in order to try. to avoid this condition of affairs. The responsibility rests, in the first place, upon the Government which has taken up the reins o~ ~wer. In the second place, the responSIbIlIty rests upon Parliament. If the Government will not act in this direction, it should be pushed by every honorable. member, irrespective of party, into makmg efforts to avoid the deterioration of our citizens. We should not try to escape our responsibilities. Flimsy pleai are put forward to excuse Government inactivity, and it is often said that unemployment prevails all over the wt)l'ld. Then we are told that machinery is responsible for the present state of affairs. There may be some justification for unemployment in other countries, but there is none in Australia. Overseas visitora seeing the possibilities of Australia lau!7h at the idea that there should be thousando of people out of work here, when those people could be employed if the Govern-· ment would only provide the essential machinery for their employment. Is it that we have no constructive ability, cr that we decline to find permanent work for our fellow men ¥ The problem has been before Parliament for three years, and that period affords opportunities f\)'!'

finding a solution of the trouble.

1830 U'I1£mployment Relief (ASSEMBLY.] (TaxaJion) Bill.

'"Sir STANLEY ARGY.LE.~Will the honor~ able, member excuse me for' a moment ~ -There is a distinguished vis,itor within the >.precincts of the House.

:'DISTINGUISHED VISITOR. 'Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and

Treasurer).-(By leave.)-I move-That a chair be provided on the floor of the

. House for the Right Honorable Sir Hugh . O'Neill, Bart., a member of the Imperial - House of Commons.

"Xr. TUNNECLIFFE (Gollingwood).-[ have pleasure in seconding the motion.

f·


UN:EMPLOYMENT RELIEF (TAXATION) BILL.

Mr. McLACHLAN (Gippsland North). -Take the case of the boys and girls referred to by the previous speaker on thiH Bill. It is a tragedy that their number is increasing from year to year, and yet no provision is being made for them. No man who has a spark of manhood in him but is prepared to make some sacrifice to try to find employment for thes~ you~hs of both 8exes. The Government IS dOIng itself injury by its inactivity in this direction. I give the Government credit for its financial efforts, but any attempt to provide work for sustenance has been conspicuously absent. This fact is creating an ·atmosphere of hostility to the State Parliament. People are being called upon to pay increased taxation,. and they take up the attitude of saying: "Why should I pay out of my earnings to keep people in idleness when the Government of this coun~ try has an opportunity to provide work for every man?" What greater good could the Government and honorable members do than to raise their unfor· tunate fellow men from idleness to work, comfort, and happiness. If we took the balance of the session to construct even an imperfect scheme to place these people in permanent work, the time would be well spent. It is our duty to help these people. If any of us have been reared in the lap of luxury, that fact should stimu-1ate us to help those who have been cast clowll by unemployment. If a war broke out now, money would be found to finance it without any difficulty. This great problem of unemployment concerns us as much as a war ·would. We are as much justified in finding money

to relieve unemployment as we should be. in finding money if this c.ountry were in· vaded. The Government tells us that there are difficulties associated with this task. Difficulties are associated with everything of value. Some people opposed education when it was first mooted. They said it would be harmful to the masses. Some people declared that slavery could not be abolished; it was. Some maintain that we cannot induc.e city people to go to the country. We have never tried to do so. Some have said that if Italy, Japan, Germany, or France ruled this country, with its empty spaces and its unemployed, it would make all effort to find permanent work for these people. We had to swallow something that we did not like after Mr. Bruce some few years ago failed in his efforts to obtain a loan. Sir Otto Niemeyer came to this country and said it was necessary for the Governments and the people to economize. We did not appreciate his advice, and were obstinate at first, but we had to face the position.. The Premiers and the economists met and established a plan for the rehabilitation of Australia. When Australia was enjoying the reign of fictitious prosperity, we never contemplated such a thing. However, we had to face the position and to accomplish something. Surely the difficulties' that present themselves in regard to the provision of permanent work can be overcome even more easily because of the opportunities to place people on the land. The Commonwealth Government sent a delegation to Ottawa in order to make provision for what was believed to be our future. salvation. Of course, the result is a debatable question. I do not know t'he full effect of the delegation's negotiations. There is a diversity of opinion, and protectionists take exception to the agreement, but that is a matter for another Parliament and not for this House. The Premiers are engaged in efforts to make financial arrangements for the future. Cannot we try to construct a scheme that will take the thousands of unemployed men in this city into the country and provide them with small allotments 1 Such allotments are occupied in the Old Country by people who produce their own food.' If that plan were followed, the taxpayers would be relieved of the necessitf to pay such 1arge

U 1U3mployment Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932., (Taxation) Bill. 1831

amounts as they now pay. After t~e Hogan Government was deposed, thls Government came into office and proposed to deal with the unemployment problem on a sounder basis. It ~ad before it the experience and the IIllstakes of the previous Ministry in rega~d to providing. permanent work. Th~s Gove~nment is made up of two partles servmg one another with unswerving loyalty.

Mr. COTTER.-The Ministry wish you were right.

Mr. McLACHLAN.-It is many years since any GoverJ;l.ment took office with "such a big majority. This· Government -cannot be doubtful whether it can get ap.y scherp.e through the House.. I ~m certain that a plan for placmg Clty :people in the country and making them small primary prod ucers would meet ·.with the approval of at least one party in· the Government. I do not know ~he1iher that party's leader has made 'any move in Cabinet in this direction. I do not know whether the Leader of the United Australia party has taken any step along this line. If those leaders have not done so, they ought to do so. 'The session is drawing rapidly to a close. There are nineteen items on the Notice Paper.

·Mr. OOTTER.-What about the transport Bill?

Mr. McLACHLAN.-There is no time to discuss that measure, but the Notice . Paper . 'contains important proposals. I · should like to see the balance of the time devoted in the direction I indicated. This subject is more important than any Bill that the Government may introduce. We shall get over the financial t.roubles, but we cannot get away from the permanent injury that is being done to people who are out of employment, and we should

· make every effort to save those people from suffering that permanent injury. l think the Government's hands should be forced in this matter. I believe in a

· man sticking to his party, ano not taking all the advantages of the party and leaving it when the party makes a decision with' which he docs not agree. Unemployment is not a party question, ano if every member of this House was determined that the Government shoulrl do something to ,provide permanent E'mnlovment for the unemoloyed, the Government would do it. Have we given mll('h time in this House to the oiscussion of

the question of sustenance? In the press, a large amount of space is devoted to discussions on the Melbourne Oup, the cricket tests, football premierships, the tariff, the opinions of pu?lic ~en B;nd economists, and other subJects In whIch the people are interested. I do not object to that, but I think that ~ore space ought to be given to the questIOn of unemployment and the evils of sustenance. The power of the press backed by the desires of the people and the moral force exerted by Ministerialists in this House would result in something permanent being' done. I do not care what it is so long as thousands of unempl?yed people in our cities are put to work In the country districts. By abolishing sustenance we would give the people more confidence, in the future of their country, and our· credit with the outside world would be. materially strengthened. If we did aw.ay· with sustenance, an unemployment rehef' tax would, in two .or three years' time, become a thing of the past.

The Minister in charge of sustenance; in the admirable speech in which he explained the Unemployment Relief (Administration) Bill, took a very gloomy view, and it appeared from his remarks that this legislation is here to stay. I do not think that the people will accept that view. They want something in return for the money that they are contributing in unemployment relief tax . By abolishing sustenance, we shall enormously increase primary production, because every unemployed man will grow his own food, and we shall also reclaim hundreds of thousands of acres of land, and thousands of human lives. Again I impress on the Government the necessity of finding permanent work for the unemployed. We have ample empty spaces in this State which, although it is the size of Great Britain, 'has a population only of about 2,000,000, one half of whom are in the capital, and it is absurd to say that there is no room for the settlement of the unemployed. It is no wonder that a visitor from Japan laughed at the idea that Australia could not make permanent provision for its unemployed. He said t'hat in his country more than one-half of the people were engaged working the land, which they had to cultivate to the hilltops.· Further, he pointed out that we had a great country, a magnificent

-1832 Unemployment Relief [ASSEM:BL Y.] (Taxatwn) Bill.

""'Climate, and plenty of open spa:c~s, . 'and yet we complained that we co~ld not ~hd work for the unemployed. I gIve the

. 'Government credit for what it has done in restoring the finances of the State, but,

·-in dealing with the ma,tter of unemploy-. a.ent, the Government is failing, and the

people are suffering. The opportunity still presents itself to' the Government and the House to move in the direction that I have indicated, and I am satisfied

-\..;that if that move were made, many thou.. sanas of our new poor would be placed in permanent employment.

Mr. VINTON SMITH (Oakleigh).In my opinion, the Government is to be commended for having introduced this Bill, and it calls for little discussion mainly because under the existing system.! which has been criticized by members on the Opposition side, there remains nothing to be done but to provide sustenance until price levels rise. I am thoroughly in agreement with a lot that has been said by the honorable member for Flemington and the honorable member for Gippsland N.orth regarding· the necessity for the formulati()n of a definite scheme. In the short period since I became a member of the House I have heard similar speeches urging tha t some scheme should be propounded, and suggesting that it should be done by supporters of the Ministry. There are certain difficulties in the way of bringing into operation many of the schemes that have been outlined. I should like to point out for the benefit of those members who have urged that certain schemes should be put in hand that it would be impracticable in most cases to operate them. I shall refer to the scheme propounded by Lord Me lchett, and indicate why I consider it is impracticable. His theory, which he terms "The cistern theory of stocks," is briefly this: The fall in prices is due to an accumulation of stocks of raw materials overshadowing the world's markets, although t»e surplus, with the possible exception of rubber, represents only about one-third of a year's total consumption of those raw ma.terials. Lord Melchett argues that if we had a reticulation system to deal with these stocks, our troubles would be at an end. It is true tha.t in relation to the supply of that commodity--water-which we cannot do

without for mote than 48 hours, we put in elaborate systems to conserve supplies during the winter months, and draw on the reservoirs in the summer months, the level of the water in the reservoirs falb ing in summer and rising in winter. Melbourne could get along very well ill winter if a few pipes were run into the Yarra, but that system would be of little use in -the summer. Just as the water comes from the clouds, enters the soil and flows into the reservoirs, so do our stocks of raw material come from the soil. It is suggested by Lord Melchett that the Bank of International Settlements should collect all the surplus non-perishable raw materials over and above normal consumption, and that it could, by means of stock warrants, buy or take in surplus quantities at a fixed price-Lord Melchett s'!].ggests 10 per cent. below the aver~ge wholesale price over the previous ten years. By that meallS there would always be a buyer-the bank-in the market. For example, in the cas~ of wheat there would be a buyer in the world's wheat markets buying at 4s. 6d. per bushel.

Mr. FRosT.-·America tried that and found it a failure.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-By that means the Bank of International Settlements would be a permanent buyer at a fixed price. People who bought for consumption would pay a little more. In times of drought in A.ustralia,· or severe frost in Russia, the bank could release a certain quantity of wheat held if the price rose above a certain point. By this means the bank could keep the price of raw materials within defined limits, and there would be au undulating price level instead of one rising to great heights and falling precipitously. The honorable member for Maryborough and Daylesford suggested by interjection that America tried that method, but I would point out that it was only a sectional method in relation to one commoditywheat-and because of that the system broke down. Immediately the price level starts to fall under the existing system there follow alterations in tariffs, the arrangement of cartels and the formation of pools, but there is a limit to-the amount of stock that any private pool can hold. The American producers tried to hold the price of copper at a certain level. They

UMmployment Relief [25 OCTOBER, 19'32.1 (Taxation) Bill. 1833

held at at £84 per ton for some time in 1936; but· in one night it craShed by £16. It is impossible to hold a price by means of a private Pool. That has been demon.titrated by tin Pools, copper Pools, and wheat Pools. The wheat Pool in Canada keeps wheat 'from rising in 'price. There'fore there should be world-wIde action, and without a system such as I have outlined it would be impossible to keep tlH~ -cistern working properly, that is to allow -the stocks to flow in and flow out to meet the normal rate of consumption. If the .system could be operated as is a water.supply system, Lord Melchett's idea would be put into practical operation. Each central bank associated with the Bank of International Settlements would be given its quota, which it might take up of the surplus stocks by discounting stock warrants, and thus in effect there would be (}reated reservoirs of raw material. Then the problem of unemployment would be solved. Theoretically I do not see why it should not be solved. The speculator would be cut out because no one would" barge " into the wheat ma.rket, knowing that fluctuations would be confined between such narrow limits. The only operators would be a few people who must' of necessity buy whea.t, such as millers, who would buy quantities for the milling of which several months would be required. They nec~ssarily have to buy or sell futures forwardJ so that if the price varies during the time of processing they will be covered and not be caught. The difficulty, and it must be obvious to ev:ery one who considers the matter, is that you cannot get international co-operation in connexion with these things. Look }low the League of Nations has failed. We cannot even get Empire co-operation. As a result of Ottawa we find Mr. Fenton leaving the Commonwealth Cabinet, and Viscount Snowden resigning from the National Government in Great Britain. If we cannot get Imperial cooperation, I think international cooperation is more remote.

Mr. CAIN.-Mr. Fenton and Viscount Snowden left their Governments for opposite reasons-one because under the Ottawa agreement the tariff would be too high; and the other because it would be too low.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-One person said to me that there must be something

good in the Ottawa agreement because ,the extremists at both ends left their Governments on account of it. Whilst international action would be most desirable, and whilst the theory I have menti\med is, I think, a very sound one, the practical application of it is very remote, because until such time as you alter human.' natUl'e you will not get international action. Human nature is the biggest factor i~ preventing international co-operation, which is necessary if periodic catastrophies are to be avoided. We are going to have them, as we have had them in· the past, while we have the present system in operation.

Mr. CAIN.-Human nature is a special brand of selfishness inculcated in people from the cradle to the grave, at school, and in every other institution.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-That is quite true. I rose simply to point out that whilst people are striving for some solu~ion of this problem, and various schemes for its solution have been put forward, at the moment, because of human nature being as it is, I think they are impracticable. Last year I had the temerity to send to members of this House a reprint of an article which I had written on the subject of making an index figure based· on the prices of commodities.

MI'. COTTER.-I bet you have been sorry ever since. . .

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-I have not, for the reason that, having been a member now for a few months, I realize'how few members must have read that reprint. I wish to mention,' however, that I received from certain members on the other (the Opposition) side of the House, and also on this side of the House, some acknowledgment of it. Particularly I remember one from the honorable member for Duudas, who rather agreed with my argument, which I shall briefly state. It is, that if you could arrange for time contracts involving the payment of money to operate on an index figure based on a very wide range of commodities, you would eliminate a lot of unemployment, because, . if a person borrows money on a certain price level, and has to repay when prices are at a lower level, we know perfectly .well he is up against it; but if his capital commitment and his interest rate varied with the price of commodities; then he would be relatively in

1834 Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY. ] (Taxation) B'l,11.

thel same position whatever plane the MI:. VINTON SMITH.-I have put price level might be at. forward t.wo theories, but the trouble I see;

Mr. HOLLAND.-Jack Lang advocated is the difficulty of convincing people on: that. the other side of the world of t'he wia-

Mr. VINTON 8MITH.-In a very dom of either Lord Melchett's theory. o~ crude form.' my own' theory, to say nothing of th~

honorable member's theory. I commend Mr. HOLLAND.-He may not have had the Bill to the House as I regard it 88

the grasp you have of it, but still he ad- the only practical thing in the position vocated it. ~ in which we find ourselves, and I intend

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-I would not to support it. . . expect him to have that grasp. It· is .. Mr. COTTER (Rir;hmond)~-I 'j~iB. quite evident to those who know anythjng with the honorable .member for Flemingabout the matter that, if you could, have to~ in suggesting to the House that a a system operating on an index figure~ .Bill ,of this nature should not, be made' a. you would eliminate a lot of unemploy- football of party 'polit~cs. Legislati~.~ ment. If a manufacturer buys his raw of this kind should not be considered material at a certain figure, and in the ir'om 'CIne aspect by a member -when hethree months in which he is manufactur- .is sitting on one side of the Housel anc;f ing his goods the price level rises, he has then i~ a later session, when he is SItting: no difficulty in selling and making a ou.'the other sid~ of the House, from ~ri.-

Profit. He gets the adventitious aid of a other aspect. The Bill' refers to the· . 11 most vital interests o.f the pe.ople of tlii.s·

rise in the price level and inCIdent a y State, whether they be in the city or i'll. conceals inefficiency. On the other the country. In my early ye;ars in Pfiihand, however efficient a manufacturer liament, when measures of this kind' may bet if he buys his raw material at a were brought forward, 'we' had very littlecertain figure, and when he tries to sell assistance from country members. Theythree months later the price level' is regarded such legislation as legislation' lower, he must lose money. These are designed to support the unemployed: -in matters to which any thinking man to-day Melbourne, and were not interested, 'as: with any consideration for his fellow-men unemployment had not spread to 'thegives a great amount of time, and :country. Now unemployment. has: thought; and, unless he does so, he is spread £a,r and wide, not only ·through-, not worthy of the position he holds in the out our, State, but throughout Australia State, whether he is a public man or in and the world. It is a matter to which business. I had thought of reading to th~ the best hrains of Parliament should be· House some brief extracts from my own devoted" and every hOOlorable member, composition, but I think I will relieve no matter on which side of the House he' honorable members of that. All I would may sit, should direct his attention to, suggest to them is that we have to deal the problem in the hope that he may be· to-day with the matter of unemployment able to point some way out of the 1>rr!-from a practical point of view. We are passe. The whole system of commel'up against it. The people have to be f.~d cialism throughout the civilized world

has broken down. We in Australia are· to-morrow morning. I might sit down, in no worse a position than are the. as might any other honorable member, people of many other countries of the. and p:roduce an excellent theory; but, world. Though the United States of' until we could convince the people America garnisheed t.hree-fourths of the. throughout Australia and, perhaps, wo'rld's gold supply in the hope of solvthroughout the world, that the theory ing the economic problem, there are milcould be put into practical opera- lions of unemployed in that country, and tion, we should be only beating the air. hundreds oIf Ithousands of ;them are' Therefore, we have to put up with the marC'hing to Washington with nothing t(}l system that operates to-day, and do the sustain them but the hope that they may' best we can for those who are the victims get some remedy when they reach there. of that system at the moment. .. Mr. FRosT.-The honorable member, Mr. CAIN.-If you believe in another for Northcote told us that there aresystem, go out and advocate it. That is 12,000,000 unemployed in the United why we are advocating a social change. States of America.

U'Il£mployment Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 (Taxation) Bill. 1835

Mr: COTTER.-In France, which has ·the . next largest sha.re. of the world's .gold, there is the same u~employ:me~t trouble as there is in America, whIle In G~rmany, where I understand they hav~ no gold at all, there are. ~llions of ll:n. employed '. This condItion of affaIrs proves that the whole system of commercialism has broken down, but t'he P~l"Ii aments of Australia have never had sufficiet:tt courage to taAkle the problem from that aspect.. It is rather remarkable that a short while back, when Mr. Theodore who was then Treasurer of the Common~ealth, suggested that c·ertain things should be done, there was an uproar throughout the length and breadth

·of the land, and people of the same political calibre as Ministerial members, were . all prepared to get their guns and shoot him at sight. What a change has oc·curred in this country since then! People have come to the conclusion that there must have been a lot of horse sense behind Mr. Theodore's proposal. The President of the United States of America, which, as I have said, has three-fourths of the world's gold, later on suggested inflating the currency by 800,000,000 dollars. He did not ask, like Mr. Theodore, f6r only a few millions ..

I should like to address myself to the House, not as an Opposition member, but as one who has had 'considerable experience amongst the unemployed, and as t~e representative of one of the poorest dIStricts of Melbourne. If Christ were to .come to Australia he would not go to Toorak to live, but he would come with me to the south side of Richmond. I mix with the people there and' I know their ways and their wants, and I shall try to put the position from. their standpoint. I am not blaming this Government any more than the Labour Government, and when the latt.er was in office I complained to the House 011

several occasions. All we have been doing in this House for the last three years to cope with the unemployment problem is to vote a certain amount of money for the relief of the unemployed. To-day we find the unemployed poorer than t'hey were three years ago, and there have been no results from the millions of pounds we have spent. There has been no Government with a programme for spending the money on works of a constructive ~haracter so that there would be something to sho·w for the expenditure.

Mr. FRosT.~What about gold mining 'I Mr. COTTER.-That may be all right;

but I do not like gold mines. I would rather see a hospital built. I pref.er something that I can see; the gold is in the earth where I cannot see it. To-day; a married man, after having been out of work for t.wo or two and a, half years, if he is lucky enough to be drawn in t'he ballot, may be sent to Gippsland for a few weeks' work, but he is employed for only four days a week. He has to keep

- a wife and family in, one of tpe suburbs of Melbourne, and when he returns to Melbourne he cannot register again for a fortnight, because he has had his turn. Two years ago that man probably had £1 or £2 in his pocket, and a good suit of clothes. To-da y, 'he has neither . In my electorate there are poor people who had to sell their blankets and other bed clothes, and are using newspapers to cover themselves at night. Some honor ... able members are living in luxury and are enjoying themselves at their clubs. I ask them to visualize the pitiable condition of people who have no more than newspapers to cover them and are unable to get anything else .until some one sends them blankets. This state of affairs exists in practically all SUburban areas, yet the Government would argue this matter from the view-point that I am now seated in Opposition. I know that I am talking to deaf ears, but I realize also that this is a question that should be outside party politics. Speaking subject to correction, the honorable member for Northcote, when he was a member of the Hogan Gov,ernment, propounded a scheme which, had it been given effect, would have had beneficial results. He proposed that a sum of about £1,00'0,000 snould be allecated to the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works for the purposes of sewering southern suburbs. That would have been work of a reproductive nature, because, after the first year interest would have been paid, There was also a proposition to allocate £50,000 for the further development of gold mining. Another proposal was to devote some money to Ql:lilding a railway line on the coast in the Welshpool district. All these schemes would have been of a reproductive character. But members of the present Government, who were then seated in Opposition, opposed those schemes, and they were not proceeded with. Whl!-t


is the Government doing to-day? It is sending men to distant country areas to work in the forests, which mayor may not be work of a reproductive nature. Next yen.r we shall have the same position as that which faces us to-day, when we are spending at the rate of about £1,800,000 a year on unemploymen~ relief.

Reference has been made to the question of work in lieu of sustenance. There is no lnan in my district who wants the dole. Every unemployed man wants work, and is prepared to go wherever the Government tells him to go. If my memory serves me rightly, a year or two ago', when the question of wages for unemployment relief work was under dis-

I cussion, there were two or three conferences w:~th another House, which was pre~ pared to take advantage of men who were out of work, and to contend that those men should work at a cheap rate. If times were norm:},l, men would not be asked to work for Is. or Is. 3d. an hour. They would have to be paid the ruling rates. But when there are 50,000 men out of work, there are certain people prepared to take advantage of them. What is more, the Government has been cruel in the extreme, and has said to the unemployed man, "If you do not go to work, you will not get sustenance." That man may hn.ve a wife and family, but at the same time wishes to remain loyal to his trade union. It will take a long time for the Government to explain its attitude in such cases. It is apparently prepared to let such a man starve because he will not scab 011 his fellow unionists. These men want to uphold those traditions for which the trade union movement has stood over a long period of years, and to retain those rights which were won for them in stern struggles. When times are good, certain employers, when they wanted three men and could only get two, were prepared to pay, sa.y, Is. 6d. an hour. But now that times are bad, and three men are wanting work when there is enough for only two, the employers say, "Take Is. an hour, or starve." That is a position which obtains when we look to Parliament to do the right thing.

I do not think that there is one clause in the Bill that I can support. The measure has been thrown at us, in a "take it or leave it" manner. There is one phase of the situation which strikes me. When the acute economic

Mr. Cotter.

position was first discussed, there was 111 Premiers' Conference at which the honorablemember for Warrenheip and Grenville, who was then Premier, was· present. At that conference certain pro-· fessors, including Professor Giblin,. attended to lend their assistance to the· Prime Minister and the Premiers. But at the more recent conferences, particu-· larly the one that is in session at this time,. thQse ~rofessor8 have not been present •. The Prime Minister and the Premiers. are, apparently, not asking those profes-· sors'tQ give them the same stupid advice which they gave two years ago. As oneof my colleagues has already said, the· Governor of the Bank of England sent an expert (Sir Otto Niemeyer) to Aus-· tralia to tell those people who have been\ born here and have lived here all their lives what to do. Experts frQm Qverseas· come to tell us how we should run our' country when, at the same time, they cannot run their Qwn. There is a stupendQus number of homeless people· sleeping on the banks of the Thames. I remember a story of a man who was brought befQre the Insolvency Court. in London, and he was asked why he could not pay his debts. He had a paper sticking out of one of his pockets, and he was asked by a barrister, "What haveyou in your pocket?" He replied, "It is 'How to solve the national debt.' " Yet he was insolvent himself. Mr. Montagu N orman, of the Bank of England, recently made a statement voluntarily, and showed how incompetent he was to deal with the financial problem. Repleaded his ignorance. Our leaders must realize that civilization has taken a fresh. turn, and we must deal with the changewith new methods.

I suppose that when the Premierreturns from the present Premiers' Con-· ference he will say that the income tax. will be given another try. He win turn to the men who are earning £100 a year,. and will put a further tax on them. Wecannot expect the Premier to put an additional tax Qn the man who receives £5,000. a year, because that is the type of man who returned him to Parliament. I complain about the "Lead, Kindly Light" attitude of Ministerialists. They gape and swallow all that is brought down to them.; I would remind. them that, after they have been members of Parliament

UnempZoym,ent Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 (Taxation) Bill. 1881

for a time, they will find that they can make very good excuses on public platforms. It was noticeable during the lq!'lt election that it was difficult to pin the Premier down. What he said at Richmond--

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I never spoke at Richmond.

Mr. COTTER.-He did not say at Bendigo. At Bendigo he told the electors how if he and his party were ]'eturned they would solve the problem. The. honorable gentleman ought to spend another two or three days. at Bena:m.hl'8.. Something has transpired there which has altered the complexion of affairs on the Ministerial side of the House. I had expected the Government to bring down several measures and make a statemeHt, but they have not come to light.

Mr. SLATER.-The mortgage Bill hllS

gone into cold storage .. Mr. OOTTER.-Benambra has h!:J.<l n

peculiar effect on the political situation. I read in the newspaper the opinion ·)f one man who said that he had, up to the present, voted Nationalist all his life. (t But," he added, "no more. The only party to which I can look for sympathy so far as the farmers are concerned is the Labour party." He could not support the Oountry party, and had decided to give his allegiance to the Labour party. This indicates there is something radically wrong in the state of Denmark. I f(;t~i that we must not make the unemployment question a football or a playtJdng of politics.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Hear, hear! Sound sense.

Mr. OOTTER.-I am very glad to hear tha t comment by the Premier. When he was seated in the Opposition, nothing which the Hogan Government proposed pleased him. The Labour party lived on the Ministerial side of the House for about two years, and the House had to adjourn at night when the honorable member for Korong and Eaglehawk became tired and wanted to go home. Now, however, the Premier is in a position where he can say, "I will carry this or that," whereas the Hogan Government had to rely on its "majority" in the corner.

Mr. BLACKBURN.-The Premier has the Minister of Lands where he must stop.

Mr. OOTTER.-The Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Lands are in the same position. Three different measures relating to the question of arbitration award rates for unemployment relief works were submitted to this House when the Premier was in Opposition, and he fought everyone of them. Since he has acceded to power he has agreed to the minimum wage and to the Arbitration Oourt award rates,. knowing that he has a majority in this House and the other place in his favour .. The Attorney-General, with all the cheek imaginable, said" the times have altered," and introduced exactly the same Bill this session. The only excuse he could make was that the times had altered. By that I suppose he meant that he and his colleagues had shifted to the other side of the House. Anyhow, the change has had a beneficial effect on the Premier; he is not nearly so pugnacious as of yore. It is no use the Government going on spending money on the dole or giving a man two or three days' work a week. That is no way of solving the .unemployment trouble. These men only come back, after they have done their few days' work, to take the dole again; they are as poor as ever.

A suggestion was made some time ago that a new Melbourne Hospital should be built. I do not know why the first Hogan Government did ll'otput that in hand. If it had done so this country would have had some return for portion. of the unemployment relief money, but we have spent about £3,000,000, and there is not a monument in all the land to show for that expenditure. I understand that the Government now has a considerabl& gang of men working on the railways,. putting the permanent way in good order. If that is so, I am bound to say that that,. at any rate, is work of a permanent char-· acter, of direct benefit to the State, and' therefore in the nature of a monument raised to show that something has been done with the unemployment relief money. But in most cases the Govern-

. ment can show nothing for all the money raised and disbursed. Men have been sent away from Melbourne for a few weeks in the country. They have re-turned to their families as poor as they were before they left, and they are placed once more on the dole. I am not prepared to offer an alternative policy to.

1838 Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY.] (Taxation) . Bill.

that of the Government, but I think it could be improved on. Surely, work could be found f'or metropolitan men in the metropolitan area. :r'here are m~ny portioml of the metropohtan area whICh are not yet sewered. Why should ~he Government, if it wants 50 men on a Job in the country, select 40' of them from Melbourne and give ten 'of the many local une~ployed men a bit of work ~ Why should not the co~ntry work. be given to as great a proportlOn as possIble of men in the 'country who are out -of work ~ And why should not the city unemployed be given work in and about Melbou.rne so that they might return to their homes each evening ~ I do not think much has been done, despite all the Premier's talk earlier in the year, in the direction of sewering certain of the larger country towns. What has become of that schem~ ? I do not see anything moving in that direction. If the Government is going to help on the sewering of such places as Warrnambool, Horsham, Benalla, and Swan Hill, why does it not get .on with the job?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Wake up! Those works are under oonstruction.

Mr. COTTER.-Then let local men be absorbed on those country jobs) and let the Government put city unemployed .on to the extension of the metropolitan sewerage area. The Premier has had a lot to say also about the removal of the Melbourne Hospital. If that institution is to be removed, it will be a mistake if it is erected on the Pig Market site. There, it would be flanked by tramways, and subject to all the noise, dust, and distraction associated with that site. When the Melbourne Hospital was built the common means of street locomotion was the horse vehicle. In these days of motor cars and motor ambulances the removal of the Melbourne Hospital reasonably far from the dust and noise of the heart of the city would be a matter .of·no great inconvenience. Why should it not be erected amidst the quiet and beauty of peaceful country surroundings, . a few miles out from the city ~ For all the £3,000,000 spent on unemployment r~lief in the last three years we have practically nothing to show to-day. It is no use the Government sheltering itself behind the repeated assertion that the lIogan Government did no~hing. If

it comes to that, I might ask, Whd't did the Allan-Peacock Government do ~ Can this Government do nothing? What about building silos for our wheat ~ f. do not know that the present Government is likely to dOl anything in that direction;' but I should certainly like to be listening in to a Cabinet discussion on the matter~ If the building of silos were put in hand with unemployment relief labour larg~ numbers of men would be absorbed and large quantities of Australian materials would be used, thus stimulating .ustralian industries. I am sure there will be some fun in the Cabinet, however; before any money is spent on the build': ing of silos. Whatever the Government does, I hope it will find work suitable to' tradesmen. Apparently the only idea the Government has of solving the unemployment problem is to give all and sundry pick and shovel work. There are many. men amongst the unemployed to-day who are physically incapable of doing such work, but if they turn it down they ata removed from the sustenance list. On work of that character they cannot hope to give efficient labour, because they have been under-fed and under-clothed for two or three years.


committed pro forma . Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and

Treasurer) presented a message from His Excellency thQ Lieutenant-Governor recommending that an appropriation be made from the Consolidated Revenue for the purposes of a Bill" to provide further moneys for the relief of unemployment, and to limit. the duration of the Stamps (Unemployment Relief) Acts, and for-other purposes." ,

A resolution in accordance with the recommendation was passed in Committee; and adopted by the House.

The House went into Committee for the consideration of the· Bill.

Clause 1 was agreed to. Clause 2-(Unemployment Relief Tax). Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-During the

second-reading debate, the question of the amount of money t'hat would be required out of this fund to meet interest and amortization was dealt with. What I should like to know from the Premier -and what I think the House is entitled to know-is what the estimate of his

Unemployment Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 (Taxation) Bill. .1839'

Dep.(l.rtment for interest is. As the Prem.ier. knO'ws, w~ have two sources. from which loan mo~ey is spent on unemployment relief. In the case of one loan of £950.,000, half the interest is paid by t.he Commonwealth Government and half by -the State Government. .

Sir STANLEY. ARGYLE.-Mdst of It IS heing provided by the various bodies to whom the money. is alloc~ted. .

Mr. CAIN.-Is the interest on the money that is being spent by the Forests Department-a large-spending Department under this scheme-tO' come out O'f revenue derived from this tax ~ We h:ave to recollect, too, that a sinking fund inust be provided. Then we have the loan which has resulted from the sugges~iO'n made by the Premier of Queensland at the Premiers' Conference, our share of which is £1,800,000. .

Sir STA,NLEIY ARGYLE.-That ~oan is not in existence.

Mr. CAIN.-It is a suggested 10an1

of which Victoria's share is estima~ed to be £1,800,000.

-Sir E,TANLEY ARGYLE.-In the event of £7,000,000 being borrowed by the Commonwealth.

Mr. ClAIN.-Provision would have to be made· for interest and sinking fund payments on that· loan. If the money is lent out to' sewerage authorities, the Governm.ent would be paying interest for some years.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-For the dead years.

Mr. CAIN.-Warrnambool, Horsham, and Swan Hill have been assured of apprO'ximately £180,000 for sewerage purposes on which, I understand, the Government will pay interest for three or four years-in fact, until such time as the works become productive. What is the estimated amount required for these purposes ~ In the first place, we are entitled to infO'rmation in respect to the £900,000, interest on half of which will have to be paid out of the UnemplO'yment Relief Fund, or by the authorities that benefit.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Most of it will be paid by the authorities ..

Mr. CAIN .-'-:What is the estimated expenditure for this year ~ And then, assuming that the Commonwealth are able to borrow ,£7,000,000, what will be. the estimated amount required out of this fund this year to meet interest obligations on the Victorian Government's

share of the loan 1 The community are entitled to know, in the event of £1,800,000 being received and spent t'his year and next year on unemployment relief, what amount of interest will have to be paid in future years, and what amount on amortization. We are doingthe same with this fund as we have don~ with other funds during a long period or years. For the last ten years Jr morethis State has been using capital money to meet interest obligation,s. TheMc.Pherson Government and preceding Nationalist Governments for many yearsused capital moneys to pay interest on soldier settlement loans. We refused to· meet our ob~igations as they became dueyear by year, until to'-day the losses on soldi'er setlemlent, have a stranglehold

011 the community. I think we should look sufficiently far ahead to enable us; to see what is going to be the result of continually borrowing for purposes of unemployment relief, and of having to establish a fund to meet interest on loans: we borrow during these years. In other words, we are entitled to' know where we are going. I appreciate the difficulty of the position, but I suggest to the Premier that he should convey to the House, in general terms, what the result of this policy of borrowing will be. The Premiers are again in conference, and they may decide to borrow more money, because, after all, our Government have been able to employ fewer than 10,000 out of a total of 60,000 men unemployed.

Sir STANLEY ~RGYLE.-Twenty thousand men will be employed on works.

Mr. CAIN.-That will leave 40,000 men unemployed.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I doubt it. Mr. CAIN.-I hope the honorable

gentleman will not. start to contradict. As I have previously stated, the number of registrations on the 15th of October at the Government Labour Exchange was 34,799. The registrations in country districts numbered 17,091, or a total of 51,890, plus approximately 14,000 unemployed female workers.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-The number of unemployed female workers is not anything like that.

Mr. CAIN.-I have obtained the figures from a report on unemployment presented on the 30th of June. I venture to suggest, with all dne respect to the Government, that, had provision not heen made for 10.000 men out of borrowed money,


the unemployment would show ll(!> decrease . a.s against last year's unemployment. There has been no absorption of labour by 'private enterprise. The figures disclose th.e contrary. At the peak periQd this year t.he unemployed numbered .54,439. On the 15th of October the num\ bel' was down to 34,799, but that leaves 17,051' unemployed in the country not accounted for. We have, therefore, upwards of 51,000 men out of work.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-Are you allowing for registrations for casual labour 1

Mr. CAIN .-Casual labour was registe!ed last year. Federal and State figures alike show that there has been no improvement of unemployment apart from the fact that-so far as this State is concerned--10,000 men have been provided with employment on borrowed money. I am not blaming the Government for this. But I am concerned with the effect of the so-called revival of prosperity which has not resulted in any real absorption of labour.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Who said pros-perity has arrived ~ .

Mr. CAIN.-The honora.ble gentleman has said it. His Nationalist colleagues in the Commonwealth Parliament have said it. We were told that as soon as the country had got rid of Labour Governments, including the Lang Government in New South Wales, and could get sound government, the finances would be put on a sound. basis, confidence would be restored, and business people would be prepared to spend money. . These things have been done, bonds are back at par, and men should be again absorbed in industry. That is a reasonable statement from the Government's point of view. But let us look at the figures. Of the number of unemployed in this State, the Go-vernment has employed 10,000 in the last four months. If they had not been employed there would be 61,000 unemployed. 'That number is higher than that registered at any period last year. Last October 2,000 men were employed by the State in Government works; to-day there are 10,000. The Unemployment Relief Works Board showed that last year there were 39,000 unemployed on the registers,

, and that 2,000 were employed on Government works, or a total of 41,000.

Sir 'STANLEY ARGYLE.-Then you were not doing much for them.

Mr. CAIN.-We were giving them sustenance. According to the figures sup-

plied, 34,799 people in the metropolitan area and 9,000 in the country dis~~jcts were unemployed on the 15th: :- 0'£ October this year,' or a total of 44,000. I submit that if it were not for the borrowed money the unemployment position would be just as acute now as it was last year. Professor Giblin, who is the Acting Commonwealth Statistician, has pointed out that the reduction in the number of unemployed has been from 30 to 29.6 proportionately. There is no real improvement in this country, or, in fact, for that matter, anywhere. The Premier was going to say that I am pleased, but I am not. I am displeased, and I believe that he is. A part from our being members of Parliament, we should as citizens be concerned with the significance of the fact that, notwithstanding the alleged restoration of confidence, the unemployed arlD3 is just as great as it was last year, and the State is getting deeper into debt. I am not blaming this Government or the Premier. I give them credit for doing their beat. I do not wish to be hard on the Government-the public will be hard on it at the next opportunity they have of dealing with it. The Government has started to' dig its own political grave. Of course, that is largely true of every Government, and I speak with a good deal of feeling.

Mr. MENZIES.-It is a terrible misfortune to be born, because sooner or later you must die, politically.

Mr. McKENzIE.-And that applies to us personally.

Mr. CAIN.-I am not concerned with beating the Government. It is too early to do so, but we shall beat the Government ill due course. I am, however, con-

'cerned with the grave problem that 35,000 men in the metropolitan area and 17,000 in the country districts, and 14,000 women are still out· of work. I do not know how many women are unemployed. With all t;he talk of restored confidence, of the so-called buoyancy of the bond market, of cheap m.oney, and of the success of the resident Minister in London, I regret that there has been no reduction in the size of our B.rmy of unemployed. When we listened to some people, we were led to think that the removal of Mr. Lang from the office of Premier of New South Wales would solve all the problems. I think that we shall be

Unemployment Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 (Taxation) Bill. 1841

forced willy-nilly to adopt some of the things that Mr. Lang -was condemned for advocating. He declared that it was impossible fo-r us to carryon at a higher rate of interest than'3 per cent. He also believed that we should be released from overseas obligations for one or two years. It is safe to say that, with the way ·things are shaping, we cannot continue to meet· the obligations to bondholders, and we shall be forced to a re-conversionof Australian bonds. As a small bondholder, I 1:Iay· that with reluctance.

Mr . VINTON SMITH.-You had better Bell your bonds while they are at par.

Mr. CAIN.-I shall not sell a good investment for what may be a bad one. If I consulted the honorable member, I am sure he could not offer me better advice.

Sir STANLEy ARGYLE.-What is this eecond-reading speech for?

Mr. CAIN.-The Premier was not here when I made my second-reading speech, and I am varying it a little. I submit again that the way out of our difficulties lies in further reduction of the interest obligations. This country cannot carry its present burdens. The farmers are bankrupt, and so are many other people. Default is facing the primary producers u.n.-l.ess they can get better prices. If they .dMault the Government will be affected. Despite the promises of the Australian Governments, I regret that they have not been able to relieve the une~ployed army of many men. I ask the Premier to make a stat.ement concerning the interest and amortization of the money borrowed for. unemployment relief in this State.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer) .-Clause 2 provides-

This Part shall be read and construed as one with the Income Tax Act 1928 (hereinafter in this part called the principal Act) and any Act and enactment amending the Bame, all of which Acts and any such enactment and this part may be cited together as the Income Tax Acts.

The honorable member for 'N orthcote has delivered an oration on that clause. He asked me certain things that cannot be answered until the end of the financial year. He knows that evel'y week the ~mployment Council is submitting to the Government for its approval new schemes for the expenditure of money on different l'elief works. I could g~t him a return

showing the amount of interest. involved up to date, but to give an idea what the total interest requirement will be is utterly beyond my power.

Mr. CAIN.-Assume that we spent £475,000 of the £950,000 this year, you could tell what your interest would be next year?

Sir. STANLEY ARGYLE.-No. Mr. CAIN.-Your officers could tell

you. Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - The

money which is partly Commonwealth is lent for productive works. The sum of £180,000 to be spent on sewerage works is lent partly by the Commonwealth and partly by the State, to various authorities t.hat have undertaken in 20 or 30 years to repay the principal a.nd interest. Except on that point, I am not in a position to answer the honorable member's question. Some bodies have undertaken to pay the whole of the interest and sinking fund, but in other cases the Government gives concessions and in some grants. I think the forest works are paid for with money derived from taxation. In nearly all cases, the grants are taken from the Unemployment Relief Fund, and I could have a return prepared showing what the interest obligations are to date. It will depend on what works are approved between now and the end of the year. There was the much-discussed work at Koo-wee-rup.

Mr. CAIN.-.l'he honorable member for Gippsland West knew about it.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-He had a friendly intimation. .

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The matter did not come before Cabinet until last night. I made a polite speech to the honorable member. The matter had been submitted by the State Rivers and Water Supply Oommission before, he made his speech in the House, but I was not aware of that fact. I do not wish to reply at length to the remarks of the honorable member for N orthcote, because I desire the Bill to be passed. Any information about interest that I can give him I shall be pleased to supply.

Mr. lIURPHY (Port Melbourne).Certain reproductive works could be undertaken in the metropolitan area, but the Board that would carry them out has not the means with which to do ·so.·

1842 Unemployment Relief L..lSSEMBLY.] (Taxation) Bill.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard). - I ,g.a ve the D~puty L€ader of the OppositIOn a certam amount of latitude when he was speaking on the clause, but I ask the honorable member to keep his re.marks .within the scope of the clause. \

Mr. MURPHY. - I t'hought, Mr. Chairm.an, when you allowed the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to' procee~ as he did, that other members would be .allowed to' do likewise; The Premier has -stated that a certain amount of money will be made available for the drainage .of Koo-wee-rup Swamp as an unemployment relief work. I consider that there is more necessary work to' be done in the metropolitan area, and it is the sewering of unsewered areas. It can be proved by statistics that sewerage is in the interests of public ,'health. The Melbournt:' .and M:etropolitan Board of W o~ks is not in the: position to carry out the work to which I referred, and if the Government made available tOI the Board an ..amount of £200,000 for that purpose, 'which I understand is the sum required to sewer Sunshine and other unsewered ,districts, from 70 per cent. to 75 per -cent. of the money would be spent on labour.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Do you suggest that the Government should give the money to the Board 1

Mr. MURPHY.-The Government 5hould loan it to the Board at the lowest rate of interest possible which would be 4 per cent., the rate that the Government would have to pay for the money. From 70 per cent. to 75 per .. cent. of the 'amOlUut would be spent on labour, and the work would be of a reproductive eharaeter; moreover, the amount loaned would be repaid by the Board. Two objects would be served. First, the provision of a large amount of employment, and, second, the extension of the metr~ politan sewerage system, with the conse<{uent; improvement of publio health in the districts connected with the system. When I visited Queensland, in August iast, I sought information in relation to the method of dealing with unemployed in that State, and the Minister of bustenanoe told me that three weeks previously an amount of £100,000 had been allocated for t'he purpose of providing work for unemployed artisans.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard). - I regre.t to say that the honorable member is not keeping within the scope of c1..ame 2.

Mr. l\fURPHY.-I shall abide by your decision, Mr. Chairman, although I think: the subject is of such importance that greater latitude should be given to honorable members, and I believe that I would be within my rights in continuing in this strain. I have point,ed out to the Premier how the Government 'might assist the unemployed, 'and I hope that he will take into consideration the suggestion that I made:

The clause was agreed to. Clause 3-(Interpretation) . Mr. OLD (SW'an Hill).-As the clallile

defines assessable income, I think that ,it can be linked up with income tax.'. In view of the fact that the Australian Loan Council is meeting at the present time, I think that it would be advisable if the Premier were to point out to' it the undesirability of issuing any more loans free of income tax. There have been too many O'f such loans issued. I do not know the amount of Victorian capital that was involved in the recent conversion loan, but I do not think that it is right or proper for the C'omm.onwealth Government to' adopt the practi_ce of excluding from the field of income taxation certain securities and investments held in. the State of Victoria. Surely it is proper that if taxation is to be levied on' incomes it should be imposed Q1n all i~comes, whether the money producing the income was loaned to the Commonwealth Government or any other authority. T4is practice often causes m,oney to be invested in Government lo,ans in order to avoid the paymel1:t of State income tax. Suppose that a man obtains an income of £2,000 per annum from investments i~ tax-free loans. In t'his way he will avoid the payment of income tax in Victoria to the amount of about £187, while another man receiving £2,000 from property would have to pay that, amount 9f tax. Why should investments in certain loans be exempt from tax·when incomes obtained from other sonrces are taxed 1

Sir STANLEY ARGyLE.-You are' refe'; ring only to future loans ~

Mr. OLD.-Yes. T think that the practice is wrong, and it- should not' be continued. It is not. fair to the State Governments. A mistake was made in the first place in exemp.ting income' froth loans' from taxation.,

The clause was agreed to, as were also clauses 4 to 6.

U ~mploYt:nent Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932.1 (Taxation) Bill .. 1843

Clause 7, proviqing, inter alia-( 1) Subject to this Part, the taxable income

within the meaning of this Part of taxpayers lUlder this Part shall be calculated and the ~mount of the tax payable by each taxpayer under this Part shall be assessed in like manner as the taxable income within the meaning of the Income Tax Acts (other than ~his Part) of taxpayers is calculated under the 'said Acts is assessed, and for the purposes of this section the provisions of the said Acts as extended and applied by this Part shall take effect-

,.'

; ,

( a) as if in calculating the exemptions provided for in section twenty-one of the principal Act paragraph (e) , paragraph (9) (so far as relates to the income of persons ordinarily resident in Victoria;) and paragraph (j) of that section were omitted; and as if in paragraph (k) of that section after the words "war pensions " there were inserted the words " or to old-age or invalid pensions"; and as if at the end of the said section twenty-one there shall be inserted the following paragraph:-

" (n) from wages or other moneys for work performed in lieu of sustenance under the Unemployment Relief Acts or under any Act hereafter in force relating to the relief of unemployment"·

and notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the State Savings Bank Act 1928 or any other Act as regards any of the exemptions pro-

'vided for in the said paragraphs ('g) or (i) the provisions of the Income Tax Acts as extended and applied by this Part and the provisions of the State' Savings Bank Act 192~ and of every other Act shall be rea~ and construed and take etl"ect accordingly.


That in paragraph (a) of sub-clause (1), all the words commencing "paragraph (e)" and ending "relief of unemployment" .be omitted with the view of inserting in lieu thereof the following words :-" paragraph (e) and ( so far as relates to the income of persons ordinarily, resident in Victoria) paragraph (9) of that' section were omitted; and as if in paragraph (k) of that section after the words • war pension' there were inserted the words ',or to old-age or invalid pensions '." This is a draftsman's amendment, in' order to bring the measure into line with t,he Income Tax Bill.

The amendment was agreed to. Sir STANL~Y ARGYLE (Premier and

Treasurer).-I move-That in, paragraph. ,(a) of sub-clause (1),"'

lines 39 and 40), the words" paragraphs (g) or {i) " be' omitted, :with the view of inserting in lieu thereof the words" paragraph (9) ".

Mr. CAIN.-I want to know what is the effect of the amendment.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - Paragraph (g) deals with the exemption of interest on State Savings Bank debentures" and the words " or (i) " should not appear, as there is no necessity for them. Paragraph (i) exempts interest accruing to any person not resident in Victoria on debentures issued by any publio or muni-cipal trust or corporation. It is proposed to continue this exemption. The amend-ment will bring this measure into line with the Income Tax Bill.

The amendment was agreed to.


That in paragraph (a) of sub-clause (1), line 44, the words "and of every other .Act" be omitted.

This is a further drafting amendment proposed to remove words which are considered to be of too general a nature.

The amendment was agreed to. The clause, as amended, was adopted,

as were also clauses 8 to 11. ' Clause 12-(Duration of Part 1.).

Mr. CAIN CN orthcote).-I presume this dause makes provision for the operation of this part of the measure until the 30th of December, 1933. That, I understand, brings it into line with the ordinary Income Tax Act, which expires at that date, but that does not necessarily end the obligation of taxpayers.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That is so. If t.here is anything owing at that date, it will still be owing.

The clause was agreed to, as was clause 13.

Clause 14-Notwithstanding anything in the Sta.mps

(Unemployment Relief) Acts heretofore in force, receipts for wages or other moneys received by any person for work performed by him in lieu of sustenance under the Unemployment Relief Acts shall be deemed to have been exempt from unemployment relief stamp duty.

Mr. McLACHLAN (Gippsland North). -Supposing an unemployed person earns in the year £100 working for sustenance,. will that person be liable to taxation under the Bill ~

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-If he has only been working for sustenance, no.

Mr .. CAIN (Northcote).-I thi~k that in Queensland' or New South Wales-

1844 U'nemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY.] (Taxation) BiU.

probably New South Wales-in addition Mr. McLAcHLAN.-Are not such men to the sustenance worker being relieved of exempted under the Bill ~ the obligation to pay stamp tax, the un-employment relief worker is also relieved. Mr. CAIN .-N 0 j only those working That is certainly a great advantage to ra- for sustenance are exempted.' I think lief. workers... the Government should be prepared to

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Does the' hOllor- grant the concession I have indicated,. able member know what the rates of 'pay particularly when men are away from are in (~ueensland 1 . ~heir hoines and living under thecGndi-

Mr. CAIN .-In Queensland and· N ('w tions that obtain in the forests. A deducSouth Wales the ordinary basic wage rate tion will be made at the rate of 6d. per is paid. Of course, a short week i~ being £1 per week. A man who is away from worked. There are a number of oiher fourteen weeks earning 52s. a week will workers in tlie community working a have deducted from his pay 178. 6d . .short week. Possibly we could not, justify That will be held until the end of the exempt:ing men like sewerage workers 1ll financial year, because a man will not be Warrnambool, Horsham, or Swan Hill, able to get a certificate until he has been who may be employed by contractors and paying for 40 weeks. paid full money, but I would suggest that ·those who are 'engaged on works for which Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I only men-payment is made direct from the Unem- tioned 40 weeks as an example. ployment Relief Fund should be exempted Mr. CAIN.-The honorable gentleman from taxation. That would exempt men d'd "engaged on forest work. It is evident that I ·not do anything of the kind. When the Employment Council is finding it 'diffi- we were discussing a previous Bill the -cult to provide work for men other than honorable gentleman told me, as did the in the .forests. The coun~il has diffimllty officials, that a man receiving £2, £3, or In findmg other reproductIve work. I am £4 a week would have to pay his tax at llot going to discuss the merits or demerits the rate of 6d. in the £1 for 40 weeks, of forest work as reproductive work. and that until a man had paid for 40 Some of it may be very good work. weeks he would not be able to get a cer-

Mr. FRosT.-In 50 years' time. tificate, because the Department would Mr. CAIN .-":Some of it is very good not be satisfied that he had paid sufficient

work now, but it is just a question whe- to meet ~s obligation at the end of the ther it can be considered to be reproduc- year. Relief workers in the forests work tive work in the true sense of the w.ord. fourteen weeks at a wage of 51s." or:. 52s. If a man on relief work" in a forest can a week. In that time about 17s. 6d. will get much more than sustenance out of it, be deducted from their wages. After I shall be surprised. He has to leave his they return to the city they do not get home in Melbourne, and go to a remote sustenance for a month. Assuming one part of the State. He has to support his of them was to get away again and do wife and family. At first, the wages paid another fourteen weeks, another 17s. 6d. were 39s. for 32 hours a week. The num- would be deducted from his wages. That ber of hours was increased, and the wages would mean that he would have paid be camEl £2 3s. per week. Now the num- 358. in taxation. His earnings would be ber of hours is 40, and the amount of pay only about £60, and his tax would not lR 51s. or 52s. per week. Out of that the amount to more than half the amount relief worker has to keep hims~lf in the" deducted. In the case of a man who forest,for which he is allowed some earned £104 a year, the tax would be amount under £1, and his wife gets the b 0 balance. I think she has sent to her 65s. a out £1 lIs. ne of the disadvantages a. fortnight. She is called upon to pay of the instalment system is that it penrent, a.nd to keep herself and her children. alizes the poorer people in the comThat il~ not very far removed from susten- munity. Th"e man who works for 42 anee. I suggest to the Treasurer that he weeks at 51s. or 528. a week will have might. consider the desirability of exempt- about 17s. 6d. deducted from his wages, iag mtm in such circumstances from pay- and that amount will be held in reserve ing this tax, which, in the case of a man until the end of the year; though if ".he earning over £2 a week, would be 6d. in doe~ not' earn any more in the meantime the ·£1. his tax will not be more than the" mini.

Unemployment Relief [25 OCTOBER, 1932·1 (Taxation) Bill. 1845 r'~;

mum of 5s. I suggest to the Treasurer that if he is not prepared to move an .amendment now to do what I have sug.gested, he will have such an amendment -:proposed in another place.

Mr. LINTON.-Do not the same conditions apply to the ordinary casual worker ~

Mr. CAIN.-Yes, and they are very :harsh indeed, particularly when it' comes -to taking 6d. in the £1 from a man .earning £2 a week. It is not so hard when it comes to taking a penny in the :£1 from a man earning less th~n £2 a week. On a previous Bill 1 moved an .amendment dealing with this matter, but honorable members were not seised -of its importance to the poorer paid section of the community. A man who has :been away working for fourteen weeKS in .a forest is no better off when he returns than when he went away. He and his family may have had sufficient to eat and drink, but he has no money with which to buy clothes. Two men came to see me last night, both Scotchmen. One of them was prospecting for months at Dayles·ford before he got a call. They have been away doing forest work for fourteen weeks. Both of them will have to stand down for a ~onth before they get sustenance. In the first week they were -engaged- on forest work they got 39s ... for the next six weeks 43s., and for the next seven weeks £2 11s., or £2 12s. They are asked to live on those wages for eighteen weeks, and if the Bill passes as -it stands, next time they get away 6d. in the £1, or a total of 17s. 6d., will be deducted from their wages.

Mr. FROST (~faryborough and Dayle.~ford).-There is one point on whi~h I should like the Treasurer to furnish me with information. Men who have been working for sustenance for the ,Maryborough Council have had the stamp tax deducted from their wages for the last six months. The side note to the clause reads, "Retrospective exemption of receipts for wages for work in lieu of sustenance from unemployment relief stamp duty." I should like the Treasurer to say whether the men will have a claim to the money that has been. deducted,'

Mr. CAIN.-1 do not think that it means what you say.

Mr. FROST.-Then what does "retrospective '1 mean, except "to go back."

Mr. CAIN.-To what are you referringt Mr. FROST.-1 am referring to cla.use

14, dealing with retrospective exemption of receipts for wages for work in lieu of sustenance, from unemployment relief stamp duty.

Mr. R'YLAND.-It is not right that a man who is working in lieu of sustenance should pay stamp tax.

Mr. FROST.-Those who have worked for the Maryborough Council ,have had stamp tax deducted.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer) .-1 think that the honorable member's reading of the provision is correct. The clause itself is as follows:-

Notwithstanding anything in the Stamps (Unemployment Relief) Acts heretofore in force, receipts for wages or other moneys reoeived by any person for work performed by him in lieu of sustenance under the Unemployed Relief Acts shall be deemed to have been exempt from unemployment relief sta.mp duty_

Such persons are not chargeable with any stamp duty.

Mr. FRosT.-And they can claim retrospectively 1

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - Apparently they can, but I will have the matter investigat.ed and let the honorable member know. Replying to the honorable member for Northcote, the question is not as simple as he mak~s out, because of the difficulty of differentiating between and classifying the various people. There may be cases of hardship, and. there are cases where there is no hardship at all. To separate them would probably require a very difficult piece of draftsmanship, and the honorable membel' can understand that.

Mr. McLAcHLAN.-Are not all the men who go into the country on unemployment relief works taken from the lists of unemployed ~ .

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - The moneys for works are taken from various sources. Some are .taken from the fund raised by taxation, some from th,e .COIt!monwealth and State loan, and some from the emergency loan-when we get it--

Mr, CAIN.-You don't s~m too sanguine about getting it. 1 do not think tha.t you had a good report from the Premiers' Oonference.

1846 U nemploymem Relief . [ASSEMBLY.] (Taxation) Bill .

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-1 always knew that it was, to use a colloqualism, in the air and that we might not get it. We are committed under it.

Mr. FnOST.-Do you refer to the loan to relieve winter distress ~

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The honQra.hle member has not got hold of t'he right loan. The one he means is in f~l1 operation, and we have spent nearly £500,000. I cannot :make the honorable member for N ort.hcote any promise on the question of a.n ~mendmeIlt, but I will have t,he mat,ter looked into and if I find it possible to relieve a case of distress I will' have an amendment inserted in ano,ther place.

lIr. McLACHLAN (Gi ppsla.nd North). -The Deputy Leader of the Opposition was wise in oalling the attention to the position of men who are sent out on to works in the country. I think that we .can oarry taxation too far. The men in question are on the list of unemployed, and the work that they get is intermittent. The total of their wages ~t the end of the year is small, and what they get is not sufficient to keep themselves and their wives and c'hildren in comfort. If anybody should be exempt, they should. I hope that the Premier will give the matter consideration and agree with the proposition submitted by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition.


. Schedule.

Mr. MURPHY (Port Melbourne).--It is provided, inter alia, in the schedule ·that-

If the t.axable income-

Is not less than £52 but does not amount to £104

Is not Jess than £104 but does not amount to £208

Is not Jess than £208 but does Dot exceed £312

I move-

The rate per £100 payabie on the taxable income'

shall be-

Ten shillings

Twenty-seven shillings

Thirty-three shillings and Dinepence

That in the first column the words and figures "Is not less than £52 but does not amou.n,t to £104", and in the second column the words "Ten shillings", be omitted.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and ·Treasurer).-1 c!J,nnot accept the amendmerit. The income and the rate of tax referred to appeared in the original stamp

tax measure, which was in operation all last year, and which was brought dowp by the last Gov.ernment.

¥r .. MURPHY.-1 voted against it last year, and I will do- sp again this year. :

Sir STANLEY·ARGYLE.-It has not, proved a'. h~rdsl:tip, and I think that. theman who is in employment might give· just a little to those who are riot. I hope that the Committee 'will reject the am.end-ment. .

The Committee divided on the question that, . the word~ proposed by Mr. MurpHy to be omitted stand' part of the schedule (Mr'. Everard in the chair)-

Ayes 35 Noes 11

Majorjty against the . ~mendment 24

Mr. Alla.n Sir Sta,nley Argyle Mr. Austin " Bennett

Brigadier Bourchier Mr. Bussau " Cleary " . Coyle

Diffev Dillon Drew

" Dunstan " Ellis

Fairbairn Holden

" Hollway' .. Hyland

. ':) Kirton

Mr. Bond Cain

" Frost Holland

. , McLachlan Murphy

AYES.·

Mr. Lind. . " Macfarlan " . Mackrell

ManHold Menzies Michaelis

" . 'Old " Paton " Pennington'

Dr. Shields Mr. Vinton Smith "

Toutcher Wettenhall

i; White ;, Zwar.

Tellers: Mr. 'Gray " Kent Hughes_ .

NOES.

Mr. Prendergast " . Slater " Tunnecliffe.

Tellers: Mr. Barry . " Lemmon.

PAIRS.

·Mr. Angus Mr. Cook " Groves Cotter

Lt.-Col. Knox McKenzie' Mr. Linton . Blackburn Sir Harold Luxton Jewell Mr. Maltby Keane

" McDonald " Hayes.·

The schedule "was ag~e~d t~. The Billwa,s reported to the House

with amendments, and the amendments were adopted.

On the motion of Sir" STANLEY ARGYLE (Premier and Treasurer), the Bill was read a. third time.

The. House adjourned at. 10.30 p.m.·

. [-Morne Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Amendment Bill. 1847

'LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL~

Wednesday, October ~6, ·1932.

The I'RES.MENT (Sir Frank Clarke) took the· chail': at· 4.55 p.m., and read the prayer: ...

UNEMP110YMENT RELIEF (TAXATION) BILL.

. This Bilt(was' reqelved from theLegi~lative Assembly and, on the motion of the. HOll. J. P., JONES (Minister of Public Wor~s),.was read a first time.'

. SOLICITbRS~. DEFALCATIONS.' : The Hon:· H. H. SMITH (~[ elbourne Province) asked the Minister of Public Works- ..

When does :the: Government intend to brilig in the proposed legislation recently ,announced !egard~ng deJa19a~ions by solicitors, an~ proYiding a remedy for misappropriations of trust funds?· . .

'. The Hon~ J. 'P" JONES (Minister of :rublic Works).-Discussions }lave 'heen oc.curr~ng . between . the' Attorney-General and ~heLaw Institute, but no legislatiorl ~a.s.l?~en prepared. yet: It is hoped to iutr.~duce a ~ilt d4ring the I?resent session.

"WtLLiA~!STO:WN RIFLE RANGE. .. 1{ECO~~TRUC.TI~N· OF TARGET :M:~UNDS. : For . the ·Ron. : 1·. H. DISNEY (M el

'b'ourne' West . .province) the HOll. H. H. Smith asked;; :the Minister of Public Works~ .. 'Will the' Government reft-ain from advancing money to. the Defe:p.ce Department for· the rec?1!struction of target mounds at the Williamstow~ !ifle rang~ until the Williamstown City .cou~Cll h~s had an 'opportunity to. give 'rull f'onslderatIOn to the' matter?· , ,

. The Hon. t. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works) ~~ The: proposals made on this subject ~re :und~r consideration.

RAILWAYS BILL. Colonel HAROLD COHEN (Honorary

:Minister) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend section 4 of the Rail ways Act 1928.'

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in, and read a

first time.

INCOME TAX ACTS AMENDMENT BiLL.

The debate (adjourned from the pre-vious day) on the motion of the Ron. J . P. Jones (Minister of Public Works) for the second reading- of this Bill 'was re-sumed.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (North-E astern Province).-When this Bill was introduced by the Minister of Public W ork..~ yesterday T asked for the adjournment of the debate in order that I might have conferences with certain representa-· tive bodies whO' desired to place before me their reasons for opposition to the nieasure. As an outcome of my bringing these peO'ple intO' contact with CO'lonel Paine, of the Income Tax Branch~

I am able to say that very largely their opp~sition has disappeared. I have just receIved the following letter from the secretary to the Melbourne Chamber of Com:mel'ce;-·

Referring to the conversation which meUl?ers of the Chamber had with you yesterday 111 regard to the "Payment of Taxation by Instalme~t Bill," I am dire~ted to advise you ~hat, actmg on your suggestIOn, we had a .discussion with the Commissioner of Taxes, Mr. Chenoweth, and Colonel Paine. We were shown a copy of a poster which the Depart~ ment proposes to issue in connexion with this matter, whic~l states that any taxpayer who thinks he has paid in instalments sufficient to cover the amount of his tax for the year can ask for his assessment. This goes further !!lan ~he Bill, which only provides for the Issue of exemption certificates, but is, we understarid, in accordance with the policy of the Department which, we are advised, is always willing to issue assessments in speci~l case!!!. .

. The Commissioner also pointed out that there are only seven months left of the present financial year, in which the tax for the whole

pdLICE 'OFF'~NCES (FALSE year must be collected.

. AD. VER.T. l .. SEMENTS·) BILL.. The explanation given by the Commissioner removes the fears which members of thecoun-

.' p~lonef' 'HAROLD COHE~ (nonor~ry cil beld in regard to the possibility of overMlnu~t~r) m.oved for leave to .bring in a payment in a considerable number of cases. ,Bill relating' to false advertisements..· I am di~ected to thank you for your c~urte-ous receptIOn of the deputation of the Cham-

. The motion, w.as agreed to. ber of Commerce. The 'BiU .:was b.rought in,. llnd read a - Yours faithfully,

.f:irst t~me .. ;,: P. C. OAKE, Secretary.

]848 j ncome Tax Acts [COUNCIL.] A merultrum,t Bill.

That removes practically the objections of Commissioner is prepared to concede, J the Chamber of Commerce to the method eannot see any way in which the Bill' of collect.ion of income tax proposed to ~ could be amended in the direction of im-set l,l.p. by the Bill. I had a conference to- proving it. As I have said, it is ,go~~g .tp. day with representatives of the Taxpayers h.e ~exce(\dingly irksO'1he for large emAssociation, and again I had the adv8n- ployers of labour if they are· to be cal1e(J! tage of being able to get Colonel Paine to upon personally to place stamps in theexplain direct to those gentlemen. the pur- ._ books of their employees, and stand overpos~s of the Bill. They represented some -t.hose employees to see that t.he stamps ar& of the la.rgest employers in this city, anrl . cancelled. I understand, however, that they came to the conference very much the Commissioner is 'prepared . to make~dverse to the Bill. I am glad to be ab1e eOJlcession,s,. and· that when an amendment to inform the House that they went away has been drafted, as has been promiRed,. pr~cticany satisfied. It remains for . this irksome condition wi)) be I'e-me, after the minute description of tbe lieved to a great extent. I had in my Bill by the Minister yesterday, to makc mind all the time, in my original 0PIWsionly a few remarks on the general prin- tion to the Bill, that it would be conveFtciples underlying t,he proposed method of irlg every employer into an income tax col~ colI.ectioll. I can imagine that a great lector, and into a detective for the number of employers will find the new Taxation Office, and I felt that that would method very irksome at the outset, and J be placing too great an onus on the em,.. can imagine that the man on the 1and and ployers. But we have been informed that ~~e humbler population of this great city the Commissioner expects to collect an may be in a quandary with respect to the additional sum of £100,000 by this met.h()d collection of their taxes by this method. -a sum which has escaped .,collection,·up 1. wonder whether the Government is not. to the present. Further, it is expected going to create considerable irritation in that the Government will save, in conthe community, which may possibly go to nexion with the Treasurer's Advance, the the extent of requests for the repeal of the sum of £20,000 per annum by way ot legislation. I hope that that may not. be interest. These are great considerations, the case, in the interests of the co1lection and I think that honorablem.embers win of the State taxes. I feel certain that a take the view which I have taken, namely,. very large number of people, both rich that in view of these facts, the policing and poor, are escaping payment of of this legislation, although it may be irkthe taxation that is imposed on some, will be undertaken by employers. them, and I believe that if this There are one or two big principles conmethod ean be tried out, and the people tained in the Bill. A1l salaried persons,. get used to it, it will be a wonderful whether receiving £2 a week or £10,000 system. I was very much prejudiced a year, are to be required to purchase against the Bill; in fact, I went so far as stamps and place th~m in books, and those to Bay that I would not support it. But. stamps are to be properly cance1led. There having eonsulted the Commissioner of are some objections to this arrangement. Taxes, and having read the Bm, and I understand that the banking authorities having listened to the explanation of the have expressed some objections, pointing Minister:, I must say that I cannot find out that they have never in the past anything which would cause me to advise evaded taxation. But if we are going t() the House to reject it; and if we do not impose this particular method of collecreject it on the motion for the second tion in respect of persons receiving small reading, it is only right that we should salaries, surely we are not going to stop pass it. just there and leave those people with the

The Hon. A. M. ZWAR.-I do not know. grievance that, whilst they"iire' to be called We could modify it in Committee. upon to subject themselves to this method,.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I doubt very the Government is going to .. allow people much whether that could be done. At earning big· money to' escape su·ch conany rate, I should like to hear at this . ditions. Large employers are to be given stag~. any svggestions with respect to the concession that they will be modi:&cation because, with the exception of allowed to buy stamps at the Taxation one princip1e which I understand the Office. They will not be ca1led upon to

Income Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER, 1.932.] Amendment Bill. 1849

lick stamps for each one of their numerous employees, but will be allowed to send in returns concerning their 'employees, and to indicate from time to time any alterations of numbers, salaries, &c. They will then be permitted by the Taxation Office to deface the stamps by means of an approved die, and they will be allO"\~ed to depute the matter of the cancellatIOn of the stamps to certain reliable employees.

A conference held this afternoon was attended by some of the largest employers in l\1elbourne, who thought that they would prefer to thave stamp-books rather than deal with this matter in the mass with the Taxation Office. Others thought it would be a good thing to deal w.ith t,he mass of their employees by supplymg a list and having a stamp effacem~nt die, to be approved by .the TaxatIOn Office which could be used lllstead of the empl~yer witnessing the defacement of the stamps by each employee. Some of the establishments are so big that almost a day is occupied in paying their employees their wages. The c?nference considered various irritating thlllgs, and those present went away more or less satisfied ,with the promises of representatives of the Taxation Office. Therefore, I reluctantly agree to the Bill: I be Ii eve that it is one ef the thmgs pre· posed by the Gev~rnment that will result in the collectlOn of large sums of money and in making a saving in the interest bill of the State, and therefore it is portion of the Government.'s budgetary plans. Certainly each individual employer will have a large amount ef labour thrown on him. If a large amount ef extra taxat,ien is collected, it will be only fair for the Government tOo say that whatever money is so ob·· tained will be used to reduce the ver» heavy charges placed on people at the present time. I do not think the Government is justified in imposing th~se conditions on the peeple without prom~sing that if they perform them they wlll receive from whatever benefit may accrue a reduction in taxation. Seeing that this entirely new departure has beelL proposed, I think that t'his House would be wise if it limited its operation t.o a period of twelve months. Such a provision would give sufficient time to the Taxation Office and the Government to se~ how the method operated. If it operated well, and the people became


accustomed to it, and the insp€ctor~ could teach the taxpayers to do wha~ they wanted t.hem to do, at thE: end of twelve months we could easily re-enact the provision either for another twelve months or else place it perma.nently on the statute-book. The operations of a method ot this Qharacter should be limited until we see what its effect i~. On these conditions I am prepared re·· luctantly to advise the House to pass the Bill.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH (.l.l1elbourne Province) .-I attended the conference, details of which 11he unofficial Leader has given in his usual clear manner. At first, I viewed the Bill with great suspicion. I know that the taxpayers of this State have been asking for the right to pay their taxation by instalments. It comes hard on a man to. pay the whole amount due at the end of the year. I feared tlhat what appeared to be a complicated system WOouid cost a lot of money and that it would not worle The leading firms and the VictOorian Taxpayers Assooiation were represented at the cOon·ference this afternoon, and after hearing the explanations given by the taxation Oofficials tOo those neoDle I have decided not to submit amendments that I had contemplated. The proposals in the Bill cover every wage earner. Everybody will pay his little towards taxation, and those who have previously evaded their responsibilities will hp. broug1ht inte the scheme. I do not think that this proposal will make it necessary for the firms tOo employ any extra staff, because the Government is prepared to meet the large employers, and it does not intend tOo put them to the trouble of cancelling every stamp. One firm employing a staff of 2,000 indicated that it would mark each- stamp with the nU!;l1.ber of the employee concerned, so that the stamps could not be used again. When a taxpayer has bought the necessary stamps, he will be able to take his sheet t.o the TaxatiOon Office, and it will be recognized as a receipt for his taxation. Banks will send returns every three months inRtead of sending one at the end of the year. The proposals will help large p.mployers and save them heavy expense. WP. do not like taxatiOon, and as the unofficial Leader said, it has been stifling this country. We know that in the past only a certain number of people paid any taxation. This measure wi.n


make everybody pay a little towards the ~overnmental expenses. and will make the people more - self-reliant--it will get rid of the mendicant. In this young eountry we are paying too much taxation. but we are in difficulties. and the sooner we e-et out of them the better. N otwithstandi;g the way in which the Minister of Public Works explained the measure, I was in a fog, and so were other honorable members. The people who attended the conference this afternoon were also in a fog, but they went away satisfied that they would get fair treatment, and that the Government's proposals were worth a trial. I trust t'hat if we agree to the proposals fOT twelve months, the Government will at the end of that, period be able to reduce the present oppressive load of taxation. Bankers and the representatives of various associations have visited me in regard to this Bill, and I felt that some alteration would be necessary, but after having heard the explanations of thE' taxation officials I am sure those present at the conf~rence were quite satisfied.

The Hon. H. F. RICHARDSON (Sou.thWestern Province) .-Although the unofficial Leader has advised the House not to reject the Bill on the motion for its second reading, I shall cast my vote against the measure, and I shall take the responsibility for doing so. I feel that I am backed by the great bulk of the business people of this State. I ha ve not spoken to a single business man who supports the proposal to pay t'he taxation by instalments. It will unnecessarily interfere with ~usiness people. The carrying of this measure will involve an expenditure of about £40,000 which will be an absolute waste of money. All that is necessary is that the Gove~nment should submit a Bill vvith half the number of clauses continuing the present system of collecting the unemployment relief tax. Employers and employees have become accustomed to that system, but to call upon the business firms to provide the tax in the way suggested in t.his measure is unnecessary. The Geelong Chamber of Commerce and Manufactures has asked me to submit to the House certain resolutions that that body carried. One resolut.ion is as follows:-

This. chamber strongly objects to the pro· posed Increase of duty on cheques, being of opin~on that this is a retrograde movement, padlCularly at a· time when everything POR-

sible should be done to lighten the burden on trade and commerce.

And, further, that the provision compelling traders to give written receipts for payments of £2 and upwards should not be insisted on unless required by the payer, as it will cause unnecessary inconvenience and loss of time to traders.

Another resolution reads:-This chamber is of the opinion that the

system provided for in this' Bill is complicated and calculated to cause inconvenience and loss of .time and impose a further very heavy burden upon employers, on whom is thrown the onus of seeing that the tax is col· lected and methods properly carried out.

Another resolution reads-This Chamber is of opinion that the time

has now arrived when systems of income and other taxation should be very much simplified and made out so that taxpayers may be put to as little inconvenience as possible.

Yet the Government is making the system more inconvenient. One of the weaknesses of our State income tax system is that the obligation is cast on about 110,000 persons in a population of nearly 2,000,000 to pay the whole of the income tax necessary for carrying on the essential Rervices of the State. I have advocated for years that single men should be compelled to pay more taxation than married men. Under Commonwealth Arbitration Court awards single men are entitled to the same rate of wages as are married men with families. If our wage system will not permit of single men being paid a lower rate of wage than married melt, additional taxation should be placed on the single men. This Bill takes a step in that direction, and I support that principle. I object, however, to the complicated form in which this legislation has been introduced. A Bill containing a few simple clauses ought to be sufficient. If the Government wants to collect income tax earlier than it is obtained under the present system, it could allow a discount of 2! per cent. of the tax to taxpayers who paid their income tax before the due date. In 'that way the Government would save a good deal in the payment of interest and the amount of £40,000, which is the estimated additional cost of collecting the tax under the new proposal, would be saved. The Government must bear in mind that many persons who obtain income from property are not receiving from the property annually the amount that they are required to pay in taxation. I know a number of people who pay in

lncom.e Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Amendment Bill. 1851

taxation an amount equal to the whole of 'the rents. received from their properties for the year. I cannot understand why they should be put to further inconvenience in the payment of their taxes. I hope that the House will reject the Bil1, and thereby force the Government to bring in another and simpler measure. If the House amended the Bill by deleting the portion relating to the collection of tax by instalments there would not be much of the measure left. In that event, t.he Government would be compelled to brjn~ in another Bill. We should give every consideration to the views of the Taxpayers Association, because it consists of business men representing t.he business community, and the present is not the time when Parliament should put business people to more inconvenience and trouble in collecting tax for t.he Government.

The Hon. W. J. WILLIAMSON (Western P1'ovince ).-N 0 matter what mode of c()llecting income tax is proposed, the bald fact remains that in ordinary circumstances the method proposed in this measure would prove intolerable to the business community, but the exigencies of the situation demand sl)eciul legislation, and, therefore, I do not intend to oppose the Bill. I am fully convinced that despite the capable efforts made by the taxation officials to collect all the taxation revenne that the State should obtain, a large sum of money is lost to the revenue every year. I have had experience of this when making up income tax returns. Only last week a man said to me, "I have not Sellt in a return before. How should I go about it now ~" I told him that he had better make a start, and when he sent in his return the band would begin to play. The wage-earner will :find it difficult to escape the payment of income tax, but I am afraid that many small farmers and other persons scattered throughout t.he country districts will still escape the payment of taxation.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS.-Do you mean the small farm.er who does not engage labour?

The Hon. W. J. WILLIAMSON.-I mean the man who has never sent in an income tax return. A few days a~o I WM

in a fairly large town in the Western Province, and there happened to be there two Government inspect.ors who were engaged

in the prosecution of persons who had omitted to place duty stamus on receipts. The official in charge of the post office informed me that the supply of duty stamps had been exhausted because of the sudden demand that had set in after the arrival of the inspectors. One of the inspectors told me that a business man said to him that it was a good job that the inspectors had visited the town, because many of the business men were not in the habit of buying duty stamps. That being so, we ?u~ht to bend ourselves to the task of assIstmg the Taxation Office to collect as much revenue as possible. The fear has been expressed that in the operation of t~is legislation there will be a good deal of p.mpricking, but I think that the TaxatIOn Office has gained sufficient experien~e no.w to avoid pin-pricking, and that It Wlll make t1he collection of the tax by e.mployers as easy as possible. I intend to support the Bill.

The Ron. W. ANGLISS (Southern Province).-I did not hear the speech. of the unoffi~i~l Leader, but I have been 1Il

formed that he spoke favorably of the Bill. While I do not like some portions of the Bill, I recognize that it has ,beeu introduced as a desperate remedy for a desperate ill. The complaint has bef'll made for years that income tax has nllt heen sprea~l over the peopl~ to. as wid~ an extent as it should be. ThIS BIll prOVIdes the opportunity of doing that. Irrespective of 1.he possibility that the new method of collection might impose some expense and inconvenienoe on large firms, I support the measure. As an employer of a large amo,!nt of labour, I re~~ lize that employers WIll be made to some extent tax collectors for the Government. That is not a bad idea for the Government, because the cost of collecting the tax will be very small, and if the Governmen t attempted to collect it in the ordinary Wft,Y

from the large army of small taxpayr.n~ that are to be brought into the taxation field, it might not be worth while doing so. As an employer I think that it is proper to throw the onus of collecting the tax (In the employers. Employers have now to collect the unemployment relief tax, :md the new obligation will not involve very much more work. I think that employers of a large body of labour will recognize the necessity of doing something to increase


the State revenue even though they are put to a little expense. I agree with Mr. Williamson that there are a grE at many people who, in some cases innocently, and in other cases carelessly, omit to place duty stamps on receipts. It will not be a difficult matter for the Taxation Office, through the agency of its inspeetors, to ascertain whether employers in a small way carry out the intentions of tho measure. I understand that some of thesu employers who criticized the proposed method of collectioll when it was first mentioned have since undertaken to support it. In the next twelve months wo shall have an opportunity of examin~np' the effieacy and the cost to the State of this method, and then determinillg whether it is worth while persevering with it. I hope that the House will pass the Bill, and that by its operation it will yield the revenue which the Government anticipates receiving.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS ( Gippsland Province).-I have examined the Bin, and I do not think that it contains .anything about which we can complain. Wage-earners who will pay their taxes by instalments will not feel the burden of taxation so much as they do now, because they will not have to pay tax in a lumV S11nt. The instalment plan will probably suit the convenience of many employeet:!. I suppose that there will be a good deal of grumbling amongst small employers 111

the country districts, because they do not carryon their business as methodically as do large employers of labour. I was under the impression when the Ministel explained the Bill that it would cause a good deal of lannoyance to employers, but after examining the measure I do not think that will be the case. Employers have had the experience of the unemployment relief tax so far as it affects their employees, and the new method of collection ought not to cause them much trouble. It certainly will be a little troublesome to farmers and others who have not been in the habit of keeping books. The employers of large bodies of labour will require to place more work on their office staff, and, perhaps, engage more clerks to. make the deductions from salaries and wages; but if they are patriotic citizens they will realize that it is necessary to do so in order to assist the State to balance its ledger.

I think that when once the public realize what the Bin contains, -and what they have to. -do in connexion with it, that will do away with a very great deal of opposition to it. There is no doubt that there was a strong opinion against it in the first place, but that has now been remo.ved to a large degree. The measure itself is perfectly plain, and I agree with other speakers that it will rope in a good many of those who have been escaping the payment of income tax in the past. That, In itself, will be of great value to the Government, and the State as a whole. If one person has been in the habit of regularly sending in his proper income tax return, when another person has been trying to dodge the responsibility, that is untair. The very fact that an employee will have to sign his name on the back of the slips that will carry the stamps will give an indication to the Taxation Office whether that person has been sending in a return in the past, and in that way the stamp slips, or books, will act as policemen for the taxation authorities. There win also be an indication of the same nature in respect of employers. I do not think th~t there win be any great disability or unfairness in the administration of the measure.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarru, Province).-I support the Bill, not, I think, for many of the reasons stated by the Minister when introducing it, but for the simple reason that I think it will cause a large number of persons who are at present under an obligation to pay taxation, to pay that taxation when other~ wise they would not. Thereby the l't'.

venue will be substantially increased. I cannot accede to the view that the mea·· sure is for the benefit of taxpayers. It may be for the benefit of some improvident taxpayers who otherwise, when their assessments are received, would find themselves without the ready money to pay the amounts demanded, and have to ask for extensions of time, or else make default in payment. But I cannot see how the measure will benefit a taxpayer-to take one who has a fairly large income-if he has to pay a sum of, say, £1 a week, for 52 weeks, rather than pay £52 at some time after the end of the financial year. The

Income Ta.x Acts [26 OCTOBER} 1932.] A mendment Bill. 1853

net result will be that the taxpaym' who pays by weekly instalments will be in .an un'favorable po~ition as compared w!th the taxpayer who pays on his annual .assessment inasmuch as in the former case the t~xpayer will ?ave paid a sub,stantial sum of money In advance to thB Government, and upon it the Government will receive interest. We have to look the facts in the face. If a taxpayer, or a constituent of mine, asked me whether the measure would in its operation be t<J his benefit I would perhaps have to say that it wo~ld be to his detriment. I think that the advantages are to the Government, and that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

There is one thing which stri~es me when considering this matter. It IS that under a measure which we shall probably pass within a few hours for the purpose of declaring the rates of income tax, we shall declare the rates for the financial year ending the 30th of June, 1933. We have already gone through nearly foul' months of the veal'. Under clause 3 of the Bill that we ;re now considering, it is provided that the instalment system shall (lome into operation on a date to be fixed by proclamation by the Governor in COU~lcil. I presume that the Governor. In Council will wait until· the TaxatIOn Office has the matter in order, as regards regulations and routine work. Suppose that the date proclaimed is the 1st of De(~ember. A.s from December, every week <>r other period in which the employee is paid, he will pay 3: certain sum of money, and he will contInue to pay that rate until the 30th of June next. When ht (lomes back from his holidays about the end of January or February of next year, he will find that he has an assessment on the basis of his income for the year ended the 30th of June, 1932. T am not quite sure on that point, but if it is correct, I think that it ought to be guarded against in some way. We ought to .see that such a man will not be taxed tWlCe. We should be certain that he is not taxed in respect of income for different years, at or about the same time. It may be that I do not understand the working of the legislation properly, but it s~ems to me that the employee who pays hIS reguJar instalments under this measure may receive in January of next year, or some time before or after, ft'n assessment based

on his income for the year ended 30th June, 1932.

There is a further point. I pay great respect to the view of Mr. Angliss as to the burden on employers, and he says that it will not be great. I think, perhaps, that it will not be a great burden on the employer who has a large and well organized business. But take the small business of, say, the suburban grocer, or the country storekeeper, or take the domestic employer who has, perhaps, a couple of servants or a gardener. All those employees will be liable to pay the tax, and the employers will be liable to provide for the payment of the tax.by their employees .. In those cases, I thInk that the system will be a great burden, and will cause difficulty. Many persons fail to realize the very great worry and anxiety which are cast upon small employers by reason of payments such as those contemplated by the Bill. They get into a great fiuster and flurry, and worry themselves very seriously over matters which in a big business are very small. As regards big businesses

h I fully expect

that many of them will ave to employ two three or half a dozen additional cle/ks. T~ke the establishments employing 2,000 persons.

An HONORABLE MEMBER.-Where are they~

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-There are several employing clerks, travellers, salesmen, and all kinds of hands, who are paid at different rates, some weekly, o~h~rs fortnightly or monthly, some reCeIVIng salary plus comm~s~ion by wu,y of sala.ry, and others reCeIvmg salarIes varYIng wi th the turnover every week. The proposal will be very troublesome to the employers.

The Hon. W. H. EooAR.-According to the unofficial Leader, those larger firms have agreed to the proposal.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-I rather suspect that it is an agreement which they feel compelled to make.

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-I do not think . that they like it.

The Hon. H. H. Sl\HTH.-That is not so.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-The unofficial Leader says that he does not think

1854 Income Tax Acts [COUNCIL.j Amendment Bill.

that they like it. It is no use talking a lot of nonsense. You cannot convince any plain man that employers like it.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-None of us likes it.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-I think that we have to be honest with ourselves. I vote for this measure because I think that it will troduce revenue which otherwise woul not be produced, and will reduce a great deal of the evasion that is at present taking place.

The Hon. G. M. DAVls.-Every member of this House is voting for the measure because it will be the means of producing revenue.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-J ust so. There were one or two interjections to the effect that the employers were quite agreeable, and that it did not matter to the employees.

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-The employers merely withdrew their objections.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-As to the period during which the provisions should apply, I would agree with the unofficial Leader, as long as the period is not made too short. You cannot test by a short period the working of a scheme such as that which has been placed before us. I should think that, in order to test it, it would have to operate, say, to the 30th of June, 1934. To extend it to the 30th of June, 1933, would practically give it only six months of operation. and, as everyone knows, these schemes often do not get into their stride until they have been in operation for six months. I am told that when the first income tax measure was introduced in 1895, the Treasurer of the day assured honorable members that it was only for one year.

An HONORABLE MEl\mER.-To be reenacted annually!

The Hon. G. M. DAvls.-He might have added that it was only for one year at a time.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-The measure is designed to protect rev~nue from evasions of taxation, and there are many evasions. One is at liberty to talk only about things which are common knowledge, but it is common knowledge that there are many and large evasions of income tax. When one looks at the Income Tax Acts, one sees that any penal-

ties for such evasions which are offences under those Acts cannot be prosecuted for after three years from the commission of the offence. I would suggest that the period should be extended to, say, five or seven years. A clever offender, with the aid perhaps, of clever participants in the off~nce, can conceal his offence for a period of years, and owing to the very short time in which prosecutions can be instituted for offences, many of the offenders get off scot free. I think that the period should be extended for a further three or four years.

The Hon. G. M. DAvls.-An offender has to pay double taxation in respect of the three or four years during which he escapes taxation.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-I am . dealing with the man who is never caught because he conceals his offence for the requisite period. It should be provided that an offence can be prosecuted after three years, in order to punish an offender who is not discovered within the period of three years. It seems to me that there will be little doubt that the Government will collect under the instalment system sums of money which, in the end, will be repayable as to some substantial part of the money collected. I suppose that the surplus will go into Consolidated Revenue. Apparently, many persons will pay, say, £5 or £10 during the financial year, and when they send in their returns, they will find that their taxation is £4 lOs., or £9 lOs. Many of those people will not trouble to collect the balance, and the revenue, in that indirect way, will probably benefit to that extent. It was suggested during the debate by an answer which the Minister gave to a question, that if a person paid more than the sum at which he was finally assessed, the balance would go to the credit of his taxation account for the following year. I would suggest that that proposal should not be embodied in the Bill, but that it be made clear that the taxpayer is entitled to a refund in cash, so that if he pays more than he is bound to pay to the Taxation Office, he will obtain a refund in .cash.

The Hon. M. SALTAU (Western Province).-Anything I may say will be very much in the nature of reiteration, but I have been tt'lrning my mind back

Income Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER} 1932.] Amendment Bill. 1855

a little, and I recall that a request was made to' the TaxatiQn Office SQme tim<' . agQ thrQugh the GQvernment that payments Qf incQme tax might be made by way Qf instalments, and the reply then was that it was absQlutely impracticable. HQwever, Qwing to' the versatility Qf the ·CQmmissiQner and his Qfficers, they have llOW prQduced a measure which, in its .(trag-net nature, leaves very little to' be desired. I am assQciated with sQme'large industries, and I feel that the measure in its QperatiQn is gQing to' be nQt Qnly cumbersQme, but exceedingly irritating, and .only the exigencies Qf the PQsi tiQn WQuld lead me to' recQrd my VQte fQr it. We have, as requested by the Minister in his secQnd-reading speech, cQnstantly kept befQre us the necessity Qf the balancing Qf 'Our Budget, and were it nQt fQr that perspective, I venture to' say that this HQuse WQuld not pass a measure Qf this kind. In its effects, it will be, as I have stated, €xceedingly irritating and cumbersQme. It has been urged that the methQd of pa;)7ing incQme tax prQPQsed will be Qf benefit to' the taxpayer. I WQuld remind the HQuse that great numbers Qf p.eQple have fQr SQme time been taking the necessary precautiQn to' meet their taxatiQll payments) when they fall due, by depQsiting in a savings bank small sums Qf mQney week by week, 0'1' mQnth by mQnth. For that mQney, they receive SQme small return in the way Qf bank interest. That return will be denied to' them when the Bill is passed. The savings effected will go to' the GQvernment. The PQint has been made that there shQuld be nO' differentiatiQn, but there is a distinct differentiatiQn, because the emplQyer need nQt pay by way Qf instalments. He can cQntinue to' dO' as he dQes nQw-pay his tax each year Qn the date specified Qn his assessment. I think it shQuld have been PQssible to' devise a scheme whereby thu taxpayer CQuld pay quarterly, half-yearly, or in Qne lump sum, withQut any unnecessary expense to' the Department, and withQut giving any grQund fQr the claim that we WO'uld have differentiatiO'n and thus break dO'wn the whO'le scheme. Only the financial exigencies of the f,tate WO'uld permit me to' vote fO'r a nieasure of this kind.

The mQtiQn was agreed to. The Bill was read a secQnd time, and

OQmmitted.

Clause 1 was verbally amended and agreed to', as was clause 2 .

Clause 3-This part shall come in to operation on a

day to be fixed by proclamation by the Governor in Council published in the Government Gazette.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (Nort~ E astern Province).-I mQve-

That the following new sub-clause be added to the clause-

" (2) This part shall continue in opera· tion until the thirty-first day of December, One thousand nine hundred and thirty· three, and no longer .

Provided that the expiration of this part shall not-

(a) affect the previous operation O't this part, or anything duly done or suffered under this part; or .

(b) affect any right, privilege, obligation, or liability acquired, accrued, or incurred under this part; or

(c) affect any penalty, forfeiture, or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against this part; or .

(d) affect any investigation, legaJ proceeding, or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeihue, or punishment as aforesaid.

and any such investigation, legal prO'ceeding, or remedy may be instituted, continued, or enforced, and any such penalty, forfeiture, or punishment may be imposed as if this part had not expired."

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-I hope. the unQfficial Leader will nQt . persist with the date named in the amendment-the 31st of December, 1933-because that WQuld nQt give twelve mQnths' experience Qf the opera tiQn Qf the measure.

The HQn. Dr. HARRIs.-I thQught 1934 WQuld be a better date.

The HQn. J. P. JONES.-Make the date 1934, and we will nQt argue abQut the matter.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province).-If the date were made the 31st Qf December, 1934, it WQuld mean that the measure WQuld Qperate fQr mQre than twO' years, because we have nQt yet reached December, 1932. I suggest to the unQfficial Leader that he make the date the 30th Qf June, 1934.

The HO'n. J. P. J oNEs.-Parliament WQuld nQt be sitting at that time, and Parliament must have an QPPQrtunity to review the measure.


The lIon. C. H. A. EAGER.-If the measure operates for six months of the financial year ending on the 30th of June, IH35, the taxation officers will come along, and say, "Do not cut us short in the middle of the year."

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-There is ample provision made for the return of taxation under the Bill, and if the measure is so irksome that the taxpayers are calling out for its repeal, it will be necessary for the taxation officers to re~ turn what they have collected.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-I will not press the point.

Sir FRANK CLARKE (Melbourne South Province).-I agree that this is a very difficult matter, and I am not sure that I can offer a solution to the Committee, but I should like to draw attention to the last clause in the Income Tax Bill-the measure that declares the rates of taxation. It provides-

Notwithstanding anything in section 3 of tho principal Act, or in section 3 of the Income 'l'ax Act 1931, the Income Tax Acts (other than the Unemployment Relief Acts, and other enactments aforesaid read with the Income',Tax Acts) shall continue in force until the thirty-first day of December, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-three.

N ow, speaking subject to correctionsubject to the experts raising some objection that I do not know of-I do not see why we should not put an equivalent clause with a similar date-that is to say, the 31st of December, 1933-into, this measure. It would then be in both measures. Again, subject to correction, it seems to me that the rates Act which I have been quoting, and the machinery Bill we are dealing with, would expire at the same moment, and very conveniently at the end of the session, so that the Ministry would have the whole of the session lI1

which to introduce amending or continuing legislation.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works) .-Clause 3 of the Income Tax Bill, with which we shall deal later, provides for the continuation of the Income Tax Acts until the 31st of December, 1933. I do not think there is any necessity for the unofficial Leader's amendment.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Except that this is an assessment measure and the other deals with the rates.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Clause 3 of the Income Tax Bill provides that-

K otwithstanding anything in section 3 of the principal Act or in section 3 of the Income Tax Act 1931, the Income Tax Acts (other than the Unemployment Relief Acts and other enactments aforesaid read with the Income ~'ax Acts) shall continue in force until the :Hst day of December, 1933; but the expiration of the Income Tax A.cts aforesaid shall not affect the past operation thereof or the validity or invalidity of anything done or suffered or the assessment, payment, or recovery of any tax which may have become payable to His Majesty under the said Acts or any corresponding previous enactments, or interfere with the institution or prosecution of any proceeding in respect of any offence committed against or the recovery of any penalty 01' forfeiture incurred under any of the said Acts or ena-ctments.

Therefore, it would appear as if there is no necessity for the amendment; that, as a fact, an Act will have to be passed before the 31st of December next year.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (North.. Bastern Province).-I hope the Committee will not be misled by that very clear statement made bv the Minister in charge of the Bill. I think we should definitely insert in this Bill a provision that it shall cease operation within a period of time unless re-enacted. I am going to state my reasons for the attitude I have taken up. The Government next year could bring down a measure which will contain all the provisions of the Income ,Tax Acts, and it would be a taxation measure. This portion of it then will be a taxation measure. It is not to-day. It provides a method of collecting. But when the Income Tax Acts are re-enacted prior to .. the 31st of December, 1933, this 'House will not have power to move for the deletion or amendment of this particular measure unless it throws out the whole of the Income Tax Acts. I question whether this House would take the stand tha t would be necessary to get this Bill, wlIOn it becomes an Act, repealed. But, if we keep this measure separate, the Govermnent will have to re-enact it, and give the House a further opportunity of expressing an opinion on it. For these reason·s I hope the Committee will agree to the amendment I have moved, which distinctly states that this measure shall remain in operation for a specified period of time. If my

Income Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER} 1932.J Amendment Bill. 1857

amendment IS carried, the House will have an op'portunity at a subsequent date of throwing the new Bill out on the second reading, should it not be required, without interfering with the taxation of whatever Government may be in power. I started off by fixing the 31st of December, 1933, as the date I wanted to be inserted.

HONORABLE MEMBERS.-Stick to that date. .

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.,-I think it is the better date. If the Act runs smoothly, we shall be only too glad to re-enact it; if it does not run smoothly, the Government might be very pleased at the insertion by us of this amendment, because we would get them out of a difficulty.

Sir FRANK CLARKE (Melbourne South Province) .-Of course, I recog~ niJ;e the validity of the Minister's contention," but I also recognize the validity -of the unofficial Leader's contention. I have the feeling that, if this were the Legislative Assembly, with the power of initiating and amending money Bills, the Minister's argument might be eompelling; but I also have the feeling that the unofficial Leader is correct in telling us that to some extent-an extent that I do not know exactly myself-we are giving this House a freer hand, and are preserving ()lir privileges as a House of review, by adopting the course that the unofficial Leader advocates. I do not see why th~ Minister should object to our putting the <late into this Bill.

The Hon. J. P .. JONES.-I do not ob· ject; I only say it is not necessary.

Sir FRANK OLARKE.-Is not that rather a distinction without a difference ~

The Hon. J. P. J ONES.-Put it in if you wish.

Sir FRANK OLARKE.-I think we may be preserving our privileges a little· more by putting it in than by simply accepting the fact that it is in another Bill.

The Hon. H. KECK (Bendigo Pro·· vince).-I favour the amendment proposed by the unofficial Leader. It is unfortunate that we have a measure like this before us, but we feel that we should support the Government in: the hard and trying position it is placed in. For that reason we have to do something we do

not like. It may be worth while to repeat a little conversation that took place in the lift at the Temple Oourt Buildings the other day. It indicates the feeling of the people towards taxation. There were six persons in the lift. One of them turned to another and said, " How are you getting on in your work?" I gathered that the work rderred to was of a philanthropic character. The reply was, "I am doing what I can, but what is the good of doing anything? Weare in the hands of burglars and members of Parliament." I said, "Present company excepted, please." " No," said the man, " the burglars steal all that they can, and Parliament takes what we have left." That gives an indication of the feeling of the people generally. We have to do things that we do not wish to do in order to help the Government to balance the Budget. We sympathize with them in their unsavoury job, otherwise I would like to see the Bill voted right out.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province).-I think we have to be very careful to see that this is not a money Bill. Under this Bill we are requiring taxpayers to pay' a certain sum of money to the Government by means of stamps which otherwise they are not required to pay. We have not yet passed the rates Bill for this year.

Sir FRANK OLARKE.-The rates Bill requires the handing over of that money.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-It is provided by this Bill that deductions from salaries shall be made, notwithstanding that the rates of tax for the year have not been declared by an Act of Parliament. The income tax rates for the current year have' not yet been declared.

The Hon. G. M. DAvls.-They are going to be declared.

The Ron. O. H. A. EAGER.-That is not my point. My point is that by virtue only of this Bill people will have to pay taxes.

Sir FRANK OLARKE.-Employers have to collect from their employees, but they need not hand the money over to the Government.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-Then we are putting a burden on a section of the people. We are requiring employees to pay a sum of money for stamps which their employers will provide.

1858 Income Tax Acts , [COUNCIL.] A mendment Bill.

Sir ]i'RANK CLARKE.-If you assum~ keep of those employed in farm work. that no rates Bill will be passed. The stamp tax has been applied only to

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-When their wages, but I notice that the clanse this measure leaves our hands, the rate~ makes provision for the taxation of the' Bill will not have been passed, and we cost of board and lodging. I do not see' shall have passed a measure which says any provision in the Bill in reference to. that an employee must pay a sum ·)f work done under the contract system. I money as and for income tax by means of am quite sure that in the past a lot of stamps. If that be so-and there are taxation has been avoided under this strong grounds for thinking it is so-we heading.. A great deal of work in the cannot amend this Bill, and can only country is done under the contract sys-suggest amendments. Nevertheless, I tern. support the purpose of the unofficial The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Is not that Leader's amendment. I agree entirely provided for in sub-clause (2) of clause with what the Minister has said, 4, which gives the Governor in Council that this measure, like any other power to prescribe as to certain contracts part of the Income Tax Act, will of service ~ Suppose shearers took a conautomatically expire on the 31st of tract, the Governor in Council could preDecember, 1933, by virtue of clause 3 vf scribe that those shearers are deemed to. the Income Tax Bill, if that be nassed, be empl_o'yees. but we have not yet passed it. I want to The Hon. E. G. BATH.-I will take know what the constitutional position Mr. Eager's word for that. will be when the Bill goes to another place The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-I do not if we have amended the measure. say that is so. I was asking a question.

The amendment was agreed to, and the The Hon. E. G. BATH.-A great deal clause, as amended, was adopted. of shearing is done by contract.

(At 6.28 p.m. the sitting was supende(Z The Hon. J. P. JONEs.-Sub-clause (2) t'Z 7 5 ) of clause 4 would cover all that.

un ~ .5 p.m. The Hon. E. G. BATH.-Will it cover Clauses 4 and 5 were agreed to. Clause 6-(Duty of employer to make it all, or only part of iH If a contractor

deductions from salary or wages). brought his plant on to a farm, and contracted to do the shearing--

The Hon.,H. F. RICHARDSON (South- The Hon. J. P. JONEs.-There would l-Vestern Province).-The only regret be power to cover the position by regular havE' is that the Government have tion. made DO provision to charge an extra tax Th H E G BATH U t eon. .. .- p 0 now,. on single men. I have argued on these there have been no regulations covering lines for some time past. I cannot under- it, and I want to make sure that there stand why some Government has not will be regulations that will cover not brought in legislation to provide that only the contractor, but the men using single men should pay a higher rate of his plant. At present, I believe, they are tax than married men. In connexion evading the taxation. They are under with the unemployment relief taxation, contract because they shear at so much a there are married men paying exactly the hundred. To take another case, the wheat same rate as single men and single women farmers' bags are sewn by contract. ~ith DO responsibilities.. I should ~~ve There has been no stamp tax paid on the hked the cla~se to make some provIsIon. contract price for sewing those bags. All w~eJ.:eby fl; hIgher rate. of tax would be wheat is handled by contract, whether on paId b:y smgle. men wIth~ut dependants the farm or at the railway station, and than WIll be paId by marrIed men. in the past the payment of taxation on the

The Hon. E. G. BATH eN elson Pro- money earned under those contracts has vince) .-As has been said by honorable been evaded. I made some inquiries last members in their second-reading speeches, year on this matter, and I did not get a the redeeming feature of the Bill is the very satisfactory explanation. The amount of money that may be collected lawyers in my town askf'.d my opinion on under it. As far as my experience in the the question. They differed. One said a country goes, in the past it has not been contractor should give a stamped receipt, customary to charge stamp tax on the and the other lawyer argued the opposite

Ineome Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Amendment Bill. ]859

way. Evidently the position was not very clear to some members of the legal profession, and I do not see how an ordinary layman could understand what was required.

The Hon. A. E. CIIANDLER.-Lawyers usually differ.

The Hon. E. G. BATH. - What I want the Minister to tell me is whether there is a provision in the Bill to cover the things I have mentioned.

The Hon. M. ~ICGREGOR.-It would be the same with potato digging.

Tlhe Hon. E. G. BATH.-I have not seen a provision in the Bill which covers the position, but I must admit that I de> not understand the measure thoroughly.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-Under sub-clause (1) of clause 4-

"Salary or wages" means salary., wages, commission, bonus, or allowance :paId (whether at piece-work rates or otherWIse) to any employee as such, and includes-

(b) any payments made for labour only or SUbstantially for labour only to any person under such classes of contracts of service as are prescribed by the Governor in Council by Order published in the Government Gazette.

Then under sub-clause (2) of clause 4 the Governor in Council may specify certain classes of labour oontracts as being subject to the deduction. That is what the honorable member wanted to get at. There are contracts that are made nowadays in which, in effect, the job is done not for wages but for a total price, the return for the price being only labour, or substantially labour. That, I think, covers the position in regard to which the honorable member asked for an explanation.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East YaTra Province).-A very important quest~on has been raised by Mr. Bath. I thmk that clause 4, whioh has already been passed, might be recommit~ed and tightened up. When we examme cl~use 4 we find that it will have very lIttle operation because of the words II contracts of service." Under clause 4 payments made to a person under a contract of service may be declared by the ~overnor in Council to be payments whlCh are deemed to be salary or wages. But there is no phrase which has given rise to more litigation and trouble in the Courts than the phrase II contract of

service." The phrase /I contract of service" probably means a contract for work which ~ome person in the character of an employer has power to superintend and control. But if, for example, the potato digger to whom Mr. McGregor referred, said, /I I will dig that field of potatoes in my own way and in my own time, and for every day I spend on the work I will charge you £1 lOs." that man' would probably not be under a "contract of service," and the Commissioner of Taxes would probably have no power to bring him under this provision.

The Hon. M. MCGREGOR. - Potatoes are nearly always dug at a rate per bag.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-That lends my argument further weight. It seems to me that the provision may be readily evaded by any person who is reasonably astute, because if a person says, /I I will agree to dig that field of potatoes for £20, and I consider it will take me 20 days," I contend it is not a contract of service. The Commissioner may think otherwise. But the only thing he can declare as wages is money payable under contracts of service. Take a Slhearer. Suppose a man comes along and says, /I There are 3,000 sheep. I will shear them. I will bring my gang of men to shear the sheep at so much per head, and will do the wo·rk in my own way. As long as I shear these sheep, that is enough."

The Hon. H. 1. COHEN.-That is not enough in this country. You have to belong to the Australian Workers Union.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-I am testing the principle. It would be difficult to say, in the case I have oited, that that would be a contract of service. I think the answer to Mr. H. 1. Cohen's important interjection is this: That the man who employs the shearers is an independent contractor and would have to treat those men as employees. ~here is another case that might well be putthat of a journeyman painter. He says, /I I will work for you for £1 a day, or, if you like, we will get away from the income tax provisions. It will take me ten days to do the job, and I will do it for £10." In the second place, the painter would be an independent co1;1-tractor, and the Commissioner would have no power to declare him a person receiving wages. He can only declare money to be wages where it is paid


under a contract of service. Illustrations could be multiplied innumerably. I would suggest to the Minister the advisaJ:>ility of taking out the words "of servIce." We should bhen have this position: Wherever the Governor in Council thinks that. a particular class of contract, however it, may be formally described, is in truth and in fact a case where a man is a workman who should pay the tax, such a contract could be declared to be a wage contract. I am not at present going to move an amendment in that direction mvself. But I do suggest to the Mi~ister ~hat the Act might be defeated m respect of these definit,ions O'f " salary or wages," to which he has referred, and in respect to the declaration, which iB the corollary to that definition, under sub-clause (2) of olause 4. I am sure that Mr. H .. I. Cohen will agree with me that the words "contracts of service" very severely limit'the position., because if a man is doing work on contract of service, on that very hypoi;Jhesis he is already an employee.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (NorthEastern Province).-I want the position to be further elucidated. I have had several consultations with the Commis-, sioner of T'axes. In the vine-growing industry nearly all the vine-growers let the picking of grapes by oontract, and the contractor supplies the labour. I wanted to know exactly where I would be in connexion with a contract of this kind. I pay a lump sum. I know that the contractor has ,to pay a large portion of it away to the men working for him. Who would be responsible for putting stamps on the money so paid away? W-ould I have to take out the money from the specified price, OJ; would the contractor be responsjble for putttng stamps on the labourers' wage receipts ~ I was not satisfied, after a disoussion on this matter, as to who was responsihle. Leaving out the quest.ion o.f the value of the phrase " contracts of service" for the moment, we have here a concrete example of whajj is done in connexion wjth vineyard la.bour. Where I am responsi,ble for supervision I see that the stamps are placed on the receipts. But when I let a contract and the contractor provides the employees, I would like to know where the responsibility rests. I find some difficulty in ascertaining where the contractor is compelled to see that the

employees place the proper stamps on the wage receipts for their labour.

The Hon.' J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-The draftsman claims bhat the clause, as drawn, will cover all the points that have been raised, and that the Taxation Office will be able, speaking in the vernacular, to "catch" these people.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS. - I do !lOot think there is any question of "catching" people. I am not suggesting anyone is dishonest in these matters. It is all a matter of responsibility; I want to know who is responsible.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I can only give the opinion of the draftsman. Clause 4 is of a technical character, and I would be very loath to interfere with it without having first had a consultation with the draftsman.

The Hon. E. G. BATH (Nelson Province) .-May I suggest that clause 4 be postponed.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-It will have to be recommitted because it has already been passed.

The Hon. E. G. BATH.-I am not at all satisfied that we shall get at the ordinary contractor who has been mentioned. r think a number of contractors will evade the tax. We should know w hether the contractor O'r the employee win provide the stamps. It is a matter that should be IOooked into very closely.

The CHAIRMAN (the Hon. W. lL Edgar).-The honorable member can have clause 4 recommitted.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY (Melbourne IVet~t Province).-There is a p'oint in connexion with casual employment on whioh I am not too clear. Supposing a man works for a month at £5 a week, he will have earned £20. One pound will be deducted from his wages.' In the course of the year he may work for seve .. ral different employers, and yet his aggregate earnings for the year may not be more than £49. What provision is there for a refund to be made to a man in that position? It is obvious enough that if his earnings for twelve months are only £49, he should not pay any tax at all.

The Hon. J. P. JONEs.-IIe will get the amount back from the Commissioner of Taxes.

lnpome Tax Acts (26 OCTOBER) 1932.] Amendment Bill. 1861

The Han. E. G. BATH.-The man has to pay the unemployment relief tax now.

The Hon. J. H. DISNE,Y.-An enor~ous sum of money will be paid into the income tax office by casual elJ1ployee~ that will never be returned. It will be the same position as with the banks. It has been stated that there are enormous sums of money lying in every bank for which there are no claimants.

The Ron. C. H. A. EAGER.--Unc1aimed dividends.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-Yes.It will be very unjust to make the casual worker, who has to pay the unemployment relief tax, pay this tax also. One shilling in the £1 will be deducted from his earnings.

The Hon. A. M. ZWAR.-At the end of the year he will not have anything to pay.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-But he has to pay every week. A thrifty man pays into a savings bank all the money he can spare from his wages. He gets a little interest on his savings, and at t.he end of the year is taxed upon it.

The Hon. G. Y. DAVIs.-I should like to ascertain the numbers who do that.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-There are many. There are some very decent tradesmen who will include the interest in their income. It seems usual in connexion with taxation that the poorer the 'person is the heavier he has to pay in proportion, and that principle apparently is adhered to in the Bill.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-I do not see how you can say that about the measure.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-I think that the Minister of Public Works and Mr. Eager realize what I mean. Probably it is difficult to correct. If a large number of people have to be roped in, it is not fair that they should be penalized, and asked to pay double what they should pay.

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-WiII they be asked to do that?

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-The casual worker will have to pay money whjch he should not pay, and which he will not be able to get back.

The Han. Dr. HARRIS.-N o. That is not so. I understand that, under this system, there will be a teller in the T axation Office. When a man takes his book into that office, and shows that he has

paid more than necessary, the teller will make him a refund over the counter.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-If he has the same experience in endeavouring t() obtain a refund from the Taxation Office as many people whom I know, I think. that he will get sick and tired. It will cost him more than it is worth to get his. money. I think that some consideration should be given to such cases. It would be a most difficult matter for the em-· ployee hiluseI£ to find out how much he had actually paid in taxation, more particularly when he had worked for several employers.

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-lle would have his stamp-book.

The Hon. A. M. ZW AR (N orthr Eastern Provin.ce ).-1 think that Mr. Disney has raised a pertinent issue. A large number of casual hands are employed in the industry with which I am connected. They work for two, three, or four weeks, after which they go elsewhere, and obtain employment for perhaps a further two or three weeks. But over the 52 weeks of the year, they may have worked for only 15 to 20 weeks, and under this new system for everyone of those weeks they will pay taxation. At the end of the year, they may not be assessed for a tax, and the result would be that by means of the stamps sold to them by their various employers, they -would have paid into the Taxation Office moneys which they were not liable to pay. Casual labour in that way will be placed at a very great disadvantage, and some provision should be inserted in the measure to meet those cases.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-The Bill provides for a refund. Every man will receive an assessment.

The Hon. E. G. BATH.-The casual labourer will not receive an assessment.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Yes, he will. The Hon. E. G. BATH.-I do not think

so. . The Hon. J. P. JONE8.-Very well. He can go to the Taxation Office, and say, "I have paid taxation which I am not liable to pay," and he will be reimbursed in cash.

The Han. A. M. ZWAR.-A man might be at Timhuctoo at the end of the year.

1862 I~come Tax Acts [COUNCIL.] A tnendment Bill.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN (Melbourne North Province) .-It appears to be quite a wrong: principle that a person who should not be subject to taxation at all should have to pay to the Taxation Office any amount, even though he may have the right at the end of the year to demand repayment. What right has the Govern· m.ent to compel people who are not subject to taxation to pay to it a certain 9.mount., and then put those people to the trouble of coming in at the end of the year to ask for a refund, while in the meantime the Government has had the benefit of the use of money to which it is not entitled?

The :Hon. G. L. GouDIE.-Clause 12 will covel' that.

The :Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-If it .aoes, well and good. It has been said that a casual worker who may not be in work long enough to earn £50 for the year, will have to pay an instalment froUL week to week during the period that he is in employment, and, if necessary, he can apply for a re£und in due course. That is most unfair. This taxation is supposed to be for persons earning £50 a year or more, and why should a man who is not earning £50 a year advance money to the Government from week to week?

TheRon. C. R. A. EAGER.-Does not that show that this is a taxing Bill?

The Hon. E. L. KIERN AN.-It appears to be. It not only taxes people who are earning £50 a year 01' more, but it taxes every casual worker, even though he may earn only £10, £15, or £20 in the year. Therefore we are reaching a stage when we shall tax those whose yearly incomes are under £50.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-Subject to their getting it back if they apply. 1 am not justifying the proposal.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-It is wrong in principle.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-A man in the Mnllee would have difficulty in coming down to Melbourne to collect the refund.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-It is wrong that we should ask any man out of his meagre wages to advance money to the Government during the financial year, and then put him to the worry and expense--if he troubles about the matter at all--to apply to obtain his instalments back.

The Ron. G. L. GouDIE.-If the Oommissioner of Taxes is satisfied that no taxation is payable, he can issue a certificate on the spot.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-There should be some provision covering people who are 110t likely to be employed for a sufficiently long time to warrant their being taxed.

,The Ron. Dr. HARRls.-How do you know that ,they are not likely to be employed?

The Hon. E. L. KIERNIAN.-If such a provision is not made, we shall be altering the whole principle of income taxation. It would not be income taxation at all, but taxation on the weekly earnings of over £1 a week, however limited the period of employment. This House must not pretend that the people who are earning £50 a year are exempt from taxation, for that does not appear under the Bill as it now stands.

The Hon. J. P. JONEs.-How are you going to tell whether the man is a casual worker?

The Hon. E. L. KlIERNAN.-That is for the Taxation Office or the Government to say.

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-No one except the man himself can say that.

The'Ron. C. H ... A .. EAGER.-He cannot tell, either.

The Hon. J. P. J ONES.-If he claims to be a casual worker, he can go to the Commissioner and say, "I am not taxable. Give me a certificate."

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-H1S employer will be liable if he does not deduct the specified amount from his earnings.

The Hon. G. L. GouDIE.-That is not according to clause 12.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNlAN.-If he is employed for only three or four weeks, and during that time there is a failure to make a deduction in respect of the stamp tax, the employer will himself be liable.

The Ron. G. L. GOUDIE.-U nless the employee has a certificate of exemption.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-No matter how casual the work, the employers will see that they collect the amount from the employees, so that we shall reach a stage when a man who earns

Income Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Amendment Bill. 1863

anything from £10 to £50 a year will be paying income tax. The whole thing is objectionable.

The Hon. G. M. DAvls.-How much income tax would a man have to pay on £15 or £20 a year?

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-If he earned £6 in anyone week, he would have to pay ls. in the £1.

The Hon. G. M. DAvls.-Can you imagine anyone being paid £6 for one week and doing nothing for the rest of the year? A very improbable thing!

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-It might happen through sickness. .

The Hon. E. G. BATH (Nelson Province) .-Let us consider the position of the employers. An employer may give work to a man for a few days, and the wages may amount to, say, £5. Under the measure that employer, I take it, would be compelled to deduct certain amounts for stamps.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-He would be compelled to deduct 2s. 6d. from his employee.

The Hon. E. G. BATH.-That is so. The employer may give work to a man for only a limited time, and the wages may amount to £5. Is the employer compelled to deduct 2s. 6d. and ~ve the equivalent to the man in stamps?

The Hon. J. P. J ONES.-If the employee is not liable for taxation, he will have a certificate, and he will say to the employer, "Here is my certificate from the Commissioner setting out that I am not liable to any tax." In that case the employer will not deduct anything from his wages.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (NorthEastern Province).-I may be contributing something to make a position which is as clear as mud a little clearer. I take it that everyone in the State who is earning money will be supposed to render a return to the Taxation Office. The tax will be imposed on that return. When a man presents to the Taxation Office a book containing stamps that have been properly defaced, he will be given credit in respect of any income tax payable, and if no income tax is due the money will be returned.

The Hon. E. G. BATH.-To whom? The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-To the man

who has earned the money in respect of

which the stamps have been placed in his book. All that the employer has to do is to deduct the proper amount and provide the stamps, which are put in the book and defaced, practically under the supervision of the employer. The Taxation Office will receive income tax re-tUrns from all wage-earners, who will send either the book or leaves therefrom by post to the Taxation Office.

The Hon. E. G. BATH.-Suppose that an employee has not a book to present to his employer?

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-Under the measure the employee is expected to have a book.

The Hon. E. G. BATH.-But will he? The Hon. A. M. Z W AR.--Not neces

sarily. Certain employers have the right to send a cheque for the deductions made.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-That relates to what are known as "approved employers." The majority of employers will not be in the category of " approved employers," and they will be expected to assist in the administration of the measure.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-I suppose that 95 per cent. of employers will not be " approved."

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I suppose so. There may be about 600 employers who at the present time are " approved" by the Taxation Office. T'hose people are ca ptains of industry. They employ an average of some hundreds of people, and they are sufficiently financial to be trusted by the Commissioner of Taxes to render returns. But the remainder of the employers in the community will be compelled to see that stamps are defaced by the employees. If a man does not send in an income tax schedule the consequences are his own fault. If he does observe the law, an assessment will be sent to him in due course, and he will be required to pay the amount of the tax for which he is assessed, either in stamps which he has accumulated in the course of the financial year, or in cash.

T'he Hon. A. M. ZWAR.-Will that apply to the casual labourer ~

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-Yes, to everyone. If the casual labourer who has been placing stamps in his book in the course of his work with no matter how many employers during the year,

1864 Income Tax Acts [OOUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

desires to. obtain a refund on the ground that he has purchased more stamps t1han are equivalent to the amount of his tax, he can only obtain that refund by rendering a schedule. If he does not, he will be losing the amount which he has over-paid.

The Ho:n. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yar1'a P1'ovince) .-T'he further we go into this complicated matter of taxation the less clear becomes the whole situation. It is well to recognize that if this Bill becomes .an Act, every employer must deduct -from the wages of every employee sums ,.equivalent to. the rates set forth in this measure. He must continue to do so unless the employee produces a certificate from the Oommissioner of Taxes. I agree with almost every word that has been uttered by Mr. Disney and Mr. Kier:aan. The fact will be that under this legislation the Government will be raising a forced loan from casual labo.urers for a period not exceeding one year. These wo.rkers, on filing a return in the ordinary way, will be able to obtain a refund; but without doubt a very large sum will never be reclaimed. I do not see how we can exclude casual workers, because, until the financial vear has expired, we cannot tell whethe~ or not they will be taxable.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY (M elbourne TVest Province) .-1 think hono,rable members agree with me tihat this Bill is most obnoxious. They do not approve of it, ye'~ they are supportlng it. I suggest that the best way to get over the difficulties associated with this proposal to bring the casual worker for the first time into the field of income taxation is to exempt incomes of £100 a yea.r.

The Hon. IV1. McGREGoR.-That would not exclude the c.asual worker. I know of suoh men who have earned £100 in three months digging potatoes.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-And what about the slaughtermen who earn 30s. a day over a brief period ~

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY.-At any rate, we must admit that we shall be unjustly penalizing the workers. I know that the unofficial Leader does not like thi!!l Bill.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I dO' not. The Hon. J. H. D1SNEY.,..-Then why

Bupport it ~ The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-It is portion

of the Government's financial emergency legislation.

The Ho.n. J. H. DISNEY.-I think that the view is that this Bill wiI] bring into the field of taxation a whole lot of new income earners, and that, to that extent, o.tlher people may hope to obtain a reduction of their taxation. I contend that the casual worker, the man who is earning only a small income; will he compelled to pay mo.re than his fair share. However, I realize that it is useless for me to argue.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN (Melbourne No'rth Provi'lice).-I was interested to hear the . explanation of the unofficial Leader, and I agree with it to a great extent. But we must realize that in this Bill we are adopting a new principle-the taxation of every wage-earner in 11he community who earns £1 a week or more. Hitherto only those persons who have earned over a certain sum per annum have been required to send to the Taxation Office schedules of their income. We are now reqUIrIng every wage-earner in Victo.ria to submit an income tax schedule, for, if he does not do so, it will be impossible for him to obtain a refund in the event of his taxation by means of these stamps being greater than the amount due by him. I have these objections: Firstly, the Government is going to make a forced loan from every wage-earner, no. matter how low may be his income. Secondly, every wage-earner will be compelled to! furnish a return, because if he fails to do so the Government will ret.ain some of his money to which it is not ~ntitled. This is altogether new. In the past, there has been a minimum o.f income belo.w which people have had no responsibility to the Oommissioner of Taxes. Now, if any person earns £1 in one week from one employer he will be required to send in a schedule.

The Hon. C. H. A. EA~ER.-·Would you suggest that when the worker who has over-paid his tax gets his money hack he should be given it wit~ In

terest at Savings Bank rate ~ The Hon. E,. L. KIERNAN.-He

would be entitled to it. The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-On the othel'

hand, if a taxpayer is behind with his payments to the Oommissioner he IS

charged 8 per cent. interest. The Hon. E. L. K1ERNAN.-Quite

so.

Income Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Amendment Hill. 1865

The Hon. H. H. SMITH (},lelbournt; J>"ovince) .-It was found in f;outh Australia, at. the end of the first financial year in which this instalment system had been put into force, that on the basis of requiring the worker to pay Is. in the £1 a week an average of 7 ~ per cent. had to be returned bv the Government. The authorities in VSouth Australia have now adopted a plan whereby the amount required to be paid is only 6d. in the £1 per week, and it is expected that only a very small sum will have to be refunded. We all know t.hat this is a bad tax, but we have to agrep. to it because of existing qircumstances. We hope that these circumst.ances will soon alter for the better, hut as t.hings are, I do not see how we can avoid taxing the casual worker as well as everyone else who is earning income.

The Hon. J. H. DISNEY. - If you make tlhe taxation too oppressive the worker will not work at all; he will take the dole.

The Hon. H. H. SlVIITH.-Then we shall be unable to raise sufficient money by way of taxation to pay him sustenance, and he will starve.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Ya1'1'a Pro1:Jince).-I put this position to the Minister in charge of the Bill : Suppose that a workman pays in the. oourse of the financial ye_ar £8 in tax. At the end of the year, after the man has deducted a sum for life insurance, he will not be uaxable at all, and he will be entitled to the £8. The Government never had any right to the £8 under the Income Tax Act. It was pointed out earlier that this measure does not impose any tax at all. If the man gets his £8 back, I do not see why he should not be in the same position as if he had put it in the Savings Bank. I think it would be well to insert words in the clause providing that in the circumstances described a person shall be entitled to interest on the money at the current rate paid by the Savings Bank on amounts up to £100. Such a provision would produce equity, and remove the sense of injustice that would rankle in the mind of a man who had paid a sum of money that he really should not have paid.

The clause was agreed to. Olause 7-(Duty of employer to Issue

stamps).

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (N orthEastern Province) .-In my scond-reading speech, I mentioned the difficulties of captains of industry ill placing appropriate stamps in books, and seeing that they were defaced. I have an amendment to relieve the large employers who are approved by the Taxation Office of that condition. I move-

That the following sub-clause be added to the clause:-

Provided that the provisions of this sub-section shall not apply in the ca.se of any employees who receive such stamps as aforesaid from any employer who has 01.>tained the authority, in writing, of the Commissioner to deliver to his employees tax stamps marked in such manner as the Commissioner approves.

The Hon. J. P. JONEs.-I accept the amen dmen t.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN (J.11elboul'ne North p,t'ovince).-I am entirely opposed to the amendment. I cannot see why large employers should be exempted in this way. The employer with a large number of employees who will have to sign stamps, has facilities for dealing with such a matter. A small employer would have comparatively greater difficulty in complying with the requirements than a large employer. Why should we give special concessions to a large employer and deny them to others?

The Hon. A. M. ZWAR.-Why not leave the matter to the discretion of the Commissioner of Taxes ~

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-"That I propose is being done now.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-To a limited extent, but we are adopting a new principle.

The Hon. A. M. ZWAR.-No. It is in operation under the Stamps (Unemployment Relief) Act.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-I am opposed to making an exception of big firms like the Myel' Emporium.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-Do you expect Mr. Myer to lick the stamps for over 2,000 employees?

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-Such a firm can see to the matter as easily as a small employer with a staff of 20. The employee of a large firm is paid his salary just as quickly as the employee of a small firm.

1866 Income Tax Acts [COUNCIL.] A mendment Bill.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-This Bill says that the employer must see that every stamp is defaced.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-Yes. The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-Do you expect

Mr. Myer to stand and see that every stamp is defaced?

'The Hon. E. L .KIERNAN.-No; but he has men qualified to attend to the matter.

The Iron .. Dr. HARRls.-The amend-ment gives him power to delegate his authoritv to them.

The lion. E. L. KIERNAN.-The em-ployee has to initial the stamps. .

The B:on. H. H. SMITH.-I t takes a big n.rm all day to pay the employees now.

The I[on. E. L. KIERNAN.-No. A man with a staff of 20 is expect'3d to see that each employee init,ials and defaces the stamp.

The lIon. J. P. J ONES.--N o. A man with a staff of ten or twenty employees can be an " approved employer."

The lIon. E. L. KlERN AN.-Is the Minister going to extel1d the principle so widely?

The Ron. J. P. J ONES.-The amendment is clear. It refers to-

Any employer who has obtained authority in writing of the Commissioner to deliver to his employees tax stamps marked in such manner as the Commissioner approves.

The Hon. E,. L. KIERNAN'.-The Minister surely does not intend to lead the House to believe that the Commissioner of Taxes 'will give general exemption to all employers.

The :Hon. J. P. JONEs.-He can give it to all who apply and whom he approves.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-I am sure that is not the intention of the Taxation Office. This amendment is intended primarily for the large employer.

The Hon. J. P. J ONEs.-Small empJoyers can also get the concession proVIded for.

The Hon. E. L. KIERN AN.-A large employer will have a sufficient staff to deal with 500 employees as expeditiously as a man who employs only five or twenty. Xf it is a good principle for one, it is good for another.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-My amendmcn t. is wide enough to include everyone.

:The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-Then . there will hardly be any need for compelling the defacing of stamps.

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-The Commissioner of Taxes will be the judge.

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-The unofficial Leader knows that the provision will apply only to large employers.

The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, was adopted.

The remaining clauses were agreed to. The Bill was reported to the House

with amendments. On the motion of the Hon. J. P.

J~NES (Minist~r of Public Works) the BIll was recommItted for the consideration of clause 4.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Ya1'ra Province ).-Paragraph (b) of sub-clause (1) of this clause sets out 'that " a salary or wages" includes-any payments made for labour onlv or sub· stantially for labour only to any person under suc.h classes of contracts of service as are pi'esCribed by the Governor in Council by Order published in the Government Gazette.

I move-That the words "of service" be omitted.

J.Jater I shall move a consequential amendment. ~he Hon. H. I. COHEN.-Will you ex

plaIn why you propose to omit those words?

The Hon. C. H. A. EAG ER.-The reason for the amendment is that which .I stated a few moments ago. ·If the provision is limited to the prescribed classes of contracts of service, it is doubtful whether the definition of salary or wages will be extended. I should think it proper to allow the Governor in Council to prescribe money paya.ble under contracts in such a way as to make it wages, although in point of form it is not wages but in sub~tance it is. In that "ray, th~ measure wIll apply to workmen who take work at a lump sum price, or in other ways described by honorable members.

The Hon. D .. L. McNAMARA (Melbourne East Province).-I raise the const.~tutional poin~ whethe;r this is a taxing BIll or a machInery BIll. I think that th.e amendment, if it means anything, WIdens the range over which the tax could be collected, and therefore imposes an increased burden on the people.

The CHAIRMAN (the Hon. W. Ii. Edga~).-I ha.ve not regarded this Bill as a taxing Bill, but as a machinery Bill.

Income Tax Acts [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Amendment Bill. 1867

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (N orth" Eastern Province).-I am inclined ~o take the same view as :M:r. McNamara In

regard to the amendment. I know t~at this measure is not regarded as a taxmg Bill, but as a machinery one, but I should say that if the House makes an amendlllent which will increase the burden on any section of the commu~ity, it should be done by way of suggestIOn.

The Hon. D. L. McNAMARA.-The House could not increase the burden by a suggested amendment. It could reduce the burden in that way. .

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I submIt that if the words proposed to be omitted by Mr. Eager are omitted, the a~bit ?f taxation provided for in another BIll wIll be widened, and therefore the burden on the people will be increased.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN (Melbourne Province).-I suggest ~hat the Committee should accept, wlth?ut compun?" tion, the ruling of the Chall'man. on thIS point. Why should we be astute to cut down the privileges of the Hou~e J Mr. McNamara did his duty by ralsmg t~e point, and t~e ChairID:an has done his duty by givmg a ruhng. If anoth~r place takes exception to what we d?, let .It do so' but do not let us be astute In rals" ing difficulties in the way of this House.

The Hon. E. G. BATH (Nelson Province) .-1 am not sure who ~hould make the deductions from wages In the case of contracts. I employ a contractor to shear my sheep, and he employs other men to do the job. Am I to deduct money for the tax from the amount that I pay him or will he deduct it from the wages that he pays the men whom he employs? Who will collect the tax?

The HOll. O. H. A. EAGER.-A fine legal point.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN (Mel~ourn.e P?'ovince) .-1 foresee some danger In t~lS matter and it is that it might resul~ In the G~vernment raising double tax~tlOn. If the words "of service" are omItted, the independent contractor would be the person earning salary or wages, and the deduction would be made by the person who employed him to do the job. Then the independent contractor would have to see that each and everyone of his em" ployees paid the tax. I do not know whether Mr. Eager wants this duplication of taxation.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Leave it to the Governor in Council.

The Hon. H. 1. COHEN.-Why should we leave it to the Governor in Oouncil? Oannot we give a decision on the matter?

The amendment was negatived. The clause was agreed to. The Bill was reported to the House

without further amendment, and the report was adopted.

On the motion of the Hon. .J. P. J ONES (Minister of Public Works) the Bill was read a third time.

INCOME TAX BILL.

The debate (adjourned from October 25) on the motion of the Hon. J. P. ,J ones (Minister of Public Works) for t h0 second reading of this Bill was re" sumed.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (NorthFJastern Province) .-1 noticed that when the Minister was explaining the Bill he treated very tenderly that portion which relates to the levying of a sp~cial income tax. The first portion of the measure deals with the re-enactment of the existing rates of tax, but the latter portion contains provision for the imposition of a special tax levied on exactly the sa~e con" ditions as the unemployment rehef tax. The whole income of the individual will be subject to the special tax without deductions. The rate of tax, which will be on a graduated scale, will be imposed on the gross income of the taxpayer, and it is in relation to this that the Bill which we have just passed will apply. While the Government is reducing' the rate of unemployment relief tax by 10 per cent., it is increasing the rate of income tax. It seems rather a left"handed way of doing business to say that the unemployment relief tax will be reduced by 10 per cent. The Government is really placing 10 per cent. of the unemployment relief tax revenue into the Oonsolidated Revenue. If honorable members vote for this Bill, they will be voting for the imposition of a special income tax without deductions. It is estimated that the special tax will yield £232,000.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East YarrlJ Province).-I think it is a great pity that when a measure imposing the rate of in" come tax is passed, it does not show the


ultimate rate of tax in one figure. If one examines this Bill, one finds first that the existing rate of tax is to be re-enacted, and in the next clause 'proyides that it is to be added to by 10 per cent. You then go on to another clause, and find that that aggregate of the original 100 per cent. plus 10 per cent. is to 'be added to by a further percentage. Then you find what the unofficial Leader just referred to, namely, an additional tax of a different kind. The Government in putting forward the Bill does not like to state in plain black and white the ultimate rate of tax, but I think it should do so. I do not see the good of saying that the rate of tax is first of all so much, and then saying in another clause "plus 1.0 per cent.," then in another clause that it is plus another percentage, and then that it is plus a special tax. Ninety-nine taxpayers out of 100 do not understand the true position; they cannot check their assessments, and are very dissatisfied. There is no need for this cumbrous method except that it covers up the fact that the tax is excessive. We are told that it is necessary to nass the measure to assist in balancing the Budget. The Government is entitled to very great credit for the way in which it is attempting to balance the Budget, but I think we must never forget that increasing taxation is not the proper way to balance the Budget. Unfortunately, the net result of the legislation we are lookinp' at to-night and other legislation that w~ shall be looking at in a night or two hence-this Bill and the unemployment relief taxation measure-is that the amount of taxation will practically be the same in bulk as at present. There is no substantial difference in the rates. Having made that statement, I should say that if a taxpayer assumes that, because there is an additional tax of 10 per cent. and a further additional tax of 7 t per cent., he will only pay 17-1 per cent. additional tax, he is wrong, because the further 7 i per cent. is calculated on £110. The thing mounts up, and that is why the statements in the legislation are very misleading.

There is another point I should like to mention. The Bill relates, not only to income from personal exertion, but to income from property,

Iron. a. H. A. Eager.

including income from interest on mortgages. At present, a person who receives inco~by way of interest on mortgages is s~~t to extremely great hardships. He is subject to a reduction of 22! per cent. on the interest, which, apart from an Act of Parliament, he is entitled to receive, and by mistake in the first place he was made subject to a super tax of 7 i per cent., later increased to 10 pel' cent. by the Commonwealth Government. You, M.r. President, may think, "What has that to do with the Bill?" but I would suggest that we are here dealing with income from property, and cannot dissever our income tax legislation from the Federal legislation. The two ditlerent sets of legislation endeavour to work in with one another. For instance, the Federal Act takes income from dividends from companies as taxable, and, therefore, the Victorian Act does not. The Premiers' Conference is at present sitting in the precincts of this Chamber, and I would earnestly suggest to the Minister in charge of the Bill that he make a renewed effort with all those Premiers, including the Prime Minister and Treasurer of the Commonwealth, to have the 10 per cent. super tax 011

interest on mortgages remitted, in' order that the mortgagee will not suffer a reduction of 32i per cent. on his income. I have no objection to a mortgagee paying the ordinary rates of income tax apart from the super tax, but when he has been made subject to a reduction of 22i per cent. and a further super tax of 10 per cent., he has lost onethird of his income apart from the ordillary State and Federal income taxes which have to be met. .

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-Did not the Scullin Government promise to relieve the mortgagees?

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-They did not make any promise enforceable at law, but I believe Mr. Scullin did sayI do not wish to put it a bit beyond what I believe-that he would favorably consider a remission of the 10 per cent. supel' tax w hen he was next considering the Budget proposals of the Commonwealth Government. But, unfortunately for the taxpayers in this point-I do not refer to other political matters-Mr. Scullin was not in power when this matter came to be considered.

Income [26 OCTOBER] 1932.] Tax Bill. IR69

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-When the Commonwealth Government put on the extra 10 per cent., the taxpayer thought it would be 10 per cent. on the tax payable. Instead of that, it was 10 per cent. on the income. That was a greater crime to the taxpayer.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-I quite agree with the unofficial Leader that what the taxpayer thought when the Bill was going through Parliament, after it was enacted, and until he received his assessment, was that the 10 per cent. super tax was simply an additional 10 per cent. on his existing tax. Of course, it was not so. It was 10 per cent. on the totat1 amount of his income, and that was a very great surprise to him. However, that is an act of the Commonwealth Parliament, and we cannot help that. The Minister in charge of the ·Bill has at various times been most assiduous in trying to get the 10 per cent. super tax on interest on mortgages removed, and I know that on two occasions, in response to questions p~t by myself, he stated that he did discuss the matter with the Prime Minister and in conference, and that certain statements had been made to him concerning the matter. I would urgently request the Minister to renew his representations on behalf of the people of Victoria to the present Prime Minister and Treasurer of the Commonwealth, and to ask him whether, in view of the very great burden put upon mortgages, he cannot remove the super tax on interest on mortgages. That would have a very strong reflex action on a matter that is troubling another place very much at the present time, namely, the relief of mortgagors. There is, perhaps, no question more pressing at the present time in the domestic affairs of Victorian citizens than relief from taxation, and if we could get a remission of the 10 per cent. super tax on interest on mortgages, the general position in regard to moratorium and mortgage relief would be very largely eased.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Frank Clarke). -The honorable member is straying very far from the Bill. .

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-I think the Bill should be supported, but I consider that income tax Bills should be made simple, instead of being clouded with many clauses and words.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS (Gippsland P1·ovince).-I should Ii ke to support the remarks of the previous speaker with I'egard to this Bill. An ordinary person after reading it carefully through would have a very vague idea of what it pro·vided. There are so many different ways adopted in the Bill of providing for taxation that one gets very mixed on the subject, and it is impossible for one to realize until one gets an assessment what tax must be paid. I am sure that 99 per cent. of the people who have to pay taxation would not understand this measure. I thoroughly agree that taxation Bills should be made as simple as possible, so that anyone may understand what is provided. If the special tax is a percentage tax on the gross income instead of the percentage being taken on the amount of the assessment at the old rates, it becomes a very heavy burden. What has been said with regard to the 10 per cent. super tax on interest on mortgages has a very great bearing on the question of the interest to be charged on mortgages. I think: that in this Bill we are im posing an increase of tax on gl'OS8 income similar to the method adopted in the Act to which objection has been taken.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Frank Clarke). -The honorable member is discussing Commonwealth taxation, is he not ~

The H.on. G. M. DA'VIS.-No; I am discussing the matter to which the unofficial Leader referred-the rates in the latter part of the Bill. The additional rates are on the gross income of the individual without any deductions being allowed. I shoul~ ,say that this will create a difficulty in the way of getting a general reduction in interest on private mortgages. The Government should give us a clear explanation of the incidence of the tax, instead of placing the proposals before us in pieces, as it were, so that no one can understand them. I suppose we shall have to pass the Bill, but I consider that the measure should be drafted in a simple way, so that the people may understand the rates of taxation they have to pay.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH ( .. lle7bourne Province).-The Government are supposed to have taken 10 per cent. off the unemployment relief taxation, but in the


assessment of income for the purposes of the special tax most of the ordinary deductiOlis are disallowed. There is one matter I should like to bring under the notice of the Minister. Anyone who invests his money in property is charged on the income from that property double the rate of tax that applies to a similar amount derived from personal exertion. I have never been able to understand why, if a man has invested his money in property and left it, perhaps, to his widow and children, double the amount of tax that applies in the case of personal exertion should be charged. There ought to be a higher rate charged in respect of property income, but it should not be double the rate that applies to personal exertion income. At present, where the ratt; in respect of personal exertion income is 7 d. in the £1, in the case of property income it is Is. 2d. in the £1, and where in the case of personal exertion income it is 10d. in the £1, in the case of property income it is Is. Sd. in the £1. Then the super tax has to be added. I consider that Mr. Eager was right in bringing forward that matter, and 1 hope the Leader of the House will bring it under the notice of the Premiers' Conference. "\Vho is going to invest his money in mortgages in view of all that has been done under the Financial Emergency Act? How can a man hope to get his money back? If a man invests his money in Comm,onwealth or State loans, the State does not get any taxation from that source. People are deterred from investing money on mortgage. A. case came under my notice where there was a sum of £5,000 to be invested. There was some talk about investing it on mortgages. I had to advise the investment of it in a Oommonwealth loan. That is a good thing for the Commonwealth, but it is the kind of thing that is holding up industry in this State. This Bill has been drawn up very astutely. The burden of taxation is relieved in one way, only to be put back in another. Oertain deductions that used to be made are not to be made now. I cannot understand why the measure should have been drawn up in this way unless it was for the purpose of getting extra taxation. I hope the Ministry will reconsider the matter.

The Hon. H. I. COHEN (Melbourne Province).-I quite agree with Mr.

Eager that it is about time the Government ··made an attempt to consolidate these various charges in order that we might know. quite clearly the precise amoun t we are paying in income tax. The only gleam of hope I can see in the matter is this: that the various forms of 1I0menclature used in connexion with these taxes will soon be used up. We have an ordinary tax, an additional tax, u further additional tax, a special tax, and au emergency tax. I do not know what they are going to call the next. It would be an advantage to know precisely where we stand. I looked up the percentages of taxes payable by a married taxpayer with two children, with a view of getting some light on the matter of taxation, but it relates only to a particular class of taxpayer. There may be married taxpayers with two children who are allowed no exemptions whatever. The table I have in my hand is an interesting one, because it shows that, in the case of one particular class of persons, the taxpayer is paying no less than six times the amount in unemployment relief tax as is levied upon him, by the Federal Income Tax Department. It was a matter of surprise to me, and I think to other honorable members. The comparative figures are :-Federal income tax £1 Is. Sd., and unemployment relief tax, with a deduction of 10 per cent., £6 6s. Ud. In addition there is the payment of £2 lOs. 10d. to the State for income tax, including the proposed emergency tax, so t.hat his whole taxation is £9 19s. 5d. Those figures relate to a man with an income of £400. Of course, in relation to that particular person, we could, by a simple sum of arithmetic, ascertain the percentage he is paying on that £400. But there are so many varied and complicated cases that it is impossible to ascertain in the majority of them exactly wha~ is. being naid. If there were 11 consohdatIOn ot these various taxes into one tax, we should know more precisely where we stand, and we should be better able to make a comparison of income t,ax in this State with income tax paid in other States. It is a curious thing that it is claimed by certain persons that Victorians are less taxed than are persons in other States. The contrary is averred by a great number of' other people. It

Unemployment Relief [26 OCTOBER} 1932.] (Taxation Bill. 1871

is because of the complicated nature of the taxation that we are not able to arrivt: at a precise deduction upon this point.


committed. Clause 1 was agreed to. Olause 2 (Declaration of rates of

duties of income tax (other than unemployment relief tax) for the year ending 30th June, 1933).

The Hon. D. L. McNAMARA (Melbourne East Province).-This clausr provides, inter alia) t.hat-

(g) In the case of any person (not being a company) whose taxable income within the meaning of this paragraph exceeds One hun· dred pounds, there shall be payable (and Whether or not in his case th.ere is also payable the tax, additional tax, and further addi· tional tax, or any of them chargeable under the preceding provisions of this section), a special tax on the whole of the said taxable income of such person as hereinafter provided, &c.

I move-That it be a suggestion to the Legislative

Assembly that they make the following amendment in the Bill:-

Clause 2, page 5, line 32, omit" One hun· dred pounds," and insert "Two hundred pounds."

I wish to point out that in this measure for the first time in a great many years there is an attempt to reduce the statutory exemption on income tax below £200. While it is suggested that the reduction of the exemption to £100 will bring a great number of additional taxpayers under the income tax proposals, it is levying taxation on a class of people who can ill afford to pay income tax at all. One can understand that, with an exemption of £200-which is reducible as the amount of income rises-and with other exemptions, their burden is not a heavy one. But once we get below that figure, we do impose burdensome taxation which can ill be carried by married taxpayers with family responsibilities.

The suggested amendment was negatived.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province).-Before we leave clause 2, I should like to record a protest against the introduct,ion of such methods of calculation as those proposed for the new emergency tax-disregarding t.he exemptions and deductions existing in the Income Tax Act at present in respect

to children under sixteen years, life assurance, and so on. I am quite certain that, from the point of view of the Taxation Office, the calculation of an emergency tax on a different basis from the ordinary income tax, will lead to additional work and trouble. The taxpayer will be hopelessly confused, and • from t.he point of view of the merits of the proposal, I dO' not see why the basis of income tax should not also be a proper basis for the emergency tax.


The Bill was reported to the House without amendment, and the report was adopted.

On the motion of the Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works), the Bill was read a third time.

UNEMPLOYMENT HELIEF (TAXATION) BILL.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister ef Public Works).-I move-


This is a Bill to provide further moneys for the relief of unemployment, and to limit the duration of the Stamps (Unemployment Relief) Acts, and for other purposes. The Bill, in effect, re-enacts in principle and in point of taxation, an Act agreed to by the House last year, except that it provides for a 10 per cent. I'eduction. I do not think there is anything contentious in the measure at all, but I will rapidly run through an explanatory statement of it. The question of unemployment relief is one that I need not make any reference to, because, Ull

fortunately, it has been with us so long that we are well acquainted with all the factors relating to it. The administration or exnendi ture side has been already before the Oouncil under the Unemployment Relief (Administration) Bill, so that the proposals contained in this Bill deal only with the imposition and conditions of the actual tax. The Government proposes to make a reduction of 10 per cent. on the existing rates of tax. An amount of £1,883,000 will be raised, of which £1,700,000 will be allocated to the relief of unemployment during the current year, and £183,000 WIll be annlied towards meeting commitments entered into prior to the 30th of June last. When the unemployment. relief tax was

1872 Unemployment Relief [COUNCIL.] (Taxation) Bill.

imposed last year, an increase of 50 per cent. on the then. existing rates was made, no1i only to' provide for the loss of tax on aecount· of reduced incomes, but also to raise an additiOonal £328,00.0, which was required to :make refunds tOo taxpayers. That, of course, does not arise this year. It is estimated that if

• the existing rates are re-enacted an amount of £2,016,800 will be ,raised. This amount is arrived at as foUows:-The "carryover" from the pre-

vious year £678,000 1932-33 assessments at the existing

rates payable in the cmrent year 1,338,000

£2,016,800

As t.he proposed reduction Oof 10· per cent. in the rates applies only to the 1932-33 assessments, the amount of £1,338,000 will be reduced to £1,2.04,2.0.0, soo that the amOount to be raised at the reduced rates of tax will be:-The "carryover" from the pre-

vious year £678,800 1932-33 assessments at the existing

rates, less 10 per cent. ... 1,204,200

£1,883,000

The Bill. is divided into two parts-Part I. deals with the unemployment relief tax on the returns basis-the same conditions as last year, and Part II. contains the prO'visiOons fo,r repealing the Stamps (Unemployment Relief) Act at present in fOorce. It will be realized after the explanatiOon I gave with reg~rd to the Income Tax Act Amendment Bill that it is proposed to discontinue the present system of SOl-called wages stamjps fo'r unemployment relief tax purposes, but enlarge the machinery to make it a collection system for both taxes--income tax and. unemployment relief tax-which will be separately ,assessed and the notices issued simultaneously to every taxpayer, based on Ihis income to the 30th of June, 1932, for which he should have already lodged a return. Clause 2 of the Bill combines this Bill as one with the IncOome Tax Acts, that is, for all the purposes of machinery and issuing assessments, coUection, and enforcement of payment, &C. Clause 3 i~ the de:finition clause, which is the same as last year. The principal definition is tha1i of (( taxable income," which is praotically the gross income after allowing the expenses of earning it. Subclause (3) incO'rporates the !schedule

lIon. J. P. Jones.

which sets out the rates of tax. Clause 4 is the charging section imposing the tax fo'r the financial year ending the 30th of June, 1933. Sub-clause (2) further incorporates this BilJ with the Income Tax Acts. Sub-clause (3) makes liable tOo tax every person whose taxable income is not less than £52. This js, of course, the same provision as that included in the Unemployment Relief Acts now in fO'rce. Sub-clause (4) exempts companies, thus making it an individual tax. Clause 5 proposes t.hat di vidends shall form part Oof the assessable income. Paragraph (a) of section 5 of the original Unemployment Relief Act (No. 3866) of June, 1930, removed dividends from the exempt list, thus making them taxable, and in sub-section (3) of section 3 of the same Act it was provided that dividends received by any person ordinarily resident in Victoria from any company whether registered in Victoria Oor not s:hould be deemed to form part of the gross income. The present position, therefOore, is as to residents in Victoria that they are taxable on dividends from any company, and as tOo non-residents that they are taxable on dividends from a company with a head Ooffice in Victoria. This clause has been designed to express mO're clearly the intention O'f previous Acts.

Paragraph (a) of clause 5 renders all dividends paid by cO'mpanies registered in Victoria subject to tax. This is the natural result of having omitted the exemption section 21(e) from the Income Tax Act for the purpose of unemployment relief tax. Paragraph (b) of clause 5 renders residents of Victoria liable in respect of dividends paid by exVictorian companies. This is specifically provided for in the Ooriginal unemployment relief tax Act as already mentioned in the second proviso to sub-section (3) of section 3 of Act No. 3866, June, 1930, and as amended by paragraph (c) Oof sub-section (1) of section 4 of Act No. 3948. The principle has been adopted for unemployment relief tax purposes that all dividends should be taxable as the Qompan~es are exempt, and this olause merely sets out the position definitely.

Olause 6 requires the lodging of returns from those persons who for the twelve months ended the 30th of J nne, 1932, received more than £50 income. These returns are now lodged (or in the course of

Unemployment Relief [26 OCTOBER, 1932.J (Taxation) Bill. 1873

lodging), and the total number of returns received to date is 435,000. Clause 7 further defines" taxable income" as apart from the taxable income mentioned in the Income Tax Acts. This is mainly a reenactment of last year's provision. Certain exemptions are withdrawn in paragraph (a) of sub-clause (1), and certain concessional deductions are withdrawn in paragraph (b) of sub-clause (1). The only difference from the previous year's taxable income is that exemption of interest from Victorian stock and debel1-tures and absentees' income from municipal loans, and also absentees' interest from Savings Bank stock is now maintained. _ Paragraph (b) of sub-clause (1) is a reenactment of the previous year's provi·· sions except that section 41 is now qualified to exempt absentee beneficiaries' in·· comes from Savings Bank stock and debentures. Sub-clause (2) is a re-enactment of last year's provision incorporating a reciprocal arrangement with the Government of New Zealand, exempting seamen from unemployment relief taxation in Victoria.

Clause 8 requires the Commissioner tu issue a notice of assessment, and provides that the tax shall be due and payable on the date shown thereon. The notice is to be In the prescribed form, and posted to the taxpayer in a closed envelope. Clause 9 provides for the assessment of tax1?ayers leaving Vic:toria. A similar provIsion is in the ordi-llary Income Tax Bill. Sub-clauses (1) and (2) of clause 10 are similar to each other, except that sub-clause (1) of clause 10 refers to the first year of operation of the tax, and sub-clause (2) to the second year. They continue the liability under the two preceding years' Acts to such persons as were then liable, notwithstanding that the salary received be less than-£312 per annum. They are merely machinery provisions. Clause 11 deals with refUlld!:! for the same two years, and clause 12 is the usual clause referring to the duration of the preceding provisions. This part is to continue in force until the 31st of December, 1933, in the same way as the ordi· nary income tax, but liability under the Act with regard to assessment, payment, offences, &c., of those persons who have not fully complied with the law will, of r,ou~se, continue as if this part did Hot expIre.

Part II. deals with the disposal of tht:l stamps tax Acts at present in force. That system operates until the 5th of November. That date is being altered to coincide with the date on which the measure providing for the payment by instalments will come into operation. The effect of this is that the old system of wages stamps as provided by the relevant stamps tax Act will lapse, and its place under the scheme of taxation will be taken by the provisions set out in the instalments measure, and the fact that all taxpayer!.-> will now be assessed for their actual tax on the returns lodged at the Taxatioll Office. As provided under the transitory provisions of the instalments tax Bill, the amount of tax paid under the stamps tax system from the 10th of July last will be credited to tax assessed under this Bill and under the Income Tax Bill. It is, therefore, necessary to provide as in paragraph (b) of sub-clause (2) of clauFlc ] 5 that the receipts for these wages stamps shall be retained until the 30th of ,June, 1933.

Clause 13 simply connects this Bill ·wit.lt the Stamps Act 1928 and unemployment relief Acts, and sub-clause (3) provides for its coming into operation. This i~ involved with the present expiry date of the wages stamps Act, the 5th of N 0-

vember next. It is most desirable that there be no break in the continuity of the system of deductions from wages where it has been once instituted as in the case of the wages stamps Act for those persons receiving less than £312 per annum.

Clause 14 is a special provision to ex· empt unemployed persons who are working for sustenance being liable to the unemployment relief stamps system, and paragraph (a) of sub-clause (1) of clause 15 is to further extend the operation of the Stamps (Unemployment Relief) Act, that is the wages stamps system, until the coming into operation of this measure, which will be on a proclaimed date.

Paragraph (b) of sub-clause (1) of clause 15 is merely a drafting amendment, and sub-clause (2) authorizes the Comptroller of Stamps to COll

tinue to issue unemployment relief duty stamps until a notified date. Paragraph (b) of sub-clause (2) requires employers to retain the receipts for wages stamps at present in use until

1874 Unemployment Relief [COUNCIL.] (Taxation) Bill.

the 30th of June, 1933. This is for the protection of the employee who may require the Commissioner's certificate of exemption from the instalments system, and must produce a certificate from his employer as to the amount of wages stamps paid under the old system.

Except for the head note the schedule is exactly the same as that containing the existing rates of tax. I have already explained the position with regard to the amount of tax to be collected, and the head note sets out the Government's proposal, which is that the present schedule should be used for the calculation of the tax, but the tax to be assessed shall be less 10 per centum of the amount so calculated. Otherwise tli(; schedule is merely a re-enactment.

Although the explanation of the Bill is very lengthy, it is after all very largely machinery, and endeavours to mould together, and, so to speak, get into one track, unemployment relief taxation and ordinary income tax. While the measure may look rather formidable, in effect it does no more than re-enact the unemployment relief taxation as well as provide for the 10 per cent. reduction. I take it that honorable members are sufficiently acquainted with the general principles of unemployment relief taxation to make it unnecessary for me to deliver any lengthy speech on the subject, anI I shall be very glad to answer any questions ill Commi ttee, where I hope the Bill will be rapidly taken.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (North-Eastern Province).-I do not intend to offer any opposition to the passage of this measure. Any small alterations which it makes are due to our having passed the measure relating to the collection of income tax and unemployment relief tax. The schedule, whirh I think this House was responsible for placing in our unemployment relief tax legislation, governs the assessment of the tax under the proposed re-enactment. I have no reason to contest the statement of the Minister in introducing the Bill to the effect t.hat it is practically on all fours with the measure that was passed last year. I, therefore, commend it to the House.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was read a second time and

coinmitted.

Clauses 1 to 15 were agreed to. Schedule. The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN (1l1elbourne

North Province).-There is not one member of Parliament who does not realize the tragedy behind the great numbers of unemployed to-day. The deterioration that is taking place in the ~ommunity, including the effect that the whole situation is having on the rising generation, is really beyond our powers of appreciation. Many thousands are still living on the dole. The late Labour Government was convinced that dole payments were altogether unsatisfactory, and should be reduced to the utmost possible limit. A citizens' committee was fmmed to go into the whole matter and seek to provide an alternative. This committee consisted of a number of very earnest, capable, and independent persons of prominent status in the community. They devoted their time to the solution or amelioration of the problem, and eventually a scheme was proposed w hereby we hoped that. the dole system would be done away wIth, and that work, to a partial extent at least, would be made available to everyone who desired to obtain work. However, the Labour Government went out of office, and the citizens' committee practically passed out of existence. A new Government is now in power, but I am sorry to say that the position to-day is just as bad as ever. The dole system is still being carried on, and, so far as I can see, no attempt is being made to tackle the whole matter with a view of doing away with the dole and its depraving effect on the people. It seems as if the dole system will require to be continued for very many more years. The citizens committee evolved a plan which would have provided a small amount of work for every one out of employment. The Hogan Government put its financial proposals before the public, and, with reasonable support, it would have carried them out.

The Hon. H. F. RICHARDSON.-Do you mean to say that you had no people on the dole?

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN.-We had, but we devised a scheme whereby, we believed, the dole would be done away with.

The Hon. M'. SALTAU.-What was the scheme ~

U'lWmployment Relief [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] (Taxation) Bill. 1875

The Hon. E. L. KIERNAN. - The proposal was for the continuance of unemployment relief taxation, and for It

loan to be raised at the same time, to be repaid out of taxation money over a period of ten· years. This would not have been a loan which would be added to the burden of debt aheady borne by the community. Our plans were not put into effect, and the incoming Government has been unable to reduce tho amount being spent on the dole.

The Hon. G. L. GOuDIE.-We are ell" deavouring to insist on work being done for the money expended.

The Hon. E. L. KIERN,AN. - The present Government could have followed up the plan formulated by the citizens' committee. Nothing has been done yet, but I hope that the Government will be able to show that it has practical means for relieving the situation to a notahle extent.

The Hon. H. F. RICHARDSON (SouthWeste'rn Province).-I was a represen tative of this House at a joint conference which was held to go into the wholo matter of unemployment relief and the reduction of the dole. The suggestion to which Mr. Kiernan has referred is identical with that which I placed before the conference. I urged that, instead of the whole of the money required being raised forthwith by means of taxation, we should borrow and provide a sinking fund, so relieving the taxpayer to-day to a large extent from the burden which he has been called upon to bear in providing the unemployed with some amount of relief. I was surprised to hear Mr. Kiernan criticizing the present Government for the amount of sustenance money which is being distributed. A still greater sum was spent on the dole when the Hogan Government was In office. We can never hope to do away with unemployment altogether. There are thousands amongs~ the unemployed who, even if the State were enjoying

• prosperous times, would be out of work, for they are unemployable. They would continue to look to the Government for sustenance. This House has always urged that relief money raised by way of taxation should be spread over as wide a field as posible. We have suggested that relief work should be carried out at

lower rates of pay than those ordinarily ruling, so that as many people as possible should be benefited. I recognize that the Government to-day is handling the unemployment situation more capably than did the previous Government. The Employment Oouncil is a good body, and is endeavouring to do the best it possbily can with the means at its disposal.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH eM eZbourne Province).-There has been a great deal of comment about unemployed people who will not accept work. I should like to know how many of them have been refused sustenance by the Government. Surely the Government is not paying sustenan'ce to people who refuse to work. Many taxpayers are, inquiring what the actual position is ..

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Labour).-This Government has endeavoured to provide work in lieu of sustenance. We have taken certain action in regard to people who are on sustenance or have been on it during the last three or four months. When the last Government went out of office, I think 32,000 people were on the dole in the metropolitan area, and the number grew to 45,500. Since the present Government took office, it has allocated over £1,000,000 of loan money to make work for those who will accept it. We have found work for about 12,000, and of course there is a fiuctuation in the number of people employed. Last week the number of unemployed on the register went down by 1,300. I cannot say definitely the number of people who have refused work, but it has been considerable. When people have not been able to give a reasonable excuse for not accepting work, their names have been struck off the sustenance list. I am satisfied that a great number of people are getting sustenance who are not entitled to it. I think the thing is being traded upon, but it is difficult to frame regulations that will enable the Honorary Minister in charge of sustenance to deal with this question. Human ingenuity seems almost unlimited in working dodges in order to get the sustenance money. The Government has had a diffi.cuI t job, because it seems that everyone who can reaches out both hands in order to get sustenance, and many of the peop Ie

1876 Business of the House. [COUNCIL.] Adjournment.

are not too particular about their methods. I cannot give Mr. Smith definite figures, but I can obtain them for him.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-I was wondering what the number was of those who J:efused work, and whether it was increasmg.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-I know that of 500 men who were offered work, over 200 refused to accept it. They may have been a bad lot, and the proportion may be exceptional, but a good many have refused work. A large number have given good excuses for not accepting work.

The sehedule was agreed to. The Bill wa.s reported to the House

without amendment~ and the report was adopted.

On the motion of the Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works), the Bill was read a third time.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of

Public Works).-My desire is to complete consideration of the Bills that we have been handling so that the House may rise until next Wednesday. There is only one question involved, and that relates to the amendments that we made in the Income Tax Acts .A1mendment Bill which has been returned to the Assembly. The Government has accepted the amendments made by this House, but I think it would be well for us to suspend the Sessional Orders so that, if necessary, we may take new business after 11 o'clock. I therefore move-

That so much of the Sessional Orders as provide!! that no new business except the postponement of business on the Notice Paper, shall be taken after the hour of 11 o'clock, be suspended during this sitting of the Council. .

I think we shall not need to avail OUI'

selves of this proposed suspension, but, on the other hand, we may need it at two minut(~s after 11 o'clock. In the meantime the Honorary Minister (Colonel Harold Cohen) can move the second reading of a Bill of which he is in charge.

The Hon. D. L. McNAMARA.-The motion that you have moved is only for the purpose of enabling us to deal, if necessary, with the Income Tax Acts Amendment Bill?

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Yes; and it is for no other purpose.


The PRESIDENT (Sir Frank Clarke). -I have received a message from the Legislative Assembly intimating that they have agreed to the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Income Tax Acts Amendment Bill.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-This is another instance of a politician's breath being wasted. In view of the fact that another place has agreed to our amendments, I do not wish to detain honorable members any later.

ADJOURNMENT.

CUP DAY.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-As Tuesday next is Cup day, I move-

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until Wednesday next.

The motion was agreed to. The House adjourned at 10.28 p.m.

until Wednesday, November 2.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.

Wednesday, October 26, 1932.

The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Peacock) took the chair at 4.6 p.m., < and. read the prayer.

BUTTER INDUSTRY.

PATERSON PLAN: STABILIZATION LEVY.

Mr. FAIRBAIRN (Warrnambool) asked the Minister of Agriculture-

Whether it is a fact that certain Victorian butter factories are not paying the stabilization levy into the Australian Butter Rtabiliza- • tion Fund; if so, how many factories are not paying the st·abilization levy?

Mr. ALLAN (Minister of Agriculture) .-1 should like to point out that the information requested by the honorable member has been supplied to me by the Victorian Section of the Australian

Rivers and Streams Fund. [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Public Departments. 1877

Stabilization Committee, as the Department has no control in the matter. The answer is-

From information provided by the Victorian Section of the Australian Stabilization Committee, it has been elicited that paymEnts of levy to the Australian butter stabilization plan (known as the Paterson plan), are due and payable on the 15th of each month for all butter manufactured during the previous month, and in most caRes payment is made accordingly. However, in the case of two Victorian factories, theE'e payments· are at pre· sent three months in arrear, although requests have repeatedly ueen made for pa::ment.

There are also two VirtOi'ian tactori,~S at present that have not yet si~necl tllC~ ~Jr··'ee· ment in connexion with the plan, and are not paying leYies.

Negotiations are, howeyer, in progress with a view to inducing these factories to join up with the plan.

RIVERS AND STREAMS FUND. Mr. DIFFEY (W angaratta and Ovens)

asked :Mr. Manifold (Honorary Minister) for the Minister of Public Works-

1. What is the total amount derived annually from fees in respect of water frontages and paid into the Rivers and Streams Fund?

2. vvllat amount was allotted from this fund during last year for works?

3. \Vhat amQunt was spent on such works. 4. To ,,,hat amount is the fund in credit

at the present time?

Mr. MANIFOLD (Honorary Minister). -The answers are-

1. For year 1930-31, £7,149 5s. lld.; for year 1931-32, £6,934 38. Sd.

2. For year ended 30th June, 1932, £3,317. 3. For year ended 30th June, 1932,

£745 Is. 3d. 4. £13,701 7s. Id.

CUP DAY. Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).

Having regard to the fact that an event of great national importance occurs on Tuesday next, I move, by leave--

That the House, at its rising to-morrow, adjourn until Wednesday next.

Mr. MANIFOLD (Honorary Minister). -1 second the motion.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Oollingwood).-I have no intention of opposing the motion, but I think the Attorney-General might have taken into consideration the desirability of adjourning the House until after Ohristmas or until June of next year. I say that because we are not doing any useful work here, but are only

indulging in idle talk. So far as dealing in a practical way with the business of the country is concerned, the I-Iouse has been an absolute failure during the last twelve months. The Government might take the opportunity, in view of the fact that there is a holiday next week, of at least adjourning for a week or two to afford them time for the consideration of national problems. They might then endeavour to do something that w()uld be of use to the country.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).If the Leader of the Opposition will put into concrete form, in the shape of an amendment, thQ obvious desire of the Opposition for a year's holiday, the amendment will be considered on its merits.


PUBLIC DEPARTMENTS. COST OF SERVICES AN D BENEFIT TO

REVENUE.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).(By leave )-Statements will be circulated to honorable members to-day showing the net cost last year and the estimated cost this year to the taxpayer of the various services, and also the cxpcnditm'e of the Departments for the last .r0l~ t' 'years, and an estimate of the expenditure for the present year. These statements were referred to in the Budget speech, and I am sure the information now furnished will be greatly appreciated by honorable members. The figures have been compiled on a purely cash basis, no consideration having been given to revenue earned and not received within the financial year, nor to expenditure incurred but not actually charged. The various divisio!~s in the Estimates of Expenditure have been shown, so that reference can easily be made from the statement to tht details as disclosed in the Estimates, or in the statement of contingencies. The necessity for presenting the annual Estimates in the present form with expenditure and revenue entirely separate, and with revenue classified under heads and expenditure under Departnfmts, makes it difficult to bring together the revenue and expenditure on corresponding services. Properly to understand the ramifications of the State's finance, and to enable full consideration to be given to

1878 Stamps [ASSEMBLY.] Bill.

the individual services involved, it is necessary that this information should be available. The statements circulated have been designed to assist honorable members in this direction, and I think it may be claimed that they are very complete in their presentation of the facts. It is hoped that, in future, similar statements will be circulated on delivery of the Bu.dget.

STAMPS BILL.

The debate (adjourned from October 5) on the motion of l\1r. :Menzies (AttorneyGeneral) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. ][ENZIES (Attorney-General).-· By leave, before the House proceeds to debate this measure, I should like to point out that in the CQiurse of my second-reading speech I inadvertently misled honorable members Qin Ol1e point, to which my attention has been since directed. That was on t'he matter of the stamping of a receipt in respect of wages. I find that in the course of some cross-firing whilst I was explaining the Bill I conveyed an impression that that would be an obligation in respect of wages of a oertain amount.

Mr. CAIN.-You did not convey SllCh

an impression. You deliberately s~id it would be so..

Mr. MENZIES.-Well, I am rising now to correct that statement. The statem(:mt which I desire to make is that the old exemption, as already contained in our legislation on this subject, reo mains. That covers, amongst other things, a receipt or discharge for wagp,s or salary of any person, not exceeding £5. I thought it desirable that that should be made clear before tp.e debate proceeded, because in the course 00£ my speech hi submitting the motion fOor the second reading of the Bill I made a statement which was .wrong on t,hat poin~.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood).-- .. This little measure has been before the House for some 'considerable time, and honorable members have had ample opportunity to familiarize themselves with its contents. Essentially, as the AttorneyGeneral explained when introducing the measure, it has been designed to increase the revenue by the imposition of an extra duty on bills of exchange, particularly on cheques-raising the amount

of duty from lid. to 2d. There iM always a feeling that any increase of duty on bills of exchange falls heavily <l,n the commercial section of the community, and t'he rural producers generally raise some objection to the intro~ duction of legislation of this character. T hope I am not misjudging the representatives of the rural producers in this House when I say that I anticipate that certain objections will be raised agaiu today, because in the past there has been always some amount of organized effort noticeable in the direction of preyp.nting the passage o,f legislation such as this. To me, it appears bhat in a time of distress suoh as the present, a measure like the Bill we are now debating is a convenient form for the collection of increased revenue. I do not think that the injury which may be done to the commercial community by this Bill will be at all serious-at any rate, weighed against thn substantial increment whinh will accrue to the general revenue.

One interesting aspect of this measure is that whilst, ostensibly, it has been designed to increase taxation in one direction, it proposes at the same time to reduce taxation in another, namely, upon promissory notes. The Attorney-GeIlf~ral realizes that this is a period of dire financial necessity, and that the greatClr t,he facilities afforded for borrowing th~ better it should be in the interests of the community as a whole. I suppose he thinks that by reducing the duty on promissory notes the.re will be an lllcrement of business involving those persons who lend money on bills of that character. The Government proposes, therefore, to reducp. this particular charge by 50 per cent. Whether any benefit will accrue to the revenue as the result of that reduction it is difficult to say. I am not sufficiently familiar with the operations of money lenders to be able to determine whether this reduction will have the effect of stimulating the borrowing instincts and propensities nf the com· munity. But the Government feels that revenue has fallen off as thE! result of the increased charges for promissory notes and that by going back to the lower charges the revenue will benefit to some extent. I mention again this paradox associated wibh the .Bill that, whilst on the one hand the Government hopes to obtain increased revenue by an increase of taxation-namely,. on cheques~on ,the

Stamps [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Bill. 1879

other, it hopes also to procure an in. crease of revenue by a reduction of taxa tion-namely, on promissory notes. However, I hope that the outcome will be that we shall find ourselves substantially nearer to the balancing of the Btate's Budget.

There are other aspects of t7he mea sure which dO' not appeal to me as a layman, and which I do not feel equipped to discuss in detail. I refer to those parts of the Bill touching on powers of attorney and settlements and deeds of gift. According to the Attorney-General, there is a tendency O'n t.he part of people making deeds of settlement to evade the payment of legitimate taxation by making their settlements in respect of relatively small amounts: paying the duty on the deeds covering such amO'unts, and thereafter increasing the amounts from time to time. Obviously, if that practice is general, the revenue Qf the State is suffering and the illegitimate procedure should be curtailed a. O

far as possible. This particular duty, of course, should not be increased to such an extent as to discourage legitimate settlements in the ordinary course of events. With the assurance given by the Attorney-General tJhat there is no attempt being made in this measure to impose unduly harsh burdens on people making settlements and deeds of gift, I think that the Bill may be considered on its merits, and I, for one, do not intenc! to hinder its passage by any factions criticism.

Mr. COYLE (Waranga).-I am surprised that the Government should have ieen fit to bring down t7his particular type of taxation measure at a time such as the present when we should be relieving the community of some of the burdens pressing upon it. SO' far as those portions of the Bill dealing with powers of attorney and settlements and deeds of gift are concerned, I dO' not prQPQse to' enter uPQn a criticism. The dQcuments in question are usually of an intricate character, and all I propose to sa y is that, seeing that persons concerned with them are Qbtaining tJhe protection of the law, it is quite fair that they should be called upon to pay something for that prO'tection. There may be some special need for an increase Qf the taxation in ~hose directions, and for the tightening of the law so that no Qne shall escape the obligation to pay tax, but I desire

to' direct my comments mainly to thp proposed increase of the taxation on receipts. The Bill provides that it shall be compulsory for a duty stamp to. be placed on all receipts for £2 or over. Until a comparati.vely few montJhs ago there was an imposition of an additional Id. on receipts 9f £5 and Qver. It is not fair of the Government to' insist that all those people who give receipts are well able to pay a tax in co~nexion with them, because the fact IS

that in connexion with very many transactions the persons giving the receipts are not making any profits at all. That tax of an additional Id. was wrong, but the Government is now proposing to' burden the people still further by insisting in all cases upon the use of a re-ceipt stamp in connexion with payments of £2 and over. In the course of the speech in which he explained the Bill the Attorney-General referred to the I~atter of a bookmaker having to place a stamp on a receipt in connex.io? with a waO'er of £2 or more. A ndlculous position would arise if a bookmaker, Qperating on the Melbourne Cup, had to' hold up his business to provide a "punter" with a stamped receipt for the sum of £2 or more. On the other hand, fancy asking the punter to make out a receipt! This is an aspect that must be dealt with. There is also the question of receipts for wages. I am not certain what the AttorneyGeneral said regarding that.

Mr. MENZIEs.-The Bill does not apply to receipts for wages or salaries not exceeding £5.

Mr. COYLE.-If a man's wages total over £5, he is to provide a stamped receipt .. The Government is also placing a burden on farmers who receive cheques for their milk. Everyone will have to send in a stamped receipt for the money he receives. The Government wishes to harass the community. People will not put up with such harassing tactics by this or any other Government. When a customer gQes to' the Myer Emporium, he pays his cash and walks out withQut a receipt. This proposal is a restraint Qn trade, and the GQvernment has no right to make such a proposal. When I started business, cheques were free of stamp duties. Subsequently duties of ~d., ld., and 1 !d. were imposed, and now

1880 Stamps r ASSEMBLY.] Bill.

the Government proposes to make the charge 2d. There is nothing to say that the Government will not increase the stamp duty still more in its hope to get revenue. People issue cheques for tho identification of· their payments, and the proper regulation of their 'businesses. The cheques are a record. If a man paid in cash he would have no records. The Government will force people to issue one cheque in order to pay a number of accounts, and in that way its object will be defeated. ..A. similar thing defeated the purpose of the increase in the fees on promissory notes. A Government provided for increases in the duties to be paid on promissory notes. In the ordinary course of events, a business man took a bill for three months. Things got so bad that he found he had to renew it. The Government's proposal wa~ actually responsible for fining the unfor·· tunate person 4s. for every £100 involved every three months, when the bill was renewed. Then the practice grew up of taking a bill on demand, whic4 is a negotiable instrument, but there was the under·· standing that the account would be kept intact. The hanks said that they wished to know that the bills were good and that the accounts were not stale. Now the banks accept these bills, some of ,,,hich have been good for two years. It used to cost a man owing £500, £1 every three months to renew the bill; llOW he avoids that outlay by giving a bill on demand, and as the banks understand the position, it is a good bill. This plan was designed to defeat the ends of the Department that was responsible for increasing the duties on promissory notes. A similar thing will happen in cbnnexion with the cheques. If the present pro posal is agreed to, it will place a restriction OIl the business people, who are objecting very strongly. I have received several letters asking me to protest ugainBt the Government's plan. Butter factories and general storekeepers have sent me communications in which they protest against the imposition of extra taxation on cheques and receipts. Yesterday, at Newmarket, an. agent pointed out that every person who received an account would have to return it with a receipt. I know that one man recently sent down four trucks of sheep from New

Mr. Coyle.

South Wales. The Railway Department got £40, and he got a cheque for £6. The sheep were not high class. Under the Government's proposal, that man is to pay a tax on his £6. Firms do not send a farmer one cheque for his wool; they send a cheque for so many bales passed. He gets one cheque now, another cheque later, and finally there will be a cheque for the balance. Is he to pay stamp duty for each cheque? Apparently the man is to be fined both ways. He will have to pay for a duty stamp for the receipt for each cheque, and the next thing will be that . he will lose something through the firm increasing its rate of commission. Businesses of this kind cannot carry this increased imposition, because they already run very closely in the matter of expenses. It is unfair to raise the duties on the receipts and on the cheques, and I hope that the proposal will not be passed. I shall oppose it fop all I am worth. Most country members have been asked by their electors to reject this plan.,

Mr. OAIN.-Will you vote against it? Mr. OOYLE.-I do not know; but I

generally vote as I speak. 11r. PRENDERGAST.-But you will save

the Government, although you are talking Dgainst its measures.

Mr. COYLE.-I am hoping to get support for a reasonable protest. Men in commercial circles are upset by the Government's plan. If a Ministry led by the honorable member for Footscray were in office, and brought such proposals in, we should not be surprised, but when a Government formed by supporters on thiR side of the House proposes such an impo~ sition, I am actually disgusted. This Government cannot plead ignorance of' what it is doing. Ministerial supporter~ fully understand the trading side.

Mr. OAIN.-Do you infer that nobody on this (the Opposition) side understands it ~

}.{r. OOYLE.-I am not making that inference, but this Government is aware of what it is doing. The Ministry l'enresents the city where the bulk of the business is done, and its supporters know that commercial people cannot stand this jmposition. I have made my protest in as short a manner as possible. There is nothing but impost af~er impost. Simply because certain people are paying one

Stamps [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Bill .. 1881

kind of tax, the Government seems to think that they can afford to pay more.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-Let us open the income tax returns, and see who has money.

Mr. COYLE.-Everybody should pay some taxation, but we should not impose further taxation by raising the stamp duty on cheques used by people who already pay' heavily. We are alienating our supporters by not doing things we should do for them. That is why we are continually losing caste. Private memhers will have to answer to the electors for what they have done, just as t.he Governmen t will. The commercial community declares that this is not a measure that should be passed in its entirety. The money needed should be I'aised in some other way. I take it that this proposal will be rejected. I do not think it is fair. I am not speaking personally, because if the tax is imposed, it. will be passed on. We should not suffer this continual increase in taxation on successful sources. Because a man has been paying taxation, it does not signify that he is best able to pay still more. The tax should be put on the shoulders of those who really can afford to pay it.

Mr. SLATER (D1tndas).-It will be interesting to see whether the House will be consistent about these proposals. I have to be consistent. I supported them some years ago, and I do .not intend to depart from that attitude, because I know' the reason that compels the Government to introduce proposals of this character. I a~ disappointed to find that, though the Government proposes to increase the duty on cheques, and for the first time has brought within the ambit of -taxation powers of attorney, it has left untouched transactions affecting stocks and shares. I want to harp on that point. For som~ extraordinary reason which I cannot dIscover, the issue and transfer of stocks and shares will not be subject to stamp tax.

Mr. MENZIEs.-Are you suggesting an ad valorem duty of some sort?

Mr. SLATER.-I do not care which way it is done, so long as the principle is established. The transfer of personal property is going on in this way every day.


Mr. VINTON SMITH.-Not to-day. Mr. SLATER.-Substantially it is. It

may have been retal;ded by the depressi0I1, and I suppose that the honorable membert as we all do, wants it restored and strengthened. It is very difficult to justify the exemption of transfers of stocks and shares from this taxation when it is pro-posed in the Bill to levy taxation on 'Powers of attorney. It will be noted that stamp duty is to be imposed on powers of attorney, and that the rate is to commence at Is. for the receipt of interest or dividend on any stock or shares where made for the receipt of one payment, and in an:v other case the rate is to be 5s. Also, iu the case of the receipt of any sum of money, or any bill of exchange or promis-sory note for any sum not exceeding £50, or any periodical payment not exceeding the annual sum of £10 not being interest or dividend on stock or shares, the rate is to be 5s., and in other cases lOs. Thow rates will apply to any general power of attorney. The latter is a high rate of taxation, but I am not objecting to it, because I think that powers of attorney are being rightly brought into the field of taxation. In view of this extension of e.tamp duty, it is unreasonable that thf'Je should be left untouched those people who transfer stocks and shares--

Mr. LINTON.-Did not a Labour Guvernment try to do something like this three years ago?

Mr. SL~I\TER.-Yes. Proposals were inserted in that Government's legislation, but they were resisted in another pla.ce and had to go by the board. To my wa)' of thinking, there is less justification for increasing the stamp duty on cheques than for exempting from taxation the issue and transfer of stocks and shares. The increased duty on cheques will hit very hard H large number of small enterprises whi('i1 payout large sums of money in the aggre-gate, but in small amounts, such as butter fa~tories. Some years ago very strollg obJection was raised to legislation of this sort on behalf of small co-operative concerns which pay small amoUllts of money by cheque to members of large bodies of primary producers. It cannot be doubted that the increase of the duty on cheques will interfere seriously with those enterprises.

Mr. }{oNcuR.-The increased duty will be passed on to the dairy farmers.

1882 Stamps [ASSEMBLY"j Bill.

Mr. SLATER.-Pro.bably it will be passed o.n to. the pro.ducers. I do. 110t

o.bject to. the increased duty, but I think it unreasonable that when new pro.Po.sals fo.r co.llecting revenue by means o.f stamp duty are bro.ught do.wn, no.thing is being do.ne to. tap the avenue of revenue in the fo.rm o.f stamp duty o.n the issue and transfer o.f sto.cks and' shares. When I intro.duced a stamp duties Bill in 1927, I madE! the fo.llo.wing statement, which I shall quo.te fro.m Hansard:-

It (the Bill) deals with a form of stamp duty which bas been in operation in England sinet' 1870. For 57 years in England they have im· posed stamp duties on the issue and transfel S

of shares of corporations, and as it can be said that, until comparatively recently at all eventFl, England. was the greatest commercial nation in the whole world, it cannot be suggested that thifl form of taxation has been an intolerahle burden on the commercial community there. The same form of taxation has heen operat!ug in some of the Australian States for a very long period also. In Queensland stamp duties on the issue of share certificates and the transfer of shares have been payable since 1894. I would point out that those duties were not imposed during the regime of a Labour administration, but right back in the" nineties." In New South Wales, likewise not during i:he regime of a Labour administration, in 189foi stamp duties were imposed on the issue and transfer of shares. Western Australia fixed the duty of 1d. on the issue of share certificate~ in 1892 .• but the ad valorem duty on transfer.; does not appear to have been introduced until ]922. That, briefly, is the position so far as England and the other States are concerned.

That was the Po.sitio.n :five years ago., and whilst I have no.t had the o.PPo.rtunity o.f examining the Po.sitio.n since then, it is reasonable to. assume that o.ther States have impo.sed, since 1927, taxatio.n o.n bo.11h the issue and transfer o.f shares. I invited the Treasurer, when o.ther financial pro.Po.sals were befo.re the Ho.use, to. make a statement o.n this subject, but apparently he did not think it a matter o.f great co.ncern. I think it is. Vlhcn the Go.vernment pro.Po.ses to. increase the stamp duty on cheques, and impo.se a tax o.n Po.wers o.f atto.rney, surely it is unreaso.nable that the issue and transfer o.f shares should be left unto.uched. The transfer o.f every blo.ck of land, no. matter ho.W small the value is, carries substantial stamp duty. When transfer o.f real estate is thus taxed, why sho.uld the transfer o.f perso.nal estate such as sto.cks and shares escape taxatio.n?

Mr. BussAl:.-Transfers o.f leaseho.l<Ls are taxed.

Mr. SLATER.-While the transfer o.f land-freeho.ld and leaseho.ld-even by gift is subject to. tax, why sho.uld it be possible to transfer even by way o.f gift sto.cks and shares o.f any value witho.ut the resPo.nsibility o.f paying tax? I sho.uld like the Atto.rney-General to. indicate to. the Ho.use whether it is the intentio.n o.f the Go.vernment. to. disregard entirely this avenue o.f taxatIOn. If the Go.vernment intends to. disregard it, we shall kno.W where we are. It is unfair that this avenue o.f taxatio.n sho.uld remain unexplo.ited while additio.nal burdens are being placed o.n so.me sectio.ns o.f the co.mmunity who. are not capable o.f bearing tho.se burdens. The general pro.visio.ns o.f the Bill dealing with settlements are desirable, and they have been suggested by the Oo.mptro.ller o.f Stamps as being necessary to. prevent evasio.n o.f payment o.f tax. The o.ther provisio.ns o.f the Bill are reaso.nable, I co.nsider, but I think that co.nsideratio.n sho.uld be given by the Go.vernment to. the advisability o.f bringing into. the arena of taxatio.n the transfer o.f sto.cks and share::;, because if that were do.ne it Wo.uld be a means o.f lessening the burden placed o.n other sectio.nH o.f the co.mmunity by the pro.Po.sals no.w befo.re the Ho.use.

Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda).-So. far as the general public is co.ncerned, it is affected principally by the pro.Po.sals to. increase the stamp duty o.n cheques and make co.mpulso.ry the giving o.f receipts. Viewing the matter fro.m the bro.ad aspect, I think it is a great pity that the Go.vernment has fo.und it necessary at the present juncture to. increase the burdens o.f the mercantile and wageearning community. I feel that the eco.no.mic reco.very fo.r which we are alllo.o.k-ing is being delayed by the present burden o.f taxatio.n. So.me time ago. I discussed the matter with an o.ld gentleman who. had had a lo.t o.f experience in business in' the perio.d after the 'bursting o.f the land bo.o.m in 1893, and he to.ld me that the reco.very fro.m that depressio.n was much mo.re rapjd than the reco.very fro.m the present depressio.n. The reaso.n that he attributed fo.r the mo.re rapid reco.very was the fact that at that time there was no. Federal o.r State land tax, no. Federal inco.me tax, sales tax, stamp duty o.n receipts, and o.ther fo.rms o.f taxation that are impo.sed' now. Because o.f


the absence of heavy taxation, the people bad more money to spend and more capital was invested in industry. I do not intend to oppose the Bill, because I realize that the Government was placed in office for the express purpose of balancing the State's ledger, and I intend to support it whether its efforts to accomplish that task mean unpopularity for the Government or myself.

Mr. CAIN.-Or whether the Government is right or wrong?

Mr. MICHAEL,IS,.-Noj but I support the Government if it feels that it is nec~~~ary to obtain additional revenue by the Introduction of the proposals contained in the measure. The mercantile community lllUSt bear its share of taxation. When Parliament has reduced the super· q,nnuation payments to retired public servants, and has imposed new forms of taxation on citizens, it would be unreasonable on the part of the mercantile COID

rr~unity to object to a small increase in tlie stamp duty on cheques. With regard to the provisions relating to the compulsory giving of receipts, I think that the principle of requiring receipts for wages to bear stamp duty is wrong, and when the Bill is in Oommittee I propose to move an amendment exempting the wage-earner from the duty of paying stamp tax on receipts for wages.

Mr. OAIN.-The stamp duty does :not apply in the case of wages under £5.

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-There are many wage-earners who receive more than £5 per week, and heavy burdens have already been plac.ed on this class. Their wages and salanes have been reduced, and they have been called upon to pay additional taxation. I should prefer the abolition of the obligation of paying stamp duty on receipts for wages, but, failing that, I intend to move an amendment with the object of easing the burden on the wageearner. Speaking from personal experience, I do not think that the giving of receipts has worried the primary producer much in the past. When he receives a cheque for his produce, he goes along in his own sweet way, and usually forgets to send a receipt. I support the view expressed by the honorable member for Dundas that a small stamp duty should be levied on the transfer of shares. I do not think that it should be applied to investment shares, but it should certainly be im-

posed on the transfer of gold-mining and oil shares, which a.re more or less in the nature of gambling transactions. III

view of the fact that Parliament has taxed racecourse betting, and recently imposed a new form of taxation on racecourse gambling, it should go further and impose taxation on another form of gambling represented by the transfer of mining shares.

Mr. OAIN.-I am pleased to know that you regard operations on the Stock Exchange as gambling.

Mr. BussAu.-Some people consider that all Stock Exchange transactions are gambling.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-That is a matter of opinion. It may be so in certain cases. I have heard of people gambling on life insurances. There is practically no avenue of commerce into which some gambling element does not enter.

Mr. MENZIEs.-Being the member for Ouyen is a gamble.

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-The honorable member for Ouyen will admit that tryi~g to raise a crop is the biggest of Qll gambles.

Mr. BussAu.-I know it only too well. Mr. !{IOHAELIS.-Exactly. I think

that some steps might be taken to im· pose a small duty on Stock Exchange dealings. The result might be comparatively small at the moment, but it would be greater later. I would suggegt that some form of stamp duty be put on gold, oil, and similar share transactions.

:M:r. OAlN.-Do you think that the representati ves of the gambling community in another place would agree to that?

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-I think that a recommendation from this House would go a long way. If it be possible to insert an amendment in the Bill so as to impose a tax uu gambling transactions of the kind to which I have referred, I will support it.

Mr. BUSSAU (Ouyen).-I am in favour of a guod many of the proposalElcontained in the Bill. Apparently, th~ chief reason for the proposed increase in stamp duties is to bring the taxation in line with that of other States. If there is loaised on behalf of the Government an argument that the stamp duty on cheque" should be increased to 2d. because in other States that rate of duty is operative, on a similar line of reasoning Stock

1884 Stamps [ASSEMBLY·l Bill.

Exchange transactions should also be brought into the ambit of taxation. I support the remarks made by the honorable member for Dundas. I think that the Bill should provide machinery for taxation of all Stock Exchange transactions.

Mr. ]~INTON.-Would you include the gambling on sheep and other live stock at Flemington ~

Mr. BUSSAU.-Stock-raisers .are paying very dearly to-day. It is not the seller of the sheep who gambles, but the buyer, who gambles at the expense of the seller. I certainly would support the honorable member's proposal. If the Minister who is in charge of the Bill would give some assurance to the House that a form of taxation would be intro-

. duced into the measure to deal with Stock l~xchange transactions, I am certain that it would have the support of all the members in the Country party corner and members in other parts of the House. r was impressed with the remarks that were made by the honorable member for Dundas, to the effect that in Great Britain the Stock Exchange for half a century had to bear a burden of taxation. Other States in Australia have had to bear Bome measure of taxation over a term of years in relation to Stock Exchange transactions, and I think that it is high time that this State should pass a Bill having the same object in view. As I have said before, the reason given by the Government for bringing down the Bill that is now under discussion is that the same measure of taxation exists in other States.

Mr. CAIN.-That is an excuse, not the reason.

Mr. BUSSA.U.-The excuse may be justifiable, but the omission of Stock Exchange transactions is not justifiable.

Mr. COYJ~E.-What rate would you propose-2d. in every £5 ~

Mr. BUSSAU.-That rests with the Government. I do not mina what the rate is so long as fair taxation is levied. I do not know whether an amendment designed to include Stock Exchange transactions could be made.

The SPEAKER (Sir Alexander Peaoock) .-Only if moved by a Minister ()f the Crown.

Mr. BUSSAU.-I should like an assurance from the Attorney-General on thi8 matter. The Country party agrees with many of the proposals that are contained in the Bill, but a number of us certainly thiuk that Stock Exchange transactions should be brought within its ambit.

Mr. ANGUS ( Gunbower).-I rise to add my protest to the proposed increase in stamp duty on cheques. I do not think that it will lead to an increase in revenue. I know of one case-a butter factory at Gippsland-which has already adopted the principle of obtaining a list of its clients, paying all by one cheque, and getting the bank to break the amoun t up into cash. If the GO,vernment persists in increasing taxation in the direction of stamp duty on cheques, the method . to which 1 have referred will become general, particularly so far as butter factories are concerned. I understand that metropolitan concerns are doing the same thing. The more we tax people, the more they will endeavour to avoid it, and country interests are learning a few things from their city brothers.

I no~ice that, as a sop, country interests are to be allowed a measure of· relief in respect of promissory notes. The Bill itself is of a promissory nature, because the proposed relief will be made effective in six months' time. I do not know whether the Government has any anticipation of not being on the Treasury bench next year and of leaving a legacy for some. other Ministry, but the proposal to postpone the proposed relief does appear to be improper.

Mr. H,YLAND.-What is your tip on the matter ~

:Mr. ANGUS.-I am not going to tip anything about the Government. I do not wish to make any statement that would have a disturbing effect. Still, there is no certainty in political life. This proposal relating to promissory notes is only to soothe the public, and I do not approve of that kind of legislation.

The relief should be given immediately, because the present imposition is bearing heavily on many people who obtain accommodation. This form of tax, in common with all other taxation, should be red uced ra ther than increased. I am satisfied that there are many members who do not appreciate the actual loss to


the producers which the imposition of ~tamp duty on cheques involves. We can take a butter factory as an illustration. Cheques are sent out regularly to each customer. They are presented for payment, and in many instances exchange is charged. The farmer breaks down the cheque that he receives from his butter factory into smaller cheques, and thus the same source of money is taxed again and again. If a man pays by cheque, why should he be taxed any more than the person who draws pound notes from the bank and pays his .account with them? On the question of country people not giving receipts, I wish to assure the honOI'able member for St. Kilda that the f armel'S in my district are not the same rlass of farmers as those who live in St. Kilda. In St. Kilda they sow only wild oats, and reap them. Generally speaking, I agree with the honorabie member for Waranga, that it is better to impose the one form of taxation, so that we can know what we are paying. At all events, the man in the country does not know what he is paying in resp.ect of taxation. If it be necessary, income tax should be increased, but all the other restrictive taxation should be removed. There should be more freedom in trade and commerce, and promissory notes should not be subject to duty.

Mr. OArN.-That is the most sensible thing that you have said for a long while.

Mr. ANGUS.-I dare say that it is the only sensible thing that the honorable member has understood. I enter my protest against the continually increasing legislation regarding taxation and other tnatter~. I t-hink that we should spend two or three sessions cancelling some of the measures that have been brought forward in the past, and make it more simple for the people to live within the law. We are not legislating wisely. We are confusing the people by not making our legislation and our taxation simple. I direct the attention of the Attorney-General to the fact that, in the case of bookmakers, for instance, the larger the bet the less the tax that has to be paid. Taxation is altogether out of proportion. If the Government desires to increase taxation, let it apply the increase to the luxuries. We all have to live, and the State cannot afford to put increased taxa-

tion on the necessities of life. Increased taXl:l tlOn 8hould be on the surplus wealth, and not on the needs of the people.

Mr. GRAY (Hawthorn).-A number of the points with which I had proposed to deal have already been touched upon by honorable members, but there are one or two others which I wish to mention. First of all, I express disagreement with the remarks made by various honorable members as regards the increased stamp duty on cheques. I regard that as a very fair impost-for two reasons. First, these documents are very generally used; and, second, although the service is not rendered by the Government, the users of cheques receive a great deal of service. To-day they practically have their accounts kept for them with a minimum of trouble by the use of cheques. For those reasons I have no complaint whatever about the proposed increased stamp duty on cheques.

Referring to clause 3 of the Bill, 1 commend the Government for the proposed reduction in duty Oll bills of exchange other than cheques, and promissory notes. I have been associated with representations to successive Governments for. many years on this question, and I am glad that the arguments advanced have at last proved effective in the case of the present Government. I think that we can very clearly draw a distinction between cheques and. promissory notes; that is to say, in their internal circuculation. As I said before, cheques are in very general use by all classes of' people. Promissory notes are used by people who obviously need assistance. The mere fact that they have recourse to these documents indicates that they are proper subjects for relief when legislation of this kind is being dealt with by Parliament. We all know that the.se documents internally are used in the main by storekeepers and small business people, and very largely by primary producers ill connexion with payments for implements, and I am very glad that the Government has seen fit to propose the reduction. At the present time, the duty in this State is double that in the other States, and four times that in South Australia, so it was high time that the anomaly was rectified. I should like to join with the honorable member for Gunbower in suggest~ ing that the reduction be· applied as early

1886 Stamps [ASSEMBLY. ] Bill.

as possible. I should also like to suggest further to the Government that they should eonsider, at least in regard ~o ex-port bills, the putting of the Victoriart duty on the same basis as that in South Australia. In the trade with which I am associated, it is the general practice.. to draw export bills in South Australia rather than in Victoria, because of the lower duty obtaining in South Australia. I suggest that it might be well worth the Government's while to consider, in regard to export bills, a further reduction of the duty to place it in line with the South Australian duty, because I believe such a further reduction would result in additional revenue being received by the Government-that is, additional to the revenue expected under this Bill. The proposition has been submitted to the GoVel'llIllollt from time to time by various trade association8 in Melbourne which have given the matter very careful consideration, and I hope the Government will take it into account before clause 3 is finally dis~ posed of. I heartily support the measure in all other respects, and hope that that recommendation will be taken into con~ sideration with a view to improving the Bill.

Lieut.-Col. KNOX ( Upper Yarra).- -When politicians are making electioneering speeches, they frequently employ the phrase" "Government is finance and finance is government," but though that phrase is somewhat hackneyed, it nevertheless states a fact. The difficulties of a Government to-day would somewhat appal a person who was not .cognizant of the liabilities and commitments that a Government is subject to at the present time. A Government is required to meet the commitments of the State, and to carryon the social services of the State, and, therefore, it is unfortunately neces-

\ sary to levy imposts on the people fl'OIll time to time. Those imposts must be levied so that the Government may m'Jet the commitments, however economical they may be, that it has incurred in a(~cordance with its programme. There is only one proper method of taxation, and that i8 the taxation of people in accordance with their wealth. That should be the basio principle of taxation. If a man has . no income, he should have .Y1othing to pay, and if he has an income,

he should pay in accordance with his wealth. There are exceptions in the case of certain low unearned incomes, and recently I took objection on the floor of the Hpuse to those incomes being taxed double the amount which similar incomes earned by personal exertion are taxed. To return to the Bill, I fully appreciate the enormous difficulties that are confronting the Government. Criticism has been indulged in by members on the other (the Opposition) 'side of the House, but if they were in power, and were faced with similar difficulties, they would, no dOll bt, be compelled to have reUOU1'3C 10

the very scheme of taxation proposell in the Bill.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-It is the Government's supporters who are embarrassing them.

Lieut.-Col. KNOX.-I do not say that the Bill contains a perfect scheme of taxation. Indeed, there are anomalies in the measure, which I suggest, with great deference to the Attorney-General, may be rectified in Oommittee; but, in p.rinciple, I support the Bill. I very much appro· ciated the proposal made by the honorable member for Dundas, the idea of which he was gracious enough to say did not originate with him, but wa:s borrowed from taxation in other communities. However, it was an original idea so far as this Parliament is concerned. He suggested that the business of transferring stocks and shares may be a good field for the levying of perfectly legitimate taxation.

Mr. BLAcKBuRN.-Didn't we have a BlH providing for that two or three years ago? .

Lieut.-Col. KNOX.-I do not remember it.

Mr. SLATER.-It passed this House, ailil was rejected by the Legislative Couuml.

Lieut.-Col. KNOX.-Then my memory is at fault. Whether people buy or sell on the Stock Exchange as a legitimat~ investment or as a speculation it matters very little, because a transfer of property from one person to another is involved, and in connexion with the transfer of land, stamp duty has to be paid. I shoul<l say that if a proposal for the taxation of transfers of stocks and shares were brought down and became law, it would obviate the necessity ?f enacting what I


think are some of the more obnoxious features of the measure now before the House. The Bill provides that a receipt bearing a 2d. 'stamp must be given on the payment of an amount of £2 up to £25, .and that a stamp duty of 2d. mUl~t be paid on every cheque. Take the case of .a person earning a small wage which is paid monthly. Stamp duty will have to be paid on the receipt for his wages, further stamp duty on the cheque with which be is paid, and further stamp duty for Lis unemployment relief taxation.

Mr. BENNETT.-And there will have to be a 2d. stamp on the envelope endn::nng the cheque.

Lieut.-Ool. KNOX.-Big firms in Melbourne are evading the payment of po,;;c.age-I think quite rightly, becau~e

people have to economize in these timesby employing boys at 30s. or 35s. a \\ eeh:. .Each boy delivers hundreds of letters .daily.

An HONORABLE lVlEMBER.-The wage would be lOs. a week.

Lieut.-Ool. KNOX.-I do not know much about the rates of wages that are paid. Big firms are evading the payment .of postage by sending out lads with hundreds of letters, the postage on which would come to far more than the wages the lads are paid. I am a farmer in a small way, and I deal in a number of small things that are produced by farmers. Take my case as an example. I would have a number of small cheques coming in for different items. For each cheque I would be supposed to tender a receipt. That would apply to hundreds of people in the same position as myself. It is unfair aud unnecessary to impose such an obligation on the small farmer. How can a market gardener selling hi::; .goods at the Queen Victoria Market P0(i

sibly give receipts for all the things he hands out at the back of his wagon tv the value of £2 or over ~ It would be impossible for him to do it.

Mr. OOYLE.-The provision in the Bill says he must do it.

Lieut.-Ool. KNOX.-It is not prac·· tic able to apply the provision. Such a man does not want to be a criminal, but he cannot give a receipt for each line of goods he sells--a few cases of fruit here. some cauliflowers there, and so on.

Mr. MENZIES.-A receipt would not be, necessary in the case of a. sale of a few ca uliflowers.

Lieut.-Ool. KNOX.-Such a man doet:! not sell a few shillings' worth of vegebut sells in lots of £2, £3, or £5 .

Mr. OAIN.-How many £3 or £4 lot::, would a market gardener sell? .

Lieut.-Ool. KNOX.-That depends on the state of the market. In the case of· cream cheques, weekly milk settlements, and settlements for small consignments of eggs, the additional duties are undoubtedly going to be a very serious impost. I do not think any member of the legitimate Stock Exchange, carrying on what we know is an honorable business, can object to taxation in connexion with the transfer of stocks and shares. The members of the Stock Exchange would not lose by it. They would still get their commission. The tax would be a definite charge on the buyer or the seller, or on both. I think that is an unexplored field of taxation that can well be tried, because I would say to the Attorney-General that, despite his very earnest desire to adjust the finances of the State, in which he has the sympathy of all sides of the Cham bel', some of the provisions of the Bill will be irksome. They will be irksome to the business community and to the farming community, and I think one or two of them could well be postponed until the Government have had time to consider the proposed taxation on the transfer of stocks and shares.

Mr. VINTON SMITH (Oakleigh).-When the honorable member for Dundas mentioned the matter of the taxation of transfers of stocks and shares, I thought it would be. necessary for me to inform the House on at least one or two aspects of the subject, but honorable members who followed him have practically relieved me, I think, of the necessity of defending transfers of stocks and shares from the imposition of taxation. I thoroughly agree with the honorable member for Gunbower, and those who spoke like him, in saying that they would much prefer to have the whole of taxation derived by direct means, particularly by a tax on income, because, as they argued, the imposition of such taxation as stamp duty on cheques, on receiopts, and on promissory notes, and also on the


export hills mentioned by the honorahle member for Hawthorn, acts as a restraint upon tra.de. For that very reason, I would oppose t,he imposition of taxation on the transfer of stocks and shares.

Lieut.-Ool. KNox.-There is considerable taxation on the transfer of land.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-I fully appreciate that; but I want to make this

• point: Honorable members heard the honorable member for Ha,wthorn urge the Government to reduce the stamp duty on export bills because, at the present moment, it is losing revenue which it might otherwise get, as the stamp duty here results in the bills being drawn in Adelaide. The Government has seen fit to reduce the stamp duty on promissory notes.

Mr. OOYLE.-Because promissory note~ are not being used.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-For that very same reason, they would be wise to leave the transfer of stocks and shares alone, because this is the one State in Australia where taxation is not imposed on such transfers.

:Mr. J3LACKBURN.-Did not Queensland have it and modify it?

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-It is still ill operation in Queensland, as it is in Western Australia, New South Wales, Tasmania, and, I think, South Australia. Victoria benefits very largely from the fact that it has not this taxation on the transfer of stocks and shares. Capital is attracted to Victoria for that very re'ason. The flotation here of an industrial concern attracts money with far greater rapidity and facility than does a flotation in another State. Capital is attracted, and labour is benefited by that capital coming into Victoria.

Mr. CAIN.-Is that the real reason? Mr. 'VINTON SMITH.-It is one

verv good reason. We want to improve the liquidity of money.

Mr. OAIN.-If you keep taxation down, there is the same attraction of money into the State.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-The State has benefited by the attraction of capital on account of there being no taxation on the transfer of stocks and shares. We should be foolish to impose taxation which would have the effect of driving maney back into the other States. I have received numerous letters regarding the

further imposition of stamp duty on cheques, and the increase of stamp duties on receipts, and making the issue of those receipts compulsory. But I would point out that there is probably no other business where the taxation exacted by means of those two particular forms of taxation is as great, in proportion to the turnover, as it is in the case of members of the' Stock Exchange. Even the interchange of cheques between brokers will carry this additional taxation. A 3d. stamp will be required on receipts for every amount over £25. Supposing a broker is instructed to sell or to buy a £1,000 bond. He may buy ten separate £100 bonds. If he bought in ten lots the aetual taxation collected by the Government-by stamp duty on receipts and cheques-would be 8s. 9d. If he bought them in £200 lots" the tax would be 4s. 7d.

lire OAIN.-If he bought a £1,000 bond, the tax would be 3d.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-No, there would be 5d. as between client and broker, another 5d. as between the buying and selling broke1', and there would still be a further 5d., making 1s. 3d., so that th~ amounts would vary from 1s. 3d. to lOs. The average would be somewhere about 5s. The actual commission to the broker, whether buying or selling, would be one-quarter of 1 per cent. When we take into consideration the cost of conducting an office and generally of running a business, it follows that a nasty bite is taken out of one's commission. In defending the case against the 'imposition uf taxation 011 the transfer of stocks and shares, I would point out that, as a matter of fact, it would not come out of the broker's pocket at all. I defend it merely from the community point of view. The arguments advanced by honorable members have more eloquently proved my case than anything I may have said. The argument used in regard to the reduction of taxation on promissory notes applies with greater force to dealings in stocks and shares.

Before I sit down I would like to touch on the' matter of gold. There are undoubtedly many transactions in gold mining shares, particularly at a time like this when there is a demand for. gold. There, again, some big mines have been developed as


the result of facilities for trading tn gold-mining stock. Fifty companies might be formed, and of the 50 two really substantial mines may become big producers of gold. I think that at this stage anything done to prevent capital going into that form of investment would be very unwise. We have had excellent mines developed recently in Queensland and also in Western Australia.

Mr. FRosT.-.A.nd in Bendigo. Mr. VINTON SMITH.-I had over

looked Bendigo. The arguments I have advanced in fa vour of leaving these transactions alone apply to gold scrip in the same manner.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-I had not intended to speak, and might not have done eo had it not been for the development of this argument. I am not raising any very serious objection to the legislation. We have, however, had a new development in the presentation of the case. We have w~tnessed the adoption of a new attitude by some honorable members on ft. question arising out of the taxation of a particular section of the communityan attitude that we do not find in other cases of taxation. Many honorable members of both parties which support the Government believe that the most sensible thing to do is to increase direct taxation in order to avoid a lot of pin-pricking collections of taxes in various small ways. The principle is a long-recognized one," but we have been unable in this State to impose that taxation. The declared policy of the present Government is to refrain from increasing direct taxation. It is their desire, at as early a date as possible, to reduce taxation. Not only is that the policy of this Government; it is also the policy of the Commonwealth Government.

Mr. FRosT.-It is a pious hope. Mr. CAIN.-It may be a pious hope,

nevertheless "it is the expressed policy of the political parties supporting those Governments. We had in the Budget at least seven or eight proposals to raise money. or to save money, in such a way as to obviate the necessity of increasing direct taxation. The Government proposes to save approximately £1,000,000 this year, of which amount £700,000 is to result from economies and reductions-

the cutting out of scholarships, the raising of high school fees, and a thousand and one other details of a pin-pricking character. This is not only pin-pricking the community indirectly; it is taxing it to a greater or lesser extent. After all, it is questionable whether it is not taxing a man very severely to call upon him, after he has had the privilege of a free education for his child for a number of years, to pay £12 12s. for the education of that child next year. No objection was taken to that by my Ministerial friends. It did not interfere with the duty on cheques. To-day, candid friends of the Government are telling them that they believe, as an alternative to adopting this method of collecting a tax by stamps and other means, it would be wise to spread the -amount over the whole field of taxation in the form of income tax. I find myself in agreement with them. The honorable member for Oakleigh suggests that a tax on the transfer of stocks and shares may be the means of keeping capital out of this State. He has pointed out the reasons why Victoria is able to encourage the inflow of capital. The main reason he gives is that we have not got these taxes. I venture to suggest to him that in Queensland there is higher taxation, which affects companies to a material exten t. Gold mining in Queensland has not been retarded in any way whatever by that higher taxation. Some big development in gold mining has taken place in that State.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-The companies have taken the trouble to register in Melbourne to avoid that taxation.

Mr. OAIN.-Development is not retarded because of any tax on the transfer of shares.

Mr. 'VINTON SMITH.-There is 6d. on every £10.

Mr. CAIN.-I am prepared to admIt tha t. The big income-earners in this State are deriving undue advantages. I do not suggest that the present Government have adonted any unusual course. The late Government introduced much the same type of legislation, not because we could not get Our proposals through this House, but that we had to study another place. The honorable member for Footscray led a Government for four months.


Mr. T'uNNEcLIFFE.-And very ably he led it.

Mr. CAIN.-I quite agree. In that Government the honorable member for Footscray proposed a scheme of taxatioll which was the most scientific that has emanated from any Government in this State. It was adopted by this House. Our trouble-it has been the trouble of N ational:ist Governments, too-was to get our friends in another place to see eye to eye with us. The honorable member for Oakleigh was speaking for the Stock Exchange and his colleagues down there, and - they very largely agree with the policy of another place. Tha t policy has been to keep back a progressive system of taxation in this State, and to-day we find that a man in receipt of an income of £10,000 is not. paying to the State more than 25 per cent. of the tax that he would have to pay upon it to almost every other State and to the Commonwealth. The figures were disclosed in a table showing in a graduated form the taxes paid on incomes in this State and in the Oommonwealth. On an income of £10,000 a year, the taxpayer pays to the Victorian Government only £605.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-I told you on a previous occasion that the person in receipt of an income of £10,000 a year is all extinct animal.

Mr. CAIN.-I think the hOm>rable member said that of a person in receipt of an income of £20,000 a year. But, whether the man in receipt of £10,000 a year is an extinct animal or not, we have refrained from taxing him to an adequate extent for a large number of years. The State has allowed its finances to drift to a large extent. Take the soldier settlement losses. We refused to pay interest and losses on soldier settlement out of revenue. We have paid the amounts that fell due out of capital funds and borrowed money. As a consequence we have got into great difficulties. I shall be interested to hear my Ministerial friends, who have been so outspoken to-night. on the proposal to increase high school fees. It is argued-and I believe with justification-that we should call upon the taxpayers to make a small extra contribution to the revenue in order that we may continue our

system of free education to the bri~ht boys and girls in the communIty. I hope that that sentiment which has been expressed to-day by candid friends of the Government, as well as by others, will be taken seriously, and that the foolish, pin-pricking policy will be discontinued of extracting from every little section of the community a few pounds here and a few pounds there, to protect the interests of the general income taxpayer, who is not called up.on to contribute taxation unless he has an income on which to pay the tax. The income tax )c a fair and honest tax, but the . land tax has the disadvantage that, during a prolonged period of drought, a land-owner is called upon to continue to pay annually when he may be obtaining no income whatever, and may even be losing money all the time. The Commonwealth system of averaging the tax over a period of yea.rs is distinctly fair, and is much better than our State methods.

Sir HAROLD LUXTON (Gaulfield).I should like to say a few words for that animal which has been said to be extinct, namely, the £10,000 a year man.

Mr. BLACKBURN.-YOU maintain that . there are still living specimens ~

Sir HAROLD LUXTON.-I do. Mr. CAIN.-Were you ever a live speci

men? Sir . HAROLD LUXTON.-At one

time. I consider that the £10,000 a year man is probably the most valuable person in the community, because he is generally a very large employer of labour. The employers of labour are the :clost valuable asset in the community. (f each employer in the State could employ f{Jl)l'

more men to-day, there would be no ruo?"e unemployed in Victoria. Anything that may be done to curtail the capacity of the employer to absorb labour is a very bad thing for the State. The honorable member for N orthcote said that a person having an income of £10,000 a year paid only £600 a year in State income tax. I presume that he had in mind that such an income wadderived from personal exertion. I have not the figures before me, but I am will-ing to wager that a man whose incom~ amounts to £10,000 a year, and who, no doubt, would be deriving some of that income from property, including shares in


the business with which he was associat6J, and who probably would be a large employer of labour, would be paying between £4,000 and £5,000 a year by way of Federal and State taxation. It would be a great, thing forI.' the State if a lot of these extinct £10,000 a year animals could be brollght to life again.

I have known of opportunities to es· tablish large industries having been lost because of the fact that our taxation i~ so heavy. I remember the ex-Premier (Mr. Hogan) mentioning to me the possibility of getting a large concern established here to manufacture certain goods. The Melbourne Oity Oouncil had at its disposal a suitable piece of land, and the Premier at that time suggested that we should view the proposition as being largely for the public good, and should make a special price in offering the lawl for the establishment of the new industry. It was pointed out to me that the outcome would be to increase the tomatogrowing industry in this State, and largely to increase employment in the city, at the same time increasing the volume of produce exported abroad from Victoria. I was able to secure a reduction in the price of the land from £10,000 to £6,000, and the offer was cabled to New York. The new industry, however, was not established here, and one of the reasons was that the volume of taxation in this country precluded the satisfactory ~stablishment of a large industry which, It was expected, would export something like £7,000,000 worth of goods annually. When the honorable member for N orthcote says that persons having an income of £10,000 a year are enjoying unwarranted privileges, in that they are not paying the amount of taxation which they should be called upon to pay, I maintain that he is defeating the objects of his own party. The establishment of large industries, which necessarily make considerable profits for certain persons, is in the best interests of the State as a whole. We should encourage the establishment of millionaire companies from abroad, no matter if it does mean that certain people will be enjoying considerable incomes, because the effect would be to increase employment very considerably and to add to the revenue of the State by the fact that these large incomes were being taxed. I do not think that either

side of this House would object to the introduction of large sums of new capital by the establishment of concerns from overseas. But I say again that such activities as these are deterred because of the heavy taxation imposed in this country.

Mr. McKENZIE (Wonthaggi). - In connexion with all debates in this House on taxation measures, there is apparent a general desire to shift the burden 'to the other fellow. That is probably very natural; but we are now passing through unprecedented times, and extraordinary measures have to be taken to get us out of our difficulties. I say quite frankly that I prefer to have the burden of taxation placed on the shoulders of the oth~r fellovy, and I follow that up by sayIng that I feel that these irritating forms of minor taxation which we are imposing on industry are altogether to be deplored. The matter of an extra id. tax in connexion with cheques may not seem to be much, but it is only one of many forms of taxation with which the busine~s com~unity is handicapped. In conneXlOn WIth my own business as a country storekeeper, if I were to detail the number of taxes, large and petty, to which I am subjected every year, the House would be greatly surprised. Many of tnem are only small impositions but in the aggregate the various taxes a~e so heavy that by the end of the year it is a wonder that there is any income left on which to pay the ordinary State and Federal taxes. It will be a particularly irksome matter for country storekeepers to be required to furnish a stamp in connexion with every transaction over the counter amounting to £2 or more. Without doubt, there will be evasions by the preparation of two dockets, so as to bring the amount of a particular transaction down to less than £2.

Business people naturally take steps to defeat impositions of this character. For example, the honorable member for Gunbower mentioned that it is quite common for people running butter factories to draw one cheque only to cover payments to their suppliers, and to go to the bank and break up that cheque, paying the amounts due by the factory into th<:) various individual accounts. Thus we see that these irritating forms of taxation

18~ Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY. ] (Administration) Bill ..

largely defeat their object. I appreciatp. the necessity for balancing the national budget, but I protest against these constant additions to the burdens being carried by the community, and especially by the trading community.


committed. Clause l-(Short title, construction,

and citation). Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).

There are one or two amendments which I desire to submit, but they are not yet to hand from the Government Printer. There may be other amendmeni'.s also to come before the Oommittee. I suggest, therefore, that progress be reported, with the view of our resuming consideration of the Bill in Oommittee at a later stage of this sitting.


UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF (ADMINISTRATION) BILL.

The House went into Committee for the further consideration of this Bill.

Clause 2-(Repeal of Acts mentioned in schedule to extent expressed to be repealed therein).

Mr. ,\VETTENHALL (Lowan) rose to speak.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Oollingwood).I -can understand the embarrassment of the honorable member for Lowan, who has just resumed his seat, because the Goyernment is chopping about with its legislation, and through these twisting tactics honorable members get no opportunity to familia.rize themselves with the Bills. The Government had one measure before honorable members, and just as they were making themselves familiar with its contents, the Government withdrew it, because it did not have its amendments ready, although an interval of something like two weeks had elapsed since we previously saw that Bill. The Government had two weeks in which to prepare those amendments, but they are not yet ready. Now, when honorable members are at dinner, the Government brings on one of its most important Bills, and expects us to get into our stride at once. Evidently the honorable member for Lowan is not seised with the position. We .are not either, and we

cannot embark at once on a discussion on individual clauses. The Ohairman naturally puts the clauses as quickly as possible, but by doing so he does not give honorable members an opportunity to realize what is under discussion. This is making a farce of legislation. I have just taken up the Bill for the first time· in the last three or four weeks, during which it has been lying idle, and I can not in a few moments familiarize myself with the clauses. These tactics are not fair; they are illegitimate. We should have time to make ourselves familiar with the matter before us. I am trying to grasp the import of the proposal before the Committee. We should not be asked to vote without knowing what the clause contains. I do not want the suggestion made that I am endeavouring to stonewall the Bill. We desire the measure to be passed, but in a modified form. Evidently, in agreeing to this: clause, we are repealing the set of Acts: contained in the schedule. I think theHonorary Minister should explain the effect of the clause.

Mr. KENT HUGHES (Honorary Minister) .-In regard to the statement that honorable members have not had time t~ look into this clause, I point out that the representatives of the Labour party have circulated two batches of amendments, none of which apparently affect!' clause 2.

Mr. OOOlc-A good many amendments have been prepared by Ministerial supporters.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-Apparently the representatives of the Labour party have gone closely into the Bill, and know what amendments they wish to submit.

Mr. CAIN.-What IS the proposal made in clause 2?

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-When this measure comes into operation all of the previous Acts will be repealed.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-Two Acts will be wholly abolished.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-All the consolidating clauses are contained in this Bill. Clause 2 merely repeals the Acts· that this measure will supersede.

Mr. WETTENHALL (Lowan).-I have taken particular interest in this

Unemployment Relief [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] (Administration) Bill. 1893

measure. Unfortunately during the debate on the second reading I was absent in my electorate. I take it that the clause repeals a number of Acts. I desire to compliment the Honorary Minister on the great work he has done in consolidating these measures. He gave a complete and explicit explanation of the Bill, and it was a pleasure to find a man who has such a thorough grip of his subject. Whether or not we agree with all the details is an9ther thing, but we are unanin;lOus in saying that the Honorary Minister made an excellent speech, and I desire to express my an preciation of it. We really need a running consolidation of the Acts. As a member of the Statute Law Revision Committee, I have been associated with two consolidations, and I can assure honorable members that the work involved after the Acts have been in operation for ten years is stupendous. I commend the Government to consider the idea of bringing in a measure to provide for steps such as are in force in New Zealand, where the Acts are continuously brought up to date. The unemployment relief legislation has been in ·operation for about three years, and yet there are three or four different Acts.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-There are six. Mr. CAIN.-Two or three are only

Acts imposing the 'rates. Mr. WETTENHALL.-There is an

argument for a running consolidation of the Acts. Laymen are not supposed to know all these Acts, but the measures are a source of continual cost to the community. Whatever outlay was involved to the Government by a running consolidation of the Acts would be more than repaid by the saving in time and expense to the people. I regret that I have not had time to circulate an amendment to clause 6.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-The concluding sentence in this clause reads-

Such repeal shall not a.ffect any regulation order applicqtion payment a.llocation of money or demand made or sustenance provided or licence granted or ri"ght accrued or proceedings taken or liability civil or criminal Incurred or anything done or suffered under the said Acts before the coming into operation of this Act.

Speaking subject to correction, I presume that that portion of the cla11se is to continue any proceedings that may have

been initiated under the Acts which are to be abolished by this mea8ure. If that is so, no serious exception ron be taken to the clause.

The clause was agreed to. Olause 3-(Interpretation). Mr. HOLLAND (Flemington).-This

is an important clause. Mr. WETTENHALL.-Are you going to

propose its omission? Mr. HOLLAND.-No, I am going to

suggest improvements. Portion of the clause deals with the question of sustenance. Last night I said a few words on the important matter of sustenance. I hope that the Honorary Minister will give an affirmative reply to the request made by the central unemployment committee through Mr. Monk for the authorization of a double issue of sustenance at the forthcoming Christmas. That concession was granted to the unemployed last year by the Labour Government, and I hope that the present Ministry will follow its lead, and accede to the request that has been made by Mr. Monk on behalf of his committee. As I said last night, the amount of sustenance allowed to unemployed families is inadequate. Take the case of a married man with two children. He receives 14s. per week.

Mr. LINToN.-What did that family receive last year ~

Mr. HOLLAND.-Not sufficient for their needs. I admit that the sustenance payments were inadequate last year. When Mr. Williams took over the control of the Sustenance Department, an improvement was made in this respect, and I am aware that the present Government have made certain adjustments in the scale of payments.

Mr. LINTON.-A substantial increase was made in the rate of payment for infants.

Mr. HOLLAND.-There is still room for further improvement. The sustenance system was introduced as a temporary form of relief, but we are reaching a stage now when we ought to realize that it is becoming more or less perma- . nent. In view of the inability of the Government, mainly because of the limited amount of money available. to provide relief work for a large body of the unemployed, a large proportion o( unemployed families must remain on sustenance. Because the heads of these families

189i Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY.] (Administration) Bill.

have been out of work for a long period, their private resources are exhausted, and their relatives cannot help them further; therefore the question of liberalizing the Bustenance scale is urgent. Take the case of the family of man, wife, and two children receiving 14s. per week for sustenance. At least Is. 6d. per week would be required for kerosene, candles, and soap. That leaves 12s. 6d. for food$ or l~d. per unit for each meal. No matter how careful the housewife is, how can she provide a proper meal for the family at a cost of 7 id. ~ In the case of a married man wIth three children, the sustenance payment works out at 8!d. for each meal for five persons. Families who are trying to· subsist on this scale of payment are suhjected to a gradual process of starvation. These examples show clearly the urgent necessity for increasing the sustenance payments.

The question of finding shelter for unemployed families who are evicted from their homes is most important, and I consider that the introduction of a rent moratorium is imperative. When the Labour Government was in office, the Acting Premier approved of a system by which the Sustenanee Department could obtain a home for an evicted family, and pay 8s. per week towards the rent.

Mr. CooK.-The system did not apply outside the metropolitan area.

Mr. HOLLAND.-That is so. The present Government abolished the system, I think, and then re-introduced it in another form. Under the Labour Government's system, as soon as the ejectment order was served on the unemployed tenant and he approached the Sustenance Department, an officer investigated his case, and made arrangements to transfer the family to another house. I understand tha.t under the present system the Department throws the responsibility of finding another house on the evicted tenant. There appears to be a conspiracy amongst estate agents to place unemployed families that have been evicted in houses which are in a state of decay. I can cite two cases. In South Melbourne an evicted family was put into a house which had no water taps. The only means by which they could obtain water was by drawing it off t!he sewerage cister~. The honorable member for St. Rilda interested himself in the case, and I think that he made better arrangements for the tf'nants. There was a.nother case, in

Carlton. The house into which the evicted family was put 'was damp, and it had no windows. I understand that the l\1elbourne City Council intervened, and condemned the dwelling as unfit for human habitation. I point out that a number of State Savings Bank homes are vacant at the present time because the purchasers were unable to meet their commitments to the bank on account of unemployment, and they had to leave the homes. These unoccupied properties are falling into a state of. disrepai.r, and there appears to be an understandmg, to which the bank is a party, that no unemployed tenant should occupy one of these houses. No matter how well built a house is, it will quickly fall into disrepair if it is untenanted. I should say that the average unemployed man who was allowed to occupy one of these homes would give a little attention to the improvement of the property, and in that way the State Savings Bank would probably be saved a good deal of money iu repairing thes~ properties. I am informed that many estate agents demand that a prospective tenant should produce a clear rent-book before they will allow him to rent a house on their books. They.know that an unemployed man I cannot produce a clear rent-book. Unemployed tenants find it very difficult to secure a home, and there appears to be a conspiracy on the part of estate agents -to treat them as "untouchables." Agents should not be allowed to place unemployed families in homes that are unfit for human habitation; such homes are a positive danger to the health of children occupying them.

(A t 6.30 p.m. the sitting was suspended until 7.38 p.m.)

Mr. HOLLAND.-Before the House adjourned for dinner I was dealing with clause 3, and the question of increasing sustenance payments. I pointed out that the amount allowed to a man with a wife and two children by the Sustenance Department is 7!d. for one meal for the whole family. When walking along Russell-street, I noticed outside a restaurant a sign advertising a three-course meal for 7d. That is cheap enough, and when we find that the amount allowed by the Sustenance Department is 7!d. for one meal for the family of four, we are able to make some sort of a comparison. I was also dealing with the necessity for the re-introduction

Unemployment Relief [26 OCTOBER) 1932.] (Administration) Bill. 1895·

of a rent moratorium Bill. There 'has come under my notice a case which bears out some of the arguments which I advanced earlier in the debate, and deals with a. set of circumstances similar to those which I mentioned .. then. I shall quote from a letter which I have received :-

An unemployed man was recently evicted from his house, and he found a hO:Ise in Scott's-avenue, Rosanna, at a rental of lOs. per week. When Mr. Bond--

Mr. Bond is a local land and estate agent. found that the man was unemployed he rang up the bank and told them that he (Mr. Bond) had another house for this man in Noel-avenue, Macleod, and then told the man that he could not go into the bank house, thus forcing him into a hovel which he had at Macleod. He (Mr. Bond) is now drawing rent to the value of 88. 6d. per week from the Sustenance Department for this house, which had previously been let at 78. per week.

The agent deprived a man of tJhe opportunity of renting through the Sustenance Department a decent sort of habitation. He used his influence with the bank authorities and compelled this man, who had nQl other option, to go to live in a hovel for which an additional ls. 6d. per week was obtained from the Sustenance Department for rent. It has been said that the requests we are making would, if given effect, involve extra taxation. In the circumstances we must expect to face the si tua tion. I think that I am safe in saying that in the last analysis taxation is paid by the workers, either in money or in kind. In many cases they have paid with their blood. Therefore, we are not asking too much, even if our suggestions woul~, in their r~sult, mean increased taxatioJ;1. On previous occasions in this Chamber speakers have demonstrated by comparing the incidence of taxation in the various States that Victoria is one of the lowest taxed in Australia.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-It certainly is. 1\1:r. HOLLAND.-That is because we

have lacked the courage to impose taxation on those who are best able to bear it. If taxation is properly applied, it is placed on the surplus income of the community . We come now to the important question of the . provision of clothing, a subject with which I dealt last night at rather great length. Even if I am accused of tedious repetition I pro~ose to deal further with it now, because it is at any rate to me of the utmost importance. I know that the Sustenance

Department has been doing excellent work in supplying a certain amount of clothing to unemployed people, but. we are reaching a stage at which from the' point of view of decency we must ma~e some superhuman effort to meet theIr needs. I ~as wondering what possibility there is of providing further work under the control of the Sustenance Department for unemployed girls, utilizing material that could be purchased at a very reasonable rate, and making clothing to distribute among the needy people. I am not exaggerating when I say that many of t'he young children of unemployed persons cannot attend school because they lack clothing and footwear. We ought to give flome opportunity to those members of the rising generation to live a full life and be properly educated. I believe that not much extra effort would be required on the part of the Sustenance Department to extend the particular activity which engages unemployed girls in the making of wearing apparel, in the way that I Ihave indicated. The girls have already gained a certain amount of experience. In the course of my frequent visits to the centres in the past, I noticed the capabilities of girls who had been brought on to the work, and without any previous knowledge of needlework had beeome rather efficient in a short space of time. I be~ieve that ~~t.h an extension of the particular actiVIty which I have mentioned, it might be possible to provide all the unemployed at Christmas with an outfit. I recognize that when we have something like 30,000 unemployed in the metropolitan area that would be a tremendous task. We realize also the particularly unfortunate position of the women. Numbers of members of this House have the experience almost daily of being waited on by the wives of unemployed men, begging that clothing may be provided for members of their families. Many of us have seen how eagerly these women attend the depots on the occasion of distributions of clothing. They are only too willing to humiliate themselves, in their straitened circumstances, by wearing the castoff clothing of other people distributed by the State Relief Committee. Cannot som€thing practical be done to get over this difficulty of providing families of the unemployed with adequate supplies of clothing? There must be a large num· bel' of girls at the various centres who are

189~ Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY.] (Administration) Bill.

tailoresses. If a few power machines .and other machines could be made avail-8bleJ I think it would be possible to meet the demands for clo.thing, at any rate, to 8 large extent. The Sustenance Department might take steps along those lines and thus cope with the acute shortage, which is becoming every day more and more acute. I appeal to the Government to make some extra effort so that steps may be taken to overcome that phase of the general unemployment situation.

I have read that in certain parts of the United States of America the authorities have been prepared to issue loans to unemployed persons, trusting them to repay in small weekly sums upon their return to normal employment. No doubt, a large number of these people would not repay the loans, and to that extent the relief funds would suffer. But in this State our own relief funds suffer in certain directions. Municipalities and public Departments which should be utilizing their ordinary revenues in carrying on their activities have . been taking unwarranted advantage, in some cases, of the availability of unemployment relief moneys. We are not asking too much if we appeal to the Government to provide, if necessary, for individual heads of families certain sums so that essential articles of clothing may be obtained. I impress on the Honorary Minister who is administering the Sustenance Department the urgency of this matter. Increased sustenance must be made available. No one can contradict my statements that certain agents are placing evicted families of the unemployed in condemned houses. I have previously related details of people being called upon to take up their residence in places unfit for animals, let alone for human beings. I feel sure the Honorary Minister will give this matter his most earnest consideration. I know that he is as keen as I am to see that justice is done to those who, as the result of continual unemployment, cannot live up to a decent standard.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard).-The Committee is considering the interpretation clause of the Bill. I have perhaps allowed a little latitude to the honorable member for Flemington, but I cannot permit honorable members generally to depart altogether from the scope of the clause.

Mr. CAIN.-The interpretation clause gives us an opportunity to deal with such matters as' food, clothing, aDd shelter.

The CHAIRMAN.-I ask honorable members to confine themselves to the matters within this clause, for they will have ample scope when debating other clauses of the Bill.

::Mr. COOK (Bendigo). - Clause 3 covers practically the whole of the matters which this Bill has been framed to deal ·with. It deals with the matter

I of sustenance, which word embraces the provision of shelter, clothing, firewood, and the like. I desire to pay a tribute to the Honorary Minister who is in charge of sustenance, for the sympathetic manner in which he has administered the Department and for the courteous way in which he has met the requests of members of this House. I pay the Honorary Minister the compliment of saying that he has carried on his administration with great sympathy and understanding for the unfortunate people whose cause· we have had to advocate. In saying this, I appreciate that the Honorary Minister could not have been as successful as he has been but for the splendid co-operation of the departmental officials. Everything I have said in eulogy of the responsible Minister applies with equal, force to his officers.

The honorable member for Flemington has paid some attention to the case' for greater provision being made to clothe the unemployed and their families. In my electorate there have been some distributions of clothing, and we are particularly grateful for the numbers 'of pairs of boots which have been received; but it is quite evident that this problem of adequate clothing is becoming more and more acute. Whilst this Parliament and the Governments which have been in office during the last few years have appreciated the necessity of providing food for the unemployed, we have not fully realized, I think, the rights as well as the needs of the unemployed in the matter of shelter and clothing. I learned only recently that it has been the custom, in the cases of families of the unemployed who have been evicted from their homes, to provide a Government subsidy towards renting other premises. That has been confined, however, to the metropolitan area. The same need exists for assisting

U nelnployment Relief [26 OCTOBER, 1932.J (Administration) Bill. 1897

to obtain shelter for families of the unemployed throughout the State-not only in the large provincial centres, but practically in all centres. The Honorary Minister is recognized all around the House" as a man absolutely fitted for the job he has to do. I appeal to him to pay some attention to the urgent need for providing shelter. When I was seated behind i.he Labour Government, I listened to honorable members who then formed the Opposition saying on many occasions that if it was right that Parliament should provide food for the people it was equally right that it should provide unfortunate families with necessary shelter. I sincerely support the appeal of the honorable member for Flemington for greater provision to be made from the unemployment relief moneys to supply clothing. In my own district there are hundreds of men who are engaged in searching for gold to supplement their sustenance payments. These men are not loafers. They are working hard and of their own free will to add to the small sums distributed to them. In so doing, however, they are wearing out their clothing and their boots more rapidly than are unemployed men in other parts of the State, particularly those in the metropolitan area, who, when they can find a little work, are not called upon to undertake it under such rough conditions as obtain on the gold-fields. The task is coming back on the various relief committees in such a way that they cannot cope with it. The amount supplied by local people is inadequate to meet the great needs. T'he Honorary Minister has proved himself to be capable of administering the Susten,ance Department to' the general satisfaction of honorable members and of the unemployed, and I hope that, young as he is, he will prove himself to be a statesman from the top of his head to the soles of his feet. He can do that only by realizing the needs of the people, and by carrying out what we desire consistently with the facilities at his disposal. Under the Bill there is provision for work for sustenance. I have been struck by the lack of clot.hing, food, and shelter for the unemployed. It must be remembered that thousands of the men are undernourished, and are unable to do 100 per cent. of efficient work when they get jobs. I appeal to the Honorary Minister

to see that those who control the men on relief works will be sympathetic and wil1 all~w them to earn sufficient money with whICh to buy food to nourish their bodies and enable them to do the work provided. Practically all of the ramifications of t.he Bill are co.vered by clause 3. I know that I am appealing to a man with a sympathetio heart, but more provision must be made for food and clothing. If the Honorary Minister wisely utilizes the IT nemployment Relief Fund he will achieve credit for himself, and do good to the community and the State as a whole.

~r .. MURPHY (Port Melbourne).ThIS IS about the only opportJInity that we shall 'have of disoussing the question of shelter and clothing, for the simple reason that this clause contains an enlarlgement, of the term "sustenance." The last Bill contained no provision for shelter or clothing, and it is through the good offices of the Honorary Minister that the two things 'have been provided for. There is no other part of the Bill on which we can discuss this matter. I have visited the Stat.e schools in Port Melbourne, and have obtained information showing that a large number of children are ~_nable to go to scho.ol beoause they have no boots. I know that the Education Department has tried to ~o something in the directio.n of supplyIng boots, but what has been done. is not sufficient. There are about 35 000 Ull

employed in the metropolitan ~rea. If the average number of each family is four, it means that about 140,000 people are affected by unemployment. The greater number have had no opportunity to earn money during the past three yea~s: ~heir clot.hing is worn out. 1vlany famIlIes ax:.e wearmg clothing that is tattered and torn. I believe that we can overcome this difficulty by a plan that I sh~l~ now mention. If the Honorary Mllllster sees any merit, in it, I am sure that he will adopt it. In different parts of the city unemployed girls are engaged fo~ two days a week, for which they receIve 12s. There are tailoresses and also tailors on the unemployed list. If we bought material from the mills these girls could make it. up into clothing. Tweeds are sold for a low price, and serge costs about 5s. a yard; I understand that it can be bought for less at the Geelong Woollen Mills. If this were done the state of a.ffairs now existing would ~ease,

1898 Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY.] (Administration) Bill.

&nd mOire people would be better clothed. I believe that if the Sustenance Department followed the plan of making clothes that I indicated, it would cost very little more than the present practice costs. Two ladies of ability manage that branch of the Department, and I believe that the Honorary Minister and they could organize things, and obtain material from the mills at a low cost. Any number of children are without boots. The children of to-day are the men and women of tomorrow. Through malnutrition, the children are getting into a condition that does not promise well for their future. I shall not worry the Committee about this matter. Some honorable members do not see the mis~ry I see, and I hope they will not. I have seen it every day for the last three years. It gets on one's nerves. Little children are hungry, and you can see starvation in the faces of some men and women. These people are wearing thin, patched clothf'.s. Although money spent on sewerage works is well spent, it is more incumbent on us, in the interests of humanity, to see that something is done in the direction that I have mentioned. On several occasions I have gone to the Honorary Minister in regard to shelter. He has a difficult Department to administer, and it 1equires a ,sympathetic man. I say, without flattery, that he is the most sympathetic' member of the Ministry.

Mr. COTTER.-And yet you say you did not kiss the blarney stone.

Mr. MURPHY.-I do not flatter, but if a man is doing his best it is worthy of recognition. If a man is doing his best, and I do not acknowledge it, I am not doing what is right. I consider myself a coward if. when I know a man is doing his best, and is doing right, I do not say so. If I took the honorable gentleman to the Port :Th1elbourne State schools, I should not need to speak in this House about the conditions of the children, because he would see them for himself. I appeal to honorable members representing more fortunate districts to give every assistance to the Honorary Minister in his efforts to improve the conditions of the poorer people; then we shall be working hand in hand in the cause of humanity. I also believe that if my plan in regard to making clothes is adopted, in three months' time we shall not hear the sad stories that are now related, and hon-

orable members will be satisfied that the money has been spent wisely.

Mr. McKENZIE (Wonthaggi).-After the eloquent appeal that has just come

.from the depths of an Irish heart, I do not think there is much more for me to say. I desire to bring under the notice of the Minister the claims of the country districts. I admit that the lot of the unemployed there is somewhat easier than that of the unemployed in the city. It is not difficult for an unemployed man in the country districts to obtain the loan of a horse and dray in order to gather a load of firewood. He can also catch fish and trap rabbits for food. In Wonthaggi more than 500 men were recently dismissed from their employment, and they swelled the ranks of those who were already out of work. The country districts have not participated in the distribution of clothing and boots for the unemployed to the same extent as has the metropolis.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-I think the country districts have _received the same proportion of boots as has the metropolis, but they have not received as much clothing.

Mr. McKENZIE.-I am actively connected with the relief committee at Wonthaggi, and in four years we have received about 70 pairs of boots for distribution when we could have done with 700 pairs.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-There was not a large amount of unemployment there until recently.

Mr. McKENZIE.-It is very difficult for me, as a business man, to tell men who come to my place of business pleading for boots and clothing for their families, that they are not available. I think that every member agrees that the relief of distress caused by unemployment is not a matter for party politics, and that it is too serious a question for the introduction of the party element. I believe that the Minister in charge of sustenance and the Employment Council are doing their work irrespective of the party brand of the member who represents a particular district, but I do not think that the unemployed in the country districts have received the consideration to which they are entitled. It is a terrible thing in a young country like this that little children should have to go to school hungry, and charitable people have to provide them with meals. The relief committee at Wonthaggi is providing 200 meals every school day at each of the two


schools. That is a heavy burden on the local people when the fact is borne in mind that one-fifth of the workers in the town are workless, and it is a burden which is becoming too heavy to bear, with the result that the relief committee's resources are badly strained. I appeal to the l\1inister to give serious consideration to the question of providing for a larger distribution of clothing to unemployed in the country districts. So far as I know, only one distribution has taken place in my district, and it followed efforts made by Mr. Holloway when he represented the district in the House of Representatives, and succeeded in having some military clothing distributed. I think I may be pardoned for adopting a parochial attitude in discussing this matter, but I think that my remarks apply to all country districts.

Dr. SHIELDS (Oastlemaine and Kyneton).-I pay a tribute to the Honorary Minister in charge of sustenance for the way in which he has administered the Department, and I also desire to support those honorable members who have praised the work of the officers. They are most efficient and obliging, and are always ready to do their best for the unemployed. I agree with the remarks of the honorable member for Wonthaggi as to the necessity for more consideration for country unemployed. The provision of housing for evicted families is a most important mattel'. There have been evictions in several towns in my electorate, and by personal effol't I succeeded in obtaining homes for the evicted families. At the same time, I do not think that that duty should devolve on the member for the district. In one case a man with a wife and two children was to be evicted,. and he appealed to me to obtain for him a couple of tents, one to house the family, and the other to be used as a store-room and kitchen. I made an appeal to the Sustenance Department, and the officers used every effort to aocede to my request, bJIt they found it was impossible to do so. When unemployed families are evicted in the metropolis, a payment is made out of the snstenance fund towards the rent of another home, but that system does not apply in the country districts. I have not much complaint on the score of the distribution of clothing." There has not been much distributed in my electorate, but I express my thanks to the State

Relief Oommittee for the way in which they have assisted unemployed families in the country districts who required clothing. With reference to the supply of firewood, I thank the Sustenance Department for having made arrangements with the Forests Commission by which firewood could be secured for the unemployed in my district from the State forest in the electorate. I have had no difficulty in getting firewood made available in that way.

Mr. JEWELL (Brunswick).-I compliment the Honorary Minister in charge of sustenance on the very sympathetic manner in which he is administering the Departmen t, and I thank the officers for their work. As the representative of a large industrial suburb, I have occasion to visit the Department frequently, and the officers have been most sympathetic towards every case that I have brought before them, and have done their best to help the unemployed. Like other members, I hope that the Minister and his officers will provide more clothing for distressed families. Some of the unemployed men have been out of work for three or four years, and it is not difficult to realize that their clothing is now threadbare. Unemployed persons come to me in scores appealing. for food, clothing, and shelter. This morning a man came to my home and told me that he was likely to be evicted. He has a wife and child, and the only place in which they have to sleep is a stable. They expect to be evicted from it at any moment. The man was in his shirt sleeves because he did not have a 'coat to wear. I am sure that the Honorary Minister will make some provision for that family when the case is brought under his notice. Men come to my home with coats buttoned up to their throats, and all that they have under their coats is their skin. The Sustenance Department should provide these men with proper clothing. It is pitiable to see young children ill-clothed and under-nourished because of the lack of sufficient food. I brought these matters under the notice of the Labour Government, and appealed to it to do more for the unemployed. I believe that it should have done more than it did, and now I make the same appeal to the present Government. Medical men who practise in

1900 U nemployme"'t Relief [ARREMBLY.] (Administration) Bill.

my el(~ctorate have told me of the dreadful privations of unemployed families. These gentlemen are well qualified to speak on the subject, because they go into the homes of the unemployed and realize that they are not receiving sufficient food, and have not the proper amount ot clothing. The Government should take steps to provide more food and clothing for unemployed families, even if the additional money required must be raised by more taxation. More firewood should be made available next winter than we distributed this year. What chance have the young children of unemployed families of growing up strong citizens if they are not now provided with adequate food and clothing ~ We must bear in mind the fact that these children will be the citizens of to-morrow, and the Government should do everything to give them a proper opportunity to obtain sufficient nourishment. I again want to compliment the Honorary Minister and his staff on the work they have done, and I believe that if the Government will allow them they will go further still, -and see that the children and the parents have food and clothing in the future.

Mr. ZWAR (H eidelberg).-I wish to endorse what honorable members have said with regara. to the Honorary Minister (!Ir. Ken t Hughes) and the sympathetic manner in which he is carrying out his duties. I also wish to congratulate the officers on the magnificent manner in which they have helped us in dealing with the unemployed throughout these bad times. I should like to refer to the matter of clothing and boots. I believe that the Department is turning out some 2,700 articles of clothing a week, the clothing being made by unemployed girls, and that there are 53 municipalities participating in the distribution of that clothing. In my opinion, the method of distribution is on a wrong basis; for instance, some 50 articles are sent out to one municipality, and that is not enough to go round. I would suggest that the biggest supply be sent to the municipality which has the largest number of unemployed. That municipality may be Brunswick. If there are 600 or 700 unemployed wanting articles, and you have only 50

or 60 to give them, you can quite understand the feeling amongst those who are left out. The Department has been extremely good to us, but the goods supplied are not nearly sufficient for the needs of the people. We have heard honorable members speak to-night of the poverty that exists, and there is no need to labour that aspect of the matter. I think that we on this (the Ministerial) side of the House have seen just as mueh of it as have honorable members on the other side. One member said that this should not be a party question, and it is not a party question. We should sink all differences at a time like this, and get down to brass tacks in endeavouring t~ assist those who require assistance. I have been for twenty years trying to help my fullows over the rough road, and for the past three years I have been in charge of the work in connexion with the unemployed at Preston. I wish to pay a tribute to the way in which the Australian is standing up to his troubles at the present time.

The honorable member for Brunswick: has referred to the difficulties m connexion with clothing. I have seen unemployed in the same condition as he has described. What applies to clothing applies also to boots. At the beginning of this year the late Government made available 47,000 pairs of boots when at least 250,000 pairs were required. To Preston 600 pairs were sent, and we required 3,000. Honorable members will understand the disappointment of those of the unemployed who could not get boots. If there is not sufficient money available to provide the goods that are required, those who are in the fortunate position of being able to provide for themselves should find it no hardship to do something more in order that the unfortunate unemployed may be looked after. In regard to the supply of firewood, we must congratulate the Honorary Minister on the amount that wail sent out. So far as housing is concerned, we have nothing to complain about in Preston. I think we have shifted something like 90 families. When notice of eviction has been given in 24 hours we have had lorries available, and have shifted the furniture into other houses. I appeal to the Minister to see if mor~ clothing cannot be sent out in

Unemployment Relief L 26 OCTOBER, 1932.] (Administration) Bill. 1901

the way I have mentioned instead of being sent out in dribs and drabs.

I consider that the Ministry should take the opportunity at the present time of getting more boots, because I do not think that ever before in the history of Victoria could boots be obtained more cheaply than at present. Leather is cheap, and if it is intended to call for tenders for the supply of boots, I would suggest that good boot operatives who are out of work should be given the opportunity of making the boots. Those men are, perhaps, being sent to the country. They are not fitted for such work as forestry work, and if they were put to work in their own trade we should get 100 per cent. efficiency out of them, whereas we would not get 25 per cent. out of them on forestry work. We should feel proud of the Department, and I am sure that it could carry out the idea I have put forward. It is said that there is a shortage of money, but I say we should not be short of money with which to help our fellows at the present time in regard to clothing, boots, and shelter.

Mr. HAYES (Melbourne).-The clause defines sustenance as including shelter, clothing, and firewood. Regarding the distribution of firewood and clothing, I have very little to complain about. I am not here to-night to make complaints as to the work of the Department, but I wish to draw attention to some of the remarks that have been made, and to suggest a way of overcoming some of t.he overlapping that takes place .at the present time. I think that the· clause should make some reference to the State Relief Committee, because in my opinion there should be only one distributing body in the State for the classes of goods referred to. It is not advisable to have two or three different bodies endeavouring to collect goods and money for the purpose of distribution in the form of unemployment relief. It is necessary that the State Relief Committee should be the sole distributing agency for Victoria, and if we make provision to that effect we shall to a -large extent get over the difficulties that exist at the present time. I realize that in distributing the clothes, boots, and groceries that are made available, the State Relief Committee has a very difficult proposition before it, in view of the fact there is only a limited

quantity of goods available. No matter what quantity of goods was sent to one district, there would still not be sufficient to go round. The suggestion made by tbe last speake.r that goods should be sent to supply all of those on the sustenance list at one particular time instead of weekly supplies being sent out might get over one of the difficulties if it were adopted, but I think there would still be difficulty, as unless a roster of those on the sustenance list were formed and they had to apply in rotation, the same people would receive relief time after time.

I consider that we should prevent appeals by organizations apart from the State Relief Committee. That should be the only body entitled to make appeals. If that were the case, probably greater assistance would be received from the various people who give goods for relief purposes. In the Oity of Melbourne, business people have appeals made to them by various relief committees, church organizations, and so on. If all the appeals were made by the State Relief Committee the results would be hetter, and the business people would be more satisfied 17hat the goods were going through th~ proper channel. I feel quite sure that the work of the State Relief Committee, in distributing food and clothes during the last eighteen months, has been satisfactory. The only complaint we have to make is that sufficient goods have not been available, but. that has ~ot been the fault of the committee. It could only distribute what goods were available, and certainly in some districts the unemployed could not get all they required. However, if we were to give 2,000 pairs of boots to one district, there would not be sufficient to go round. In my opinion, the State Relief Commii tee in conjunction with the Sustenance Department has done a very good job.

The question of rent is one that requires some consideration. The Department has apparently decided that before rent will be paid for an unemployed person, eviction from his i}wme by order of a Court must have taken place. Several cases have been brought under my notice where people who have been livillg in the samp houses for years past have been unable to pay rent for twelve or eighteen months, owing to their having been out of work. The landlord has been a good landlord to allow them to stay in possession

1902 Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY. ] (Administration) Bill.

for twelve or eighteen months without paying rent. If he wants to get any rent for his house he has to take the tenant to the Court. and secure an eviction order. As soon as that is done, the Department will make provision for the evicted tenant elsewhere. In my opinion some system should be brought about whereby an owner who has been genero~s enough to allow a tenant to stay in hIS house for twelve or eighteen months without paying rent would be given some consideration. He would be quite prepared t.o take the 8s. a week made available by the Department. As I have said, the Department will not pay rent for a person unless that person has been evicted. When that occurs it places him in another ,house. Considerable expense is involved in moving people from place to place and I think the Department, withou'~ sacrificing anything, could meet the wishes of the persons concerned by allowing the tenants to remain in their homes and paying the landlords 8s. per week. Why not leave the tenant in the house where he may have lived for seven or eight years ~ The officer in charge of the rent question at the present time has some very hard cases to handle. I recognize the position he is placed in. He is und~r t.he control of the Depart.ment, and he has to do as he is told. I think ,he should be allowed some discretion, so that he may decide cases on their merits. If he considers that it is justifiable to allow a tenant to remain in his home, and the landlord is prepared to accept 8s. a week, it should not be necessary for the tenant to be evicted before the Department will agree to pay rent for him. If the payment of the rent were recommended by the sustenance inspector and the rent officer nothing unfair would be done, and the Department could very well allow the tenant to stay in his home and arrange for the landlord to receive the rent in aocordance with the Department's regulations.

I understand that the Department proposes to extend the system of distl'ict labour bureaux. I think that will be a step in the right direction. It will, perhaps, be a means of abolishing the overlapping that has taken place in the past,. It win also prevent any imposition taking place. People will not be allowed to' register in more than one district. The lists at the Government Labour Exchange

Mr. Hayes.

have already been considerably reduced. As a result of lOocal registration, men have not to go into Melbourne tOo register. This system seems to work out very well. , A local branch has, say, 25 men ready to take up work. The central exchange wants 25 men. 'The local committee is rung up, and the men are at once sent to the work. Instead of the Department calling up 400 or 500 men, and having a number of rejections of work, only those men go to the Department whO' will accept the work. This is a more satisfactory arrangement all round. It means that the men will not be sent to the Government Labour Exchange unless work is offering. The officer in charge of the local district will send particulars of the men registered in that district to headquarters.

Mr. KENT HUGHES (Honorary Minister) .-1 very much appreciate, both personally and on behalf of my staff, the kind remarks that have been made to-night. But I should like at this stage to make a statement with regard to clothing. Clothing and rent arl two of the most difficult problems we have to deal with. The honorable member for Port Melbourne suggests that more might be done with regard to clothing at the work centres. I may say that it costs us more to get the clothin g from the work centres than we can get it for by inviting tenders from the factories. We can get quite good material at Is. a yard. Two thousand seven hundred articles a week are turned out at the local work centres. The cost of those centres to us is £90'0 a week. I have a table showing the actual distribution of clothing and other goods by the State Relief Committee. I do not propose to put it into Hansard, because, as a printer, I know something of the cost of setting up a table of this nature. The table will be available to honorable members who want to peruse it. During the last fortnight the State Relief Oommittee have issued 3,184 garments of different kinds. The garments include a great variety of children's, girls', women's, boys', and men's clothing. We keep as large a supply of clothing for distribution as is possible in the circumstances. I should like to remind honorable members that up to the present the sustenance rate has cost about £1,350,000 a year. When I say sustenance, I mean also the cost of work centres.

Mr. CAIN.-Wood and everything.


Yr. KENT HUGHE'S.-Yes, wood is included. When we add the amo·unt proposed to be allocated by the Employment Council for work, it will be seen that we have not much of a margin left. I sympathize with the statement made with regard to rent and clothing, and I can assure honorable members that we are doing our best. While I do not wish honorable members to curtail their remarks nnnecessarily, I would point out that we are not helping either ourselves or the unemployed by repeating arguments that have been advanced. I can assure honorable members that the staff, and I, and the Government are alive to the problems which have to be dealt with. I appreciate the attitude honorable members have adopted towards the Bill, and I hope that we shall make progress with it.

Mr. MURPHY.-You think more should be done as regards clothing than has been done up to the present?

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-I should not like to make any rash promise that I might not be able to fulfil.

Mr. MURPHY.-Tailors are sent into the bush to do work they are unfitted for. It would be better to use their services in making clothes.

Mr. KENT HUGHES. - Better methods of distribution will have to be adopted ill certain areas. In those areas lots are drawn for boots, and some people get boots who do not need them, while others who do need boots do not get them. I know what the difficulties of distribution are when there are not sufficient articles to go round. We want, if we can, to provide clothing and boots for all who badly need them. I hope that some committees will overhaul their methods of distribution, because they are faulty. I know that it is a difficult problem, but we have to try to make, not only the central office, but the local committees, more efficient.

Mr. PRENDERGAST (Footscray).I have been struck by the glowing remarks made by honorable members in regard to the efficiency of the Sustenance Department. But I have been looking at a report which appeared in to-day's Age, and I want to know who was responsible for the conditions described in that report. A Carlton labouring man-a man with a wife and seven children-was sentenced to three months' imprisonment because,

as far as I can see, the family were victims of horrible poverty. The man had been in receipt of sustenance. Some officer must have known, when he applied for assistance, that he was very poorly clad. I should like to know who is responsible for the dreadful conditions described in the Age report. According to the evidence of a police constable, there was practically no furniture in the man's house-a four-roomed house-and verv little of anything else. Accordirig to thole constable-

In the first room there was an old iron bedstead, on which there was a dirty old mattress, but no bed clothing. In the next room there was no furnishing of any kind, but there was an old iron bedstead in the third. In the fourth room, the floor of which was covered with linoleum, there was a very nice pianola and some furniture. In a bath containing cold water a little girl was washing her feet, but the other six infants were huddled around a small fire in the grate. The eldest girl told them that the only blanket in the house was being used as a window curtain. Both the children and the house were in an appalling state of neglect, and the only food consisted of a small piece of butter, a crust of bread, a minute quantity of tea and two pounds of flour. The children wore only very scanty outer garments, and those were filUlY. The baby appeared to have been starved, and waR covered with sores.

The family was well-known to the Sustenance Department, as is obvious from statements made by a policeman and a policewoman. According to the report-

Defendant said he had been out of work for a long time and had done his best for the children. He had applied for clothing, but had been unable to obtain any. He had gone to the country on relief work, but returned on learning that his wife was ill.

There was a pianola in the house which had been obtained on the hire system and was worth £168. We know that there are business people who practically force these things on poor people. They obtain a little money from these people, who after a time have to forfeit the goods. The pianola will be taken back by the :firm which supplied it, and which ought to have known that the.se were not proper people to supply it to. The only offence committed by this man at Oarlton appears to have been the offence of extreme poverty. The matter should be made the subject of a proper report. The sustenance drawn by this family amounted to probably only a few shillings a week, and it could not be expected that there would

1904 Unemployment Relief [ASSEMBLY. J (Administration) Bill.

be mueh food or clothing in the house. r want to know why the case was not investigated earlier. People will say that cases of this kind are occurring right under the Department's very nose. I want to know what the Honorary Minister has to say about it. We have been told about cases that have been helped. I want inquiries to be made with the view of ascertaining what cases have not been helped. Was it a fair thing to send this man to gaol?

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-Who sentenced him?

Mr. PRENDERGAST. - Mr. Freeman, P.M., who said- --

It was a very distressing case. After making 'allowance for the fact that the cleanliness of the home and the children was generally left to the mother, there were certain features for which the father was responsible. There were many people just as badly off as defenda.nt and his wife, but they managed to keep their homes clean, and, by sacrifice, endeavoured to see that their children were provided for.

A sentence of three months' imprisonment was" imposed.

I hope the Honorary Minister will make 8. note of that. The home was there, and the parents had made sacrifices as they had seven children to look after. There was no bed clothing except a blan"ket, which was used as a curtain to a window.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-The sentence was not imposed because there was no olothing.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-It looks as though a man can be sentenced to imprisonment for endeavouring to cover up his poverty. I want the Honorary Minister to give the case his earliest attenti on. It looks as if the man should be released from gaol at once.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-YOU did not read the headlines. The report is headed "Shocking Parental Neglect."

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-I have read the evidence. In another portion of the newspaper there is reported a case in which a man was charged with forging and, uttering. He was given a sentence of six months, but the sentence was suspend~d. Poverty goes to gaol, and roguery escapes with a recorded sentence. The other man has to go to gaol. That is a position which does not appeal to me, and I call attention to it in connexion with the question of sustenance. I have no wish to blame anyone. It

may be proved that it is impossible to deal with such cases. At the same time we have the evidence, and I should like to know what the responsible - Department intends to do in respect of it. There have been cases brought before the Court in whioh men have been shown to have tried to obtain an extra shilling or two. They have to be sent to gaol, while the clever rogue has his sentence suspended.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-There is the pianola, for which an instalment was paid on the 14th of October.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-r.Dhe man'! wife and children obtained the pian01a. Because t.here is nothing else in the home it is sought to bring the pianola into the consideration of a criminal offence. The Honorary Minister must not try to stop me speaking on the subject.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard). - I do not thi!lk that the Honorary l\{inister should interject, because it gives the honorable member further food for thought.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-I should prefer the Honora.ry Minister to give more food to the unemployed, but apparently they are given merely food for t40ught. It may be that he is doing the best that he can in t.he circumstances that exist, but I do not propose to support the imposition of a sentence of three months' imprisonment when people are trying to obtain more than the Government allows to enable them to live. Even when they do, the amount is insufficient for their existence. If this question is not settled in a satisfactory way, I can assure the Government that it will be brought before this Chamber again.

Mr. BARRY (0 arlton).-I was very interested in the comments of the Honorary Minister when dealing with the questions of clothing and housing. He did not explain fully what was in his mind when he said that the Sustenance Department was considering further the problem of housing. I am satisfied, so far as my district is concerned, that the Department are making a good job in the face of a very difficult situation, and I feel competent that the people concerned are appreciative of that fact. I endorse the remarks that have been made by other 'honorable members in that respect. I agree that there is food for thought in the statements that were made by the honorable member for Footscray


who has given us if not facts, then certainly what was published in the press to-day. Contained in that repm:-t there is a story that should provide food for thought to the communit.y generally.

Mr. DIFFEy.-One would think that t.here was more in the matter than is suggested by the newspaper report.

Mr. BARRY.-We know that newspapers always attempt to create a sensation.

An HONORABLE MEMBER.-Why not wait for the facts 1

Mr. BARRY.-I know the facts that obtain in a number of homes in Carlton. I have heard it said that in one case there was a piano,la in the home. I have no doubt that the firms which supply such instruments find it much more convenient to leave them in the homes than to take them away and store them in other places. I do not blame the Department for the position in which the man in question finds himself. Is there not the fact that the man is in gaol for three months 1 It is claimed that the ohildren are in such a state that they have no blankets on their beds; the blankets that were there at one time being used as window blinds. There is absolutely no furniture in the home, and the fact that there are seven young Australians living in such conditions certainly providea food for thought. The children cannot be held responsible for the position, no matter what can be said otherwise.

I was to-day in the Carlton football ground, where there was a demonstration by children from the schools in the district. I saw children providing others with lunch, lunch that had been sent by parents who are working to be shared with the children of parents who are not working. I know that it is not the fault of the Sustenance Department that such a position obtains, but it leads us to think. Surely the time has come when we must do something. The position, so far as sustenance is concerned, is that the provision is inadequate. There are people who are not being fed, clothed, and sheltered as we would desire, and that such a state of affairs should exist is shameful, and a reflection on a Christian community. It is not the fault of the Sustenance Department. It is the fault of Parliament itself. We can provide the means to furnish food, clothing,

and shelter. I. approve of the sentiments expressed to the effect that this problem should be handled from a nonparty point of view. It may be said that the people concerned are God's creatures, and that God will look after them. I concur with the view submitted by the honorable member for Flemington that it is not fair to leave the job to God and get out of it ourselves. We have a duty in the direction of ensuring that in this land of plenty no one should starve or be without the necessities of life.

Mr. MAOKREJ~L.-If we had a truly national Government with your party represented in it, would that not cover what you want?

Mr. BARRY.-The Nationalist Governments that we have to-day are only making the position much worse than it was. I have already endeavoured to indicate that there is no question of attacking a Government. I am not making my statement in condemnation of any Department or the Government, nor do I desire anyone interested in the relief of the distress in the community to bolster up authorities when they do not attempt adequately to cope with the situation. I am prepared to admit that the position was not much better when the Labour Government was in power. Let us brook no party. interference, but let us attempt to do the job in a proper spirit. If the Government moves along those lines it will find that there will be no objections raised on this· (the Opposition) side of the Chamber. I

I am not attempting to work the parish pump, for I think that the situation as it affects housing applies generally. Houses fitted for the accommodation of distressed people are not now procurable at a rent of 8s. a week. The Sustenance Department is doing its best, is paying 8s. a week, and is relying in many in· stances on the people concerned to provide the difference in cases where the rent is lOs., 12s., or 15s. But the occupants are not able to pay that difference. If Parliament carries out its duty it will say that the time has come when an increase should be made in respect of the amounts that are paid for the rent of the homes. We should adopt the suggestion that has already been made regarding the occupancy of State Savings Bank homes.

1906 U nemploynumt Relief [ASSEMBLY.] (Administration) Bill.·

There are at present thousands of such dwellings empty, and they are falling into disrepair because no purchasers are forthcoming. Yet there are unemployed persons who have no homes at all. We should approach the State Savings Bank to ascel'tain whether those empty dwellings can be utilized. Within a few hundred yards of my own home there are two sueh places empty, and they have been empty for the last two years. Both houses were renovated with a view to sale, but they have not been sold, and are falling into a dilapidated condition. If unemployed with their families 'were allowed to occupy those places something might be done to prevent the dwellings from falling into further disrepair, -and while the value of the properties would be enhanced deserving people would be provided with the necessary roof over their heads.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-At Sunshine there are some soldiers' homes which are unoccupied. Even returned soldiers can-110t obtain them.

Mr. BARRY.-That is a further phase of the situation. I sincerely hope that as the result of the discussion it will be possible for the Government to consider taking action in the direction suggested. We should also ensure that it is not necessary for people to be ejected from their homes before something i8 done to relieve them. Tlhey should not have to go before the Oourt and be ejected before action is taken. A move should be made to relieve them earlier than has been the case, and save them the pain and misery of being thrown out on to the streets. If that were done, we should prevent the distress which now results from. lack of timely action. Honorable members can' visualize the plight of people vvho are walking the streets homeless on a wet night such as this. Yet here we are discussing their position when there are unused dwellings that they are not allowed to occupy for shelter. To my mind, that is a disgrace to this Christian community.

Mr. KEANE (Coburg).-I am pleased that the conspiracy of silence on the Ministeri.al side of the House has been broken. I am not so much anxious to speak as to see results from the speeches that have already been made, and from what can be done by Ministerial supporters in per-

suading the GO'vernment. I am convinced that there would be greater results than are likely if the Government's majority were to use their influence in connexion with the matter under debatf'. I regret that many of the younger members on the Ministerial side have not contributed to the debates on any of the matters that have yet come before the House. I am not so much concerned O'ver the silence of the older members as with the attitude of the new young men, especially those who belong to the Australian Natives Associa tion. They may not altogether a ppreciate the rebukes which I have administered hitherto, but I promise them that on every occasion where I can avail mvself of the opportunity I shall continue to administer to' them similar rebukes if they do not ,change their methods, and take their part in the djscussion of all important matters such as the present. The honorable member for Carlton has unwitting1y stolen some of my thunder. I, too, had intended to speak on the matter of the circumstances of those peO'ple who have been acquiring an equity in a property purchased from the State Savings Bank. Many of these people are now faced with the prospect of losing their equity altogether. In view of the relationship of the State Savings Bank to the Government, I maintain that the Government should take steps to alleviate the position of those home purchasers who are suffering, or who have suffered, the loss of their equity in the properties which they have been endeavouring to buy for themselves.

Without placing a halo around the head of the Honorary Minister who is administering the Sustenance Department, I compliment him on the very fine work he is doing. He is following worthily in the footsteps of two very fine administrators, Mr. Williams and IVIr. Kiernan. He has the most difficult Department of all to administer, and he js not to be envied, but he is doing his job as well as he could possibly do it. Although the late Labour Government had a considerable hand in framing our unemployment relief legislation, I do not hesitate to say that the Act is absolutely rotten j but, administered sympathetically and with humaneness, it is proving a good deal better than it would be if it were in the hands of an unsympathetic l\1inister. I have lived in Cob-lug for the last 40 years, and it will be appreciated that I know a great number of my

Unemployment Relief [26 OCTOBER} 1932.] (Administrat,ion) Bill. 1907

fellow citizens. I think honorable members generally will appreciate to the full how humiliating it must be for numbers of them who know me well, and whom I have known for so long in times when they held good positions, to' have to, come to me nowadays and ask me for my cast-off clothing. The whole thing is a tragedy. It is tragic for me to have to tell them that I cannot give them anything, as I have nothing left to' give. The Go,vernment is tOI blame for a good deal, notwithstanding that the previous Government did not do all it ought to have done. If members of the present Government were sincere in the criticisms which they uttered when they were O'n the Opposiside of the House, they would be doing something more to' relieve the widespread distress which we see all about us. When the Hogan Government was in office, it was badgered all the time because of its proposals to obtain more money by way of taxation so that common justice might be given the unemployed and their families. The present Government is not in a similar situation, because the present Opposition would stand behind it on every occasion when it might seek to raise more money through the taxation of the people whOi made immense sums during the war by the exploitation of their fellow Australians. If another war were to break out to-morrow there would be any amount of money available from the financial institutions to clothe, feed, and equip men tOi fight. The Governm.ent could boldly say tQl-morrow, despite its boast that it would not increase taxation or reduce wages and salaries, that it felt bound to raise more money fOir the relief of the situation of the unemployed. And it would succeed in that objective, because it would have the unanimous support of the Opposition. A man called on me a little while ago and asked if I could not do something for him, as he was in a state of absolute destitution after three years of unemployment. Unfortunately, I could do nothing, because the Government had taken out of the hands of the Departments all authority for finding employment for individual members of tJhe unemployed. Three days after I had had to tell that man that I could do nothing for him he was found at the rear of my home, shot. That was the end of the trials and the troubles that he -had had to endure fOlr three years. When it is said that the Government cannot do more

than it is doing, I say that it can do more. It can tax more heavily the people who are the fortunate possessors of large incomes. Every measure it has brought down so' far has been a direot -tax on the poorer sect~on of tJhe community. The Government could do a great deal more than it is doing in the way of taxing the more fortunately-placed citizens. The honorable member for Upper Goulburn remarked that the fault lies with members on the Opposit.ion side of the House, because we will not join in forming a National GO'vernment. There is a National Government in Great Britain, and conditions in that country are infinitely worse than before that Government was established. In tJhe north of Ireland the unemployed made requests for increased sustenance. T~eir appeals were refused, whereupon they demonstrated that the .Irish will not sit down under an injustice, and they got all they wanted. There have been similar occurrences in various parts of EIi"gland, and such things have happened as near home as New South Wales. It may be only a matter of time when the example will be followed in this State. I do not wish to see violence, for that has never brought about any permanent remedy. Surely something is wrong in the government of this communit.y when little children can exist in conditions of misery and starvation. Surely we have the machinery at our disposal to ensure that such a state of affairs shall no longer exist.

I appeal to the Government to listen to the pleas of the honorable member for Flemington and other speakers that additional quantities of clothing should b(~ provided for the unemployed and their families. I know, only too well, the humiliation that is suffered by those people who are forced to beg for cast-off clothing for tJheir children and themselves. I know what it is to have to suffer. In 1893, when the banks closed their doors, I was called upon to walk the streets of Melbourne for four solid months, and many a time I sat down to a meal of dry bread and black tea through no fault of my own. In such a country as Australia, endowed as it is with all those things which go to the maintenance of life under decent conditions, and in which more things are being produced than the people can consume, there ought not to he such misery amongst so many people as exists to-day.


Again I appeal to members on the lVlinisterial side of the House to exert some pressure on the Government to see that the existing state of affairs is ended. If the Nationalist members in this House would express themselves as Opposition members have been doing, t.he Government would come to heel just as it has had to do because of the attitude of members of the Country party towards the mortgage legislation.

The clause was agreed to. Progress was reported.

STAl\iPS BILL. The House went into Committee for

the further consideration of this Bill. Clause 1 was agreed to. Olause 2, providing, inter aZiar-(1) The third schedule to the principal Act

as amended by any Act is hereby amended as follows:-

For the words and figures-(And on and after the 15th

£ s. d. I January, 1930, until the Bill of Exchange J 31st December, 1935, in-

payable on de- \ clusive, additional duty mand (cheque, &c.) 0 OIL equal in amount to one-half

of such duty." there shall be substituted the following words and figures:-.. f And on and after the 15th

January, 1930, until the 31st October, 1932, inclusive, additional duty

£ 8. d. equal in amount to one-BID of Exchange half of such duty

payable on de- 1 mand(cheque, &c.) 0 OlAnd on and after the 1st No-

vember, 1932, until the 31st December, 1935, inclusive, additional duty equal in amount to such duty."

Mr. BLACKBURN (Clifton Hill).Sub-clause (1) provides for the payment of double stamp duty until the 31st of December, 1935, on bills of exchange payable 011 demand, and, of course, refers to cheques. I move-

That after the words "amount to such duty" the following words be inserted:-

"Provided that on and after the First day of November One thousand nine hundred and thirty-two the duty upon any cheque drawn for a sum not exceeding Two pounds shall be One penny."

If my amendment is agreed to, consequential alterations will be involved. Until 1929 the stamp duty on cheques was 1d., and it was subsequently raised to l~d. I always felt that it was a mistake to increase the duty on cheques. It is desirable to' encourage the people to have banking accounts, on which they can operate by cheques, beca.use it is the only record that they have of their trans-

actions. In the case of cheques of £2 or under, we should under my amendment revert to the old rate of Id., and leave the increase to operate on cheques over that amount.

Mr. LIN'roN .-Everybody would have to possess two cheque books.

Mr. BLACKBURN.-No, because the normal cheques could be embossed with the 1d. duty stamp, and the extra stamp could be added. It is undesirable to discourage people from using cheques, and 1 fear that the proposed increase will have that effect. If the Government's proposal is carried, people will withdraw their aocounts from the ordinary trading banks, and put the money in the savings banks. I should have no objection if the people could operate on the savings bank accounts as easily as they can on the ordinary current accounts. A private person cannot write a cheque on a savings bank account, and send it to somebody else. Savings bank depositors are forced to pay their accounts in cash. They withdraw a certain amount, and the pass-book shows that on a certain date they drew a sum, but there is no explanation what they dlew the money for. The advantage of the trade banking account is that it enables a person to keep a record of his transactions, and he can refer to it. After several years of struggling with adversity, men have been forced into bankruptcy, and some of them have had no records, and there' has been nothing by which their gradual decline could be traced in all its gradations. It seems to me desirable that people should not be driven away from the trading banks. I thought from the first that it was a mistake for Parliament to increase the stamp duties on cheques, and I hope that now the Committee will not merely exempt the smaller amounts, but will revert to the original stamp duty.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).I hope that the Committee will reject the amendment. In connexion with the whole subject-matter of cheques, convenience is a matter of no small importance. If the practice had been to pay the duty in respect of cheques by :fixing an adhesive duty stamp, there would be no difficulty in providing for two systems of stamping the cheques; that is, stamping the cheques for 1d. in the case of £2 or less, and stamping them for 2d. in other cases. In point of practice, cheques are used with a duty stamp embossed on them, and adhesive stamps are not used.

Stampi [26 OCTOBER, 1932.] Bill. 1909

If we had two different rates of taxes, two different cheque forms would be necessary. It would be serious if the banks had to issue two different sets of cheque-books, each one to be- resorted to by reason of the amount to be paid. The alternative would be to have the duty stamp of 1d. embossed on the cheques, and for adhesive stamps to be added for the extra duty. Such an arrangement would cause serious inconvenience. It would mean that people would have to supply themselves with adhesive stamps and be ready to add them to every cheque written for more than £2. So greatly has the convenience of cheques been favoured in the past, that I think I am right in aaying that no one has previously suggested there should be two different rates of taxation for them.

Mr. :BLACKBURN (Clifton Hill).I think that for some months in 1930, ttfter the alteration in the rates of stamp duty was made, adhesive stamps were fixed to the existing cheque forms which were drawn for 1d. stamp duty. A.dhesive stamps for id. were added until the new cheque forms were available.

Mr. VINTON SMITH.-And a great nuisance they were, too.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Everylbody will have to use adhesive stamps for this extra taxation until the old cheque forms are used up.

Mr. BLAOKBURN.-I am concerned about the man with a small account in a trading 'bank, because it is more convenient for him to pay by cheque than to attend a savings bank. That particularly applies to people in remote parts of the country; they would not have two sets of cheque books. A person who· has a large account might have two sets of cheques just as he might have two sets of receipt books. People have receipt forms some of which are impressed with 2d. stamps and some with 3d. stamps. The arrangement of which I spoke was not regarded as inconvenient when the stamp duty on receipts was increased. I am thinking of people with small accounts.

Mr. MENZIES.-YOU assume that it is only the man with a small account' who writes a cheque for less than £2.

Mr. BLAOKBURN.-The interests of those who make fA number of small payments should be considered. When

people living in one district wish to make payments in Melbourne, or somewhere else, and have no current account, they have to draw money from the Savings Bank, and then obtain a postal note; whereas in the other case they simply write. a cheque. If the increase is agreed to, we shall drive a number of small accounts out of the trading banks, and it will be bad for the banks and for the individuals. It is against the interests of the community to compel people to use cash in their transactions. The use of cheques should be encouraged, and people should be encouraged to have banking accounts and pay by cheque for the several reasons that I have stated.

The Oommittee divided on Mr. Blaekburn's amendment (Mr. Everard in the chair)-

Ayes 21 Noes 27

Majority against the amendment 6

Mr. Allnutt " Barry " Bennett " Blackburn

Bond " Bussau " Cleary " Hayes " Holland " Hyland " Keane

Mr. Allan Austin

" Diffey " Dillon

Drew " Dunstan " Ellis " Fairbairn

Holden " Hollway " Kent Hughes

Kirton " Linton

Macfarlan

AYES.

Mr. Lind " Moncur " Mur.phy " Old

Paton " Prendergast

Slater " Tunnecliffe.

Tellers: Mr. Cain

" Jewell. NOES.

Mr. Manifold " McLachlan " Menzies " Michaelis " Pennington

Dr. Shields Mr. Vinton Smith

" Toutcher " Wettenhall " White " Zwar.

Tellers: Mr. Gray " Maltby.

PAIRS.

Mr. Cotter I Mr. Groves " Frost " Angus " Lemmon Sir Stanley Argyle " McKenzie " Harold Luxton.

The clause was agreed to. Olause 3-(Limitation of period fer

double duties on certain bills of exchange and promissory notes).

Mr. GRAY (Hawthorn).-I should like to refer again to th.e matter that I


mentioned in my second-reading speech, a.nd suggest that the stamp duty on export bills be reduced from 2s. per centum to Is. per centum. I understand that the representations which have been made bv various trade organizations to th~ Treasurer have been mainly directed to the reduction of the rate on bills of exchange generally to Is. per centum. I am not in sympathy with that proposal, because, if it were given effect to, it would not meet the Governme.nt's requirements in relation to revenue, and, further, this Bill provides for a return to the rates originally enacted in 1879. I submit my proposal to the Government with the view of its initiating an amendment when the Bill is in another place to the effect that the stamp duty on export bills only be reduced to Is. per centum. I am satisfied, from investigations that I have made, that a modification of this sort would not imp(!,ir the Government'.'3 requirements for revenue, but would be calculated to ensure a larger revenue. I express the hope to the Attorney-Genel'al that my suggestion will receive consideration prior to the passing of the Bill in another place.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).-I. do not desire to express any concluded VIew on the proposal, but I will bring it under the notice of the Treasurer, with the object stated by the honorable member.

The clause was agreed to, as was also clause 4.

Clause 5 (Receipts-Amendment of Act No. 3775).

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).I move-

That the following new sub-clause be inserted at thf~ end of the clause:-

" on The exemptions under heading II. of the Third Schedule to the principal Act as amended by any Act are hereby amended as follows:-

(a) For paragraph (3) of the said exemptions there shall be substituted the following paragraph:-

(3) (a) Receipt for money de,posited in any bank in current account and not as a fixed deposit for any period;

(b) Receipt or acknowledgment for any money, bill of exchange, promissory note, or cheque on the payment or delivery thereof by one banker to another in the ordinary course of banking business, or 0;1

the ,payment or delivery thereof to any person by a banker in the ordinary course of banking business;

(0) Acknowledgment by allY banker of the receipt of any bill of exchange or promissory note for the purpose of being presented for acce·ptance or for payment; and

(b) At the end of paragraph (8) of the said exemptions there shall be inserted the following paragraph:-

(9) Receipt or discharge given by or to a bookmaker in respect of any wager (not being unlawful)."

This amendment deals, inter alia, with deposits in a bank on current account and with certain receipts given by bankers. The amendment does not introduce any new principle in this respect, but is merely designed to bring the schedule in so far as it deals with receipts into line with the provisions of the Stamps Act in relation to cheques. In the third schedule to the Stamps Act 1928, the first exemption provides for exemption from payme:Ilt- of tax of any-draft or order drawn by any banker in Victoria upon any other banker in Victoria not payable to bearer or to order and used solely for the purpose of settling or clearing any account between such bankers.

It is thought desirable to introduce the principle of that exemption into this legislation by a new amendment in relation to inter-bank receipts. In doing this, we are not endeavouring to deal with ordinary transactions between bank and bank such as clearances. Those are merely internal arrangements between the banks.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Duty is not being charged on ordinary bank receipts.

Mr. MENZIES.-N 0, at the present time 'it is not charged. Sub-paragraph (a) of the substituted sub-clause exempts from duty receipts for money deposited on current account and not as a fixed deposit for any period. Sub-paragraph. (b) deals with the inter-bank position of clearances which is purely an internal arrangement, and sub-paragraph (c) relates to an acknowledgment by any banker of the receipt of a bill of exchange or promissory note presented for acceptance or payment. I refer honorable members to section 52 of the Stamps Act 1928, which sets out that the term " receipt" covers, inter alia-"any note memorandum or writing whatsoever whereby any money amounting to £2

Stamps [26 OCTOBER} 1932.] Bill. 1911

or upwards or any bill of exchange or promissory note for money amounting to £2 or upwards is acknowledged or expressed to have been received or deposited or paid . . ."

Formerly the kind of transaction I have just described would come under the term "receipt." Where a banker receives a promissory note or bill of exchange for the purpose of presenting it for payment there is no payment to the bank or receipt given by the banker, because it is a transaction between banker and banker. The transaction will ultimately result in the payment by one party to another, and, in respect of that, duty will be chargeable on the receipt given. Provision has been made for this sort of transaction in the amendment in order to avoid a double tax on the one transaction. Paragraph (b) of the substituted sub-clause provides for the exemption of a receipt or discharge given by or to a bookmaker in respect of any wager not being unlawful.

Mr. MICHAELIs.-If wagers are unlawful, should a tax be collected on the l'eceipts? .

Mr. MENZIES.-The Taxation Office bothers only about the income and not as to the manner in which it arrives. That is one of the fundamental principles of taxing incomes.

Mr. OAIN.-It is very sound, too. Mr. MENZIES. - Extremely sound.

As honorable members will see, there are at least two good reasons for exempting these bookmaking transactions from the application of any provision for a receipt stamp. One is that it is palpable that such a requirement would be more honoured in the breach than in the observance having regard to the circumstances in which the transactions are made, and the other is that already ill Parliament we have imposed fairly substantial taxation on bookmaking transactions, and it scarcely seems desirable to add to it in this Bill.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda). - 1

move-That the following new sub-clauses be added

to the clause:-(3) In the Third Schedule to the 'principal

Act, as amended by any'" Act, ill the words and figures under the heading "II. Receipt or Discharge given for or upon payment of money" for fhe expression "not exceeding £5" there shall be substituted the expression

"not exceeding £6 per week whetlwr paid weekly or otherwise".

( 4) (a ) Notwithstanding anything in sec-55 of the principal Act as re-enactcrl by this section, the Comptroller of Stamps may in his discretion accept in respect of stamp duties payable under heading II. of the Third Schedule to the principal Act as amended by any Act on payments of salaries or wages pa id by or on behalf of any employer approved in writing by the Comptroller of Stamps on 3Jpplication by such employer in the prescribed form and containing the prescribed ,particulars (including any undertakings by such employer if required by the said Comptroller) a sum equal to the total amount of stamp duties payable under the said heading by his employees during any prescribell period.

(b) For the purposes of this suusection a statement in writing III

duplicate and in the prescribed form and containing the prescribed particulars shall be furnished to the Comptroller of Stamps by the said employer or by some person nominated by him in writing in thnt behalf and shall be verified by statutory declaration if so prescribed, and be accompanied by a remittance for the full amount of such duties.

(c) On payment of the duties as aforesaid the Comptroller of Stamps shnll denote by duty stamps on one of the copies of such statement that the duties to which the statement relates have been so paid and shall return the stamped copy to the person furnishing the same and retain the other copy.

(d) In any case to which this SUll

section applies the Comptroller of Stamps may require security to be given up to an amount and in a manner approved by him by allY employer for the payment of the stamp duties.

( e) In any case to which this sub-section applies the amount of stamp duties payable under heading II. aforesaid in accordance with the Stamps Acts by each such employee shall be paid by him to his employer, and it shall not be necessary for any such employee to give a stamped receipt to his employer for the amount of salary or wages paid ·to him during such prescribed period:

Provided that any stamp duty payable by any such employee may be paid on his behalf by his employer, and notwithstanding anything in or under any Act 01' contract to the contrary any sum so paid may be recovered by the employer by deducting the same from allY salary or wages due by the employer to the employee.


(!S) For the purposes of this section and of the Third Schedule to the principal Act as amended by any Act

"Salary or wages" means salary wages, commission bonus, and allowance paid to any employee as such.

Proposed new sub-clause (3) provides for an amendment in the Third Schedule to the principal Act, so that, instead of the sum or wages in regard to which a receipt stamp has to be given being £5, it shall be £6 per week. This will liberate another section of the community from the neeessity of paying for receipt stamps on their wages. Anyone receiving wages in excess of £6 per week will have to pay the receipt stamp duty. The second part of proposed new sub-clause (3) provides that where the weekly wage does not exceed £6, the total amount, whether paid weekly, fortnightly, or monthly, will be exempt from receipt stamp duty. Proposed new sub-clause (4) is on the lines of the " approved'" employer provision of the unemployment relief legislation. The object is to obviate the necessity, where there are large numbers of employees, of receipt stamps being given in each case. The provision will enable employers who are approved to pay a lump sum to the Taxation Office periodically, and to get the 2d. in cash from their employees at the time the wages are paid. I hope the Minister win agree to the amendment.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).I am quite agreeable to accept.ing the amendment submitted by the honorable member for St. Rilda. I should like to point out that the first portion of it does two things. The present exemption in relation to wages-that is the exemption from receipt stamp duty obligation-reads in this way-" receipt or discharge for the wages or salary of any person not exceeding £5." Honorable members will see that the reference to the £5 is a reference to the sum paid, and not to the weekly rate of wage. The amendment of the honorable member for St. Rilda has the effect of increasing the £5 to £6, but employs the words " not exceeding £6 per week, whether paid weekly or otherwise," so that in the case of a man earning less than £6 per week, even if he is paid fortnightly, and receives, for example, £10 in one payment, there will still be an exemption from the obligation to give a stamped receipt. The point is that

the amendment will eliminate from this field of taxation, not merely the man who receives £6, but the man who receives £6 a week, even if he receives it fortnightly, monthly, or quarterly. The next portion of the amendment, as the honorable member for St. Kilda has pointed out, applies to this matter the system of "approved" employers, and it seems very desirable. The revenue is amply protected, because approval is not given by the Taxation Office to an employer who cannot be relied upon under the conditions stipulated to discharge his obligation. It would be refused to employers who might be suspected of collecting the money from their employees and then not handing it over to the Taxation Office. Under the circumstances, there seems to be no difficulty in accepting the amendment.

Mr. CAIN· (Northcote).-It is interesting to find the Government agreeing to the amendment. I am taking no excep-tion to it, but for a long period of years the amount of the exemption has been £6, and that was the case when wages were at least 30 per cent. higher than they are at the present time. The Government is now passing legislation with the view of compelling everyone to giv:e a receipt stamp for any amount he reCeIves of £2 or over. The amendment of the honorable member for St. Kilda 'increases the amount of exemption, so far as wages are concerned, from £5 to £6. If there is justification for increasing it from £5 to £6 now, then it should previously have been £8, because £6 now has about the same value as £8 had three or four years ago. .

Mr. MENzIEs.-This is .not a statement of repentance, is it?

Mr. CAIN.-No; but though the Government is looking for revenue, when one of its good supporters, who does not agree with the legislation, says" I will support the Bill for the Government's sake, but I should like an amendment made," the Government agrees.

:hiI'. MENZIES.,-I think you will vote for the amendment.

Mr. CAIN.-I cannot take anyexception- to the amendment, but no one knows better than the honorable gentleman that it is inconsistent with what Parliament has been doing for a long period of years, because it has always been obligatory to

1 ncome Tax Acts [26 ()eTOl3ER, 1932.] .A mendnu:nt Bill. 1913

put stamps on receipts for wages above a certain amount.

Mr. LINToN.-Has it been the practice ~ Mr. CAIN.-It may not have been the

practice. I admit that the law has been evaded. It is now proposed to extend the ~xemption to £6, and there is nothing wrong with that. It may be a conveili«mce to the employer, but the l'eaSOn I am supporting it is that it is an advantage to some of the employees. At the same time I think the amendment conveys a lack of consistency on the part of honorable members.

Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda).-My personal desire was to free all receipts for wages from the obligation in respect to stamp duty, because, as I pointed out in my second-reading speech, men who are receiving wages are at the present time getting hit ill a good many directions, and I should have liked to see them relieved from this burden altogether. However, I thought that if it was a case of not being able to get the whole loaf I should be content with half a loaf.

Mr. OAIN.-What do you call wages? Would you say that a man getting £1,000 a year was getting wages?

Mr. :MICHAELIS.-I do not know that I would, but I. should like to make the whole of these payment~, whether o,f £8, £6, or £3 a week free from the proposed obligation. However, not being able to get the 'whole loaf I thought I would ue satisfied with half a loaf.

The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, was adopted:

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).I am sorry to have to propose a very short interruption of the consideration of this measure in Committee, but the Income Tax Acts Amendment Bill has been returned from another place with amendments with which it is very desirable this House should deal at once. Therefore I ask that progress be re·ported.


INCOME TAX AOTS AMENDMENT BILL.

This Bill was returned from U~e Legislative OmUleil, with a message intimating that they had agreed to the same with amendmen ts.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).The amendments made by another place

Secolld Session 1932.-[71]

are three in number. The first is pwely verbal. It is to insert in clause 1, after "Income Tax Act 1928," the expression "hereinafter called the pl'incipalAct." The second amendment adds a new subclause to clause 3, somewhat unnecessarily~ in my opinion, but I do not think it is i~ terms which would impair the effective operation of the Bill. It is. already provided that this provision shall come into operation on a date tOo be fixed by proclamation of the Governor in Council, published in the" Government Gazette. What another place suggests is that there shall b~ a provision in clause 3 of this Bill that-

(2) This Part shall continue in operation until the thirty-first day of December .One thousand nine hundred and thirty-three, and no longer:

Apparently it was thought desira~le to have the position made quite clear in this Bill. As a matter of fact, it is made perfectly clear by the income tax rates Bill, but there does not seem to be any harm in saying it twice. The following proviso is added:-

Provided that the expiration of this Part shall not-

(a) affect the previous operation of this Part or anything duly done or suffered under this Part; or

(b) affect any right, privilege, obligation, or liability acqUIred, accrued, or incurred under this Part; or

Ie) affect auy penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against this Pan; or

(d) affect any investigation, legal pro.ceeding, or remedy in respect of a.ny such right, privilege, obliga.tion, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid;

and any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued, or enforced, and any such penalty, forfeiture, or punishment may be imposed as if this Part had not ~xpired".

That proviso is put in in order. that the expiration of the Bill at the end Oof December, 1933, shall not affect any rights then accruing. I think that we would probably have had the position adequately protected by another Bill that has gone through, but in view of the fact that another place' has made the amendment, I do not think anything would be gainetl by arguing the matter, as the amendm~nt does not weaken the position established in another Bill.

The third amendment made by another place is made in clause 7, which deals

1914 Income Tax Acts [ASSEMBLY. ] Amendment Bill.

with thEl duty of the employer to issue stamps. The main provision is that-

At the time of paying to any employee any salary or wages from which a deduction under this Part is made the employer or the person making the payment on his behalf shall deliver to the employee adhesive tax stamps denoting the amount deducted.

The enlployee has to securely affix the stamps in a book which he is required to provide, and to write in ink on every stamp' his name or' initials and date of paymen.t. Another place 'has added the following proviso:-

~I Provided that the provisions of this sublIection shall not apply in the case of any eUlployee8 who receive suck stamps as aforesaid from any employer who has obtained the autllority in writing of the Commissioner to deliver to his employees tax stamps marked in sueh manner as the Commissioner approves."

Again, that seems to me not unreasonable .. I understand that it was pointed out on behalf of certain bodies of taxpayers that it would be a definite advance to have a proviso of this kind. I move-

That the amendments be agreed with.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-I do ·not take exception to the motion, because I think that t.he case has been fairly stated by the Attorney-General. But I regard it as a bad practice to accept amendments without having them before us in print. There are few men who, like the Atto~neyGeneral, have the capacity to explain important· amendments in such a way as tv carry conviction to the minds of honorable members who have not copies of the amendments before them. That makes it all t..he more desirable that printed or type-written copies of amendments should be distributed. I have availed myself of an opportunity to discuss the amendments with an officer of the Department, and he explained them in much the same way as the Minister has done. I suppose' that t)he Government want to get this legislation out of the way before Cup Day, but it is undesirable that we should be called upon to pass important amendments without having them before us in printed form. ThE! first amendment was, to a large extent, superfluous,' and the third amendment, which gives power to an approved employer to give ana to cancel tax stamps, may lend itself to abuse. I know that influences are being brought to bear on -~mother place against this legislation. We 'all know that a campaign has been con-

ducted in the press by the Taxpayers Association, due largely, I think, to failure to be seised of all the facts. That campaign, fortunately or unfortunately, has been carried as far as another place, some members of which have a wonderful capacity for listening. They have their ears to the ground all the time, particularly when dealing with taxation matters. There is no place more prone to listening when taxation proposals colite along. I suggest very seriously to honorable members that they should insist ill future on having important amendmentl:4 made in a Bill by another place printecl and circulated.

The amendments were agreed with.

STAMPS BILL. The House went into Committee for the

further consideration of this Bill. Clause 6-(Relating to powers of

Attorney). Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).

Sub-clause (2) provides for a power of attorney to be stamped. I move-

That at the end of the sub-clause the following proviso be inserted:-

ProvW.ed that, notwithstanding anything in the Stamps Acts, where a power of attorney chargeable with stamp duty under the heading "XV. Power ·of Attorney" in the Third Schedule to the principal Act as amended by this section---i

(i) is not otherwise chargeable with stamp duty except under the heading mentioned in the last preceding sub-section; or

(ii) is included in an instrument containing or relating to any other distinct matter where such instrument is not otherwise chargeable with stamp duty except under the heading so mentioned-

it shall be sufficient if such power of attorney-( iii) if made or executed in Victoria-is.

before it is acted upon stamped by the person making or executing the same or by the party to the same by whom it is held; or

(iv) if made or executed out of Victoriais before it is acted upon in Victoria stamped by the party to the same by whom it is held "'.

The clause provides a new system of imposing a tax upon powers of attorney. "Power of attorney" is defined in subclause (1)-

For the purposes of this section H Power of attorney" means any letter of attorney or power of attorney or other instrument in the nature thereof; but does not include a power of attorney which is by or under the Stamps

Starn,ps [26 OCTOBER, 1932.J Bill. 1916

Acts otherwise chargeable with stamp duty (not being stamp duty chargeable under the heading "II. Receipt of Discharge given for or upon payment of money" in the Third Schedule t'O the principal Act as amended by any Act) or a power of attorney which is included in an 'instrument c<?n~aining or relating to any other distinct matter where such instrument is by or under the Stamps' Acts otherwise chargeable with stamp duty (not being stamp duty chargeable under the heading aforesaid).

N ow, it has been pointed' out·, to me by representatives of the Law Institu.teand I think with very great force-that as it stands the clause may impose a power of attorney tax upon documents which it is not designed to tax at all. For example, we might have a power of attorney which, with due formality, appoints a man an agent for some purpose, and the document may be, in the whole of its character, a power of attorney-it would be described as a power of attorney-and would be properly taxed under this clause. But there are many other doouments in which the giving o.f a power of attorney is a mere incident. For instance, there might be a clause in a mortgage or a contract of sale, some clause which, in a mere anciHary way, does give a power of attorney from one party to another. Under the circumstances, it was a little difficult to see how to avoid the injustice of imposing the extra power of attorney tax upon a document, the power of attorney in which might never be used at all, because it was a mere incident in the matter of a larger transaction. Finally, the method worked out-the method which I recommend to the Committee-was this: That, in respect of a power of attorney, if contained In a document which otherwise is chargeable with some kind of stamp duty-and that is true of every document which contains a' receipt for money-it shall be sufficient if such power of attorney-

If made or executed' in Victoria-is before it is acted upon stamped by the person making or executing the same, or by the party to the same by whom it is held.

And then t..here is a corresponding provision in the case ofa document ,made or (\xecuted out of Victoria. ·1'he effect of that, in pJain words" will be this: That where there is a mortgage the duty now imposed u,pon it will not. be alter~d, even

though the mortgage instrument contains a power of attorney as one of its minor incidents, but if at som.e time in iih. future it is desired to act upon the power of attorney, then the document will have to be presented and stamped as & power of attorney. In other words the exemp .. tion from the power of attorney tax of a document of the kind will be conditioned upon the using of the document asa power of attorney. The result then would be that in the case of documents in which the giving of the power of attorney is a mere subsidiary matter, the extra' duty charged under this Bill will not be payable unless it is desired to exercise that power. If it is not desired to exercise it, the extra duty will not be chargeaple. That, I think, is a fair way of getting over what would otherwise be an injustice to many parties to transactions of sale and mortgage who. in the ordinary course, would not expect to act upon the power of attorney at alL

Mr. SLATER (Dundas).-The posi· tion, as outlined by the AttorneyGeneral, is a sound one. It would be unfair to the mortgagee if, in add)tion to the 12s. 6d. required for his stamp fee-we now make it 13s.-there should be superimposed a fee for the stamp registration of, a power of attorney, invorving a further fee of lOs. Some difficulties may arise in the working of this proposal because, as the Attorney'General has explained., the clause in ~ mortgage or a contract of sale relating to the power of attorney could not be exercised until the document had been. stamped i~ accordance with the requirements of this Bill. A man might want. to exercise. this power suddenly, and he might be in a part of Victoria where he could not readily get at the documents. As the clause stood originally, aD. unreasonable payment of fees would have been involved.

The amendment was agreed to, &llcl the clause, as amended, was adopted.

Clause 7-(Settlements and Deeds of Gift).

Mr. SLATER (Dundas).-This is a desirable clause; but I' am sorry that I have not heard' the Minister say what were the intentions of the Government in relation to the taxation of shares. Since I spoke earlier to~day, I have recalled the

1916 Stamp8 [ASSEMBLY., Bill.

fact that there is a great deal of evasion. That question is pertinent to this clause, which is designed to tighten up the law in regard to settlements, and to a void the leakage which occurs by the additions to primary settlements. As the law stands to-:day, .exemption of shares from stamp tax works very harshly against people who own real estate, and are obliged to pay stamp duty on transfers. As a matter of fact, the way is open to companies and corJ>orations largely to evade stamp duty which is nonnally payable on the transfer of property, and which is not payable on the transfer of shares. The AttorneyGeneral must appreciate that there is a body of opinion in this House favorable to the view that transfers of shares ~hould np longer escape taxation. I u:llderstood that one of our largest buildings in Melbourne virtually changed hands without one penny of stamp duty being paid~ If it had been the transfer of property in an ordinary sense, very large stamp duty would have been payable, but by the transfer of shares in company holdings not ·one penny came to the· State. I hope, in view of the substantial body of opinion that is favorable to a reform, and of the fa~t that evasions Occur at present, because of a weakness in the law, that if the Government is not prepared to consider the proposal now--

Mr. DUNsTAN.-How do you say taxation was dodged? :

Mr,. SLATER.-I do not want to weary the Oommittee.

Mr. DUNsTAN.-I want to know. Mr. SLATER.-It may not,. perhaps,

be ad.visable to tell the honorable gentleman, because in the arrangement of his affairs he might take advantage of it. I hope that if the Government is not disposed to undertake the reform now, necessity will compel it at some early date to consider these matters', and to compel those people who transfer per.sonal estate to pay that share of taxation which they escape at the present time. I repe~l.t that the time has come when the G:overnment should have regard to this proposal. .

M:r. MENZ.IES (Attorney-General).The Government did consider the matter that has been raised by the honorable member for Dundas, together with a

number of other proposals, and decided not to incorporate that particular proposition in this measure. But in view of the expressions of opinion that have c~me from various parts of this Chamber during the debate, I will certainly undertake to see that the matter is brought before the Government. It cannot possibly be considered in time to be incorporated in this legislation, but I will certainly see that it is brought l,mder.,the notice of the Government, und~;that the representations that have been made will be considered.

The clause was agreed to, as were clauses 8 to 11.


On the motion of Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General), the Bill was read a third time.

The House adjourned at 10.40 p.m.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. Thursday, October 27~ 198fJ.

The SPEAKER (Sir Al~xander Peacock) took the chair at 11.8 a.m., and read the prayer.

VOTES ON ACOOUNT. The House wEmt into Oommittee of

Supply.

Mr. MENZIES (Atto~·ney-General).I move-

That a. sum not exceeding £954,906 be granted to Ris Majesty on account of, or towards defraying the following services for the year 1932-33 :-Legislative Council-salaries and contingencies, £70; Legislative Assembly --salaries and contingencies, £771; Parliamentary Standing Committee-salaries, £48.: Refreshment-rooms-salaries and contingencies, £155; Engineers and Gardeners-salaries and contingencies, £139; farliamentary Printing, £500; The Library, State Parliament Housesalaries ~and contingencies, £230 ~ Victorian Parliamentary Debates-salaries and contingencies, £475; Chief Secretary's Office-salaries and contingencies, £800; miscellaneous, £250; 'pensions, & c., £5,630; Board for the Protection of the Aborigines--salaries and contingencj,~s. £120; Explosives-salaries and contingencies, £520; State Accident Insurance Office-salaries and contingencies, £277; Fisheries and Gamesalaries and contingencies, £280; Government Shorthand Writer-salaries and contingencie8~

Votes on [27 OCTOBER, 1932.] Account. 1917

i1l5; The Governor's Office-salaries and ~~ntingencies, £20; Inebriates Institution"':;" salaries, contingencies, and iniscellaneous, £210; 'Travancore Special School-salaries and, COllt.ingencies, £390; Observa.tory-salaries and contingencies, £240; Audit Office-salaries and contingencies, £1,436; Government Statist-salaries and contingencies, £1,825;. Hospitu.ls for the Insane-salaries, contingencies, and miscellaneous, £32,000; Children's Welfare. &c. -salaries, contingencies, and maintenimce, :£28,100; Penal and Gaols-salaries and contingencies,. £6,770 ;Police-s~laries, contingeii,cies, and miscellaneous, £46,000; Public Library, &c.-salaries and miscellaneous, £3,080; Public Service Commissioner-salaries and contingencies, £216; Depa.rtment of Labour :-salaries and contingencies, £2,100; Education -salaries, £164,632; contingencies and miscellaneous, £16,128; :pensions, &c., £7; works and buildings, £428; endowments an4 . grants, .£7,499; Attorney-General-salaries and contingencies, £10,072; pensions, &c., £17; SolicitorGeneral-salaries and conti.ngencies, £6,460; Treasury-salaries and contingencies, £1,600; miscellaneous, £3,050; transport, &c., £450; unforeseen expenditure, £60; payments to Railway Department, £15,000; hospitals and charities, £18,000; grants, £170; pensions, &c., £05; exceptional expenditure, £6.500; Premier's ()ffice-salaries, contingencies, and Agent-General, £1,034; State Superannuation Board-salaries, contingencies, and miscellaneous, £231 ; Taxation Office-Administration-salaries and contingencies, £130; salaries and miscellaneous, £4,703; Government Printer-salaries, contingencies, and miscellaneous, £8,123; advertising. £91; Lands-Survey, Settlement, &c.-salaries, contingencies, &c., £5,781; miscellaneous, .£6,516; Botanic and Domain Gardens, &c.salaries and contingencies, £1,077; works and buildings, £166; Public Works-salaries and eontingenciee, £3,750; works and buildings, £8,000; road works and bridges, £100; PortR .and Harbours-salaries and contingencies, '£1,462; works, &c., £1,000; Mines-salaries and contingencies, £1,480; miscellaneous, £730; 1!'orests-salaries, Qontingencies, and miscellaneous, £5,510; State Rivers and Water SupIlly Commission-salaries, &c., £16,666; Agriculture-Administrative-salaries and contin.gencies, £859; salaries, contingencies, and miscellaneous, £3,684; Maffra Beet Sugar Factory, £1,500; Horticulture-salaries and miscellaue-<IUS, £1,618; Stock and Dairy-salaries and miscellaneous, £5,065; EX!port Developmentsalaries and miscellaneous, £4,211; Public Health-salaries and contingencies, £5,050; grants, £750; Railways-working expenses, &c., £482,150; pensions, &c., £196; Railway Construction Branch, £368. Total, £954,906.

Pending the passing of the Appropriation Act, it is necessary that further. Supply be granted by Parliament in order that Government services may be carried on. The amount now asked for, £954,906, is to provide for November requirements, and, compared with one-twelfth of last year's expenditure, shows a decrease of £147,745. 'The total estimated expenditure for the

year under the various divisions is disclosed· 'in the ~stimates already in the hands ,of honorable members, the amounts shown in the first column of the slip circulated with this:Bill being the requirements: for next month. The principal items showing increa~es in N ovember a.~ compared with a proportionate period of la,st year's expenditure, are. as follow:---: Under Division No. 48, Treasury--exceptional expenditure, there is an increase of £3,188, but provision is made for the contribution of £6,000 for the Shrine of Remembrance. That is the explanation of the increase. Under Division 56-Lands-Miscellaneous, there is an increasf,l of £9~0,. and it represents increased expendjture 011 vermin destruction. As honorable members know', that work has be-come necessary in several parts of Victoria.

Mr. MURPHY.-Under Division 55, Lands-Survey, Settlement, &c.-salaries,. contingencies, &c., there is a difference between the two amounts. The sum require4 for November is £5,781, and the proportionate amount of expenditure for the previous year is set down as £84,153.

Mr. MENZIES.-I cannot explain the difference at the moment, but I shall answer the question later.

Mr. CAIN.-The Minister of Lands will tell you about it.

Mr. MENZIES.-I shall take that advice. I realize that the difference calls for an explanation, and I shall get it later.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Oollingwood).There is evident reluctance on the part of honorable members On both sides of the House to rise to speak on Supply. Knowing the Chairman's enthusiasm a'nd eagerness to put questiqns of this kind through, and to dispose of Government business as promptly as possible, I thought that I might temporarily fill the breach until other honorable members had sorted their views out, and decided on what items .they would speak.

Mr. MENzIEs.-The honorable mem.ber for Footscray has a lot of matter ready:

Mr. TUNNEOLIFFE.-I understand that the honorable member for Footscray will eloquently discuss a nllmber of mat: terse The honorable member for ¥~l';' bourne also wishes to bring points fOl:~ ward for th~ consider·ati()n. of hODQrable

1918 Votes on f ASSEMBL Y·1 Account.

members. In a statemept published .yesterday, I noticed debits against the Chief Secretary's Department, which, as honorable members know, I administered for a brief period. In that state:r;nent, a credit of £24,000, which ought to be given to the Penal Department for. themanufacture of wire netting, is given to the Public Works Department, and therefore the position of the Chief Secretary's Department is made to appear materially worse than it is. This is a little discrepancv that the Attorney-General should ende~vour to explain later, even if he does not do so to-day. No Department should get credit for another Department's activit.ies. Wire netting is manufactured in the Penal Department by penal labour, and the payments are made to the Chief Seeretary's Department.

Mr. MENzIEs.-That very matter was ~efore .C~binet at ~ts last meeting, and it IS reCeIvmg attention.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-I thought I should draw the Minister's attention to the discrepancy. . Mr. ~LATER.-A similar thing occurs In relatIon to other Departments and it . . ' :i8 an maccurate form of bookkeeping.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-In view of the fact that the Government has decided to bring down an ordered system of accounts, 80 that honorable members will realize the financial position of the Departments, a strenuous effort should be made t? present accounts as accurately as pOSSIble, so that receipts and expenditure will be shown under the Department concerned, and not spread over a variety of Departments, otherwise the work will be .more or less wasted. I understand that by rising to speak now I have not waived my right to speak o~ Supply. I a~ .n.ot now prepared to deal with various dIvISIOns" but wish to later.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard).-The honorable member will have another opportunity to speak when he sees fit

Mr. M:ENZIES (Attorney-General j._ (By leave. )-As the difference in the amounts provided for the Lands Department was referred to by the honorable member for Port Melbourne, I think it ",,:ould, perhaps, ~e better if I straightway gIve an explanatIOn for the apparent discrepancy. The provision for the month o.f N ove~ber is £5,781, but the proportIonate amount of expenditure for 1931-32

was £84,153. The reason is that the greatest item of expenditure in the Lands Department is involved in making up the deficiency on settlement claims. . The amount required to make up that deficiency is provided in June, and not in a;ny other month. The money is provided as a lump sum in June.

Mr. MURPHY.-Is this the usual pro-cedure~ .

Mr. MENZIES.-Thi.s question has been raised" more than once. U nfortunately from year to year there has been a substantial deficiency on soldier and closer settlement. That deficiency is all brought into the June accounts. There lDay be an average expenditure of £~,OOO or £6,000 for the eleven months preceding June, and a large expendi ture is shown in June. -

Mr. DUNsTAN.-You will not give the Minister of Lands any credit for this.

Mr. MENZIES.-No, I cannot. The CHAIRl'rIAN (Mr. Everard). - I

wish to remind the Committee that some honorable members talk loudly all the time the Chair is being addressed by an honorable member, and exception is taken to that fact. We should not mind if they were to talk in a low tone of voice, b~t when they talk loudly, it is very dIfficult to hear the sneaker, and it is not fair to him. I therefore' ask honorable members to be fair to those who are addressing the Chair, and not to converse loudly.

Mr. HAYES (fflelbourne).-I desire to ascertain the position of men working on relief works for the Railway Department. I understand that they have been put on the Department's ordinary work. It' is all very well for t.he officials to describe the work as special. The Department has dispensed with the services of a large uumber of employees who should have been retained. Now their places are being filled by relief workers, and the Department is getting the jobs done at reduced .rates, ~nd I. wish to enter a'protest agamst thIS action. I am surprised at the Employment Council allowing it. I think the Department is to blame for having dispensed with the services of its regular employees, and employed other men in their place at a lower rate of pay.

Mr. MENZIES. - The Department would be to blame if it had done that~ but it has not done it.

l'otes on [27 OCTOBER, 1932.] Account. 1919

Mr. HAYES.-I am satisfied that the relief workers who are engaged on re-1aying and ballasting work are taking the place of regular employees. These relief workers work for 40 hours' per week, and their rate of pay works out at about £2 6s. per week. They are employed on railway lines in the metropolis and in the country districts, and are sent away frO'm Melbourne as relief workers. Regular employees of t,he Department engaged on this class of work obtain six days' work iu the week, are granted a camping-out allowance, and are given passes to enable them to' return to' their homes for a shQrt spell once in every three or four weeks. The relief workers are sent away from Melbourne, and they work side by side with the regular employees, but they have been refused the 'Camping-out allowance and passes to return to their hOlmes periodically. There should be no differentiation in the treatment given to the tWQ classes of labour, particularly as the relief workers are paid at a lower rate than the other men. The questiQn of granting the relief workers passes to' return home periodically was raised in the House a few weeks agO'. The granting O'f t.he concession 'WO'uld cost the Department practically nothing" because some of the trains running on the lines on which the men are engaged carry few passengers at certain times. The men who O'btained the free passes might lose some Qf their working time, but as t,hey work only 40 hours a week they would have spare time In

which to travel to their homes and return t.o work.

I desire to bring under the notice of the Government a matter relating to the harsh treatment meted Qut by some estate agents tQ unemployed tenants, and I shall mention one specific case. The man in question has resided in North Melbourne for 40 years. For the last 20 years he has rented the Qne house. AbO'ut eighteen months agO' he was £10 in arrear with his rent, the cause being unemployment and illness. I approached the owner of the house and the estate agent, and they agreed that nO' further action WQuid be taken in relation to' the recQvery Qf the arrears. An arrangement was made that the tenant should pay 8s. per week rent to the agent, and since that time, eighteen months ago, he has paid that rent. I understand that the agent, acting on his Qwn autho-

rity, recently gave nDtice to the tenant to quit. The Qwner of the property is

. at present' Qut ,of ~he State. BefQre he left VictO'ria h~consented' to the tenant remaining in,the pr~rty if he paid 8s. per week fDr it.. In 'the absence0f the o,wner, the agent has now given the

'tenant notice to quit. The attitude that has been adopted by t.he agent is very harsh, and I think that it is very undesirable that agents, acting on their own aut,hority, should have the power to' take tenants to' Court and obtain ejectment orders for no apparent reason. Tenants ejected in these circumstances are compelled to apply fO'r sustenance, and they therefore become a burden on the sustenance fund. I ask the HO'n·· Qrary Minister (Mr. Kent Hughes) to' consider whetp,er action of this sO'rt by agents eQuId not be stopped by an amendment of the Real Estate Agents Act. Surely if the owner of this particular property was agreeable tOI the tenant remaining in the hQuse provided he paid 8s. per week, which rent he has paid, the agent should nQt have power to force the tenant QUt. of the property.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-Does that agent carry Qn business in North Melhourne 1

Mr. HAYES.-Yes. Mr. PRENDERGAST.-We ought to be

t.old his name. lVlr. HAYES.-So far lit.tle has been

dOone by the Government to' provide work for unemployed single men. I understand that the Government intends that employment shQuld be provided for them, but frO'm what I have been told by the Department and men whO' have received employment, it appears that the policy is being adopted of giving preference to single men whO' are living in camps Qr institutiQnal homes indirectly under the contrQI of the Government, to the disadvantage Qf single men who are living in private homes and are receiving sustenance. The men should be selected fQr work accQrding to the length Qf time that they have been registered as unemployed. I understand that a fair number oi men who have been living in a particular home at East Brunswick have been given preference in this way, apparently because the Government wants to remove SQme of them frO'm that place. If men living in camps or Ihomes have been registered at the Government Labour Exchange fO'r a long period, they are entitled to receive preference, but

Votes-" on {'&SSEMBL Y.1 Account.

in the engagement of single men for relief work preference should be given according to the length of time a inan has been registered, irrespe~ive. Oof whether he is living in the Broadl)1eadows Camp or with his people in,·a .private home in North M:elbourne or, elsewhere. ~hree unemployed married' ",men' complained to me this: morning that;, although they have been registered at the Government ,Labour Exchange for nearly two years, they have not obtained relief work. They pointed out that single unemplOoyed men 8.re being given wOork in the metropolitan arett. I think that the Honorary Minister who is in charge of sustenance should nscertain whether single men are being given Iwork in the metropolis through the Government Labo.ur Exchange. There is something wrong with the system if single men are given preference over married men. If a married man wants to take work in the metropolis ,he sho.uld be given it, 'provided it is available. Married men have strong ground for complaint when they are told by officers at the Government La.bour Exchange that there is no work available for them. and they find that their next door neighbour, who. is a single man, has been given relief work in the metropolis. I ask the Honorary Minister in charge of sustenance to ascer~ain whether this policy is being put mto effect, and, if so, whether he will consider an alteration so that married n;len will receive preference fOor work in the metropolis.

Mr. MURPHY (Port j,felbourne).-I notice that the amount to be voted for the Fis4eries and Game Department for next month is £280 as compared with £553; which represented one-twelfth of the expenditure last year. The staff of the Department consists of a Chief Inspector, three clerical officers, and five inspectors. The Chief Inspector receives 8. salary of £507 per an~um, t.he three clerical o:fficers receive in all £800 and the five inspectors £1,270. The ~atter should interest the Gippsland members very much. We should all do everything we can to improve the fishing industry. About fou.rteen years ago, a Royal Commission was appointed to investigate the industry; the honorable member for Footscray was chairman, and I was a member. Another member, who took the ~eenest interest' in the subject, was the late Mr. Snowbal1. ~he Commission pre-

pared a valuable report, which was laid before' Parliament, but was pigeon-hO'led, and nothing was ever done. Let us examine the statistics with respect to the consumption of &h in this State, so that we may appreciate the possibilities of the industry. During 1931, 11,768,225 lb. O'f nsh was ca Ulght in Victoria, and the value of that fish was £147,103. In 1930, the quantity of fresh fish imported into 'Victoria was 2,663,235 lb. In that same year, 6,993,170 tins of fish were imported, amounting to £335,774 in value. The evidence taken by the Royal Commission convinced me that we have in our A.ustralian waters as valuable fish for the purposes of cO'nsumption as any varieties that can be imported. Yet, in 1930, about 7,000,000 tins of fish were imported.

Is it not possible for us to dO' some,.. thing to foster the local industry ~ We have fish in abundance in our waters. Some years ago oyster beds were established in the Gippsland Lakes. Where are they to-day ~ They have nearly all disappeared, but during the last twelve months 3,793 cwt. of oysters was imported into Victoria. Oyster beds were established also in Port Phillip Bay, but the necessary attention was n'ot paid t() that branch of the industry, and there are no oysters in the bay to-day. The Fisheries and Game Department is not as efficient as it should be, because it is altogether inadequately staffed. Even under present conditions there are between 1,500 and 2,000 men engaged in the' fishing industry in Victoria. If only we could get the canning industry established in this State, employment would be found for large numbers of persons. Surely that is to be preferred to our importing huge quantities of tinned fish from Canada, New Zealand, and elsewhere~ Without doubt, our own waters could provide sufficient quantities to supply our re-' quirements o.f tinned fish. Seeing that the whole staff of the Fisheries and Game Department amounts to only nine persons, it is impossible for the Department to carry out its activities ade,!uatdy.

Mr. LIND.-Is it not about time the Government instituted research work in the Lakes district?

Mr. MURPHY.-That question is one which was dealt with by the Royal Commission, and was the subject of a recom-· mendation.

Votes on [27 OCTOBER, ~932.]. A.ccount. 1921

~lr. LIND.-What ha!3 happened since' that report was presented to Parliament? The fish have gone from the Gippsland Lakes. The··crabs have taken posaession.

Mr.' MURPHY.-I appeal to the Minister in charge of the House, the Attorney-General, to. examine the whole subject ~nd ascertain whet~er something practICable cannot be put III hand. It is our duty to do everything possible to. foster this valuable Australian industry.

Mr. LIND.-But is not the big job to be found at the metropolitan end, in the marketing of the fish?

Mr. MURPHY.-Yes. Evidence was taken by the Royal Commission with respect to Murray cod, the finest fish one can get. We heard sworn evidence that the return to the fisherman on the Murray was lid. per lb. after expenses had been deducted, and that that same fish was 'sold' in fillets, in Swanston-street shops, at Is. 6d. per lb. Men sent fish to Melbo.urne from the Murray and elsewhere, 'but, instead of obtaining returns on which they might live, they received debit notices. Honorable members would be well advised to study the report of the Commission. Since it was produced, the honorable member for Footscray and I have directed attention to the position of the industry time and again. What was the use of appointing that Commission and spending the money of the country if its report was not to be at least examined and <!onsidered ? .

There should be one thing done always in connexion with all reports of commissions and committees, including the Public Accounts Committee. Whenev~r a report has been tabled, a day should be set aside for the full discussion of the subject of that report· by this House. If that were done in every ease, there would be a different conolusion to some of the matters which' are investigated, often at considerable expense to the taxpayer. The Public AcC9unts Committee has furnished from time to time invaluable reports on various pl!-blic activities. With respect to the last report which it made available to Parliaml}nt-that dealing with the Maffra beet sugar industry-I am glad to be able to say that practical results followed. The recommendations of the Committee were acted upon. Those recommendations numoored eleven, and ten

of . theI~{' ",vere . put into effect by the responsible Minister. The Maffra Beet Sugar .,Fact.ory is in its present position largely because attention was paid to a. report. I would suggest to the Minister that a day should be set. apart-we often spend a day on the v~ntilation' of grievances-for the consideration of reports that have been presented to the House. We might get practical results from such a discussion. At the present time, Committees work hard and present valuable reports, the result of which is nil, because the reports are pigeon-holed. , I hope that the Minister' will pay attention to the requirements of the lfisheries and Game Department. A lot of research work in co.nnexion .with our fisheries requires to' be done. A little extra expense would be involved in the employment of officers for the purpose, but the ~oney spent would be more than counterbalanced by the bene:fits accruing to the community. . Mr. LIND (Gippsland East). -The

question raised by the honorable member for Port Melbourne with regard to our fis~eries is one of great interest, and I can assure him that he may always count upon the Gippsland members to assist him in any effort that he makes to· improve the position. If he ~ooks up· the records, he will fiJ?d that Gippsland members have been by no means idle. As a matter of fact, they have been on the job all the time. ,We have urged the undertaking of research work in the Lakes district. We want to ascertain why the Lakes' have' been' denuded of fish. Many reasons may be given for this Unfortunate occurrence. There are people who say that crabs have increased to such an extent as to force the fish to leave. Others are of opinion that the fodder upon which the fish fed in' days "gone by' has . largely disappeared as a result of these conditions. It is a big question, and one that I.do not p~o~e to go into to-day. I hope that the Government will give the' matter very serious consideration. The honorable member for Port Melbourne deserves credit for bringing it under their' notice. ' , Mr.MuRPHY.-F~shing· should be one

of our best industries. . Mr. LIND.-;-It should be, but the hon

orable member has only to go to the fish market to see what conditions obtain.

1922 Votes on [ASSEMBLY·l, . Account.

:Mr. :MURPHY.-:-I go ther,e ;v-ery often. Mr. LIND.-Then the' honorable mem-'

ber must agree with lrieth~t:: the' (}onsumers in this great metropolitan city are not getting fish at a price which they can afford. to pay.

:Mr. FROST.-Are not the :fish auction sales all right ~ .

Mr. LI~~D.-It is too long a story for me to tell just now. There are two other matters I want to deal with. The first relates to the employment of single men in country districts. It may be said that the single man can look after himself. We know that he can look after himself more easily than an unemployed married man can. He can go further afield in search of work because he has not the same household' ties. I wish to refer to young men who have been taught a certain trade or who have followed a particular occupation:' In the timber areas of the State there are young men who from their childhood have practised timber cutting. Under present-day conditions and restrictions tllese young men are not able to get permits for timber cutting, 8.nd there is no other occupation they can turn their hands to. When a road job is put in hand as the result of an unemployment relief grant, these men are refused jobs. They are told that the jobs are only for married men. In this way they are denied the right to work. Some consideration of the unfortunate position they are placed in is overdue.

Another question I want to touch upon is the position of our ex-temporary school teachers. I have a list here of 48 men and women-ex-temporary teachers-who are fully quali:fied to teach, and who have given the best years of their life to the service of the State. They were attracted to the service at a time when sufficient teachers could not be obtained to staff the schools. They were encouraged to joill the Service. 'Many of them have brilliant attainments. They passed 'al~'neeessJlry examinations, and have had degrees conferred upon them. For years they gave of their best to the service of the State. Then, without warning, they were gradually put off until only four or :five of them remained in the employ of the Education Department.

Mr. ALLNuTT.-And quite a number of schools nr~ understaffed to-day.

'Mr. LIND.~That is perfectly tr\le. I feel compelled to' say, though it is hard to have to' say it, that some, of our .sGhools are in charge of teachers, who, are not as fully qualified to impart knowledge to the pupils as are the male and female extemporary teachers who have been thrown on to the scrap heap. I know that the symnathies of honorable members are with these ex-temporary teachers who are unable to :find other occupation. We should unite in our demand that the Government shall give some consideration to them.

Mr. CAIN.-Move a reduction in the: vote for the Education Department.

Mr. LIND.-I do not propose to do< that, but I do say that the Government will deserve the censure of the House if they take no notice of our representations in the matter.

:Mr. DUNsTAN.-What do you suggest?' Mr. LIND.-That the quali:fied ex

temporary teachers who are mentioned in this list shall be given employment in the Service.

Mr. DUNSTAN.-Butwhat do you mean by quali:fied ~ Do you mean that they had leaving certificates ~

Mr. LIND.-I refer to men and women who passed, whatever examinations were required by the Education Department to qualify them for permanent employment in the Service.

:Mr. CAIN.-They devoted the best years of their life to the work.

:Mr. LIND.-That is a point I have already made. Included in the list of ex-temporary teachers are widows who were encouraged to go in to the Service and who have families to-day to support. The door is closed to them. I want to say to the Government, and to say very seriously indeed, that if positions cannot be found for these ex-temporary teachers in the education service of the State~ other positions should be found for them in the Public Service. The staff of the Taxation Office is to' be increased. Some of them could be found positions there. It is the duty of the Government to help these teachers who helped them at a time when their services were badly needed.

Mr. COOlc-Many of them were invited to enter the Service, and they gave up other positions in order to do so.

Votes on [27 OCTOBER, }93~.1 Account. 1923

Mr. LIND.-Two or three of them taught in my district, and when the Department wa:s transferring th~~ to' O'ther districts, the people sent in a' -petition praying that -their services should be retained in the district. :Much t1e same thing has happened in O'ther districts. It showed what the people thO'ught O'f these men and WQmen. They evidently thought a lot more of them than the Government of the day. It will not reflect to' the credit Df the Government. if it does not very soon either reinstate the persDns concerned in the education service or place them in some Dther Department or occupation which they are qualified to' fill. We ask for no CDnsideratiOon that is not due to. them. We do nDt request the Government to' place men and women whO' have not qualified for the positions.

Mr. PRENDERGAST (Footscray).·I regard to-day as an equivalent to' griev.:. ance day, of which the Government has deprived us. The opportunity afforded for general debate is largely in the interests Df members who are entitled to' voice III Parliament the opiniDns of their electQrs. If such opportunities wer~ nDt given-and they are limit.ed-their constituents would blame them. I am reminded of the lines in Through the Looking Glass:-

"The time has come," the Walrus said, ,; To talk of many things:

Of shoes-and ships-and sealing waxOf cabbages-and kings-And why the sea is boiling hotAnd whether pigs have wings.

It may be said that all such matters can be cQnsidered Dn a grievance day. The questiDns that are discussed in this House O'n such days as this are nDt tho'Se enumerated in the lines which I have read, but certainly we can direct our attention to subjects upon which, perhaps, we have given pledges to our constitutents.

I support what the honorable member for Port MelbO'urne has said regarding the supply Df fis'h. There is nO' doubt that the inquiry by the Royal Commission elicited the fact that the coastal waters Df the various States could prDvide as large a quantity Df fish as would meet the needs Df almost the whDle Df the civilized world. One of the great difficulties is that we know very little about the habits of fish. We remember that some years ago Dannevig. left in the ship Endeavour, and was in-

vestigating the questiDn O'f the fish supplies off Dur CDast when he and his ship disappeared withDut leaving any trace. There is nO' doubt that the wDrk upon which he was engaged would have proved Df immense advantage to' us. One Df the recQmmendat.iQns Df the Royal CO'mmissiDn was that a biolDgical institute. shDuld be established in Australia for the purpose of studying the question; including the possibilities Df fish supplies fOor Dur markets and the habits of the fish, particularly in the waters. where they go for food. It was said that off the coast Df New South Wales and this State-including BQtany Baythere were fishing grounds which after having been trawled successfully for heavy loads, seemed to cDntain even mDre fish than were there previously. It is clear that a vast populatiDn cDuld be s~pplied with this commDdity, and with very mach grea~er advantage than the peDple in Great Britain Dbt.ain. It is said that the whDle area of the NDrth Sea between Great Britain and the continent is trawled once every three years. The waters are carefully swept fOol' fish, and, notwithstandiI;lg the huge quantities obtained the fish never seem to get any less in number. It seems to. me that a biDlogical institute in Australia wDuld furnish us with valuable infDrmatiDn. The reproductive faculty Df fish appears t,o become greater at perio~s wh~l1 larger quantities Df fish than usual are caught. The RDyal Commission came to the CDnclusiDn O'n the available facts as to the species, quality, and . location Df fish that there was an abundance Df the CDmmDdity in the different waters surrDunding Australia, and this had special reference to' thDse kinds which return gDod prices· in the markets. In the Upper Gippsland districts and at the L.akes Fattrance there is an abundance Df sal~ trDut, for instance, and in this CDn:nexion we can regard the posF.ibilities of the fishing industry at Lakes Entrance. . Salmon trDut is very edible, and if trawling O'perations were properly conducted the fish could be sold to' the public at cheap rates. It ha.s been shown in the past that the cDnsumption of fish in Australia averages about 10 lb. per head -per an~um, whereas, in my opiniDn, the consumption cDuld eaRily average between 50 lb. and 100 lb. per head.

Votes on .[A\ssEMB~Y .1 Account.

Mr. FRosT.-It is 40 lb. per head in England.

Mr. P'RENDERGAST .-1 know that it, is from 40 lb. to 50 lb. there. Not many months ago we were witnessing in the metropolis the auctioning of fish by men who in that way obtained better prices an.d at the 'same~ time supplied the ·commodity to the 'public at reasonable rates. But that regular marketingthere were 'two or three sales nearly every day-:-see:ms to have ceased, and people ~th small means are not able to. ,obt.ain the benefits that those cheap supplies conferred on them. It' is evident that a great deal of this. valuable food is, so to speak, going to waste. .' It is known to he hea.lthy food, and in most cases of physical ailment in which the use of red meats is prohibited fish can be eat~n with very little detriment. The sufferers are &s a consequence able to live for much longer periods than they would otherwise . Anyone can obtain a report regardiQ.g the inquiry of t.he Royal Com· mission.: I know that the secretary issued a valuable review of the evidence. which is well worth reading. The honorable member for Gippsland East is conversant with this subject.

Mr. LIND.-I know the report from A to Z. It is good.

Mr. PRENDERGAST. - I suggest that the Honorary Minister (Mr. Manifold) should proj'ect a proposition for. the establishment of biological' stations in different parts of Aust.ralia for the purposes to which I ,have already referred. I have come to .. the conclusion that, generally speaking-excluding the oonsideration of the fish 'which inhabit certain specified waters-it~ is absurd to put any restriction on fishing as regards' the siz~' of ,the fish caught. People living on the coasts of China hav.e . for many a century fed m~inly ·on fish, 'and red meat is very little known or used. Visitors to China can see in the coastal ,waters large fishing boats fitted with old-fashioned sails which, to judge from. the patohes on them, have been in use for many years. Those boats are used for fishing over a huge expanse of water, a,nd the industry ,has been carried on from time immemorial. Still there seems to be no' scarcity' of fish. .A~ to· the~ restriction on the sizes of fish caught, we must remember that we· place no restriction on the size .of the livestock which go into humali consumption.

Sucking pigs, lambs, &0., come int.o the market for that purpose. I certainly think that protection can be afforded in respect of the salt water fish in the bay and the small inlets, hut I am satisfied that we need never be afraid of causing a scarcity of fish in our coastal waters. Their very!eproductiveness will keep pace with the supply and demand.

I can recall one or two humorous incidents that have occurred in the .past. The Royal Commission was taking evidence from a Gippsland gentleman. Gippsland people tell 'some tall stories. This particular witness informed the Commission of t,ha amount of fish that he caught. He said that one early morning he and his son went out to fish and oame back at 9 a.m. with a.. boatlo·ad. They repeated this performance twice during the day. My secretary,. who was seated next to me at the table,. wrote the following lines:-

The witness was on his oath But talking without bias,

I'd sooner take the simple word Of good old Ananias.

That indioates that we should not trouble very much about these fish tales. Returning to the question of the esta.blishment of biological institutes, I consider that they could be formed in connexiC;)ll with our universities at very little cost, and the advice that could be given by them as to the value !Jf fish as a food and their habits would be invaluable. There could be obtained informa.tion as to the drying and curing of fish which I understand can be· carried out by a, simple process. . I recall that at the time when an inquiry was being made int" the fruit-growing industry, it was shown that in America you could have posted to you a.t any time for a cent an apple or any of the seasonable ,fruits. PacketR of fruit, werp. sent through the .post· with as much facility as letters. That kind of thing could be encour.aged in this countr.y, and it would meet the convenience of many people who crave for fruit diet and, are unable, through certain circumstances, to gratify that desire. I t.rust that thE> Honorary :Minister will ask the Government to look jnto the question' of establishing biological. institutes in relation to the fish supply with a view to bringing that commodity more within the reach of our people, and making it a more general article of food than it is at the present

Votes on [27 OCTOBE!t, 1932.] Acoount. 1925

time. It would be fine if we could increase the consumption of fish by abQlUt 25 lb. per head, although even then the average would not be up to that obtaining in other parts of the world.

Recently I read the report of a deputation of Maffra beet-growers. Although I have not been engaged in analysing the facts appertaining t~ the quant,ities now grown, and the questi<?n whether further production would be payable, I am satisfied that if what the deputat.ion said was correct--and I believe that it is -the cultivation of a further 5,000 acres of beet would be of tremendous benefit. to the State, and would result in the oirculation of a larger amount of money among the farmers, who would obtain a reasOnable price for their crops. I understand the production averages about 12 tons to the acre, and some areas have given a profit of £18 per acre per annum. Does that make the Honorary Minister's mouth water 1 Does he think that sheep return tJ:Iat rate of profit.

Mr. MANIFOLD.-I am sure that they do not. .

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-This is one good territory, and there is plenty of land suitable for beet-growing in Gippsland. If a Select Committee were appointed to inquire in to the question of beet-growing, it would be a good thing. When farmers ask for something, they generally open their mouths as widely as possible. If the area now devoted to the cultivation of beet were extended by 5,000 acres, big production would follow. Care would have to be taken that the land-owners did not put up the prices, because if they did all the advantages that m,ight be derived from an extension of the area would be destroyed. It is said that beet sugar can be placed on the market for 1d. per lb. less than it is being sold at to-day.

An HONORABLE MEMBER.-Why is it not done~

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-A number of people need encouraging. The Government and its experts are the greatest encouragers of the use of land. The experts give excellent advice, such as no private individual could hope to obtain otherwise. At present there is a poultry plague, and the action taken by the experts will eventually prove to be of great benefit, not only to the poultry farmers, but also to the community. If n9 Go-

vernment proclamation had been i~sued, and if the Government had no deSIre to assist the industry as it has done, all the poultry-yards would have been decinui.~d.

Mr. LINP.-If the Depax:tment gave more supervision to the killers of pou~try and the· dealers, it would be better.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-If an official destroys diseased stock, he is bound to have enemies. As I was saying, a committee should be appointed to investigate the matter of beet-growing. If that step were taken, it would be of great benefit to the industry.

Mr. LIN D.-The Government generally appoints committees of outsiders instead of deputing members of Parliament to act.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-When Select Committees and Commissions sit, they are not immune from fierce criticism. The: Commissions that inquired into the fruit: and fish questions .were attacked. . The. reports of such bodIes are not sufficIently· circulated.

Mr. HYLAND.-There was no fierce! criticism of the report of the Royal Com..-mission on fish and fisheries. '..

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-To-day the fishing industry is in a parlous condition. Fishermen follow a somew)lat dangerous occupation. Unfortunately, neither fish nor fruit is reaching the public, and we have not profited from the methods of distribution adopted in other countries. We can only collate information on that point through a Select Committee of this House. If a Select Committee were appointed to-day to consider the question of fish, it would not cost more than £100, even with the printing that might be involved. I hope that the Honorary Minister will consider the question of the establishment of a biological institute. An appeal.sh.ould be made to the Univel'sity of Melbourne on this subject, and the work should be taken up where the la.te Mr. Dannevig left it in the last of his publications. If such an institute were established, and undertook this work, I am satisfied that in three or four years the State would benefit immensely. The industry should be encouraged on account of the great value of nsh as a food, and I trust that something will be done in this matter.

When I mention what I consider to be weaknesses ~f the unemployment relief

Votes on {AiSSEMBLY·l Account.

,~aCheme, I am not blaming any Minister. The man who is doing his best· is liable

-:\0 be misunderstood, and it is not a fair ithing to make charges unless one has suffi\cient evidence to support them. I poinr, out, however, that there is a demand among the unemployed for more boots and clothes.. I draw the conclusion from "What was said on this subject last night, ;that there must be great quantities of

.... various goods available, but I know that ~ihe people in my di~trict cannot get 'boots. I ask the honorable member for Heidelberg whether similar conditions do lIlot prevail in his constituency ~ There is also a continual cry for work. Complaints are made in the country that men are being sent from Melbourne. People in some districts also protest that unemployed from other parts are being sent to their districts. I say wherever we find a man out of work, give him as much work as possible, no matter from what district he eomes. When the unemployed are provided with work, we help the butcher, the baker, and everybody else to employ more people profitably. In speaking of baking, I may say that I am waiting for the amending factories legislation. -Since the ]~actories and Shops Bill was projected, it has been found that bread is being baked in the metropolitan district 'by a firm that bakes all the week round, ·.and some restrictions should be imposed on it. A man 'whose doings need supervision is making saddle chains and paying his employees low rates. Honorable memLers will recall that it was found that women stripped to the waist were making th~ chain3 in Cradley Heath, England, fOT l8d. per day. Robert Blatchford, the eelebrated Socialist, engaged a band and travelled about England telling the people of the conditions under which these women worked, and urging that drastic changes should be made. After he had spolren, the 'band would. play, "Britons ne~l' shall be slaves." . . 'TI.'he question of providing clothes for tbe unemployed is a problem. Work should be found for unemployed tailoresses in the way suggested by the llonQrable member for Flemington. No ~nbt material could be obtained at half the usual rates without anyone being sweated. If this were done, work could JJe. provided for those who need it, and ·there would be a profitable expenditure

Mr. Prendergast.

of money. We should also be encouraging the employment of people in the woollen mills in Melbourne and in Geelong. There ·are. two classes of people in this community. There are those who wear black cloth and saehes, and those who wear sackcloth and ashes.' Why should the Government hesitate to adopt the policy advocated by the honorable member for Flemington for the manufacture of clothing for unemployed' families? There are about 14,000 women registered as unemployed.

Mr. MANIFOLD. - There are about 4,000 registered at the centres.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-I understand that the total number of unemployed women is 14,000, according to the return presented by the Government. It is dangerous to allow many young single women to remain unemployed. The services of a good many of these women could be used in the making up of clothing for unemployed families. I suggest to the Government that fish should be included in the sustenance ration. If the Goyernment engaged unemployed men to catch fish, it could make the fish available to the unemployed at one-fourth of the price that is charged for fish in the Melbourne shops, many of which are controlled by foreigners. I do. not object to foreigners running shops, but I do· object when they introduce in this country conditions of labour that operate in their own countries. Take, for instance, the case of the foreigner who has a business in Carlton for the manufacture of chains used on farming implements. He is obtaining labour for 30s. per week, and work is carried on in his factory at all hours of the day and night, and on Sunday. If fish was {ncluded in the sustenance ration work would be pr.ovided for unemployed men, the profeSSIOnal fishermen would have a larger market for their catches, and the addition of fish to the die.t of unemployed families would be of great benefit to their health.

Mr. LIND.-It would be necessary for the Government to obtain the fish direct from the :fishermen.

1\11'. PRENDERGAST .-The Government could find plenty of unemployed men who have had experience of fishing to cooperate with professional fishermen in the supply of fish.


Mr. LIND.--It would be necessary for the Government to obtain the fish direct from the fishermen, because once it got into the retailers' hands the price charged would be beyond the reach of the Government.

Mr. PRENDERGASTJ-The fishermen could send the fish direct to the consumer. Recently the fishermen through their association instituted a system of .selling fish by auction to the public in metropolitan markets. The system has :flagged a little recently, probably because of some trouble, but I hope that it will he extended. Fish could be brought to Melbourne and kept in cold storage so as to ensure a regular supply for the unemployed. The louvre trucks used by the Railway Department are suitable for the carriage of fish.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard).-l'he honorable member is making an interesting speech, but his time has expired.

Mr. PRENDERGAST.-I shall round off my representations in a few words. A large supply of fish could be obtained in the River Murray, and at very little expense and trouble it could be 'brought to Melbourne by the Railway Department and landed here in good condition. I impress on the Government the necessity of establishing a biological institute for the purpose of eX!landing ~~e fishing industry, and also makIng provIsIOn for a plentiful supp'ly of fish to the unemployed. Immediate attention should also be given to the suggestion made by the honora·ble member for Flemington that unemployed women should be engaged in the manufac~ ture of clothing for the unemployed. The ~ork could be done cheaply without sweatmg any oBe.

Mr. GRAY (Hawthorn).-I want to take this opportunity to express a certain anxiety that I feel, but before doing so I c~ngratu.late. t~e Government on the speed WIth whlCh It IS despatching the business of the session. There appears to be a common impression, fostered largely by the Leader of the Opposition, that slow ·progress is being made. Before I became a member of the House two years ago I was a frequent observer from the gallery of the way in which the business of this House was dealt with, and I must say that I have not known any previous Government to make such. rapid progress with

important legislation as the present Government is doing. I am glad taat this is so, but it leads me to express the anxiety that I feel. The Budget· proposals have been largely disposed of, and I am anxioufJ to learn what the Govern~nt's propos alP are for dealing with the State's major problems-the losses on the railways and closer and soldier settlement.

Lieut.-Col. KNOX.-You should not embarrass your Government.

Mr. GRAY.-I do not know whether I am embarrassing it, but I want to know when we shall have an opportunity of considering important proposals. Befor~ I. entered the House my main theme wnelb addressing the electors from the platform:. was a criticism of the then Government: for what I considered to be a lack of per-· spective. There are two main problems~ confronting the State-the loss on the· railways and the loss on land settlement the latter being that charming activity of the State in setting up in business as land. salesman and subdivisional expert. I d() not want to be placed in the position of having to subject the present Government to the same criticism as I levelled against a. Labour Government-lack of perspeo~lve. I want to k~ow, for example, where 18 the tra~sport BIll. Has it been pushed on one SIde because of the activity of t;uculent and selfish interests representatIve largely of politics as enunciated from this (the Ministerial) side of the House' What has happened to the Bill dealing with soldier and closer settlement, and when is proper consideration to be given to those sections of distressed citizens who are interested in that measure?

Mr. LIND.-I should like to know who put the brake OIi Cabinet in relation to that legislation.

Mr. GRAY.-We are being asked to pass all sorts of pin-pricking economy legislation, and legislation imposing little imposts over a wide field.

Lieut.-Col. KNOX.-You have been a~ ardent supporter of the Government up to date.

Mr. GRAY.-I support the Government, but I am anxious that the beneficial effects of these economy measures and imposts should not be offset by, for example, a Minister going to a soldier settlers' conference and making an unwise pronouncement.

Votes O1i {AlssEMBLY·l Account.

"-Mr. Lnm.-Have you heard anything ":about the Forests Bill ~

" ":M!-r.GRAY.-~t is! at least on the Notice Paper, and some progress has been ma~e with i!. The other important measures to whICh r have referred have not yet appeal'ed on the Notice Paper, and I think it is reasonable for Ministerialists to ask the Government what it is going

" to do about legislation affecting the major "1 problems of the State.

,~r. LIND.--YOU have not mentioned . the flour aequisition Bill. "

:M:r. ALLNuTT.-Or marketing legislation.

'The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard). - I Ilsk the honorable member not to take any Botice of interj~ctions. .

Mr. GRAY.-The policy which found sneh general acceptance with the people of this State at the last election was peculiarly definite in the matter of the' proposals which it made regarding these tW(I) major problems. I shallI;emind honorable members-particularly those on the Ministerial side of the House-of the actual wording of that policy. I do not suggest thnt, as to the railway problem, some progress is not being made. The mere fact that there is a new Government-a Government with a reasonably good outlook on the limitations of political control-does a great deal of good. Some benefit has been derived by the new administration of the Railway Department; but further steps require to be taken, and one of them, advocated by the party to which I belong, is the introduction of a transport Bill.

Lieut.-Col. KNox.-But we did not all subscribe to that part of the policy.

Mr. GRAY.-The policy speech stated that this party-8t&nds for ;\ fair and just and democratic "fi'ansport Bill. Every reasonable person will admIt that we must endeavour, by co-ordinatlO1l, to get rid of the present traffic chaos which, becau:~e of its wasteful competition and overlapping, is fair neither to public nor to private 'interests. The co-ordination and control of commercial transport should be in the _hands of a committee equally representative of public and private transport, with a comp.etent and independent chairman. No politICal hand should be laid upon its decisions. I am fully aware of the huge investment the people of Victoria have made in their State llailways. I hope I am also aware of the remarkable and rapid modern development "of .he motor-road vehicle.

I ha.ve.read a great many policy speeches, but It IS unusual to have so clearly stated in a policy speech the attitude of a party towards a particular problem. I want to ~now how l?ng 'Ye. are going to be in gettln~ the ~II~ gIvmg expression to that polIcy. SImIlarly, I want to know where is the Bill in connexion with the adjust,,ment of civilian and soldier settlement. What does the policy, which found such ~eneral acceptance with the electors, say In that regard? It says this, with re-" spect to closer settlement and soldier settlement-~hese State e!l~erprises have all completely

fal~ed under polItIcal control. The only policy whIch offers any possible hope is their complete d~vorce,ment from political interference, and the settIng up of independent Boards or Commissions responsible only to Parliament. Many soldier settlers have been unable to meet their obligations to the Government through no fault of their own, beinO' the victims of outside circumstances, such I:) as the fall in values of commodities, unsuitable or insufficient land, adverse seasons, bush fires floods or other acts of God. Other settle;s hav~ proved themselves quite. unsuitable as land settlers for various reasons unnecessary to specify here.

For the former class some policy of assistance to enable them to make good will have t? be devised, a!1~ a conference of representa~Ives of all .poh,tICal parties and the settlers IS now consldermg the question. For the second group there is a consensus of opinion that no good purpose will be served by allowing them to remain on the land. Here, again, have we ever heard in a policy speech, anything more defi~ite in the way of setting forth views on a specific problem?

Mr. LIND (Gippsland East).-On a point of order, I should just like to as·k whether it would not be as well if the Premier came into the Chamber to hear these remarks.

The. CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard).-That IS not a matter for me to decide. A Minister is seated at the table and no doubt,. he will take note of the ;peech of the honorable member for Hawthorn· and will submit to the Cabinet the m~tters with which he deals. " Lieut.-Col. KNOX.-What part of the Supply motion is the honorable member for Hawthorn talking on, any way ~

Mr. GRAY fHawthorn).-If I may be allowed, I Will express again, in more moderate terllls, the complaint which I feel. The two problems to which I have referred are the major difficulties with,

Votes on [21 OCT08ER7 19H2.J Account. 1929

which the State is confronted. They are the two problemg which most seriously .affect the financial stability of the State. -"For example, the. Budget speech reveals that the provision this year to meet the .railway losses amounts to £683,000; and that the provision for losses in respect of land settlement is £430,000. It is legitimate, I think, to point out that we have been spending a lot of time effecting relatively small economies, and enforcing l'elatively small impositions, which might ~asily be offset by hesitancy and delay in dealing with the two great problems. I hope that the Government will be in a position very shortly to submit to this Housc its proposals dealing definitely with these two principal problems which eonfront the State.

Mr. COOK (Bendigo ).-1 have listened with much pleasure to the somewhat humorous address of· the honorable member for Hawthorn. His speech has come like a cool breeze on a summer's day. It has revived us to listen to oile of thc chief supporters of the Government castigating the Government in humorous vein. In the first place, the honorable member says that this Government has made greater progress than any other Government for a considerable number of years, and, in the second place, he gives the House a very interesting dissertation on the Government's lack of progress. I t is very encouraging to hear a speech delivered in thiat manner. Frankly, I congratulate the honorable member on the independence which he lIas shown. I, too, have been wondering why this Supply measure has been brought down at the present juncture. We have been told from time to time that the Government is anxious· to proceed with the business of the country. There are many major Bills listed on our business paper. It is time the Government, instead of fiddling about with the business of the country, gave some attention to such matters as the honorable member for Hawthorn has spoken about, and to such things as are in the minds· of many other members, so that the major measures might be brought down, and the House allowed to deal with them. The present position of the Government is very peculiar. Possibly, the idea in the minds ·of the members' of the Cabinet was to bring forward a Supply measure

to-day, because they ·are in trouble with respeot to their mortgage and education legislation. However, although the hon:. orable member's speech was humorous;, we all know there are many true words spoken in jest. I dare say his remarkS will be taken to have been based on substantial grounds, and that they will ha ve the desired· effect.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-The honorable member for Hawthorn is the henchman of the Attorney-General. He represents the other wing of the Government.

Mr. COOK.-The Government seenis to ha ye several wings. .

Mr. HOLLAN D.-All moulting! ~Ir. COOK.-It was interesting to note

the very keen attention paid to the speech of the honorable member for Hawthorn by at least one other member of his own party-one who probably belongs to the same wing.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-N 0; I think .that the honorable member whom you have in mind he longs to another wing.

Mr. COOK.-At any rate, equally keen attention was paid by members of the Country party.

I wish to refer now, by way of warning to the general public, to the maohinations of certain people in connexion with the revival of gold:.mining activities in this State. I wish to put on their guard the many people who are being urged to invest their money in the various mining propositions which are being given public attention to-day. In my own district particularly, there is considerable activity in this direction, and I desire very seriously to warn the public against becoming involved in wild cat schemes. Unfortunately, there have been associated with the gold-mining industry in the past many things which have not been calculated to foster the industry. At the present time, when we have every hope of the industry being re-established on a firm basis, the Mines Department should be especially watchful of what is happening. If there is anyone who is entitled to secure what may be called a rakeoff from the industry, it is the prospector. But I am afraid that there are men associated with the floating of companies in this State who are out to mine the miners, and not to develop the industry in a genuine way. I have seen certain things going on, and I feel it incumbent upon

193() Votes on fAlSSEMBL Y.1 Account.

me to warn the public against the machinations of these people. If I am asked in what way they can be scotched, I am bound to reply that the problem is difficult. One way, however, is for the Mines Department to be particularly watchful with respect to the issue of leases. I have been told by officials that, so long as a man or a syndicate complies with the conditions laid down under the mining regulations, the Department has no alternative but to accept the preliminary fees paid down for leases. Whilst that may be true, I would urge upon the Government-particularly the Minister of Mines-that before the leases are finally issued a very close scrutiny of them should b~ made by the Mine's Department, in order to ascertain what kind of people they are who are applying for the leases. That would· be the first step towards justifying the confidence which I am pleased to say is being shown in gold mining to-day. When the pros:pector has done his work, a syndicate comes along to get an option over the proposed mine, and the bona fides of these people should be ascertained so that the peonle who are invited to become shareholders would be justified in in, esting.

Mr. DUNsTAN.-The information win be difficult to 0 bta~n.

Mr. COOK.-I do not think so. A number of leases have been taken up by syndicates or companies in Bendigo, and I understand that they have pegged out a considerable area. Before the leases are finali,ze.d the M:ines Department should devise some means of inquiring into the bOlla fides of these people. I do not think it is asking too much when I ask that that shall be done. I realize the difficulties in the proposal. My sole obJect is to eliminate unfortunate practices such as were followed in the past, and had more to do with the decline of the mining industry than anything else. I am concerned with the genuineness of the people who apply for leases. I am apprehensive of the machinations of those people who have no desire to develop our gold resources, but by means of company promoting B.re anxious to get in on the ground floor, as it is called, and who will jeopardize the industry. Seeing that the Mines Department has the last say in the issuing of leases, I think that it ought to exercise control by scrutinizing. very

closely the type of people who apply for Jeases. If' the· expected development in the gold-mining industry takes place and companies are promoted, we are going to strike trouble because we lack competent mine managers. As a 'result of the decline of the industry, there are few men in the community capable of acting as· mine managers. Every manager is sup_· posed to be certificated. .

Mr. LINToN.-They are almost an extinct class now.

Mr. OOOK.-Quite so. During the transition period, the Mine Managers" Examination Board was able to give certificates to men who had had for a certain num bel' of years practical experience as managers. Some of these managers are certificated because of their length of service only. But with the development which we expect to- take place, particularly in the Bendigo district, a large number of mine managers will be required. How the companies which will be promoted are to secure the services of certificated mine managers I do not know. I have discussed this matter with the Mines Department, and particularly with the officer who controls matters of this kind, and he admits that the problem is a difficult one. An amendment of the

. Mines Act may be necessary. I urge the Government, and the Minister of Mines particularly to put this matter in hand before we have reached the position where we sha]] have mines and no managers to put in charge of them. Under the law as it is at present, a man can manage a mine though he is not certificated if only eleven men are employed underg~ound. As soon as a twelfth man. is put on, the manager is required to be certificated. In Bendigo, a large number of old mines are being opened up, and in each of them more than eleven men will be employed underground. The question therefore arises, what certificated managers have we to take control of these mines ~ If an amendment of the Act is 'required, the Government should have the amending legislation prepared immediately.

Another aspect of this matter is the need. of resident inspectors on our goldfields. If there is one part of Victoria where a resident mining inspector is absolutely needed, it is Bendigo, where we have a gold-field that embraces quite' a


considerable area, quite apart from the City of Bendigo; I am told that even to-day there are conditions in the mines that call for close supervision. I hope that the Department will take this matter up with the view of assisting the industry, 'and especially of looking after ,the interests of the wage-earners.

Another aspect of the matter is this: The gold yield for Victoria is, unfortunately diminishing, and bu.t for the Bendigo gold-field would be diminishing very seriously. This is largely the re'suIt of the withdrawal of assistance to fossickers. Recently, figures were published which sought to show that some 5,0'00 men are receiving 'sustenance from the Mines Department. I am inclined to doubt the number. If the figures are true, it means that only half the number of men are 'being assisted by the Mines Department to-day as compared with the number assisted when the Hogan Government held office. It is unfortunate that the Hogan Government removed the basis of the revival when they took away from the fossicker the small amount given him for sustenance. The gold yield of the State star~ed to go down immediately. This is a serious state of affairs from the stand-point of the welfare of the State. A few thousand pounds spent in assisting the best type of unemployed men to go out fossicking would be money well spent. Men willing to go out on to the goldfields have proved their worth in the past. It is significant that when the fossickers' sustenance was removed the gold yield immediately decreased.

Mr. LIND.-What did Mr. Baragwanath say?

Mr. COOK.-He said he was satisfied there was more gold underground in Victoria to-day than had been taken out of it.

Mr. HOGAN.-Everybody knows that there is more gold than has ever been taken out of it.

Mr. COOK.-The point I want to emphasize is this: That we brought about a considera ble increase in our gold yield when we assisted the fossicker. It is unfortunately a fact that the responsibility rests on the last Government of taking away that assistance, which has led to a decrease in the gold yield.

Mr. FROST.-It was this Government.

Mr. COOK.-No, it was the last Governmen t. This Governmen t, unf ortunately, has contin~ed the policy. By a judicious expenditure of unemployment relief money in mining districts we could greatly increase our gold yield. What revival we have had in the gold industry of this State has been due almost entirely to the work of the ,fossicker as distinct from that of the prospector. The advantage we were thus deriving was lost through the niggardliness of the Gover~ment in refusing to pay the men, w.ho went out fossicking a few shillings a week while they were battling for a crust. I hope that this matter will be brought under the notice of the Employment Council. We have been told that it is a matter of Government policy. In that case I want the Government to recognize the importance of the work carried on by these men, and to take such steps as will bring about an immediate increase in the gold yield of the State.

I now wish to refer to the action of the Government in depriving certain sufferers from miners' phthisis of their allowances. I know that different opinions have been expressed on the nature of this disease by members of the medical profession. I have lived on the gold-fields all my life, and have paid particular at- " tention to the needs of the unfortunate worn-out miner. I have always understood that anyone su.ffering from a fibrotic lung so long as the fibrosis was contracted whilst he was working as a miner, was a proper recipient for the miners' phthisis allowance. I have perused the reports submitted to the Treasurer by medical men. Every sufferer whose name appeared in a list was declared to be suffering from fibrosis and unable to work. Most of these men receive the old-age pension. This shows that they are unable to work, yet the Government has taken away from them the allowance. I very much regret that, and I sincerely hope that when the finances of the State improve more sympatheti'c treatment will be dealt out to these men.

(:it 1 p.m. the sitting was suspended unhl 2.5 p.m.)

Mr. COOK.-Before I leave the question of the- men whose allowances for miners' phthisis have been suspended, I express the sincere hope that the Ministry

Votes on (Ai8SEMBLY·1 Account.

will undertake to reconsider the cases because, as I have said, I think that the :wen are entitled to have them re-cons~dered. When dealing with a matter of that kind, I cannot help thinking that if the stock: of this State were s'll;ffering to the same extent as those human beings are, whether the stock were cattle, .swine, or fowls--and I understand that there is a disease among fowls ,at the present time -the Country party section of the Government supporters would be on their hind legs crying ()ut for reform and proper treatment. Because it is a section of the human family that is suffering, apparently those members of the Governmellt who belong to the Country party are oblivious of the rights of those men who are suffering from miners' phthisis. I trust that, as the result of the representations that have been made, the worn out miners will receive consideration from the Government.

I do' Itot wish to leave the subject of ~he m~ning, industry before I emphasize the need for the services of another battery on the Bendigo gold-field. I will not go into this matter fully at the moment, becau~e I am negotiating with the Minister.· Still, I press the desirability of having another battery on the Bendigo field. Unless it is obtained, a serious state of affairs is likely to beset the rapidly developing industry, and chaos will result. A battery could be supplied for a comparatively small sum, but it would relieve a great many prospectors, and would

, have a powerful influence upon the ,de,velopment of the industry.

I sheuld like to support the honorable member for Melbourne in the plea tnat he made that work should be given to un~ployed. single men. That is a question that has been discussed in this House on previous occasions, and I believe that all the arguments that were used on those occasions could again be advanced with added emphasis. I hope that the Government, through the Employment Council or the Sustenance Department, will see that our single men are provided with a certain amount of work on the relief projects that are in progress. The honorable member for Gippsland East is -to be complimented upon bringing under the notice of the Government the plight of ex-temporary tE~achers. I agree with everything . Mr. Cook.

that he said, and I urge the Government to take some notice of his representations. I have no desire to go over the ground that ;he covered, but I know the plight of the people concerned, and I realize that the Government which was in power a few years ago practically asked many of those people to go into the service. At the time there was a shor~age of teachers, and actually teachers were brought from Great Brit~in. In order to cope with the situation at -that period, men and women who had had teaching experience and had left the Department years previously, were induced to return to assist in the education of our children. In several instances, to my know ledge, these teachers had other positions, and in a few cases were actually engaged in business earning sufficient for the livelihood of themselves and their families. They responded to the call of the State, thinking, quite naturally, that when once they were engaged on the teaching staff, some security of tenure would be provided for the rest of their lives. But as soon as the slump came, they found that they were left to battle for themselves, and they are now practically stranded. I concur with the honorable member for Gippsland East in saying that, even if the Education Department cannot - find places for the. ex-temporary teachers, there is a moral obligation on the Government to find positions for them in some other branch of the Public Service. '

. In a final word on the gold mining industry, and the suggestions that I have made in respect thereof, I wish to stress that it is of paramount public importance that the requirements should be provided, and, unless the Mines Department uses the powers that it has to keep the development clean, I am afraid that crashes similar to those that have occurred in the past will be experienced. In conclusion, I say that Bendigo is famous, not only for its wonderful gold mines, but for its brilliant sunshine, luscious fruits, and pretty girls.

Mr. ALLNUTT (Mildura).-I desire to touch upon two or three important questions which I think we have taken very few opportunities of late to discuss as the need arose. I desire to support the claims put forward by other honorable members, and particularly tha~ mentioned by t.he

Votes on [27 OCTOBER, 1932.] Account.

honorable member for Gippsland East sonable and tangible nature to remedy it. who spoke of the qualified ex-temporary When the Teachers Bill comes on--teachers who are unemployed. I wish to Mr. TUNNEOLIFFE.-You notice that it emphasize the facts because ",J am con- is not coming very -soon. cerned, not only with their position, but Mr. ALLNUTT.-It may come too also with the influence of the under- quickly for the Leader of the Opposition. sta~ng' WIth "qualified teachers on outback When it is before the House, I hope that

,schools. The' ,Minister of Public Instruc- he wil~ be able to offer someClJres for his tion has assured us that nothing of the' .past SlDS, 'b~cause h~ 'ha.s had far more kind is' taking place. Without being dis- Influence on pa~t legIslatIOn t~an I have courteous to him, I say that the Mildura had. He h~s. ~lso to accept his share ~f

, schools hav,e been shockingly understaffed the responsIbIlIty .for ~ha.t he and hIS for ,a long 'time. A short time ago an in- party have .d?ne .In b~lDgIng about ~he " "h ld 'f f h .' hopeless posItIon In whIch the EducatIOn

,sp~ctor e a co~ erence 0 tea~ ers ,Ill Departmen~ is. ~:be Teachers Bill con-~bldura .. ~e deSIred to have a dIsplay of stitutes an unwarranted attack upon the Infant tralDlng, but he found t,hat there future of our children and teachers, and was not on~ teacher who could gIve such a particularly on those in the outback dem~nstratIOn. He could. not understand districts. Schools 'in those parts that In the ~hole of the MIldu~a electorate have been closed, and the children are the EducatIOn D.epart~e~t dId not. h.ave compelled to obtain their education by one teac~e~ qualIfied I~ Inf~nt tralnmg. correspondence, :whereas certain metro-1 ~ave VISIted s?hools m Mildura, Mer- politan people are c~amouring for the ~ell~, and Redchffs, and can say that abandonment of high school fees. JunIor teachers who are by no means Our system of secondary education trained are being called upon to take up is most unsound. While primary schools this all-important work. Qualified have been closed in the country teachers have sought the earliest oppor- districts, I am not prepared to suggest tunity to leave the northern areas because that Parliament should be encouraged to of the lack of staff in the local schools. agree to the Bill. I say without fear Those teachers have found that instead of that the educat,ion system, particularly so ~aking progress, they were going back. far as secondary education is concerned, There is the spectacle that the education needs an overhaul and a change. system is dangerously approaching the Mr. SLATER:.-What do you mean by a position that prevailed in 1925 and 1926. change ~ When Parliament discusses the Teachers Mr. ALLNUTT.--,.,I mean that to ask Bill I hope it will take into consideration people to pay for secondary education the actions, not only of this Government, ~uch as the State now provides is unfair. but also of the ex-Government. No one Mr. SLATER.-The main cost of secon·· party is responsible for the economied dary ~du~ation is in the capital cost of effected since 1929. During election the buIldmgs. . ' contests 'we have heard the leaders Mr. ALJ.JNUTT.-I thInk that the honof the v~rious parties trying to bid a little orab~e member will agree ~hat the system higher than their rivals, and so the poli- pr?vldes secondary educatIOn to scores of

,tical ga,me has gone on. Even outside the ?hIl~ren who are not capable of abso!bpolitical parties sections of the COD1- mg It, and 'Yho ar«: not capable of m~kIng

. ' . the best of It. NeIther can I subSCrIbe to munlt~ have ~emanded somethmg more the idea of the State having to foot the bill than :Ival factIOns have offered. The r~- for such a system. I know that secondar suIt IS we cannot put the responsI- ... y

. bTt f th t d't" f th educatIOn IS most deSirable and needful, I I Y . or e presen con I Ion 0 C but the State's first duty is to provide pri-

EducatIOn Department on an! do.n~dGol- mary education for all, and to give every vernment, or one party or one ~n. ~VI ua. child a start in life. I emphasize that On the ~o~trary, the responslblhty f~ fact. Until we can afford to give primary t~~t condItIon rests, even as ~he responSl- education to all the children, and not calJ blhty for every other' question rests, on on the outback districts to resort to the whole of the peoo~e. of Victoria. W e corr~spond~nc~ courses, we are not justi~ ·have created the condItIon, and we have to fied In contlIlUlng on the present lines. I join together and do something of a rea- maintain that in the interests of the

1934 Votes on f AlSSEMBLY·1 Account.

children and of the State, Parliamentshould be careful how it approaches the Teachers IWl. . _-

I inten.d to make some suggestions regarding the raising of additional revenue, and I hope that the Government will consider them. In its economy campaign, the Government a ppears to. be acting on the line of least resistance. I feel that..it would be well advised .to c,OJJ..Sider the question of licensing insurance agents. Auctioneers are required t,o pay an annual licence-fee of £25, and real estate agents have to pay a fee to obtain their licences. Other classes of business people are licensed. I see no reason why insurance agents should not be licensed and compelled to pay a fee to the Government. All sorts of men act as insurance agents. I know of farmers, hairdressers, and others in small businesses who combine i~surance agency work with their ordinary business, the commission supplementing the income from their ordinary avocation. Others canvass for insurance business, and often accept proposals for which the policies are sometimes unjust. Trouble often occurs in , the case of these poli~ies when a valuation is made after a fire occurs. Before the Government asks Parliament to agree to the transfer of money from the Oountry Roads Board Fund to C0nsolidated Revenue, and to pass legislation affecting the rights of public 'servants, railway men, and teachers, it should investigate the question of licensing insurance agents. The imposition of a licence-fee would benefit the State revenue, and also be in the general, interest of business. This matter should certainly be considered before the Government attempts to transfer 'from the Oountry Roads Board Fund the revenue now derived from the registration of motor drivers. That is a matter which will have a serious effect later on if legislative approval is given to it.

Mr. LIND.-It will have a serious effect in this House if the Government goes on with it.

Mr. ALLNUTT.-I agree with the honorable member. I have suggested on previous occasions the advisability of the Government licensing motor garages and motor mechanics. I am aware of the fact that many motor car owners are deliberately robbed by some garage proprie-

tors because those' engaged in the trade are under no special responsibility to the public. I do not think that the man who is legitimately engaged .in the bu~jnes!:! of conducting a· garage and undertaking repair work and the competent mechanic would have any objection to registr~tion. Garage owners apd mechanics in Melbourne and the country districts ha ve complained that they have no protection against the unqualified or dishonest man. I have been forced on many occasions to pay lads who knew little more about my car than I did myself 4s. 6d. per hour, and more, for small repair~. Many motor car owners have had this experience. They take their car to a garage for repair, and after they travel 20 or 30 miles the car breaks down again. The licensing system that I suggest should be intro .. duced in the interests of State revenue and the protection of the motor-owning public. The public would be protected, as also would the men who are legitimately engaged in the business, and are rendering efficient service to motor owners. The honorable member for Hawthorn expressed his disappointment that the Government had not brought before the House the subject of closer settlement.

Mr. LIND.-He is not the only one who is wondering what has become of the Bill.

Mr. KENT HUGHES (to Mr. Lind).-A Minister who is a member of your party is in charge of the matter.

Mr. LIND.-And who has put the brake on him?

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-There has been no brake.

Mr. ALLNUTT.-With the honorable member for Hawthorn, I wonder what has happened to the Bill.

Mr. FRo sT.-It is in cold storage. Mr. ALLNUTT.-It has been in, cold

storage for years. Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-It is frozen stiff,

now. Mr. ALLNUTT.-It is interesting to

find the honorable member for Hawthorn shedding tears over the subject of land settlement, which he said is one of the two major problems to be dealt with. If he is sincere in his statement that the loss on land settlement is due to the fact that. the State has acted as a land salesman, 1 entirely disagree with him. In order to be a success, land settlement must be supplemented by marketing legislation. The

Votes ott. [27 OCTOBER, 1932.] Account. 1931)

present position in relation to land settlement is, in my opinion, the result of the world-price situation. I realize that there is difference of opinion on this matter, but I have expressed my view. One of the main reasons why the settlers as well as the State as a whole are in the position in which they find themselves to-day is that, while we have for 25 to 30 years been building up secondary industries, we have done so at the expense of the primary industries, which are the sources of the production of our exportable products. If the Government is sincere in approaching the problem of cleaning up land settlement, it can make all the readjustments it may deem fit; but any legislation designed to go merely that far and no farther, as suggested by numbers of members of this House, will land the State in the same position again before many years have passed. We must give more attention than we have been giving to the problem of marketing our exportable products. The criticism may be offered that that is mainly a Federal question, but the fact remains that the cleaning up of land settlement is not being approached in a satisfactory way. What are our agricultural experts, the men who have been trained and paid to conduct research, doing with the view of preventing a recurrence of the existing situation? Despite all their training and their research, we have not heard one suggestion that they are dealing with a practical scheme. We need to get down to something of a concrete character to ensure that present-day conditions shall never return. We have watched the expansion of our primary industries, but we are now in an impossible position, and we must clean it up.

lIr. KEANE (Coburg).-I totally disagree with the honorable member for Mildura that the secondary industries have been fostered to such an extent as to have placed the man on the land at a considerable disadvantage. The honorable member has been bewailing the fact that the primary producer is suffering all sorts of disabilities for which the responsibility has to be placed on the Government. I remember when Sir Graham Berry first opened up the lands which had been occupied by pastoralists on lease. Immediately those leases fell in, Sir Graham Berry caused legislation to

be passed which gave to primary producers opportunities of obtaining those lands and cultivating them to the fullest extent. In no other country of the world have such wonderful conditions been given as were given 'to the men wh<> went on the land in those days. There was any amount of cheap land avai~able .. Every encouragement was given in that direction, but no other encouragement was given for a long time. To-day, however, we are constantly hearing complaints about the disadvantages suffered by primary producers. It is a strange fact that, immediately a bit of land is available in the vicinity of an already established farmer, he is after it to put his own sons on that property. If the condition of the wheat-growing industry is so deplorable, why are the farmers crying, like Oliver Twist, the whole time for more?

We need to remember what immense sums of money have been spent by Governments in the past in providing primary producers with cheap water supplies. We should remember at the same time that in many cases the people wh() have benefited have not attempted to appreciate their responsibilities by paying off the liabilities incurred by the provision of that water for them. In the COnstituency of the Minister of Agriculture an 'irrigation trust was relieved of its responsibilities, about twenty years ago, to the extent of £1,500,000. That liability was passed on to the masses of the people, to be paid off by them. There would have been no development of this country but for the construction of railways. The farmers need to be reminded of that fact, for on the slightest pretext they desert the railways which have established them and give their patronage to private enterprise. Simply becauso they can get their produce transported for a little less than is charged by the railways, they go past the railways and demand the construction of perfect roads parallel with the railway lines to enable private enterprise to compete with the railways under unfair conditions. The farmer has been the best treated man in the community, but he wants an the protection and consideration for himself. I recall the days when the Minister of Agriculture happened also to be chairman of a concern known as

Voles on [AlSSEMBLY·l Account.

th-e Fresh Food and Storage _ Compaily. At a meeting of that compa.ny he suggested that they ehould organize the dairy-farmers to come first to a meeting of thecoll}pany, over which he would preside. 'They did so, and he said to them, " Now I want you to wait on me as a deputation. I am Minister of Agriculture, aild I want you to come along and suggest to me that a butter bonus should be gi ,'en." They took the hint, ahd waited on the chairman of the company in his capacity of Minister of Agricp,lture, when he said, "I shall put your request before the Cabinet, and recommend that it be granted." He did so, and the dairy-fariners got their butter bonus, which was continued for many years. That was what a Government of years gone by did for the primary producers, who, I repeat, "want all the encouragement and protection' they can get for themselves, but who, when it comes to a matter of fostering secondary industries, are opposed to such projects every time. They want all sorts of things done for theml3elves, and when they have secured what they want they have not the slightest gratitude. Provision has been made in our unemployment relief legislation to make available to the farmer cheap lahour, costing him practically nothing but the feeding of the men working for him.

Mr. DIFFEy.-How many farmers took advantage of that provision?

Mr. KEANE.-I know all about the point of view of the "cockie" towards those who work for him. I have worked for the "cockie," and God forbid that any relative of mine should ever have to do so. I know what it is to be pulled out of bed, in the Ballarat district, and to have to go out and dig potatoes before daylight. I have had to partake of my breakfast by starlight. I know how I was treated, and, whilst my employer might be said to have been a tip-top man, I have known people related to myself who were less fortunate with respect to their employers. One unfortunate man, who received 15s. a week, was quartered in an old shed, the floor of which was below the level of the ,surrounding land. He could do anything and everything on the farm. On Sunday afternoons he was quite willing to do the milking in order to relieve

the farmers' daughters .if. th~ywanted to' go to" church. I had two -"and a half years' experience as a dairy farmer, and had it not been for the fact that IDJ" wife became ill-unfortunately I lost her soon afterwards-I would have been only too pleased to remain on the land as a <lairy farmer. Previously I h~d been employed on a good wage in Melbourne, but I liked the life on the land. I was satisfied with it, although only a tenant farmer. When I hear country members talk about the great disabilities of the farmers, and hear them demand their pound of flesh on every occasion, whilst ignoring the demands of the unemployed in the metropolitan area, I can only come to the conclusion that they are talking humbug. They are simply throwing dust in the eyes of the people. The sooner the Government realizes that it is up to it to stop these subsidies to farmers in the country, the better. I opposed the subsidy given to the freezing companies by the Hogan Gdvernment. Those companies owe the State £750,000. When the co-operative freezing works were in full swing, many of these farmers:, who talk with their tongues in their cheeks about their disabilities, would nOt send their own stock to them because they could get a little more money by sending the stock to a private freezing works like that run by Angliss and Company. We know, too, that the farmers nearly brought about the destruction of the bacon factory at Dandenong by their selfishness in sending their pigs to other places in order to get, perhaps, 2s. more per pig. When country members say that the farmers are not getting that meed of justice to which they are enti tIed, they had better talk to somebody else, because I know better. In no country under the sun has" such encouragement been given to the farming community as has been given to the farmers of this State by various Governments that have occupied the Treasury bench in this House. I felt that" I must contradict the statement made by the honorable member for Mildura about the miserable existence of the man on· the land. I realize that many men on the land are suffering, but their lot is as Paradise compared with the lot of unemployed men in the city, who have no means of producing the" foodstuffs that


they need. I produced all the foodstuffs, except meat, that I required when I was a tenant farmer. Things were different in my young days. I remember working on a farm where we had potatoes and meat all ·the week through, with meat and vegetables on Sunday for a change. There was no fruit or anything of that kind. I totally disagree with the statement made by the honorable member for Mildura that the Government has lacted selflshly in developinl! secondary industries, and neglecting the primary industries. Every Government that has beeu in flower in this State has done considerably more for the farming community than I would have been prepared to do.

Mr. DILLON (Essendon).-This is a suitable occasion for me to take to C011-elude remarks which were abbreviated by the Ohairman when I made a speech last week during the Oommittee stage of the Farmers Relief Bill. Honorable members will recollect that I referred to a certain metropolitan firm, and was about to give some details of the conditions of the employees of that firm when the Ohairman decided that my remarks had no relation whatever to farmers' relief. I now want to say that the conditions of employment in the indu~try to which I referred are sufficiently serIOUS to ·warrant the attention of the House for a few minutes. When I had to curtail mv remarks last week I was referring to "the firm of lng. L.' Benini and Oompany. One man employed by that firm worked from 7 a.m. until 5 p.m. on thirteen days, including Sunday. He worked altogether 84i hours.

Mr. OAIN.-If he worked 84! ho~rs, he was not employed from 7 a.m. till 5 p.m. every day. . Mr. DlLLON.-He did 6i hours' work on the Sunday. He was paid £l.by his employer.

Mr. BARRy.-Sweating of that kind is common' in my district. .

Mr; DlLLON.-Another man employed by the same company is an electrical welder. He worked for seven w~eks.' and was to receive 30s. per week. ~IS tIme-book showed that he was paid at the rate of 7i hours per day. He was booked at the end of a fortnight as having worked 72 hours. This man was not paid the back money due to him, even at the 30s. per week rate. He has not yet

~ ',;

received payment for his second week'~ work. Another man, a fitter, worked for a fortnight, and received £2 on account. He is a married man with two children. Another employee, who has given sworn evidence, states that he worked for this firm, starting on it Monday at 7 p.m., and working till 10 p.m. He worked the same hours on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. On Saturday, he started again at 12 noon, and worked till 4 p~m. He was then informed that his .... wages would be 20s. per week. He was told that the firm did not work under any award, and could pay as it liked. Other hours he was expected to work were from 7 p.m. to 4 a.m.., up to Friday, then on Friday from 7 p.m. till Saturday at 12 noon, and on Sunday from 7 p.m. till 4 a.m. But as the pay and conditions were not satisfactory to this man, he left the firm. He received no pay for his last four days' work. He has not yet been paid. He found that the flare from the elect,ric welding machine was injuriQlUs to his eyesight. He was not prepared to accept the dangerous conditions to which employees were exposed. The switches of these machines are uncovered, and con:" tact with the body would result in instantaneous death. The electric welding machine is claimed to be the Qnly one of its kind in Australia, and was imported from Germany.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-That IS not a bad Thing under the circumstances.

Mr. DlLLON.--:-The firm dismissed a man for refusing to work on Sunday. On account of the low wages-no one is supposed to get more than 30s. per week -and the lon~ hours of work, changes are very frequent amongst the employees. The men employed in the factory were three Italians, two half-caste Chinese, and three Australians. The half-caste Chinese workers, though competent, were paid 5s. a week each on account. This is called cash payment. The employer says, "I pay between 25s. a.nd 30s. per week," and he describes that as "good wages." He expects men to work one week for nothing. Ea~h employee is told, "Y ou must earn money for mE' first."

Mr. TUNNECUFFE.-What is the name of the firm?

Mr. DILLON.-The firm is re~Btered as lng. L.

o

]~e!!~~i,.and . 0 90mpany, of 211-2.J 5 ·Cardigan . street , Carl ton.

1938 Votes on (A1SSEMBLY·1 Account.

Mr. 'ruNNEcuFFE.-What IS their business ~

Mr. DILLON.-It was formed for the purposes of carryin~ on the manufacture .of electrical equipment and imitation marble materials~ Eviden~lit that line ·of business was found unprofitable, and the firm at preEJeJit is engaged in manufacturing electric welded chains.

Mr. IloLLAND.-For whom 1 Mr. DILLON.-These chains are used

by one of the large manufacturers of farming implements in this city, the firm ,of H. V. McKay. There is positively DO justification for the Labour Department allowing such conditions as I have described to exist. The firm that purchases the chains pays to Benini and Company more than sufficient to enable Benini to pay the full engineers' award .rates to the whole of his employees. Benini and Company are paid £42 lOs. per ton for these chains, the firm of H. V. McKay supplying the material. 'The costi price of the material is £16 ,8s. per ton, and the difference between that amount and £42 lOs. is represented by profit and wages. H. V. McKay Limited have had quotations from firms -of repute and standing in New South Wales for delivery of all the material .at Sunshine at £44 lOa. per ton. They have gone into this question .and worked it out sCientifically in this way, and have decided to manufacture their own chains rather than allow the condition of affairs to contin ue. They find also that the cost to their firm, including ful.! award rates, will be £36 per ton. Altogether they use 80 tons of these chains annually. On one occasion a couple of tons of these ~hains were seized from Benini's premises at Carlton. Other disclosures of a like nature could be made, but I think that I have shown that it is absolu.tely essential that some additions or amendments should be made' in our factories legislation to deal with such cases as that which I have outlined. That should be done in justice to the honest and legitimate employer of labour ,as well as to the honest worker. There are thousands of honest workers who through stress of circumstances are

'being compelled to accept wages and conditions (n employment that they would never even look at if times were any;, where near normal. It is because of

competition of the nature I Ihave mentioned with legitimate firms that em.:. ployees find great difficulty in getting anything to do. .

Mr. MICHAELIS.-Is there any .Wages Board under whioh the firm can be brought~

Mr. DILLON. - There is no Wages Board operating in respect of that firm. beoause it is engaged in what is practically a llew industry. But it is time that something should be done so that firms of that kind can be roped in under an award or determination in order that the employees can be given work under ruling rates and conditions.

Mr. CAIN.-You cannot get employees to go on to W'ages Boards in many., cases. That has been the experience with the Radio Board recently appointed.

11r. DILLON.-That is quite true. I wish to say that, no matter how difficult it is for us to legislate so as to remedy the state of affairs with which I have been dealing, we should make some attempt to protect the men who, as the honorable member for N orthcote has indicated, are almost afraid to take a seat on the Wages Board which governs their partioular industry or calling. That kind of thing should not be tolerated by this or any other Parliament. We are not setting a good example even through our own State Departments. We find that the Railway Department, .which is one of our biggest spending institutiona--

Mr. WETTENHALL .-And the biggest loser.

Mr. DILLON.-Yes, unfortunately. But it is certainly not l~ing as the result of the rates paid in the cases to which I am going to refer. It is necessary for the Department to emplo~ a certain number of horse-drawn vehIoles round about the Spencer-street yards and goods-sheds. Tenders are called for the supply of horses, vehicles, and drivers, and, in spite of the fact that serious objeotion is raised by the Chairman of the Railways Commissioners to the motor transport industry, because of the unrestricted opportunities given for sweating, we find that the Railway Department is prepared to accept a price-as it has done covering the present term-qf 12s. a day for the supply of horse, vehicle, and driver. I seriously suggest that the Department should be informed t'hat it is nqt playing the game with another


Government Department--the Labour Department. The amount drawn by t.he contractor would be £3 12s. per week, and the wages due to the. driver for 48 hours' work-without allowmg for the fact that he has to get his vehicle to and from the job, necessitating at least half-an-hour's work-would amount to £3, 8e. 6d., leaving 3s. 6d. for the conI,ractor to make a profit for himself, pay for the wear and tear on his vehicle, and, feed, groom, stable, and otherwise look after his horse. It should be apparent at once to any Government Department in suoh circumgtances that if it is not absolutely the cause of sweating :it is at all events rendering itself liable to criticism. Is is also indicating to contractors that any conditions of employment will be tolerated. The firm in question is not a respondent to a Commonwealth Arbitration Court award, and consequently is liable to pay the Wages Board's rates. Since it is working under the auspices of one branch of Government activity, surely the Government, through the Labour Department, will ensure that a more satisfactory basis is established.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-The Government does not believe in interfering with the Railways Commissioners.

Mr. DILLON.-No. But I believe in interfering with that kind of thing wherever it exists. Men are tendering for municipal cpntracts at all sorts of ridiculous rates. I direct the attention of the honorable member for Coburg to the conditions of the contract existing with the Coburg Council for the supply of the same kind of service.

Mr. KEANE.-I know it well. The rat.e is lIs. 6d. for a man, horse, and dray.

Mr. DILLON.-Yes. The honorable member for Bendigo also may know that the Bendigo Council ,has knocked 3s. off that rate. When we get municipalities and Government Departments accepting these low rates, saving the last penny at the expense-in nine times out of ten -of the man who is working and not at the expense of the contractor, it is time that this House took serious notice of it.

Mr. BARRY.-The Government IE

doing it, too. Mr. DILLON.-At all events, G~

vernment Departments are doing .it ... I have not yet finished . with' Governtnent

Departments. I am sorry to say that we could almost complete a round of the whole of the Government Departments and find the same kind of thing operating. I have a letter from an old contractor to the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission, a man who has followed that particular calling for at lea:st twenty years to my "knowledge, whIle being one of the biggest contractors in earthwork to the Commission for a number of years. I can accept his statement as absolutely correct, and I venture to say that conditions that exist in the Rochester district under the Commission would not be tolerated for five minutes in the metropolitan area, even in the distressed conditions that obtain here. This man says there is one particula;r driver employed by a contractor who IS

working under t.he direct supervisi~n of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission. That driver is at present driving two horses and drays-one is not sufficient up there-and he receives £1 per week. The writer of the let~e; was employed as a foreman superVlsmg a contract under the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission at a salary of £5 a week. The contractor was decidedly unsuccessful in his venture, and my friend walked off losing £30 of the wages due to him. While the man. employed at £1 per week is paid, the foreman on another contract is not.

Mr. DUNsTAN.-Do you mean to say that £1 a week is paid by the Commission?

Mr. DILLON.-No. It is paid by the contractor who is working under th'e supervision of the Commission. I can quite appreciate the difficulties of municipal and other authorities. If contractors will tender at these ridiculous figures, I know that temptation presents itself to officers of any Department or municipality to accept such tenders. But, I contend that due consideration should be given to the conditions of employment when any contractor puts up his deposit and accepts the responsibilIty of a contract. The Country Roads Board is not altogether free ,of criticism in this direction. Recently it called tenders for the supply of 3,'500 yards of salamander on the Ballarat-road. Salamander is a decomposed basa~t., . It·, really, con'Sists of the tops of the solid . rock in the' quarties. 'Very

-roteson (ASSEMBLY. 1 A.ccount.

often it is used for foundations,but ,ge.nerally for what are known as shoulders in r6a.d making. This contract was let, and the contractor had not only to supply the material, but to grade it to ;speoification) and transport it 21 miles. 'The price aC('ep~d \lnder those conditions was 2s. 3d. per yard. I shou1d think that nobody knew better t.han the ·engineers -who suggested the acceptance ·()f,that tender, that it was positively impossible--

Mr., CoOK.-It would be int.eresting to see their estimates.

Mr. DILLON .~I did not see them, but I venture to say that the figures would have heen considerably above the accept.ed price. One quarry that was situated within 400 yards of the place where the work was commenced tendere,l the price of 3s., and I am informed that that was the actual net cost to the quarry. However, a contractor can tender a price of 2s. 3d. per yard and d€'liver the material .from a place 2~, miles away. I say serIously that the -officers of our Departments should be instructed to give due consideration to the conditions of labour that might obtain when the work is begun. I do not make this appeal wholly and solely in the interests of the employees. I make it to the Government and honorable members generally, as much in the interests of the honest and legitimate employer of labour as from the employees' point of view. The grinding dow~ of wages, any more than the grinding Idown of prices for materials, or for P.rimary produce, of which sO'much is said in this Chamber, is never going to assist in the rehabilitation of this country. We have Commonwealth Arbitration Court awards and Wages Board 'determinations to which all reasonable employers of labour are willing to adhere. It should be impossible for men to· secure contracts under conditions which ought not to be tolerated in this democratic community.

Mr. BARRY (Oarlton).-I was greatly interested in the remarks on sweating made by the honorable member for Essendon. A few weeks ago, it will be recalled, thit:; question was discussed in this Chamber by the honorable member for Melbourne and myself. During the discussion a Minister promised that legislation wouM be brought down to make Sunday work impossible. Despite that. fact,

Mitiisteria] supporters are still asking fo:r that measure. The happenings in one factory have been described by one honor'able member, but such things occur in my electorate. I believe th.at girls are being sweated in other districts. I also know that good employers, particularly in my electorate, have been forced to close down because they do. not belong to the class that works its employees on Sundays, and works them generally under conditions that are a disgrace to a civilized community. It is time that Ministerial supporters joined with us and demanded that some steps should be taken to give relief to these unfortunate employees. I hope that something will be done immediately.

Mr. WETTENHALL.-YOU should show appreciation- pf what has been done rather than demand that something should be done.

Mr. CAIN.-The Factories and Shops Bill introduced in another place will allow more sweating.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Everard).--I ask the honorable member for Carlton to take no notice of any observations made by honorable members.

Mr. BARRY.-You, Mr-. Chairman, will agree that I did not take any notice of other honorable members, but the question is so contentious that everybody desires to take notice of it. Sweating still continues, and, therefo,re, the honorable member for Lowan should not expect me to express appreciation when reany nothing has been done to prevent it. The Age has done wondetful work in placing details concerning sweating before the public, and yet the Bill submitted pro· poses nothing to prevent such conditions. In view of these facts, why should I express approval of the Government's action 1 So long as I am a member of this House, and opportunity affords itself, I shall raise my voice against the degrada.tion suffered by young Australians at the 'hands of unnaturalized foreigners who are killing not only labour but also 'invested capital.

I was interested in the remarks of the honorable member for Gippsland East, who asked the Government to find employment for the temporary teachers whose services have been dispensed with by the Education Department. It is a scandal that the Department should have treated in such a manner people who came to its assistance when it. could not SE-cure·


teachers. SQme Qf thQse peQple spent 1') or 20 years in the Service, but they have been thrQwn out, and a number are nQW recipients Qf sustenance in my electQrate. One man was in the EducatiQn Department for fifteen years, Qf wh~ch he spent five at a cQuntry schQQ~. He IS the. father Qf seven children, and IS an ~x-.sQI~Ier. He suffers seriously from war mJurIes, and cannot follow any occupation other than teaching. Now he is recei~ing a war pe~sion of 30s. a week. Whlle fully qualified teachers are walking the streets, the State is still educating more people to follow this profession. It should be possible for the Government to find work for these temporary teachers, either in the Education Department or some other Department. A discussion in Cabinet may be necessary to decide the question o.f employing them in some other Department.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE. -They do not discuss things in Cabinet. They are tQQ busy fighting Qne anQther.

Mr. BARRY.-Evidently frQm what has happened here tQ-day the fights are nQt cQnfined to' Cabinet. The hQnQrable member .for HawthQrn cQngratulated ~he GQvermnent Qn the WQnderful speed WIth which it had brQught dQwn legislatiQn, bllt later he cQmplained bitterly because. certain measures he advQcated had nQt been submitted. As' a result of the statements made by Ministerial supPQrte~~, I hQpe that influence will be brought to' be.ar on Cabinet to hurry the submISsion of important legislation. This mQrninga discussion Was inaugurated by the hQnQrable member fQr ~elbQurne on the subject of work fQr smgle meu. An attempt should be made to' find mQre wO'rk fO'r them generally, but I shO'uld li~e to knQw the qualificatiQns necessary In order to' secure them jQbs. SQme time agO' a number Qf men marched Qut Qf the BrQadmeadQws camp and tQQk up residence in PQrtion of my electQrate. I learned last evening that 125 of them had been called up fQr wQrk, and that th~y will accept it. in different cQuntry dIS-tricts. .

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-They were .made test cases, but they all accepted the wQrk.

Mr. BARRY.-I realized that the Go·vernment wanted to' make tests Qf them.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-A man withQut a home is worse off tlhan one with a home.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-That is why yQU put a "T" Qn their cards. M~. KENT HUGHEs.-There was no

test bf them. Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-We have three of

the cards.

Mr. BARRY.-Men whO' have been registered as unemployed for two. or th~e'e years have been unable to find JQbs.· If the GQvernment can pick Qut 125 single' men and find the111' wQrk, surely it has nO' . reasQnable grounds fQr nQt picking out 125 mal'1'ied men with 3, 4 0'1' 5 childre·n. Such men are 10Qking fQr work every day at the GQvernment LabQur Exchange. It is pleasing to' knQw that wQrk is being found for SQme men, and that they are not wQrking for farmers under the cQnditiQns described by the hQnQrable member for Coburg. If a qualificatiQn for work. involves marching Qut and demQnstratIng, then I should' advise the unemplQyed to demonstra te, and the quicker they do SO' the quicker they will get a jQb. ~he Minister in charge Qf sustenance mIght 8;lsQ take intO' cQnsideration a point affectmg ex-sQldiers. A numoer of these men have seen me, and they tell me that t~eir ,!ar pensiQns are taken into cQnsideratI.on when they apply for sustenance. Many Qf them WQuld be better Qff if they drQPped their war pen-. siQns and went Qn· to' sustenance. Then they could Qbtain frQm the sustenance fund an amount Qf 8s. per week for rent. They have nQW to' pay their re"rit. out of the small sustenance allowance and' pension that th~y r~ceive. ~ ho~ that the Minister WIll gIve consIderatIon. to this matter.

When I was in Maffra recently, a CQmplaint was m.ade to' me regardi~g the mariner in which unemployed relIef workers are treated, and I brQught the matter under the notice Qf the member fQr the district. I received a letter tQ-day relating to the same .matter .. T~e distributiQn Qf sustenance In that dIstrIct appears to be under the contrQI of the shire engineer. When an unemplQyed man is put to wQrk on a CQuntry Roads BQard jQb, he has to' sign the BQard's wages-sheet as receiving mQney fQr sustenance. I That is wrQng, I cQnsider, and the ma~t~r oug~t to be investigated by the MIlllster In charge of sustenance. Where a man is emplQyed on a Country RQads Board job, the BQard shQuld pay him for the work

)942 Votes on " {ASSEMBLY·l Account.

at the award rate, and he should not be compelled to sign the wages-sheet as a recipient of sustenance.

Mr. Coox.-Do you mean that the Board is compelling men to work for sustenance?

Mr. BARRY.-The person in charge of the distribution of sustenance in that "district :is compelling the unemployed man to work on a Country Roads Board job, but when he . is paip. t'~o! the work, he is treated as a recipient of sustenance. Such men should be paid the prescribed rate by the Country Roads Board for the work done. I hope that the Minister will remove this anomaly. I make. the request 'that my representations relating to temporary teachers be submitted to the Minister of :Public Instruction with the object of securing some relief for persons who have given good service to the State and are now unable to obtain other work. Many of these teachers have spent the major portion of their lives teaching, and they are as efficient teachers as are the teachers in the Service. These temporary teachers came to the assistance of the State when the Department was short of teachers. I hope that the Government will· provide some employmen"t for them, if not in the Education Department, in some other Department.

Mr. WETTENHALL (Lowan).-When so many contentious measures are being dealt with by the House, it would be pleasant to welcome the introduction of a noncontentious measure which might serve to pour oil on troubled waters on certain occasions. I have previously referred to the practice of some manufacturers in adulterating woollen goods, and also to the practice of false advertising of goods .sold to the public. It is true that there is provision in the Goods Act and other statutes to check these nefarious practices, but the administration of the legislation appears to be so in~fficient that adulteration of goods, and false advertising, are being eng;aged in to the detriment of consumers. I hope that before the" end. of the session the Government will bring down an amending measure tightening up the existing legislation relating to the adulteration of goods and false adver-tising. ". " . ~r.. JB:OLLAND (Flemington). ~ I bring under the notice of the Minister in

charge of sustenance the necessity of ob~ serving the margin for skill in the payment of wages to relief workers. The Commonwealth Arbitration Court has laid down the principle that the margin for skill should be allowed on relief work, but I am inform~d that it is not being observed. Relief workers should receive the same consideration as other workers in this mattel;, and I hope that the Government will take .steps to see that relief workers obtain the margins to which they are en ti tled.

I join with other honorable members in making representations to the Government on behalf of temporary teachers whose services were dispensed with by the Education Department. Many of these teachers have had a long period of service, in some cases up to 30 years, in the Department, and they came to the assist"ance of the Department when it foana difficulty in obtaining the services of competent teachers. Moreqver, these temporal;Y teachers did not hesitate to go to schools in the outback parts of the State. I do not want to disparage the teaching efficiency of the products of the training colleges for teachers, but I point out

\ that the temporary teachers have demonstrated their efficiency, because the Department retained their services for many years. It is true that trainees obtain a theoretical knowledge of teaching in the training colleges, but full efficiency can only be secured by practical experience in "teaching, and this the temporary teachers have had. On the files of the Department, one will find evidence of 'the gratitude of parents of children in the backblocks for the splendid sery'ices rendered by the temporary teachers. Many petitions have been received by the Department from parents of children attending backblock schools, praying that the temporary teachers be retained at the schools. I have been informed that the places of some of these teachers have bem) taken by trainees. I consider that there is a moral obligation on the Education Department to recognize the valuable· service that the temporary teachers have rendered in the past, and that they should be given another QPportunity to ~rve in the Depart1p~nt. The se;rvices of the temporary teachers were" dispensed with be'cause the Department had to make room ..for the larg~ number of young teachers

VoteS01t [27 OCTOBER, 1932.] Account. 1943

leaving the training colleges. It may be said, therefore, that the temporary teachers were displaced because the Department did not make a correct survey of the future requirements of the teaching service, and allowed too many trainees . to enter the training colleges. In view of the frequent references which have been made to the matter on the floor of this House and at deputations ~o the Minister, the Government ought to settle it once and for all. These teachers have given good and loyal service to the Department. When other teachers on the permanent staff refused to go out into the backblocks and take schools there, these particular people did not hesitate to make their services available. Subsequently they came back to the city and found that the Department had no place to which to appoint them. There is something radically wrong when their services should be dispensed with after they have given years of good and satisfactory service. The Department has a moral obl:i;gatioll, I maintain, to place them back in the teaching service.

Mr. LIND.-They did everything they were asked to do, and, after years of service, in which they had reached the standard required of them, the door was shut in their faces.

Mr. HOLLAND.-The Department has no excuse to fall back on. It is useless to say that these people have not the necessary qualifications. The fact· of their employment for years by the Department is sufficient evidence of its recognition .of their qualifications. I .~ay again that there is a moral obligation on the Department to do simple justice to these people.

Mr. KENT HUGHEs.-When were they put off? ~

Mr. HOLLAND.-The services of the bulk of them were not renewed last J anuary. The late Labour Government must accept its share of responsibility, but. it is no use blaming individual Ministers; it is the permanent heads to whom we must look. If there are no vacancies in the Service to-day, it is due to overstaffing with graduates from the training colleges, who, whatever may be their qualifications, lack the experience, which is the great qualification, and which is possessed by these people whose eases I am advocating.

Mr. LIND.-Why should it not be possible for the Department to work in a few of the dismissed temporary teachers at a time?

Mr. HOLLAND.-That could be done, I am sure. Another point if; that some junior teachers, particularly in the metropolitan area to-day, have to take classes numbering between 60 and 70 pupils. No teacher can be expected to do justice to any class exceeding 30.

Mr. McLACHLAN (Gippsland North). -I support the honorable member for Oarlton with respect to the particular matter which he placed before the Government. I hope that inquiries will be made by the Minister inunediately concerned. The Oountry Roads Board should be in a position to pay decent wages to the men in its employ. There was a long and earnest discussion last night on the general subject of sustenance. It is questionable whether this State can provide sustenance for the unemployed and their families to the ex~ tent that'is really necessary. Thousands of people require food, clothing, and shelter. The best thing the Government could do would be to make an effort to reduce the unemployment relief taxation by getting many of the unemployed, who have no chance of finding employmen.t again in this city, into the country. If large numbers of theSe people are placed on small holdings, we shall have got rid of the most difficult problem confronting us. We want small land-owners to add to the wealth of the State. We want them for defence. We want them for the purpose of strengthening the physique of the· nation. We want them that they may Ii ve in clean and healthy surroundings. We want them ·for their independence and self-reliance. We want them to become the backbone of the nation. We want to brighten the lives of the many thousands who are in idleness and want in this over-grown city. A Government which will try to achieve these things will hand its name down to history. It is not impossible for a Government to succeed in this direction. The opportunity is available to the present Government. As I have always said, I believe in work in preference to the payment Ot sustenance.

Mr. KENT HUGHES (Honorary MiD.ister).-I wish to take this opportunity

'"

Votes on {AlSSEMBLY·l Acco'J,tnt.

.to .refer especially to a case which was

. referred .to last night by the honorable JtUember for Footscray. He suggested a departmental inquiry. I have before .me a file, and if any member of the House desires to peruse it, I shall be pleased to hand it over; but the facts are so tragic ·and so sordid that I do not desire to ~ake thlem public. This particular case has been known to several charitable organizations for about five years. I may take this opportunity to point out that if any member of the House desires any information concerning a particular case, the Sustenance Department, so far as it may be able to do so, will be only too pleased to provide all the details known. "It may save the time of honorable members and of the House if they will make their inquiries direct from the Sustenance Dert.artment, instead of bringing the matter forward here. Particularly' is that proeedure desirable where the facts of a case are such that, in the interests of the family concerned, they ought not

·to be ,made public.

With respect to the matter of providing :work for single men, the Government was . as~ed some time ago to try to make some money available; and, although actually, l~nder the Act, I do not think the Employment Oouncil was within its rights, .it did endeavour to make a certain :arpount a.vailable. In this particular instance we gave opportunities of work to several specific groups or sections of single men who were living in much the ~ame unfortunate conditions as have been described in this House. There was another community, in Dudley Flats, North Melbourne, the members .of which were in an even worse condition than those specifically referred to here. , There were .some other men also, in' Fitzroy, who .w~re known to be living in most unfortunate circums'tances. These, together with some of the men at the Broad,~eadows Camp,' were given the opp.ortunity of a first call on single men. It is not intended, however, to apply in future the principle of calling up gr.oups here and there. It was .only because there were special circumstances that that was 'done in this .one instance, and in respect .of these parties of men who were living in what may be! termed unauthorized ·camps.

Mr. Kent Hughes.

Mr. HAYEs.-It was not fair in VIew of the seniority principle .

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-No, that is, so, and it is not intended that it should be taken as a precedent. I do think, however, that those cases were perhaps deserving of a little' extra consideration. Those members who have been au fait with the conditions under which certain :groups .of single men were living-part.icularly those in North Melbourne-will agree that it was desirable that work. should be found for them, if possible. I hope that the new relief measure which has been brought down will have the effect of providing more work for single men. At present, we are tied up by the provision. of tIre existing Act, which stipulates preference for married men.

Mr. LIND.-I hope you have not forgotten that there are single men in the country also.

lil'. KENT HUGHES.-No, but the fact remains that in most cases single men are better' off in the country than they are ill the city. I think that country members themselves win admit that unemployed people in the country have better chances generally of helping themselves-to this extent, at any rate, that they can obtain firewood and may be able to grow vegetables and the like to augment their food supplies. It is not intended by any means to o\erlook the claims of the country, or to say that the 'country shall not receive the due proportion of one-third.

Mr. BARRy.-Don't - VOll think there will be encouragement given to single ment to go into such camps if they are to be given preference of employment ~ . Mr. KENT HUGHES.-We know'the . conditions which brought about the for-mation of the camns, and it is obvious,. owing to the flux of time, that any camp HOW formed will be formed nossibly for that purpose. 'These conditions have obtained for eighteen months. The honora ble member for Melbourne referred to the question of the employment of sinP.'le men at Fisherman's Bend. I do not think any single men are supposed to. have been called on to do work there, but, -I will have the matter inquired into.

Before I sit down, I should like to ~'efer to one question of a ~eneral nature which was raised. I refer to the position of the ex-tempol'ary teachers. ' We

Votes on. [27 OCTOBER, 1932.J Account. 1945

all sympathize with these men and women in the position -they are in, but it is very hard, once they have been put off, to put them back again into jobs which really do not exist.

Mr. TUNNEcLU'FE.-It would be not only hard but impossible.

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-I think a large part of the difficulty has arisen ill a way pointed out by Professor Hancock in his book-that is to say, we take the brightest pupils from our State schools, and send them on to the University by means of scholarships, and the only future for them is to become teachers and train other bright pupils. I hope it will not be long before the entrance examination into certain parts of the Public Service will be made so high a standard that only pupils best fitted to go on to our University will be able to step into the jobs offering. I feel that the system under which entries are made into the Public Service at present leaves a lot to be desired. For many of these young people, unless they can get into a profession outside the Service, there is no opening. They qualify for the teaching profession, and that is why so many apply for positions as teachers.

Mr. BARRY.-Why not give the extemporary teachers an opportunity of employment in the Taxation Office?

Mr. KENT HUGHES.-I will bring that matter under the notice of the Government.

Mr. SLATER (Dundas).-The Committee have had an opportunity of hearing two interesting speeches from the Ministerial side of the House, in which the speakers, in effect, attempted to chastise, or at least to admonish, the Government for its delay in bringing down legislation of great importance to the State. The honorable member for Hawthorn, in a speech which surprised honorable members on both sides of the House, referred to the delay in regard to transport legislation. I understand that reference was made also to the delay in the consideration of the soldier settlement problem. As the representative of an electorate which comprises a great number of soldier settlers, I may say that many of these settlers have been reduced to despair by the delay of the Government in submitting to Parliament the proposals that the Government has in mind to deal with


this outstanding and major problem. I did not rise to criticize the Government in any carping spirit, because I kno\v that many of the proposals, the considera-· tion of which has occupied the attention of the House up till now, were .closely associated with the Budget. I was taken somewhat unawares earlier in the week when the Attorney-General, in that charming way of his, said to me, "We are just going to re-enact this emergency legislation for a month." It afterwards occurred to me that the reason for the re-enactment of the legislation for a month only was the pressure that had been brought to bear on the Government by its own supporters. The Gov.emment has been embarrassed by the pressure from its own side. Early consideration should be given to such outstanding proposals as the financial emergency legislation and the transport legislation.

Mr. CAIN.-If you were a member of the Cabinet, you would appreciate the difficulties of the Minister of Railways.

Mr. SLATER.-I do appreciate those difficulties. But take the position of the wool-growers in the west of Victoria. It is possible to strain their loyalty to a great extent, but we cannot reasonably expect them to patronize the railways when they can save from £1 to £1 lOs. a ton by having their wool carted right from their sheds to the wool warehouses hy motor trucks. It is not an unusual thing to see a procession of these great mortor trucks carrying the wool.

I support the observations of the honorable member for Hawthorn, who admonished the Government earlier in the day, because of its delay in submitting tranSDort legislation. The honorable member for }.IIildura, who also chose to admonish the Government, raised the question of marketing. I know how difficult that problem is to the Government, because of the different views of its SllPporters.

Mr. LIN D.-And you know their keenness regarding it.

Mr. SLATER.-Yes; if the Hous~ is to have an opportunity of giving proper consideration to these problems, there should be no further delay. We cannot (teal with soldier settlement legislation, or with transport legislation, or with any of the major proposals to be brought forward, in the course of an hour or two.

Votes on [ASSEMBLY·l Account.

I hope thai the major proposals will not ue rushed through with undue haste.

Mr. MENzIEs.-They will not be. Mr. SLATER.-There is no prospect

of the House rising before the 24th of December.

Mr. Mll:NZIES.-You are quite right; there i51 not.

Mr. SLATER.-It also seems probable that the lIouse will be asked to resume, after recess, not later than March. I hope that the important matters to which I have referred will be dealt with as quickly as possible.

I now "wish to refer, briefly, to a comment made by a Melbourne barrister, who told us that a section of a political party had been described as "Mallee anarchists." That political party is not the Labour party. I do not know what party the learned counsel was referring to. He ought to have made that point clear, because some people" have the idea that only a Red party like the Labour party could possibly be standing for the forces of disorder and unrest. Consequently some people have taken the rema.rk. of the learned counsel as referring to the Labour party.

Mr. M:ENZIES.-All the parties have TtOW denied it, so the learned counsel lnust have been wrong.

Mr. SI.ATER.-Probably he was, but I felt that I should take this opportunity -of correcting the impression cr"eated by that speeeh. I think people who are so ready to run round condemning certain settlers in the 1\1a11ee, because of some action they have taken, are not conscious of the extraordinary strain that has fallen upon that section of the community, and has been endured over a long period of time. However, I wanted to' make it perfectly clear that the reference made by tlhe Melbourne barrister was. not to the Labour party, or to any sactlOn of that party.

The honorable member for Waranga referred last week to the printing of certain books, and suggested that they should not be printed by the Government Printing Office, because they were working overtime there. I am assured that that is not thE~ case, and that all the printing reQuired can be done" in the Government Printing Office. There has been an extraordinary rationing of work there. I very earnestly urge the Attorney-Gene-

ral to consider the question and make it possible for the work to be done by the Government Printing Office. It could be done cheaply and efficiently, and those employees who have suffered so severely by rationing would be given a further opportunity of employment between now and Christmas.

I was much impresse9. with the comments made by the honorable member for Mildura on the subject of maintaining our primary schools, and particular ly those in the remote parts of the State. The gradual whittling away of educa-: tional facilities, and the closing of small country schools, is a disastrous policy. It is proposed to close some of the small country schools in my electorate in t~e far west "f the State, where I contend the circumstances are absolutely unique. There we have a district which has been settled for 70 or 80 years, and where the difficulties of life are far greater than they are in almost any other part of the State, due to the problems of transportation and oomparative isolation. The numbers of children attending those schools have dwindled even below that required for maintenance of the schools. The closing of the schools will prove of the worst possible harm to the settlers, and I say that that should be the last economy to be practised. Economies affecting the structure of education are the worst that can be made. Surely we should have r~sort to other means for saving money before we strike at that structur~. :E-n·n if keeping open the primary schools in the remote parts of the State will cost something, I appeal to the Government to have regard to the needs of the people in those parts, and their grave disabilities. Educational facilities should not be withdrawn. I trust that consideration will be giv-3n to the representations made by the honorable member for Mildura, who represents a constituency which, like mine, is far from Melbourne, and the settlers in which have fewer opportunities for educating their children than have people in ether parts of the State.

Mr. BUSSAU (Ouyen).-The honorable member for Dundas referred to a statement relating to the Mallee. A certain barrister in Melbourne alluded to what was occurring in that part of the State, and to the farmer~ defence lea.gue. The learned Judge who was presiding at

Votes on [27 OCTOBER, 1932.] Account. 194;

the time remarked that it was anarchy. I propose to read to' honorable members the constitution of the Farmers Protection League, so that they will realize what the objectives of that much maligned organization are. The first plank is-

'l'o. co-operate with each other in order to give security of tenure to farmers during current year.

The constitution operates from year to year while the depression remains. The second objective is-

In all caseR, as far as practicable, to prevent foreclosure proceedings and distress sales by peaceful negotiation.

I ask honorable members to note particularly the word (( p~aceful nego.tiatiou." The third objective is-

In cases of forced sales, to protect the interest of the debtor as far as possible by practical, moral, and lawful support.

Mr. MENZIES. - (( Peaceful negotiations" are, I suppose, the twin brother to II peaceful picketing."

Mr. LINTON.-I notice that the words " as far as possible" are used.

Mr. BUSSAU.-Yes; "as far as possible by practical, moral, and lawful support." The fourth objective is-

Generally, in cases where debtors are unduly harassed, to interview traders, and, if possible, take such action as is necessa.ry to protect the interest of the debtors.

I may say t,hat farmers' defence leagues are established not only in the older and newer Mallee, but extend right across the Wimmer a district, which has been considered the best wheat-growing district in Australia, and has been descri.hed as the best wheat-growing district in the world. These men have come together to protect their interests. The first farmers' defence league came into existence at Hopetoun in my electorate. The reason for its inception was that there had beej1 ill operation an association of traders in the town who had banded together to protect. their particular interests. The farmol's were being called on to the mat, and asked to disclose their :ijnancial position. The result was that the doctor and the barber in the town knew the position of those farmers, who decided to form the league. In one afternoon 120 of them enrolled, and from that date there has been no trouble in the district. Farmers to-

day are merely taking the steps which other sections of the community have taken. In Melbourne, almost every interest is protected in a similar way. We have organizations of business, commercial, and professional men. Some years ago, in connexion with the friendly societies, a strike of medical men was organized by the British Medical Association. In this State there is the Law Institute, where the legal men gather for the purpose of self-defence. But if the poor farmers get together, that is termed anarchy-the last stage 1 The stand taken by the farmer has been the last stand of individualism in the world. On account of his having to work as a single unit in isolation, the farmer has been the last to join an organization for his own protection. We all recognize that we must get together for co-operation and for mutual protection. It is for this reason that I thought honorable members should lmow the facts .. There is not a state of anarchy in the Mallee to-day. The farmers realize that, with every other class of the community firing. at them, and with all the costs passed on to them, the time has arrived when they should seek protection.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-That is not anarchy. That is co-operative effort.

Mr. BUSSAU.-That is so. The farmer is endeavouring to obtain by various means protection for himself, and in tho interests of the State. I am afraid to think of the consequences to this country if the farmers did not continue producing. This year the wheat-growers of Australia have sent overseas £23,000,000 of pro,,: duce. To that we can add another £5,000,000 or £6,000,000 for the lambs, wool, butter, and other exportable commo· dities produced by wheat-growers on their holdings. In all, the value amounts to about £30,000,000 a year. What would be the position of Australia if that vast quantity of produce were not sent overseas to maintain the solvency of the Commonwealth~

Mr. LINTON.-Do you seriously think that it would be possible for the farmer to cease producing ~

Mr. BUSSAU.-He will have to cease producing unless something is done for him. •

1948 Votes on [A8SEMBL Y.1 Account.

Mr. MIOHAELIs.-Something is done for him!

Mr. BUSSAU.-He is selling his wheat at about half the cost of production.

Mr. MENzIEs.-That is utter nonsense, or at least a most extravagant statement. You can never support it.

Mr. BUSSAU.-I can prove it; and I say definitely that at present prices, wheat is selling at half the cost of production.

Mr. MKNZIEs.-Then, unless the wheatgrower gets 5s. per bushel, it is hopeless?

Mr. BUSSAU. - I should give the figure at 4s. 6d.

Mr. SLATER.-How can he get 4s. 6d. a bushel?

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Frost). -Please allow the honorable member to make his speech.

An HO~~ORABLE MEMBER.-The farmers must have 4s. 6d.

lrfr BUSSAU.-Yes; all over Victoria.

Mr. MENZIEs.-Then the wheat industry is finished for ever.

Mr. BUSSAU.-The Attorney-General knows nothing about the wheat industry. The European countries consider that the wheat-growers should get from 6s. up to 7s. 6d. a bushel, yet when I speak about 4s. 6d. for the Victorian wheat-grower the honorable gentleman says it is ridiculous.

Mr. MENZIEs.-So it is. Mr. BUSSAU.-In European coun

tries the prices I mentioned are considered fair and equitable for wheatgrowers, but the Attorney-General thinks 4s. 6d. is too much for the Victorian wheat-grower.

Mr. MlcHAELIs.-Oanada has refused to support the wheat farmers any further.

Mr. BlJSSAU.-I do not know what has taken place in Oanada; I am referring to the European countries.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Frost). -Will honorable members please allow the honorable member for Ouyen to complete his speech in his own way, otherwise it will be 6 o'clock before he finishes.

Mr. BUSSAU.-For the reasons enunciated, I say that important legislation has not yet been introduced into this House, and the State will suffer seriously from a financial point of view.' Marketing legis-

lation, a measure to deal with the ~cquisition of flour, and the transport Bill should be submitted at an early date. All these proposals are very important, and I therefore suggest that the House should sit on Fridays as well as on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays.

1\£1'. MENzIEs.-Will the members of your party attend on Fridays?

Mr. BUSSAU.-Yes. I can assure the Attorney-General that the Oountry party members will attend if important legislation is brought before them.

An HONORABLE MEMBER.-What about the socialization of industry ~

Mr. BUSSAU.-When we talk about the present position of industry, and the number of unemployed, we refer to big problems which should be satisfactorily debated. It might not be amiss for the House to discuss the socialization of industry. These subjects have been considered by the intellectuals of the world.

Mr. GRAY.-The honorable member for Lowan should include in his legislation deceptive political labels.

Mr. BUSSAU.-It is a new phrase, but it is consistent with the remarks made by the honorable member for Hawthorn on other occasions. I could go on for auother hour, but I shall conclude my remarks now.

Mr. LEMMON ( Williamstown).-We have listened with great pleasure to the address delivered by the honorable member for Ouyen, and although he glanced. to the left for a period, he eventually turned his attention to the right (the Opposition) side of the House, whence hope comes. When he read details of the policy of the farmers defence league, I thought they were planks of the Young Nationalist party, because they seemed so tame. However, after he warmed up to his subject, he showed that the mantle of Peter Lalor had fallen on his shoulders. When he got to business to-day, and talked about the general necessity for assisting the primary producers, there was derision from the Ministerial side of the House, but there was frank co-operation from thid (the Opposition) side of the House. While the hOT\.orable member is associated with the group that feeds out of the hands of the Ministry, what hope can he have? A


Labour leader in the New South Wales Parliament once said that when vested iuterests came into the road of progress, his party had a waddy and a free hand to strike them. The honorable member for Ouyen must link up with the party that is free to fight vested interests. At present his party is bound body and soul with the Nationalist party. He knows the Government's attitude towards bulk handling and mortgages. The Farmers Union should be true to the radical spirit in the country districts, that is associated with the Labour party. If the farmers are to get anything at all, they must link up with the Labour party.

The question of temporary teachers has been referred to. Soon the Government will be reviewing the number of entrants to the Teachers Training 001-lege, and in that connexion I suggest that it should consider the tragedy of the unfortunate temporary teachers. I do not say that the previous Ministry was not responsible for terminating a number of appointments.

Mr. LINTO~.-I am glad to hear you say 50.

Mr. LE~fMON.-A_ number of young teachers were coming from the Teachers Training College, and the Hogan Government was compelled by law to place them, and so the temporary teachers were displaced. The young peo'ple had the qualifications, but I felt doubtful whetJher they were better qualified to instruct the rising generation. A proposal was made to put off a number of junior teachers, who had teaching qualifications so as to take on a number of young people who had had no experience in teaching, but I declined to agree to it because I felt that practical experience counted for so much. While the junior teachers were retained, they were ear!ling something, and meantime the young people were maintained in their homes.

Mr. LINTON.-Did you dismiss temporary teachers last year?

Mr. LEMMON.-The services of a number were ended last year. I do not blame the administration. It could not antioipate the depression which came down on us like a wolf on the fold. Once young people attend the Teachers Training Oollege, 99 per

cent. of them enter the Education Department as fifth-class teachers. I ask the Government to consider the idea of limi ting the number of students admitted to the Teachers Training College, especially as capable temporary teachers with excellent records are available. It would be better to curtail the number of students entering the Teachers Training Oollege, and to give preferential treatment to those who have rendered excellent service as temporary teachers. They are competellt to teach, and the country people prefer them to ex-trainees of the college. If the Government curtailed the number of entrants, as I have suggested, it could probably hold out some hope for the temporary teachers.

The other matter to' which I desire to refer concerns requests for clothing for the unemployed. There is a big need for clothing in my district. I have the honour to represent a great industrial centre. The Government is probably seeking to reduce the number of girls em-ployed in the sewing centres which produce clothing for the unemployed. The other source is the State Relief Committee. I think it is correct to say that from these two sources there is being produced 50 per cent. less goods than were produced last year. The Government js opening centres in order to give unem ployed 'gir Is training in domestio work. That means that the girls are being taken from the sewing centres, and there is 50 per oent. less goods being produced at those centres than was the case last year.

Mr. LINToN.-There are 50 per cent. fewer girls.

Mr. LEMMON.-But less clothing is being produced for the unemployed. When I was Minister of Public Instruction last year, the Department received a great deal of co-operation from manufacturers and unions, and they rendered valuable honorary service. I am satisfied that if the Government appealed to the Australian Woollen Mills it would receive from the mills as much material as it required for clothing at a comparatively low price. I am sure that employers and employees a.ssociated with bhe clothing industry would co-operate with the Government in the provision of more clothing for the unemployed, Opportunities would then be provided for the employment of workless girls, and a

1950 Votes on f ASSEMBLY.] Account.

great deal of clothing would be made up at a rel).sonable price for the unemployed in the metropolis and the country districts. The spirit of co-operation demonstrated by manufacturers and unions should bfl used to the maximum advantage of 1:;he un em ploy ed, and I am certain that, a little organization on the part ofbhe Government would obtain the willing co-operation of manufacturers and unions, with the result that a great deal of additional clothing would be made available for unemployed families.

I have noted that the Government is considering the allocation of an amount of about £9,000 from the Unemployment Relief Fund for the improvement of the rifle range at Williamstown. The people of Williamstown are opposed to the further use of the land as a rifle range. It IS a tragedy that that la:n~e area of valuable land should be reserved for rifle shooting~ and the Williamstown people want the range removed. Rifle shooting is almost a. thing of the past. I am inclined to think that the rifle clubs a,re mltinly behind t.he demand for the improvement of the range. A great many of the members of the clubs are men over the military age, and I do not think that they would be of much value to the State from the point of view of defence. Representations have been made by the Williamstown Council and other 'bodies to the Commonwealth Government that ~he range should be remo1ved,' and I hope that the State Government will not commit itself to any expenditure on the range until t.he Commonwealth Government has announced its decision.

Mt. MENZIES (Attorney-General).Most of the matters that have been mentioned during the debate will be referred to the appropriate Ministers. I have not had the opportunity of hearing all the representautions that have been made, because I have been absent from the Chamber on public affairs. One matter that I did Ihear mentioned was a complaint by the honorable member for }\1:elbourne that the Railway Departmflnt was em:ploying unemployed relief workers on work which would otherwise be done by the regular employees of the De)l>Qrtment. That complaint, put in that way, is not supported by the facts. The truth is found by looking at the ma-tter more closely. The position is this: The work on which unemployed labour is engaged is work which would have Lean

done some day. Noone suggests, I should say, that it is work that the Railway Department never contemplated doing. What is being done is to do this year some work which, Ihaving regard to the financial stringency, would not have b~en done for years. The fact that unemployment relief money is availab1e has provided the opportunity of accelerating some of these jobs, and placing unemployed labour on them. Regrading work is of great value to the Railway Department and the State, and that. was the prime reason why Cabinet approved of the allocation of some of the relief money to such work. Regrading tends to reduce substantially the cost of railway running. The work is so useful that the Department would have done it out of ordinary funds this year, but it could not do it because of the financial stringency, and if this special fund had not existed the job would have remained untouclted for probably the next two. or three years. In these circumstanoes, unemployment relief money was allocated to the Railway Department and is being used for the employment of men who were unemployed. These unemployed men work to some extent side by side with the regular employees of the Department. That is necessary in order that there might be skilled associates and directors on the particular job. It is not correct to say that any regular employee of the Department has been put off in order to make room for unemployed men. On the contrary, the ordinary programme has been carried on in the usual way. The jobs on w~ich unemployed labour is engaged are extra jobs being oarried out for the reason that I have mentioned.

Some complaint has been made about the Government's programme, and particular reference has been made to such matters as marketing, bulk handling or grain, transport, and soldier and closer settlement. Everybody realizes that each of these subjects is important, and everybody will recognize, I hope, that each is difficult. In dealing with each of these problems, Cabinet is amply re .. presentative of those who are presr,ing for the introduction of the legislation. There is no lack of representation in the Cabinet in respect of such matters as bulk handling, ma.rketing, a Milk Board, transport, and closer and soldier settlement.

i

Votes on [27 OCTOBER, 1932.] A.ccount. 1951

Mr. TUNNEOLIFFE.-That seems to be Cabinet's weakness.

Mr. MENZIES. - Not at all, but Ca.binet does not propose to bring down to the House half-baked or ill-digested legislation. Each of these subjects is of sufficient importa.nce to justify the weightiest consideration. Take, for instance, soldier settlement. It is humourous to hear the criticism that has been directed at the Government from the Opposition side, because a Bill has not been brought down. Soldier settlement has been an urgent and critical problem for some years, but no Bill was introduced during the last two years when the Labour Government was in office.

:Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-We had nc majority in the House.

M!". 1\fENZTES.-Thc Government had a sufficient number in Cabinet and ample time to prepare a Bill. The present Government has been five months on the job.

Mr. BARRY.-And it is still thinking about it.

Mr. MENZIES.-We are, and I ,hope -that it is no vice to think.

Mr. 8LATER.-What about the state,ment made by the Minister of Lands to :the soldier settlers! conference ~

Mr. MENZIES.-The honorable member for Dundas is well fitted to appreciate the intricacies of the problem. It was one of the first matters which engaged the attention of the Ministry, and it has occupied more time at Cabinet meetings than any other subject. It is true that when the Government took office Cabinet had, as other Cabinets have found it necessary, to lay down general lines of policy and then to direct its attention te each task and work out the details in o'rder to enable Bills to be prepared. If the arithmetical test is anything, the carrying out of the broadest scheme in connexion with the land settlement will involve not fewer than 300 amendments of the existing law. I mention that because it is desirable that it should not be thought that the problem is a simple one to be solved by a few rhetorical flourishes. It is a problem which calls for the examination of a mass of dAtail, much of which is uninteresting and difficult, and I can assure honorable members that the solution of it is not being overlooked. Rather, it is receiving a great deal of consideration by Oabinet. The Government's transport measure is at the moment in the

hands of the Parliamentary Draftsman, receiving its final detailed drafting, and it is hoped that at a very early date it will be introduced to Parliament. But here let me say again, transport control is a diffioult problem. It is not a matter of simply wa.ving a wand and saying to the Parliamentary Draftsman, "Let us have a transport Bill for to-morrow afternoon's meeting of Oabinet." There are some members of the public, and occasionally, I have thought, one or two members of this House, who imagine that Bills can be produced overnight by the waving of a hand.

Yr. TUNNECLIFFE.-You were not looking at the honorable member for Hawthorn, were you, when you said that ~

Mr. MENZIES.-No. I did not hear the criticisms of the honorable member for Hawthorn, but I have been reading them in this evening's papers.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Dld you prepare his speech for him ~

Mr. MENZIES.-N o. I have quite enough work of my own. Once or twice, however, I have felt tempted to offer to prepare a .speech for the Leader of the Opposition.

The only other matter to which I wish to refer is that which was raised by the honorable member for Ouyen, and I !hention this only because what he said with resp~ct to the wheat-growing industry led me to suspect that my own views are, as usual, liable to be misrepresented in the country. The statement has been made in this House by the honorable member for Ouyen, and it has been made in other places also, that the cost of production of wheat in Victoria is 4s. 6d. a bushel. I do not believe that for one moment.

Mr. ALLNUTT.-If you tried to grow wheat, you would do so.

Mr. MENZIES.-In the first place, these sweeping generalities are usually unsound. Fancy anyone presuming\to say what it costs to produce a bushe1;of wheat without knowing approximately what kind of a crop will be reaped, without knowing how many bush fils each acre will yield, without knOWing what kind of a farmer the particular person under review happens to be, and without knowing what kind of mechanical assistance he has at his elbow r Noone with firsthand knowledge of the wheat-growing

1952 Votes on [ASSE:M~BLY.] Account.

industry will offer to say that there is some fixed line below which one cannot produce wheat at a profit in Victoria. I ~ad the pleasure the other day of discussing this matter with a wheat-farmer from the p.~rt of Victoria from which I came, and whom I have known, all my life. Recently, after selling his wheat at 2s. 9d. pel' bushel at his own country ..station, which is a substantial distl:\,nce from Melbourne, he was able, he informed me, not only to pay his way for the year, but to pay £600 arrears of interest.

Mr. BUSSAU.-How much of his crop was self-sown? '. Mr. MENZIES.-At once the honorable member proceeds to admit that there may be circumstances from year to year in which a farmer can profitably produce wheat in Victoria for 2s. 9d. a bushel. If what the honorable member is getting at is that the present price of wheat is unprofitable, then, speaking broadly, I should say that no one would quarrel with him. But with respect to the statement that unless. wheat is sold at 4s. 6d. a bushel it cannot be produced at a profit, I can only comment that, if the future of the wheat-growing industry in Victoria depends upon the farmer getting the price Qf his product up to 4s .. 6d., it seems highly probable that the industry will cume to an end-that is, unless it is desired by some sections of the community to put the industry permanently on the dole. Does anybody desire that we should carryon any of our great primarv industries permanently by means of subventions from the Treasury? I hope not. Certain factors are occasionally overlooked. For example, the wheatgrowing industry last year received a bounty from the Commonwealth Government. A great deal has been said about the bounties which have been given certain other industries.

1\1:r. ALLNuTT.-Hear, hear! To the iron and steel industry, for instance. ~r. MENZIES.-The one bounty

paId last year to the wheat-growing industry exceeded in amount all the bounties that have ever been paid to the iron and steel industry since the Commonwealth began.

Mr . .A.LLNuTT.-That is not so, and you know it.

Mr. 1\1:ENZIES.-It is so. The honorable member will find that bounties are

not confined in their operation to one particular secondary industry, or to secondary industries generally. However, I do not want to be led into a discussion of that matter. I do not think we are doing any good by constantly asserting these wide sweeping propositions to the effect that the cost of producing wheat is, and will be, 4s. 6d. a bushel.

Mr. BussAu.-That is the computation which has been made over a period of :five years in Victoria. '

Mr. MENZIES.-Well, all I can say is that I do not believe it. The honorable member for Carlton seems to be engaged at the moment in a side controversy with the honorable member for Ouyen. If those two "red" members would only keep quiet--

Mr. BussAlJ.-And if the third" red" member would only be quiet also, he might get more praise in the country.

1\1:r. MENZIES.-I do not want any of that. I assure the honorable member I sometimes wonder whether· we do not take into account to far too great an extent certain inflated costs whioh have held good in the past. The honorable member for Dundas has said over and over again-and I thoroughly agree with him-that there is no rural problem today which is so serious as that of overcapitalization.

Mr. LIND.-Is that 'not the trouble still ~

Mr. MENZIES.-The man who has taken up a property on inflated values, who has bought in at boom prices, cannot, of course, produce his wheat for 4s~ 6d. a bushel. I dare say we could find many farmers who: would be unable to produce at a profit for 6s. a bushel, and some of us put in far too much time wondering how we can save such men from the results of their own folly. I am no more concerned to protect a man from his own folly in such circumstances than I am to protect some suburban tradesman who has done the same kind of thing from going into bankruptcy because of his folly.

Mr. LIND.-What about the 'high cost of a farmer's machinery?

Mr. MENZIES.-The honorable"member cannot tell me that the problem of the man on the land has been p,roduced by the high cost of his ~achinery. On the last occasion when I went through my

Ways and Prj eans. [2 NOVEMBER, 1932.] Farmers Relief Bill. 1953

old part of Victoria, I found that a number of people were in serious difficulties because they had bought tractors for which they could not afford to pay. If the honorable member for Gippsland East likes to include tractors in the machinery necessary to enable a farmer to produce his wheat, well and good; but the prime problem of a great many men on the land is that they paid far too much for their land. They specu-

- lated, and they lost. Mr. BussAu.-A man who paid nothing

for his land is in the same position as the others to-day, on account of low prices.

Mr. MENZIES.-The honorable member will have a hard job if he wants to tell us that the farmer who got his land for nothing will need to get 4s. 6d. for his wheat if he is to come out with a profit. That is altogether too extra vagan t to be believed.

Mr. LIND.-The former member for Ouyen told us that 5s. 3d. was the required price.

Mr. MENZIES.-I think we shall be safer in sticking to the present member for Ouyen. We cannot go back to the distant past.

The motion was agreed to. The resolution was reported to thQ

House, and adopted. Mr. MENZIES (Attorncy-Genersl).

I move--That out of the sum of £701 already voted

by the Committee of Supply, but not yet reported to the House, a further sum not exceeding £70 be granted to His Majesty, on account for or towa.rds defraying the following services for the year 1932-33, viz. :-Division ~o. 1, Legislative Council, £70. That refers to Division No.1 of the Estimates, which was passed at the conclusion of the Budget debate, and the motion simply takes £70 out of the sum that has just been agreed to.


WAYS AND MEANS.

The House went into Committee of Ways and Means.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General).I move-

That, towards making good the Supply granted to His ~ajesty for the service of the year 1932-33, the sum of £954,906 be granted out of the Consolidated Revenue of Victoria.


The motion was agreed to, and the resolution was reported to the House, and adopted. /

CONSOI.JIDATED REVENUE BILL(No.5).

Leave was given to :Mr. Menzies (Attorney-General) and Mr. Manifold (Honorary Minister) to bring in a Bill to carry out the resolution of the Committee of Ways and Means.

Mr. MENZIES (Attorney-General) brought in a Bill to apply out of the Consolidated Revenue the sum of £954,906 to the service of the year 1932-33, and moved that it be read a first time.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was read a first time, and passed through its remaining stages.

The House adjourned at 4.53 p.m., until Wednesday, November 2.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wednesday, November 2, 1932.

The PltESIDENT (Sir Frank Clarke} took .the chair at 4.55 p.m., and read the· prayer.

STAMPS BILL. This Bill was received from the Legis

lative Assembly and, on the motion of the Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works), was read a first time.

CONSOLIDATED REVENUE BILL (No.5).

This Bill was received from the Legislative Assembly and, on the motion of the Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works), was read a first time.

FARMERS RELIEF BILL. The debate (adjO-urned from October

25) on the motion of the Hon. G. L. Goudie (Minister of Water Supply) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (NorthEastern Province) .-Honorable members will recall that we passed a Bill last year, which consisted of two parts, one referring to the relief of tenants, and the other to the relief of farmers. That Act was portion of the legislation

1:954 Farmers [COUNCIL.] Relief Bill.

brought down in connexion with the Premiers' plan. Last year's measure was designed by the Hogan Government with the object of giving relief to financially distressed. persons, who were unable to meet their commitments by way of ordinary business arrangements. The purpose of this amending measure is to make the Act more satisfactorily operative. One of the provisions of the Act was that a farmer, on being pressed by his creditors, might apply to a Court for a protection certificate. The Bill will allow the Farmers Relief Board to grant relief except in cases where creditors representing 25 per eent. of the amount outstanding .object to the Board acting. In that case the matter can go to a Court, but even then the investigation must be made in camera. I think the idea of the Government is that the financial affairs of the parties concerned, when they are being inquired into, shall receive as much privacy as possible. In order to reduce expenditure, it is proposed that the matter shall go before the Board.

The lIon. H. H. SMITH.-Has not the nourt been satisfactory?

. The lIon. Dr. HARRIS.-I think the Court of Petty' Sessions is quite satisfactory.

The lIon. R. KILPATRICK.-But alto-gether too public. .

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-Another feature of the amendments contained iu the Bill before the House is that the mortgagee must be notified in the case of a share farmer applying for a protection eertificate.. There was some controversy here last year having to do with a case in which a mortgagor might have a large mortgage over portion of his property, whilst another portion might be quite free. It was a question whether the land aetually mortgaged should not be particularly specified. I think we left ~he matter by providing for the specifyIng of any of such land or of all the land. This Bill proposes to narrow the position down by requiring the specification of the land actually subject to the mortgage. That ought to give relief to a farmer to Bome extent. Clause 6 extends the operation of the Act to the 1st of March, 1934~that is, fOIl' twelve months.

The Bill contains provision for the protection of stock, but it does not do so in the way in which we want it done.

I.t is all ve~'y well .to have such a proviSIon operatlllg dUrIng the period of the. proposed extension of this moratorium legislation; but I see no reason why the provisions that have been made in this legislation should not be embraced in a separate measure, so that stock shall be definitely excluded from being distrained. on by a mortgagee, for instance, when proper arrangements have been made as' between a stock and station agent and the owner of the land. Other people than those who may obtain protection certificates under this legislation will want similar protection; and, if it is a good thing to make this provision in the Farmers Relief Act, it should be a fair thing to extend it without limitation by means of a separate statute. I heard of a case recently wherein a bank had. distrained ·on stock grazing on a certain property. The stock and station agent ooncerned is apparently going to lose all his right, title, and interest in that stock.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-It may be added that this arrangement was under a stock mortgage to a storekeeper, who had been carrying the farID;er on .

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I approve of this principle in the Bill, but I do not see why we should not amend the Landlord and Tenant Act so that the principle may be applied to business generally.The mortgagee gets his security from the land over which the mortgage has been given. It always seems to .me to be repulsive that the mortgagee should be in' a position to distrain on anything and everything on that land. The land itself should be regarded as the proper and sufficient security for the loan.

I wish to refer now to one matter that is not contained in the Bill. Section 21 of the principal Act deals with the conditions prescribed in connexion with obtaining a protection certificate: Paragraph ( c ) of sub-section (10) of tha t section winds up with the following:-

Provided that any such mortgagee, vendor, person, lessor, grantee of a bill of sale, holder of a lien, owner, purchaser, or other grantee may at any time prior to the issue of a protection certificate give to the farmer one month's notice in writing of his intention to exercise any remedies availa.ble to him and the farmer shall not be entitled to a certificate thereafter unless he applies for the same. within on~ month after his receipt of SUGh

notice.

:

f .-'

Farmm's [2 NOVEMBER; 1932.] Relief Bill. 1955

That has worked ou~ in this way. Suppose that a man has a hire purchase agreement with a machinery merchant, and that he has received notice from that merchant that he must carry out his agreement, A notification is sent him to the effect that if he does not do so within a month, the merchant will take proceedings. There may be a lot of creditors, and the merchant may be only a small creditor. Yet because of the notice from tha t machinery mer chan t, the farmer is not able to apply for a protection certificate unless he does so within one month of the receipt of the notice. I think that that presents a difficulty which was not anticipated by the House when the former Bill was under consideration.

The Hon. M. SALTAu.-Has such a case actually happened?

The H,on. Dr. HARRIS.-There have been many such cases. No matter what sort of friendly arrangement a farmer mny make with his creditors, if he does not apply for a protection certificate within a month after he has received ~ notice from one of them, he is debarred from doing so. When we were considering protection certificates we were, I take it, thinking about creditors in the bulk. I know that I. was. vVe can see how easy it would be for a man to be placed right outside the benefits of the Act by reason of the fact that he has not applied for a protection certificate within a month of his receiving a notice from even a small creditor. When we are going through the Bill, I should like this defect in the Act to be remedied. I have had a small

,amendment drafted for the purpose of preserving the rights of a farmer, in the event of his making a satisfactory arrangement with his creditors after the lapse of a month, to apply for a protection certificate. Pressure might be brought to bear upon the farmer. He would be "up against it" and unable to see his way to carryon unless some such satisfactory arrangement could be made.

The Hon. M. SALTAu.-If he were attacked by another creditor, he would still be debarred.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-The langual!e of the sub-section is very clear. A creditor has to give a farmer one month's notice in writing of his intention to exercise any remedies available'to him, and the farmer shall not be entitlf'o to a cer-

tificate thereafter unless he applies foJ' the same within one month of the receipt of such notice. I have had an amnndment drafted in clause 3 of the Bill which I hope will meet with the appr')va 1 of the House. The amendment I wifl:!1 to move is--

The PRESIDENT (Sir Frank Clarke). -It is rather an irregular proceeding in a second-reading speech to read amendments that it is proposed to move at a la tel' stage.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-The object of my amendment is to preserve the rights of a farmer in a case such as the one I cited. I, want him to have the right to apply eIther to the Farmers' Relief Board or to a magistrate, for a protection certificate after the expiration of one month, Of course, if I am debarred from reading- the amendment--

The PRESIDENT.-I do not debar the unofficial Leader from doing so, but it would be an objectionable 'practice to permit the reading of amendments in the course of a second-reading speech. .

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-This is only a small amendment. '

The PRESIDENT.-Could not the unofficial Leader describe it briefly?

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I want the following amendment to be inserted:--

Clause 3, sub-clause (2), paragraph (a), sub-paragraph (viii), after "two months" insert" and at the end of the said paragraph (c) there shall be inserted the words 'unless the farmer after the receipt of such notice has made with the person givi)1g such notice an agreement, in writing, relative to the subjectmatter of the notice',"

We should in that way give to the farmer the right to apply for a subsequent protection certificate. I have nothing more to say on the Bill. This sort of le~slalation is repulsive to many hono~able members. It was passed with the object of making things a bit more elastic during the depression. It was necessary that men should act more kindly towards one another during the depression than is usual under ordinary business arrangements, and it is necessary that that shall be done until the times are sounder financially. I quite agree with everyone who complains about these Acts. It is opening the way to what we should have said at one time were more or less dishonorable principles.

1956 Farmers [COUNCIL.] Relief Bill.

The Hon. W. H. EDGAR.-Have you any idea how many people have made applications to the Court?

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I think the Minister stated that the number was 187. WOe are living in very peculiar times, when the ideas of business that worked very well in the past are not operating satisfactorily. We want to evolve legislation which is going to assist people to retain the interest they have in their properties, which will keep up their hearts, and which will give them an opportunity to work out their salvation under the altered conditions. After all, Governments throughout the world assisted in bringing about those conditions, and, therefore, it is right that the Governments should give the people an opportunity of endeavouring to work out their salvation. That is the objective of the financiers of the world. If the communitv are called upon to perform a sacrifice, there should be an equality of sacrifice on the part of both individuals and companies. We had the conversion of £5~'1 ,000,000 of bonds. That was a sacrifice to the bondholders. Another sacrifice--one tha t had to be borne by the workers-was the reduction of the basic wage. The conversion loan was a; success. The amount of money repre-sented by dissentients was only £16,000,000. The owners of that money were forced by a measure which was passed through this House to accept the conversion terms offered as part of the Premiers' plan. Surely people who come in between those two sections-the

"" workers and the patriotic bondholdersshould lIe prepared to take their share in the sacrifice the community is called upon to make. Whilst this legislation may be derogatory from the whole stand-poi!lt of business, and may create in the minds of some people a want of integrity, we have to recollect that the depression will not last for ever. When better times come these Acts will be repealed, and we shall go back to that standard of integrity on which rests the business of the British Empire. But I do say-and I say it very solemnly-that there are some people in the community who are not prepared to make their share of the sacrifice. If people will not make a sacrifice from patriotic motives, then Parliament should compel them to make a sacrifice from a duty stand-point.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK (Northern Province).-I have had a good deal of experience in connexion with this legislation, and, to be perfectly frank, I dislike it very much indeed. I feel that it has not given the people the relief that was expected of it. I understand that there have been 187 applications for relief. Apparently, we are not getting the best results from this legislation beml'_ •. se of the many obstacles in the way. Let us take, for instance, the question of stocking a holding. I spoke to the Chairman of the Farmers Relief Board, and I think he stated that in only one case were auctioneers stocking the place of any man who was under a protection certificate. The auctioneer is supposed to receive only 5 per cent. on money he may invest in assisting a settler, and he does not get any protection. Consequently, I think the legislation should be amended in such a way as to enable any financial institution which is prepared to stock the holding of a man under a protection certificate to conduct the transaction entirely in its own way. In otlier words, if an auctioneer supplies a man who holds a protection certificate with stock, then the control of that stock should not come under the control of a Court or of the Farmers Relief Board. It should remain as security.

The Hon. Dr. lliRRIs.-Would you not apply that principle right through? Why should a stock and station agent be in a different position from others ~

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-He provides the wherewithal to produce something. The storekeeper does his part, but I take it that the auctioneer, or the man who supplies stock-cows, for instance-is in a different position from old creditors.

The Hon. G. L. GouDIE.-He may be acting a.:5 fig-ent for the sale of the stock.

The Hon. R. KILP ATRICK.-I feel, from my own personal experience of the Act, that it is not very satisfactory. In cases where farmers have made applications "to a Court and got protection certificates, the creditors themselves could have carried the debtors just as satisfactorily. We should amend the Bill in such a way as to give consideration to people who are prepared to provide stock to those unfortunate farmers who come under the protection of the Court.

Farmers [2 NOVEMBER, 1932.] Relief Bill. 1957

The Hon. M. MCGREGOR.-Do you not think that those who supply material for the use of producers should also receive consideration?

The Hon. R. KILPATRIOK.-The man who supplies the material gets his profit, but an auctioneer or a financial institution supplying a farmer with stock is expected to be satisfied with a returu of only 5 per cent. on capital. The unofficial Leader referred to a case of which I know something, and while it has no relationship with this Bill, I think it is worth mentioning. The State Savings Bank has put in a bailiff on the property of an unfortunate farmer who, I admit, is two years in arrear with his interest, and the bank has seized the stock supplied on the security of a stock mortgage by a storekeeper who has been helping the farmer for some years. What the resul1 of this proceeding will be I do not know, but I hope that the Honorary Minister (Oolonel Harold Oohen) who introduced a Landlord and Tenant Bill some time ago will see that something is done to protect persons who supply farmers with stock. I feel it is ,a great pity that we have to extend legislation of this kind, and the sooner we have an opportunity of abandoning such measures the better it will be for the State.

The Hon. H. F. RICHARDSON (S outhlVestern Province).-I regret deeply that I have to support legislation of this kind. The mere suggestion of legislation involving the breaking; of written, contract.:! would have been laughed out of Parliament some years ago. I am aware that we are living in difficult times, and it has been found necessary to introduce legislation of that kind. While I am anxious to assist the primary producers as far as possible, I cannot help thinking that a good many of the men who are asking for assistance of this sort have got into trouble largely because of their own fault; moreover, I cannot help thinking that many of them are living extravagantly. I do not take the view that the introduction of the motor car has been a blessing to primary producers; rather it has been a curse, because, in addition to the cost and upkeep of the vehicles, they are responsible for a great waste of the farmer's time. I realize that taxation is much heavier now than it was in the

days of the pioneers, when there was no land tax, for instance. Still, the pioneers did not come begging to Parliament as farmers have done in recent years. In moving the second reading of this Bill, the Minister of Water Supply said that the prices obtained for primary products were lower to-day than they had ever ·been in the history of the State. My memory carries me back a long way, and I can recall a time when prices for a numbpr of primary products were lower than they are to-day. I remember the time w~en Mr. Lascelles opened up a large portIOo of the Western District. Wheat brought only 1s. 4d. per bushel then, and he sent pigs to the distl'ict to feed on the wheat. I cannot help thinking that many farmers are in financial difficulties now because they did not engage in mixed farming. They put all their eggs in one basket. They concentrated on wheat-growing, for instance, when they would have been in a sounder position if they had kept poultry and pigs and grown their own vegetables. There are even many farmers who do not even grow their own vegetables. Farmers could go in for many side-lines, and in this way assist themselves better than they now do.

I am afraid that many of the farmers who are expecting assistance from thi.~ legislation will find that they are really cutting their own throats. I know of many people who will have nothing to do with mortgages in country districts. People with money to lend will not advance one penny on mortgage on the security of land in the Mallee or other wheat-growing districts. They say that they do not know whether they will receive their interest or whether legislation will be passed preventing them frum obtaining their interest. Very little consideration, it appears to me, is being given by Parliament to the position of the mortgagee. There are a large number of unfortunate men and women who, after saving for years, invested their savings in mortgages on the security of country land, ,and they are not receiving any return. They had to work hard to save their money in the first place, yet no consideration is being given to them in the legislation that is being passed. I know of numerous cases of widows and orphans who depend for their livelihood on the return from mortgages on country land. They are not receiving any interest, yet

1958 Farmers [COUNCIL·.1 Relief Bill.

a good many of the mortgagors are living extravagantly. It is the fault of a lot of farmers that they are not succeeding. I remember when the price of sheep was much lower than the present-day price. Farmers sent their sheep to Geelong to be boiled down for fat, and legs of muttou were sold in Geelong for a few pence. Yet it is said that the primary producer is worse off to-day than he ever, was. I point out that the pioneers did not own motor cars, but they worked hard, and pulled themselves out of their financial difficulti,~s. Things are no worse to-day than they were many years ago. Certainly the price of wool is low, but I remembel' the time when just as low a price was obtained. An effort should be made to abolish the Federal land tax, which is a scandalously unfair impost, particularly in view of the extravagant manner in which the Commonwealth Governm.~nt handles the finances of the Commonwealth. The farming community woulrl be assisted greatly by the abolition of the land tax. I have to support legislation of this· kind, but it is the type of legislation that I do not like to swallow, because, to a great extent, it" is intended to break contracts, and I consider that it is dishonest to do so.

The motion was agreed to. The :Bill was read a second time, and

committed. Clauses 1 and 2 were agreed to. Clause 3, providing, inter alia, for the

keeping of lists of protection certificates.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Water Supply).-Sub-paragraph (viii) of sub-elause (2) of this clause provides-

In paragraph (c) of sub-section (10) for the words "one month's notice in writing" there shall be substituted the words "two months' notice in writing by registered letter" ; and for the words "one month" there shall be substituted the words "two months ".

I desire to move that this sub-paragraph be omitted with a view to inserting the proviso which I have had drafted.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (NorthEastern Province). - The amendment which I foreshadowed would follow immediately after that proposed by the Minister. I suggest that the following

. words be added to his proviso :-" or unless the. farmer after the receipt of such notice has made with the person

giving such notice an agreement in writing relative to the subject-matter of the notice." That would preserve the right of the farmer to apply or re-apply for ~l protection certificate, if he gets notice from any of his creditors in the future. Under the existing . legislation he is prevented from doing that if he does not apply within a month.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Water Supply).-I will adopt the suggestion of the unofficial Leader, and move-

That sub-paragraph (viii) be omitted witil a view to inserting the following:-

" (viii) for the proviso to paragraph (c) of sub-section (10) there shall be substituted ttlt' following proviso:- •

'Provided that any such mortgagee vendor person lessor grantee of a bill of sale holder of a lien owner purchaser or other grantee may at any time prior to the issue of a protection certificate give to the farmer two months' notice in writin~ by registered letter of his intention to exercise any remedies available to him and the farmer shall not within the period of three months after the receipt of such notice be entitled to a certificate unless he applies for the same within two months after his receipt of such notice or unless tilt"' farmer after the receipt of such notice has made with the person giving such notice an agreement in writing relative to the subjectmatter of the notice.''' ,

The amendment was agreed to, and the cIa use, as amended, was adopted.

Clause 4 was agreed to. Clause 5-(As to land being specified

in protection certificate).

The Hon. M. SALTAU (Western Province).-I can hardly see eye to eye with the proposed alteration. I should like the Minister to give one or two good reasons why any debtor should not disclose to his creditors all his assets. Why should he simply specify" the particular land," which words are sought to be substituted for the words, "specifying any land" in the principal Act ~

The Hon .. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Water Supply) .-At present there is a doubt whether a farmer is required to specify his farm land when he applies for a protection certificate. There are cases in which police magistrates have not specified any land as being land on which farming operations are carried on. That Reems to have resulted from an awkward construction of the original prOVISIon. The clause seeks to clarify the position, and sets out that a farmer


applying for a certificate must specify the land to which that certificate would apply.

The Hon. M. SALTAu.-He may have other lands.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-Yes. The Hon. M. SALTAu.-And unen

cumbered. If a man wants protection he should disclose the whole of his assets.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE. - The object of the clause is to make it clear that a man who applies for a protection certifioate must specify the land over which that certificate will operate.

The Hon. Dr. HAURIS.-I see that point,but I also see the other side. A farmer may have a mortgage on only a portion of his property and may be able to carryon and pay his interest. He may have hidden securities, and you are giving him by this clause the right to hide his securities. He has to specify the land which is the subject of the mortgage.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-My reading of the clause suggests to me that in the past the applicant may not have specified the land on which he is carrying on operations that are the subject of the application. The result is that some confusion has been caused.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS Cf)lorthlCastern Province).-I should like the :Minister to consider a specific case. A man may have 500 acres of land on which there is a mortgage, and also 2,500 acres on which there is no encumbrance at all. Under the clause he is given an opportunity to apply for a protection ('ertificate covering the mortgaged land and to hide the asset of 2,500 acres-that is to say, not to include it as an asset subject to a protection certificate. I think that the Farmers Relief Board or a Court should have the right to inquire iuto the whole of the circumstances of au applicant for a protection certificate.

The Han. G. L. GOUDIE C:Minister of ,,v ater Supply) ~-The explanation that I have received is that it is necessary when a farmer makes application to the Court to specify the whole of his land. But ,vhen it has come to specifying the land a doubt has arisen whether the provisidn has been working satisfactorily. The clause will make it clear that a man must specify the whole of his land when he is . making application for a certificate.

Sub-section (4) of section 21 of the Unemployed Occupiers and Farmers Relief Act provides-

On receipt of such application and aft~r considering the same and the accounts (If any) rendered by creditors of the farmer together with any representation submitted by them the Court if satisfied that proceedings in respect of the debts of such farmer are threatened or impending and that it is in the interests of the farmer and his creditors that a protection certificate should be issued may issue to the farmer a protection certificate in the prescribed form and specifying any land to which the certificate relates; and no land shR.ll be specified in such certificate unless at the time the application is made the farmer IS

engaO'ed (whether on his own account or under a shoare-farming agreement) in agricultural horticultural viticultural dairying or pastoral operations on such land . . . .

As far a& I can see, the amendment proposed by the clause will clear up' an ambiguity.

The Hon. M. SALTAu.-The position is not very satisfactory, but I do not see that I can do anything.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-It should be made clearer.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-As I have already intimated, the magistrates have not in all cases specified the land.

The clause was agreed to, as were clauses 6 and 7.

Clause 8 - (Protection of owner, lessor or vendor who is mortgagor of land ~n which farmer is carrying on operation).

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Water Supply).-Sub-clause (2) sets out to insert at the end of sub-section (10) of section 21 of the principal Act a provision that no action proceeding or steps referred to in that sub-section shall be commenced or taken by a mortgagee, in certain circumstances, where the owner, lessor, or vendor remains liable to the mortgagee under any mortgage. Subparagraph (iii) in the proposed new paragraph (e) provides that no action can be taken-against any vendor (as mortgagor) of land under a contract of sale with or under a transfer or conveyance to the farmer.

I move-That the words "or under a transfer ur

conveyance to the farmer" be omitted with the view of inserting the words "the farmer (whether with or without a transfer or conveyance to him) ".

The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, was adopted, as was clause 9.

1960 Farmers [COUNCIL.] Relief Bill.

Clause lO-(Value of property, &c., disposable or payable to farmer).

The Hon. M. SALTAU (Western Province) .-Do I understand that the proceeds of the sale are handed to the Farmers Relief Board?

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-Yes. The clause was agreed to, as were

clauses 11 and 12. Olause 13, making provision inter alia

as to payments with respect to live stock, goods, &c., supplied to a farmer.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK (Northern Province).-I should like to ask the Minister in reference to sub-clause (7), what will be the position with regard to stock sup~lied prior to the issue of a protection certificate.

',rhe Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Water ~upply).-I think the Act lays it down that all the provisions apply during the currency of the protection certificate.

The :Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-But not before. The Landlord and Tenant Act operates in that case.

The HOll. G. M. DAVIS ( Gippsland Province).-In connexion with the matter mentioned by Mr. Kilpatrick, I should like to know what will be the position of the mortgagee in the case of stock supplied under mortgage prior to an application for a protection certificate. Will the Board have power to include such mortgaged stock in the assets of the person asking for a protection certificate? I understand that you can deal with mortgaged stock up to the point of the person making application for a certificate, but that once that application is made, it prevents anyone dealing with the assets of the estate, including the mortgaged stock.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Water Supply).-As a matter of fact, when a man makes an application to the Board for a protection certificate, he gives the whole of his assets and liabilities to the Board, and if one of the creditors of the estate has provided him with stock, and there is a stock mortgage the Board, of course, has to take that fact into consideration. In the distribution of the proceeds, the mortgagee would have to be considered. As far as the provision in the clause is concerned, it will not deal with any mortgage that has been entered :into until a man has obtained a protection certificate.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER ( East Yarra Province).-I feel with some other honorable members that the position of a stock and station agent, or other person who supplies stock to a farmer in order that the farmer may carryon his business, is not altogether free from doubt, and perhaps ought to be improved in favour of the person who supplies the stock. There is the following proviso to sub-section (2) of section 32 of the principal Act-

Provided that notwithstanding anything in paragraphs (b), (0), (d), (e), or (f) of this sub-section, the Board in giving any directions as aforesaid shall, so far as practicable, make provision so that any income arising from live stock purchased by the farmer after the first day of January, One thousand nine hundred and thirty-one, shall, after the deduction therefrom of a reasonable amount for the agistment of such live stock, be applied towards the payment of any debt due by the farmer in respect of the purchase money of such live stock, together with interest (where payable) on such debt, at a rate not exceeding Five pounds per centum per annum from the date when sueh debt became due.

In practice, that is perhaps found not to go very far, and Mr. Kilpatrick, I understand, has raised the point as to whether or not the protection to the supplier of the stock might be extended. Of course, the-re would be no difficulty so far as concerns an Act of Parliament giving further protection, but the question is to what extent that protection should be given. The point arises, if we are going to give protection to people who provide stock on credit, are we going to protect further those who proyjde machinery or other assets on credit? It may be said of the machinery merchants that they have always protected themselves by obtaining hire purchase agreements, under which a farmer obtains no property in the machinery until he has paid the full sum.

The Hon. M. McGREGOR.-If a machinery merchant can remove his machinery, a stock and station agent should have power to remove his stock.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-That may be so, but I doubt very much whether that can be done at present. I feel that if the protection which Mr. Kilpatrick and Mr. Davis ask for is to be given, it will mean some pretty thoroughgoing amendments of the Bill, and their wishes cannot be given effect to unless they are prepared with some formal


amendments which would produce that result.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-What about reporting progress to enable the amendments to be drafted ~

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-I rose to my feet mainly to give a little time to those honorable members to consider the position, and to suggest that, perhaps, after the dinner adjournment, they might have some amendments ready. I think the Committee would be prepared to give favorable consideration to the views expressed by them, if it could be done with fairness to the whole of the creditors, but, since the inception of this legislation, I have always firmly held the belief that the unfortunate man who provides what may be called floating assets, including stock, for a farmer to carryon his business, is in a very disadvantageous position as compared with a man who provides the fixed assets, such as machinery and plant.

. As the law stands at present, the former is under a very great disadvantage, because, unfortunately, the stock which he sells is movable, and movable under its own power. It can be walked off the place, and then the security is gone. I shall support any amendments which Mr. Davis and Mr. Kilpatrick can devise which will, without . prejudice to other creditors, give suppliers of stock, who perform a very valuable service, some protection. In conclusion, I would say that we hear a great deal about the protection of the farmer, but very little about the protection of those who serve the farmer by providing him with money, stock, and other things to enable him to carryon his business. Unless we protect that class of men, ultimately it will not be much use protecting the farmer.

The Ron. M. McGREGOR.-The storekeeper who provides the farmer with sustenance is as much entitled to consideration as any other creditor.

The Hon .. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Water Supply).-The clause deals entirely with men who make application for protection certificates, and sub-clause (7) is designed to protect people who supply farmers with stock. I know there are numbers of auctioneers who are supplying farmers with stock now.

The Hon. M. SALTAu.-Have you any idea of how many are supplying people who have protection certificates ~

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-In one part of the State they are supplying stock to about five men, where formerly they used to supply about 200. I think the provision in sub-clause (7) will protect the man who supplies stock to the farmer.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-Not to the ordinary farmer, but to the man with a protection certificate.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-That is so. I understand that the Honorary Minister (Colonel Harold Cohen) has a Bill to deal with the other phase of the matter referred to by the unofficial Leader. The provision in sub-clause (7) will protect the man supplying stock to the farmer who gets a protection certificate, and the Bill I have just referred to will deal with the cases of people who supply stock to other farmers. I strongly advise honorable members to pass the clause as it stands .

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-What is the general subject-matter of the legislation which the Honorary Minister (Colonel Harold Cohen) proposes to introduce ~

Colonel HAROLD COHEN (Honorary Minister) .-It may clarify the position somewhat if I make now a statement which I would probably have made in any case later in the sitting during the discussion on the Supply Bill. The matter dealt with in the clause is only the protection of those who supply stock to a man who has been granted a protection certificate. It does not want to be confused with the general question Mr. Kilpatrick ::tnd the unofficial Leader have been agitating in relation to the men who supply stock to farmers when that stock is attacked under the attornment clause in a mortgage. Some time ago, the consideration of the Landlord and Tenant Bill was postponed, so that consideration might be given to that aspect of the matter with a view to the inclusion of further clauses. Since then, I have discussed the matter with the president of the stock and station agents, and the further clause~ have been drafted and re-drafted. They have been submitted to the AttorneyGeneral and the Parliamentary Draftsman, and I am waiting now for their decision to bring the matter before the House. The matter dealt with in thoRi?

1962 Oonsolidated Revenue [COUNCIL.] Bill (No.5).

clauses is distinct from the matter dealt with in the clause now before the Oommittee, and the inclusion of it here might only lead to confusion.

The H.on. G. M. DAVIS (Gippsland Prov'ince).-Leaving sub-clause (7) as it is will have the effect that the holder of a stock mortgage will act quickly in regard to removing his stock, whereas if he had some protection, he would probably continue to allow the farmer to have posspssion of the stock from which the farmer might get a profit.

The clause was agreed to, as were the remaining clauses.


On the motion of the Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of 'Vater Supply), the Bill was read a third time.

CONSOLIDATED REVENUE BILL (No.5).

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).~I move-


The period for which Supply was granted has expired, and as honorable members know, it is necessary for Parliament to pass a Bill in order that payments for servicEls may be made this week, and this measure is designed to achieve that object. The amount of supply requirea for the month is £954,906, and full details are supplied on printed lists distributed to honorable members. Although there are minor variations affecting specific divisions, the total amount asked for shows a decrease of £147,745, when compared with one-twelfth of last year's expenditure. The principal items showing increases in November, compared with a proportionate period of last year's expenditure, are as follows :-Under Division No. 48, Treasury-exceptional expenditure, there is an increase of £3,188, but provision is made for the contribution of £6,000 for the Shrine of Remembrance. Under Division 56 - Lands - Miscellaneous-there is an increase of £910, and it represents increased expenditure on vermin destruction. There is nothing out of the ordinary in the Bill.

(At 6.20 p.m., the sitting was suspended ; nntil 7.53 p.m.)

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (NorthEastern Province).-I suggested that tho Bill should not be read a second time before dinner only to preserve the privileges of honorable members. I do not propose to make any remarks on th~ second reading.


committed. Clause l...:..-(Issue and application of

£954,906). The Hon. H. F. RICHARDSON (S outh

VVestern Province).-I wish to make u short explanation regarding the questiolJ to the Minister of Public Works of which I gave notice this afternoon, in which reference is made to the raising of the necessary revenue to keep our hospitals and other charitable institutions in proper funds. I have asked to be informed what amount would be raised by a tax of ld. in the £1 on all incomes. I have, of. course, no idea of the amount likely to he raised, but I feel that something should be done to place our charitable institutions in a proper financial state. In that connexion all sorts of suggestions have been made. One suggestion is that we should have lotteries such as are held in other States, but I hope that the Government and Parliament of this State will never agree to the raising of money in that way. I feel that a tax of ld. in the £1 on all incomes would raise the necessary amount of money without the taxpayers feeling it. I consider that we should see that our charitable institutions, which institu tions are necessary in every civilized community, are placed in a proper financial position without the extra efforts which are being made from time to time for that purpose.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK ( Northern Province).-I should like the Minister to indicate whether the hospitals can expect any greater sum from the totalizator this year than last year. Owing to the spending power of the people being very much diminished, the hospitals are in a very serious way, and I hope that the Government will introduce something that will help them.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-YOU wanta little more taxation.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-I do Twt know what it would be.

Oonsolidated Revenue [2 NOVEMBER, 1932.] Bill (No.5). 1963

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Publio Works) .-Of course, I cannot say what the returns from the totalizator will be this year. One could not form an estimate until the year had progressed further.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (Northgastern Province).-When I was consu1ting with the taxation officials last year l'egarding a schedule for unemployment relief tax without exemption, I constructed a table with gradations of £50, and from my recollection a tax of !d. in the £1, rising by !d. in ~he £1 for ev~ry £50 of income, was estimated to YIeld about £1,400,000. I wanted to introduce that as the method of t.axation for unemployment relief, but we had agreed as a House to give the Government £1,700,000, and the table I have referred to was rejected because under it the amount of money we had agreed to give the Government would not have been contributed. I have mentioned these figures to give honorable members some idea of what a tax of the nature suggested by Mr. Richardson would produce. I deprecate the imposition of such a tax. I think the people are being over-taxed, and that the time has come when the placing of any more straws on the camel's back will break it. I deprecate any talk in this Chamber of extra taxation for either charitable or any other purposei::. The only taxation that I should be in favour of would be of a voluntary character-such taxation as an honorable member stated would be imposed in connexion with a sweep or a lottery. I believe that when many people know that a fair proportion of the sum invested will be devoted to maintaining the charit.ies they will be prepared to put in money voluntarily, and they are entitled to do so, but I am opposed to continuously taxing the ordinary thrifty man.

The Hon. H. F. RICHARDSON (S outhWestern Province).-I desire to ask the Government whether it will see that by posters and other advertisements the taxpayer is made acquainted with the complicated legislation dealing with payment of taxation by instalments. If that is not done people will be prosecmted for not having obeyed the law. In such circumstances, it is "grossly unfair that they should be prosecuted. This legislation is much more

complicated than any other measure that we have passed. I was alone in opposing the measure, but as it has become law, I hope that the Government will have the information circulated to tell people exactly what they have to do.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-The Taxation Office proposes to issue posters throughout the State setting out the conditions of the new taxation method, and also the responsibilities resting on every taxpayer. I agree with Mr. Richardson that adequate notice should be given to the public. So many taxes have been agreed to in the last two years that the people are bewildered. Every opportunity should be given to t~e people to know exactly what theIr responsibilities are, and I understand that the Taxation Office will give .adequate notice of the details to the public.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN (Honorary Minister).-By arrangement with the Premier I wish to use the measure now under consideration as a vehicle to convey to the Committee certain information in relation to the subject of taxation that was raised at the Premiers' Conference. I do so because the particular business was left in my hands to deal with. There has been a great deal of discussion for some years by traders in the various States as to the incidence of taxation on what is known as interstate trade. Different bases have been adopted by different States for taxing traders who carryon businesses in more than one State, and j II consequence a great deal of confusion and in some cases double taxation have reo suIted from the methods adopted by the different taxing offices. The matter was the subject of a conference of taxation officials in 1929, and a basis of arrangement was arrived at which has been given legislative effect by this State and by South Australia. It has not, however, been given effect tin any other of the States, and the whole subject-matter of this sort of taxation and the principle which governs it was raised at the ~remiers' Conference and submitted for the consideration of the States with a view to the position already adopted in Victoria being given uniform effect or having the matter further investigated with a view to getting a uniform principle. The present position results in duplication, and sometimes in multiple

1964 Oonsolidated Revenue [COUNCIL·l Bill (No.5).

taxation, and there has been a good deal of complaint by traders who have businesses in more than one State. It is desirable that some uniform principle be adopted to provide that not more than 100 per eent. profit should be taxed. I obtained permission from the Premier to make this statement.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-What did vou do in regard to border motor traffic? "

Colonel HAROLD COHEN. - That subject was not discussed at the Premiers' Conference.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-It was supposed to be, because we passed a measure that is standing in abeyance until there is uniform legislation.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-It was not discussed.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK (N orthern Province).-I wish to ask the Government to see whether it is possible to remove what might be described as the iniquitous tax on land. It is truly a class tax. If we are to put the primary producers on their feet, we must remove some of their shackles. The Commonwealth and State land taxes are heavy burdens on those men. If such taxation were abolished and interest were reduced, the people would soon get back to a sound position. Persons with money are not inclined to advance any of it on land because taxation is so heavy. The taxation, of course, is the first call on the land. I trust that the Government will consider the question of repealing this taxation for at least two or three years.

The Hon. H. F. RICHARDSON (SouthWestern Province) .-I desire to ask what action has been taken in regard to the re-appointment of the Forests Commission. I had a good deal to do with the Commission as :Minister of Forests, and I found its members able and efficient. They look after an important part of this State's aetivities. I understand that they have been temporarily re-appointed, and I should like to know why they have not been re-appointed for several years instead of for only three months. They have given satisfaction. The Commis-. sion is protecting the forests, not only for the present, but for the future, and we should not interfere with men who are doing their duty.

The Hon. J. ·P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-This matter is befon; Cabinet. One of the members of the Forests Commission has reached the reo tjring age. In order that the Government may have adequate. time to give consideration to the whole question, it temporarjly re-aPlJointed the Commissioners for a short period.

The Hon. H. F. RICHARDSON (SouthWestern Province).-I desire to refer to a matter to which I have been asked to draw attention in connexion with the Railway Department. It is the subject of a newspaper paragraph as follows:-

A JUSTIFIABLE GRIEVANCE. Little River residents have a grievance aboHt

the railway fares that operate from that centre, and Geelong, as the nearest city to the district. can join in the disapproval. The return fare from Little River to Geelong, a. distance of 15 miles each way, is 4s. 6d., whilst the retll!'o fare to Melbourne, a distance of 30 miles ea.clt way, is only 5s. 6d. Seeing that Geelong is the main centre for the district, residents consider that there should be a greater difference than Is. in the fares when there is only half tlte distance to be travelled than in the case of R journey to the metropolis.

In connexion with the fares to Melbourne, however, there is an extraordinary pOSititl~l. If the Little River station were 2 miles nearer the metropolis, it would be within the rad;118 where a day return fare of 3s. 6d. would operate. Two shillings for 4 miles' travel is considered exorbitant by residents, whose views were summarized by a prominent resident when he said he considered that the .Departmetlt should make fares operative from stations, and not from the exact point of a stipulated distance.

Similar conditions prevail all over the State. I can see no reason why there should be a special reduction for people travelling to the metropolis and not for those travelling to other large centres. Why should the Little River people be compelled to pay so much more per mile for travelling to Geelong than they would pay for travelling to Melbourne? I hope that the Minister will Qring this matter before the Railways Commissioners. The policy should be altered. There should not be a special concession for travellers to the metropolis compared with those travelling to Geelong, Ballarat, and other big centres of population. As I have shown, residents of Little River who desire to go to Geelong to carry out their business have to pay nearly as much as they are called upon to pay when they go to Melbourne. The Minister should

Consolidated Revenue [2 NOVEMBER, 1932.] Bill (No.5). 1965

direct attention to this glaring case with a view to ascertaining whether all the centres of population can be placed on the same basis as the metropolitan area.

The Hon. J. P.' JONES (Minister of Public Works).-I will have the attention of the Minister of Railways directed to Mr. Richardson's remarks.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK (N orthern Province).-I suggest that the Minister of Railwavs should give consideration to obtaining the co-operation of graziers, auctioneers, and stock and station agents in connexion with the problem of railway freights which on stock are very heavy. If there were more general co-operation, I feel sure that our railways would be more popular, and a reduction of railway freights would be effected. I suppose that the trucking of live stock is one of the most profitable undertakings of the Railway Department, and I should like the Minister to refer this matter to the Cabinet or the Minister of Railwavs. I can assure him tha t there is a desire among the people concerned to assist the Railway Department.

A friend of mine sent me some information that was published in a newspaper, and gives some idea of costs. :Mr. McGregor, who comes from Gippsland, may be able to throw more light on the matter. The article in questiu;l JUiS a heading to the effect that £10 was SlJpnt on an 8s. job. The article states --

There has been a startling outbreak of economy in the Victorian Railways. On every platform of the Victorian Railways appears a placard telling the long-suffering public, if the railways don't pay, the taxpayer foots the bill. And here is how £10 or more was added to that bill.

The article proceeds to record that some little time ago a stationmaster in Gippsland discovf'r.ed that the station tank had sprung a leak. Before notifying the Railway Department, he called in a local plumber, who estimated the co~t of the work at 8s. There is a reference to the officer in charge writing into the Department acquainting his superiors of the trouble, and at the same time of the price given by the local experts. That did not suit the railway authorities-

After the usual lapse of time an inspector arrived on the morning train. He inspected; he stayed the day; and departed. Another lapse of time, and then one fine day a departmental plumber and his mate arrived on the morning train. They did their job and

stayed for the day, departing well. content with pay well earned. The clock· tIcks on. Then another inspector arrived-not the first one . . . he came; he saw; he departed after staying for the day.

The article concludes by stating that, allowing for fares, salaries and wages, meal allowances, &c., the cost was a trifle over £10. This is a small matter, but it eonveys some idea of the position. A friend of mine recently referred to the fact that there was occasion to write the words " ticket office" over a window, and I understand that it took four men to do the work.

The Hon. H. KECK.-Railway fareH were included in the cost of that plumbing work; but railway employees travel free. '

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-That is only by the way.

The Hon. M. McGREGOR (Gippsland Province) .-I should like the Railways Commissioners to consider whether the time taken by trains running from Melbourne to Bairnsdale could not be reduced, bearing in mind that Bairn~dale is a terminus station. I have had representations from Omeo, which is nearly 70 miles away, to the effect that in the present circumstances the people have to use motor transport right through to Melbourne. I can understand that. The train leaves Melbourne at 7.55 a.m., and after travelling 60 miles there is a stop of some 20 to 25 minutes for refreshments at Warragul. There is a stop at Morwell for a little while because of a branch line, and about 10 miles further along the line-at Traralgon-there is another wait of from 20 to 25 minutes. At Sale, a similar delay occurs before the train leaves for Bairnsdale. I am not talking in a complaining manner, but I simply ask the Commissioners whether they cannot provide a more efficient ser.vice, which would result in its being used more generally.

The Hon. G. M. DAvIs.-They should reduce the time between Melbourne and Bairnsdale and Bruthen.

The Hon. M. McGREGOR.-The time spent at various stations should also be curtailed. I travel very frequently 011 this line, and at Warragul I :find only one or two people in the dining-room. It is not necessary to spend such a long period

1966 Oonsolidatsd Revenue [COUNCIL·l Bill (No.5).

at stations. If the Railway Department was making a good deal of profit at the dining-room, the matter might be a little different, but most travellers have their breakfast before they leave on their journey. This is a serious thing for people who live in the outback parts of the State. I am perfectly satisfied that, so far as the people in the Bairnsdale and Sale territories are concerned, they would patronize the train service on the Gippsland line to a much greater extent than they do now if it were made more efficient. I was surprised and disheartened when I eame to Melbourne on Monday night to observe that very few people were travelling. A few years ago I often had to stand for nearly 80 miles, and in those days two or three trains would be in commission for Cup day or for the Easter and Christmas holidays. To-day, however, one can have a carriage practically to one's self. I believe that the timetable could be so adjusted that it would encourage a greater volume of traffic. This and the other matter mentioned by Mr. Kilpatrick cannot be regarded as satisfactory, viewed in the light of a commercial proposition. If the railways were handled from a commercial stand-point, considerable changes would be made, and, so far as the Gippsland service is concerned, the Railway Department would receive the support that it should get if greater efficiency were shown. The Railway Department is a State concern, and it is certain that an effort should be made to provide better services.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH (Melbourne Province).-There is a small matter to which I trust the Minister of Public Works will give some attention, and which I have mentioned before in this House. In Alexandra-avenue there is a hairpin bend under the railway bridge. This has been the cause of many accidents. Alexandra-avenue is one of the best 'drives in Melbourne, and is quite spoilt because of the disadvantage to which I have referred. At one time I arranged a conference between the municipal councils concerned with the idea of not only straightening out the bend in the avenue, but of continuing that thoroughfare through to Glenferrie-road. It is well knowll that traffic on Toorak-road and other thoroughfares becomes very congested at certain times of the day. The work of

elimina ting the hairpin bend would provide many men with employment, and the extension of the avenue would add to the beautification of the city, and also provide employment for many people. Because the Railway Department refused to contribute anything towards the cost, and because the councils concerned were not prepared to spend money to improve Alexandra-avenue, the proposition has not been proceeded with: I hope that during his tenure of office, the Minister of Public Works will see that the necessary work is carried out. The Honorary Minister ( Colonel Harold Cohen) and the President represent one province which is interested, the Minister of Public Works is interested in the district on the Richmond side of the river, and Mr. H. 1. Cohen and I represent the Melbourne Province, which is also concerned in this matter.

The Hon. J. P. JONEs.-We ought to be able to have it done!

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-Does the Minister not think that with a little tact he could bring the interested bodies together and have the project commenced? When he was Minister of Public Works in a previous Administration he promised to give the matter his attention.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public Works).-To the points raised by Mr. Kilpatrick and Mr. McGregor, I shall direct the attention of the Minister of Railways and the Railways Commissioners. I made an effort on one occasion to secure the elimination of that very awkward curve to which Mr. Smith has rightly directed attention. I understood that matters were progressing satisfactorily in the direction of a solution of the difficulty. However, I promise to see that if anything more can be done it shall be done. I quite agree with Mr. Smith's comments, both from the stand-point of d~nger and from the aesthetic point of VIew.


The Bill was reported to the House without amendment, and the report was adopted.

On the motion of the Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of Public .W orks), the Bill was read a third time.

Stamps [2 NOVEMBER, 1932.] Bill. 1967

INOOME TAX BILL. A message was received from the Legis

lative Assembly intimating that they had agreed to an amendment in this Bill recommended by His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor.

The amendment was agreed with.

STAMPS BILL. The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister of

Public Works).-I move-That this Bill be now read a second time.

The measure is, to some extent, a technical one. In the Budget speech, the Premier and Treasurer made reference to various means whereby the Government proposed to increase revenue so that the State should keep within the Premiers' plan and the budgetary deficit fixed for the current financial year. The Premier said that, since the passing of the Act making it compulsory to affix a duty stamp of 2d. on receipts, that obligation had been deliberately evaded, so that considerable loss of revenue had occurred: One of the objects of this measure is to tighten up the position, and it has been anticipated that in a full year the increase of revenue due to the amendment of the Act will amount to £50,000, whilst, for the current financial year, the accretion of revenue will be in the neighbourhood of £37,500. Actually, that latter estimate will have to be discounted to some extent, as it was expected that this legislation would be passed by Parliament at an earlier date than can now be the case. One other proposal in this Bill is to increase the duty on cheques. The duty at present is l!d.; it is proposed to make the duty 2d., which will bring in, for the present financial year, about £37,000, and, for a full year, £50,000. Honorable members are well aware that the Government has been hard put to it to find the least oppressive means of increasing revenue so that the budgetary position may be met.

The Hon. G. M. DAvls.-What amount ef revenue is received at present from the l1d. duty on cheques ~

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-I am officially informed that the amount is about £150,060. Running briefly through the clauses, I may 'point out that clause 2 provides that cheques and bills of exchange payable on demand shall be chargeable

on and after the 1st of November with stamp duty of 2d. instead of l1d. as at present. This extra duty will be charged until the 31st of December, 1935, which is the date to which all additional duties charged under the Stamps Acts have been extended. In all the other States, and ir:. New Zealand, the stamp duty on cheques has amounted for some time to 2d. In England the duty was raised, in 1918, from ld. to 2d. Clause 3 is for the pu~'pose of giving effect to the desire of the . Government that the burden of taxation on the business community shall be lightened. On and after the 1st of April, 1933, the present charge on all promissory notes and bills of exchange other than cheques will be reduced to one-half of the present rate. This reduction will bring Victoria into line with other States of the Commonwealth. It is considered that the reduction of duties will assist in the revival of business, and that any loss of revenue owing to such reduction will ultima tely be made good. Promissory notes and bills of exchange were made dutiable instruments by the first Stamps Act of December, 1879. The rates prov-ided were :-U p to £25, 6d.; up to £50, ls.; up to £75, ls. 6d.; up to £100, 2s.; and then ls. for every £50 or part. The rates were doubled as from the 1st of July, 1915. On the 1st of April next, tle duty will revert to the original charge as in the Act of 1879. Clause 4 is for the purpose of extending the provision of the principal Act amended' by an Act (No. 4014) passed at the close of the session ending on the 24th of December, 1931. The amendment provided that receipts for payments of money amounting to £25 and over should be chargeable with 3d. instead of 2d. as formerly, but the further charge was enacted for twelve months only. The present clause extends the period until the 31st day of December, 1935, thus bringing the additional duty chargeable on receipts into line with all other additional duties. The rate already operating on receipts given for sums of £2 up to £25 is unaltered; therefore, persons ill a small way of business will not be affected by the increase. In other States, receipt duty is chargeable thus:-

In Queensland, the duty on receipts isa sliding scale, thus :-£2 and not more than £5, Id.; over £5 but not more than £50, 2d.; over £50 but not more than £100, 3d.; and over £100 and for every £100 or t>a.rt, 3d.

1968 Stamps [COUNCIL·l Bill.

In Western Australia, the rates are:-On £1 and up to but not including £25, Id.; 011 £25 and up to but not including £50, 2d.; -on £50 and up to but not exceeding £100, 3d.; .and over £100, for every £100 or part, 3d . .Receipts are compulsory for all payments of :£1 or more.

In Tasmania, the rates are :-On £2 and up to and including £5, 1d.; over £5 and up to and including £15, 2d.; over £15, and up to and including £25, 3d.; over £25 and up to and including £50, 4d.; over £50 and up to and including £100, 5d.; over £100, for the first £100, ·5d., and for every additional £100 or part, (ld.

Olause 5 amends section 55 of the principal Act, and provides that on and after the first of November, 1932, the giving of receipts for amounts of £2 and upwards shall be compulsory. It provides, in cases where payments are made by cheques payable to order, that duty stamps shall be affixed to the back of cheques, and that such stamps shall be duly cancelled before the cheque is paid to the credit of any person in a bank. The Government has viewed with grave concern the increased evasion of the provisions of the Act with regard to the giving and stamping of receipts, and it is considered absolutely necessary, in the interests of the State, to make the giving of receipts compulsory. This principle was adopted in Queensland and in Western Australia some years ago. It is obviously inequitable that, whilst most persons and firms furnish receipts and pay the duty, others should avoid doing so. The clause also provides additional exemptions for transac.tions with bills of exchange and promIssory notes between bankers in the ordinary course of banking business. Receipts given by or to a bookmaker in respect of wagers are also exempted. Subclause (3) amends exemption 5 in the present Act relating to receipts for wages, by increasing the exemption from £5 to £6. It also adds the words "whether weekly or otherwise." The effect is that, whereas at present a person earning £3 per week and being paid fortnightly the sum of £6, would be liable to pay receipt duty, in future, lfe will not be required to pay receipt duty on wages unless his wage exceeds £6 per week. Sub-clause (4) provides that any employer of a large number of employees may be authorized by the Comptroller of Stamps to deduct the receipt duty from the employee's wages, and to pay such moneys direct to the Oomptroller. The employee, under

Hon . • 1. P. Jones.

these circumstances, is not required to give a stamped receipt to his employer. The object of this sub-clause is that employers who have not been taking receipts in the past (using pay envelopes, for instance) should not be put to extra expense and loss of time on making payments to employees. Sub-clause (5) defines "salary or wages'" as including commission, bonus, and allowance.

Clause 6 relates to power of attorney. This is an instrument chargeable with stamp duty in England, New Zealand, Tasmania, Fiji, and all the Australian States, excepting Victoria. The clause provides for payment of stamp duty up to the sum of lOs. In New Zealand, the maximum charge is 15s., and in New South Wales, Western Australia, South Australia, and Fiji, £1. Victoria has never sought to bring every variety of instrument within the scope of the stamp duties as some of the other States have done. Letters and powers of attorney are, however, important legal documents, and it is thought reasonable that they should be brought into line with the practice of the other States. It is provided that the instrument must be stamped before being acted upon or, if executed in Victoria, within seven days of execution, or if executed out of Victoria, before being acted upon or before the expiration of seven days after it is first received in Victoria. Provision is made that, in cases where a power of attorney is included in an instrument already chargeable with receipt duty, it shall be sufficient if such power of attorney is stamped before it is acted upon. Provision is also made for stamping after execution, and a number of necessary exemptions are provided for.

The purpose of clause 7 is to prevent evasions of stamp duty chargeable on deeds of gift and settlement under paragraph IX. of the Third Schedule to Act No. 3775, and is in substitution for sections 4 and 5 of Act No. 4014. The sections referred to were each enacted for the purpose of preventing leakages of revenue, but proved to be not quite effective for the purpose. Section 4 referred to was designed to prevent persons making a settlement for a nominal sum paying duty thereon, and subsequently adding further moneys to such settlement

Police Offences [2 NOVEMBER, 1932.] (False Advertisements) Bill. 1969

without executing any further instrument, and consequently without paying any further duty. Section 5 was designed to prevent persons intending to make a settlement of a considerable sum, from dividing such sum into a number of smaller ,sums and so enabling the settlements to escape payment of the higher rate of duty which would be applicable to the full amount of the intended settlement, if drawn as one instrument. The two sections referred to did not provide for the application of the aggregation principle of section 5 to sums of money added to a settlement as in section 4- owing to the fact that the said sums of money were not the subject of an instrument. The clause is for the purpose of rectifying such defect. Although this amendment will benefit the revenue 1y preventing considerable evasions of· the settlement and deeds of gift duty, it does not make any increase of the present rates which have been in vogue since the 1st of July, 1915. The sections referred to" 4 and 5 of Act No. 4014, are repealed.

Olause 8 provides machinery whereby proof of the value of property added to a settlement as in clause 7 may be obtained by the Oomptroller of Stamps, also that a trustee or other person acquiring an interest in any estate may be required to pay for a valuation of the interest acquired.

The section of the principal Act which is sought to be amended by clause 9 appears to have been copied from the English Stamps Act without any attempt being made to adapt it to the requirements of this State. It deals with the method of valuing currencies of other countries in terms of British currency. The necessity has now arisen to make the section applicable to present exchange conditions in Australia. The revenue will benefit to a very slight degree.

Olauses 10 and 11 are machinery pro~ visions, and are rendered necessary to enable the Oomptroller of Stamps or his officers to ascertain whether the provisions of clause 5, dealing with compulsory receipts, are being properly observed. The clauses make provisions almost similar to those contained in section 14 of Act No. 3868, the Stamps (Unemployment Relief) ... I\ct, and are regarded as being essential to the proper safeguarding' of the revenue. The same provisions, in almost identical

form, are contained in the New South Wales Act No. 47 of 1920, section 131.

That is the explanation of the various provisions of the Bill, which I now commend to the House. I shall be happy to give any further information required by honorable members.

The Hon. W. H. EDGAR.-What amount of additional revenue do you expect to get~

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-The additional revenue for a full financial year is £100,000. For the current financial year it will be about £72,000.

The Hon. W. H. EDGAR.-All additional taxation ~

The Hon. J. P. JONES.-Yes. On the motion of the Hon. Dr.

HARRIS (North-Eastern Province), the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, November 8.

POLIOE OFFENOES (FALSE ADVERTISEMENTS) BILL.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN (Honorary Minister).-I move-

That this Bill be now read a. second time.

In dealing with the proposals contained in this measure, I think it is useful first to consider the reasons which lie behind its introduction. The matters it provides for have not been suddenly brought about. The departmental files show that the matter has been under consideration since 1913. The proposals contained in the Bill have been put forward to Governments from time to time by, in particular, two organizations concerned with the selling of goods and materials that are brought under the notice of prospective purchasers by means of advertising. The two bodies to which I refer are the Australian Advertising Association, the organization which consists of those whose business it is to prepare and promulgate advertisements, and the Better Business Bureau. The former body has put forward from time to time proposals for the better control of advertising material so that it will not mislead people by its falsity, and for the keeping clean of their own business by the establishment of principles which have been given legislative effect to in the United States of America. The American legislation is familiarly known

1970 Police Offences [COUNCIL·l (False Advertisements) Bill.

as the Printer's Ink Statute, obtaining that name from the newspaper Printer)s Ink, published by the advertising bodies in Ameriea. The legislation has been tried out in the greater number of the American States so that there is practical experience of its effect. The Better Business Bureau has for a long time advocated. the need for the proper protection of the public in the purchasing of goods which are brought under their notice by advertising of variou~ kinds, whether by display, press advertisements, dodgers, circulars, and the like. The Better Buisness Bureau consists of various business organization~ in this State, and includes, amongst others, the Ohamber of Oommerce, the Ohamber of Manufactures, the Employers Federa'tion, the Institute of Advertising, the Master Drapers Association, the Retail Jewellers ..c1ssociation, the Electrical Federation, Retail Furnishers Association, and the Pharmaceutical Chemists Association. All these bodies are concerned to see that people who sell goods to the public are placed upon an equality in having to observe fairness in advertising, and not misleading the public by falsity of what they state in relation to the goods advertised. It is primarily because of the representations which these important trading bodies have made that the Government has gone into the question, and now submits the Bill before the House. There are various ways in which advertisements and notices of that kind may be false, and they cover a very wide variety.

The Ron. R. Kn"PATRICK.-Can you indicate any of them?

Oolonel HAROLD OOHEN.-If I were to catalogue all that have been brought to my notice, I might retard the retirement of honorable members to a quiet rest. It is intended to put a check on these forms of advertising. For instance, there is the familiar example which has been given a great deal of public notice with reference to the sale of woollen goods, and illustrations have been brought under notice by deputations, one of which was introduced by my friend, Mr. Ourrie. I have samples on the table befo·re me, but I do not think that it would be any good wavmg them aloft for members to in:' spect. If any honorable member desires

to inspect the samples, he may do so before the Bill reaches the Committee stage. Cases have been brought under notice where blankets have been advertised as pure wool. They consist of partly wool and partly cotton. There are instances where mattresses have been stated to be stuffed with pure Java down. The word" down" has the natural implication to the inexperienced sleeper on ill a ttresses like myself that it is something to do with feathers, but it really consists of a rather inferior kapok.

The Hon. Dr. HARRls.-It is not eiderdown?

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-N 0, it is "take you down." In relation to furniture, you will be told that a piece of furniture is made of walnut, whereas it consists of un inferior timber with a walnut veneer or a stain to resemble walnut. Then there is the case of the jeweller professing to sell an article of true gold, when it is really a gold wash on inferior metal. People are misled in relation to the description of seeds. I have numerous examples extending from cauliflower to lucerne seeds.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-Not wild radish 1

Colonel HAROLD OOHEN.-Nor wild rabbits. That is one class of fraud it is desired to check. Another class, apart from the description of the goods, is also misleading. You see displayed on a building a statement that a sale is being held within of an insolvent stock acquired at enormous expense, and being literally given' away, when, as a matter of fact, there is no insolvent stock and the prices are a little higher than those charged by another trader up the street. There are also instances of people who say that goods have been marked down in price, but the figure to which they have been marked down is a little higher than the price that was formerly charged for an inferior article.

The Hon. H. KEcK.-They will have to wri te another ticket.

Oolonel HAROLD COHEN.-It is a case of writing your own ticket now. There are people who talk about selling crystal. Crystal is a particular kind of glass hand cut. People who buy some sorts of crystal described by fancy names are really getting ordinary glass made in a mould without any of the characteristics

Police Offenoes [2 N OVEl\fBER, 1932.] (False Advertisements) Bill. 1971

of crystal. These examples might be extended to great length and diversity. The primary things the Government desires to check are mis-descri ptions of goods and mis-descriptions of the conditions under which they are sold. There are similar kinds of mis-descriptions which might relate to the sale of real estate and shares, and there are other different types of misleading by persons who sell businesses. Honorable members are familiar with the gentleman who wants to sell an interest in a business for £50, and promises that the interest will return £10 per week to the person who acquires it. The transaction brings the sum of £50 to the seller, but the other man finds that he has bought only sorrow.

The Hon. D. L. MeN AMAUA.-Will the Bill apply to patent medicines?

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-It will apply to the description of the label on the bottle. In relation to the sale of any of these things, if there is mis-description of a .material character, and I emphasize the words "material character," and if that mis-description is knowingly made, those who publish it shall be responsible and be liable to punishment under the terms of the Bill. Those two elements are included because the Government have been anxious to see that traders will not be subjected to petty prosecutions for ordinary business conduct. The trader who makes an honest slip or a mistake in a matter of small detail should not have to bear punishment inflicted by this measure, but if the thing is done with the intention of misleading, and is done knowingly, I should say that there is no honest tradesman who will object to his unfair competitor being put under a handicap. In many cases persons who have a civil claim do not take action, as the matter is too small, but this will be changed, because if there is what might he termed a police provision to deal with dishonest traders, the public will be protected, and the honest trader will be given the protection which the honest trader ought to have. The Bill consists of two clauses. Th~ first is the short ti tIc, and the second :is the operative provision.

The Hon. H. H'. SMITH.-Don't you think' that too many loopholes are being left?

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-We must retain some balance between the punishment of the man who ought to be punished and the avoidance of annoyance by prosecution of the honest trader. That aspect of the matter has received a lot of consideration, and the Bill has been reshaped several times. It establishes the principle of safeguarding the public and honest traders without its being so punitive that it will affect persons who make errors innocently. Clause 2 deals with the publication of any statement which is intended or apparently intended by such person or any other person to promote the sale or disposal of any real property or any personal property, including chattels real or stocks, shares, bond, or other security--

The lIon. H. F. RICHARDsoN.-Will chattels real bring in land?

Colonel HAROLD COHEN .-Chattels real are a thing attached to real estate.I shall obtain a dictionary definition of " chattels real" for members before the clause is reached in Committee. The term covers the hinterland between real estate and goods. Real estate includes freehold property. If you sell freehold land by an advertisement which contains a knowingly false statement, you come under the provisions of this Bill. The clause continues-

or any services, or to increase the consumption or use of any such personal property, or to induce any person or persons to enter into any obligations relating to any such real property, or personal property, or services, or any interest in any such 'real or personal property; and

(b) is to his knowledge false in any material particular-

shall be liable to a penalty of not more than £100.

A statement shall be deemed to be published within the meaning of the clause if it is inserted in any newspaper printed and published in Victoria, or publicly exhibited in, on, over, or under any building, vehicle, or place, whether or not a public place within the meaning of section 27 of the principal Act, and whether on land or water, or in the air, in view of persons being or passing in or on any public place, or contained in any document gratuitously sent or delivered to any person or thrown or left upon premises in t~e occupation of any person. In proceedmgs under the clause it will

1972 Police Offences [COUNCIL·l (False Advertisements) Bill.

be necessary for the prosecutor to prove that there has been publication within that meaning. You prove that the statement published is false in a material particular. Then it rests upon the person charged to show that it was not done with his guilty knowledge.

The. B:on. H. KEcK.-Who is to say that the seller or the merchant is guilty?

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-Under any Bill of this character in which there i3 a general punitive provision, it is open to any citizen, as it is in connexion with most of the offences in the calendar, to evoke the law by applying for a summons. If I were sellIng tomatoes which I described as being the best high-grade Bendigo tom.atoes, whereas, as a matter of fact, I had grown them in my electorate and they were very inferior, Mr. Keck could ask for a summons and have me dealt wit.h if I were guilty. The man who is charged has to show that he had reasonable grounds for believing the advertisement was true, that he had no reason to suspect that it was false, or that he acted innocently. That is provide<i designedly, because in some cases the persons prosecuted may not be the instigators in the first instance, but only the vehicles by which the knowledge is conveyed. 11 such a person says: "I took this advertisement in good faith. I had no reason to suspect it was not true," if he is believed he is absolved.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-That is where I think there is a loophole.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-In our desire to punish" people who act with guilty knowledge, we must be very careful to see that we do not punish people who, in the ordinary course of business, act innocently, say, by accepting an advertisement for publication, or by allowing a hoarding to have an advertisement placed on it. We must see that people are Il9t made liable for something for which they are not responsible.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK. - What would be the position of a man who brought stock into a yard and described them as four years old, if you found out afterwards they were ten years old?

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-I am not a stock expert, but I take it that thaL would be a material matter.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-It would indeed be material. Such cases oft~1l occur.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-Say a grower of sheep goes to an agent and says: "I have 100 four-year old sheep to sell,'~ and the agent sticks up an advertisement saying that 100 four-year-old sheep will be spld on a certain day.. A man comes along, but does not have a look to see how old they are-

The Hon. R. KILPATRIcK.-He could not tell.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-How are you going to convict a man of having made a false statement if you cannot tell the age of the sheep? If the agent colludes with the grower-knows that they are ten-year-old sheep, and says that they are four-year-old-he is equally guilty wi th the grower.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-He could tell the age of four-year-old sheep, but eould not tell the age of six-year-old sheep.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-Cutting out the ages, if the grower makes a false statement about the sheep, and the agent innocently pushes that false statement on to some third person and a sale results, if the agent did not know the statement was false and makes the Court believe he did not know, the agent is absolved. If the agent did know, he is as guilty as his principal, and ought to be punished.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-It looks to me as if y.0u have a splendid Bill, but that it WIll be very hard to prove an offence.

Colonel lIAROLD COHEN.-W e say that an element of punishment is a guilty knowledge, and that the facts h.aving been established that a statement is false, that it has been published, and that it is material, the defendant will be excused if he can show that he is innocent. The defendant has to make the Court believl: that he is innocent. Of course, if Mr. Smith said he was innocent, that would be the end of it, but there are some people the Court would not believe. I do not think the Bill is so weak as to be useless.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.~ I think' you have left the door pretty wide open.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-I do not think so. I think that if we make the door so completely unopenable that a man

Police Offences [2 NOVEMBER, 1932.] (False Advertisements) Bill. 1973

will be punished without being able to show that he acted innocently, we shall be treating him unfairly. We have provided that a body corporate shall be liable for an offence, but have not put in the provisions which are sometimes, I think ,objectionably, put into these Bills-that where a body corporate is to be punished, its officers and servants shall be personally liable. In a matter of this kind, if a company can be fined £100, that is quite enough punishment, without saying the secretary and every director shall be equally liable, and such provisions have been deliberately omitted. The Bill also provides that every person who aids, abets, .counsels, or procures, shall be on thp same basis as the person who publishes a false advertisement. If Mr. Smith gets me to put a false advertisement in a newspaper, he will be just as .liable as I will be.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH.-I would have to be a pretty clever f~now to do that.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN. - You never know. That is why I want to give the innocent man a chance to get out. The provisions of the Bill are not to affect the rights that a man has to recover in the civil Courts if he has been misled on a sale, and are not to be taken as a weakening of his rights, but as an addition to them. I suggest that the measure is a desirable step forward on a line that should have been taken long ago. I suggest, further, that it is so designed as not to be an unreasonable use of power over people who act innocently, and I contend that the safeguards in the Bill do not weaken its power. The Bill, if it is made law, will in itself be a sufficient deterrent without prosecution to many of the people at whom it is directe.d: and those who persist if they are guilty will be punished.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (NorthEastern Province).-The objective of the Bill is rather a good one, but I am inclined to think that the Honorary Minister (Colonel Harold Cohen) in his usual sympathetic way-he is always fair and honest-has opened a door in the measure so that it will be almost impos~ sible to secure convictions.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-I should like to have a try at some of these people.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-A conviction might be obtained in a very glaring

case, but it is not the glaring cases that we want to get at. Anyone can get at a glaring case. What is wanted is to produce a little business honesty in the minds of people who would take advantago of the devious methods the Honorary Minister has described. If that result is to be achieved, it is llecessary to pass a measure that will operate. I have received representations from bodies of persons who want a Bill JJassed. They do not say they want this Bill; they would rather have the American measure than this one.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-Have you seen the American measure ~

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-No. Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-I can let

you have a copy of it; but I do not think you will like it.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-One of the representative men who came to see me gave me a list of certain things that are done, and I shall read some extracts from it to show the necessity of passing legis· lation on the subject.

Paint.-A paint recently sold in Sydney was advertised as being made of white lead, zinc oxide, pure linseed oil, and turpentine. This, upon analysis. was found to contain only 4; J?er cent. zinc, the remainder being barium siuca and adulterants, with the exception of about 17 per cent. titanium oxide. See Argus, 25th September, 1931, page 5.

White Lead.-Material sold as Number 1 white lead, actually contained large quantities of barytes and other fillers. See Argus, 2nd October, 1932, page 5.

Furniture.-Suite of furniture advertised as upholstered in real English leather ,vas covered with a cheap substitute. Furniture advertised as made of imported oak, was made of Australian hardwood.

The document deals with misrepresentations in connexion with hosiery, books, leather substitutes, blankets, mattresses pillows, auto air vaporators, old gold: cures for human ailments, radio sets, and drapery. It was delivered to me by Mr. Jervis Manton, who is connected with the Advertising Association of Australia, which very much wants a measure dealing with false advertisements passed. I commend the Bill, if it will do what it is intended to do; but, in view of sub-clause (3) of clause 2, it wiU be very difficult to obtain convictions. That sub-clause provides-

In any proceedings under this section against any person for publishing any statement aforesaid, or causing the same to be published, if

1974 Railways (COUNCIL·l Bill.

it is proved that such statement was fa~se. in any material particular, the person pubhshmg the statement, or causing the same to be published, shall be deemed to have published the same or to have caused the same to be published with knowledge of its falsity, unless he proves-

(a) that he had reasonable ground tc> believe, and did believe, that the statement was true; or

A man must be pretty hard-boiled bef.ore he starts publishing these false advertI~ements. Just imagine the Hono·rary Mlllister cross-examining such a man.

Oolonel HAROLD OOHEN.-Suppose you prosecute:; B for something which was manufactured by A, and which B bought in good faith. You have to protect that case. If it was something he ought to have known about because of his skill, Of because he could see it, he could not say that hp had rea~onabl~ gl'ounds to believe that the statement complained of was true.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-The man at whom the measure is aimed is usually pretty hard-boiled. He did not C?IDe down with the last shower, and he WIll be prepared to go into the witness-box with a good hard face on him, and swear pretty clearly.

Oolonel HAROLD OOHEN.-He has to eon vince the Oourt.

The :Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-Paragraph (b) reads-

(b) that he had no reason to suspect that . the statement was false; or

'How is a man to be convicted, in view of that loophole? Paragra.ph (c) reads

(c) that otherwise he had acted innocently.

"'-in experienced man would never be convicted with such loopholes in the law.

Oolonel HAROLD OOHEN.-I should like to have a go at him.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS.-I should like to be in the witness box. I believe in the Bill but I do not think that it will accomplish what the Minister expects It to do.

The Hon. H. H. SMITH (Melbourne Pro'vince).-I consider that the Bill leaves the position too open, and that it will be hard to convict a man. A great deal of legal discussion will. follow, an~ I should like an opportumty to consIder this point. I move--

That the debate be now adjourned.

The Hon. G. M. DAVIS.-It is better to let off ten guilty men than to convict one innocent man.

The motion for the adjournment of the debate was agreed to, and the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, November 8.

RAILWAYS BILL.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN (Honorary Minister).-I move--


This measure is not long, but it deals with a matter that has been the subject of a good deal of vexed discussion. Section 4 of the Railways Act provides-

For the purposes of this Act the Commissioners or company shall be deemed to be a common carrier, and (except as by this Act otherwise provided) shall be subject to the obligations and entitled to the privileges of such carriers.

A decision on that section sets out that the Oommissioners have no power to limit by regulation their liability as common carriers of passengers. I think that applies also to goods. As honorable members know, there has been a good deal of discussion in relation to the provisions for the sale of stock in the N ewmarket yards. There is a period of peak traffic from August to February, as to which there has been a complaint in regard to congestion. There hav~ been various schools of thought concerning the best method of permanently meeting this matter. One party suggests that the present site should be enlarged or altered, and another that the yards should be removed elsewhere.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-Encourage inland sales.

Oolonel HAROLD OOHEN.-There are various places to which the yard8 might be removed, but that is not the subject-matter of this Bill, which aims at dealing with the question of the present congestion until the general policy of the larger matters is decided. There have been many conferences between the railway officers and the live-stock handlers and agents in an endeavour to limit the yarding in one day in a satisfactory manner. It has been common ground between the various competing views as to what should be done with the yards during the peak period, and it is that there should be two sales in-

Railways Bill. [2 NOVEMBER., 1932.] Factories and Shops Bill. 1975

stead of one. The holding capacity of the yards is about 65,000 head of stock. There is a difficulty in dividing the stock offering between the two days unless either the Railway Department is in a position to control the number of trucks which may be available or there is some common agreement which can be effectively carried out by those concerned in the handling of stock. The effort to make an arrangement has not been effective, because it has not been possible to get uniformity in the methods by which it should be done. As a result, on one of the two days there is inability to display the stock properly, and stock are injured, and a loss in prices occurs.

The Hon. G. M. DAvls.-I take it that the live-stock people are in favour of the measure.

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-The live-stock agents are in favour of the two days' control. Some of them, I believe, advocate the removal of the yards. In October last, an agreement for a second market was made, and a limit was placed on the number of orders given for trucks. It worked all right for two or three weeks, and then a slaughtermen's strike occurred which, coupled with the breakaway by an agent, terminated the second market. The Railways Oommissioners take the view that they are common carriers and cannot refuse to provide trucks to agents or to private eonsignors, and in the absence of legal power they cannot refuse orders for trucks to anybody who seeks them. It is, therefore, not possible to regulate, as it is desired to regulate, the position in the stock market. There are two markets, and with equal divisions it would be possible to handle 1,200 or 1,300 trucks, whereas on anyone day it is not possible to handle more than 600 or 700 trucks, although some people preferring the one-day market seek 900 trucks, and loss and trouble sometimes follow. The second market, in the opinion of the Railways Commissioners, would enable a more satisfactory condition, and they could guarantee delivery in ample time for earlier sales. The agents would be a pportioned trucks, and they could apportion trucks to their clients and take the responsibility as to whose stocks should be listed, and on which day. The Railways Commissioners will work along

this line until the larger question of where the yards shall be is decided. This Bill provides in clause 2 for the insertion of the following sub-section at the end of section 4:-

(2) For the purpose of aiding the better regulation of the supply of live stock to markets at or near Melbourne, the Commissioners may notwithstanding anything in this or any other Act or any law to the contrary refuse to receive or forward any live stock intended or apparently intended for sale at such markets.

The whole purpose of the Bill is to amend section 4, and I think that statement sufficiently describes the purport of the measure.

The Hon. R. KILPATRICK.-What is the position of a man who orders trucks and unloads them at Donnybrook and brings the stock to Melbourne by road ~

Colonel HAROLD COHEN.-At the moment I am not sufficiently skilled in the art of selling stock to answer the question, but I take it that if Donnybrook is at or near Melbourne, the Railways Commissioners can refuse to supply trucks. It is a question of fact. I cannot say whether Donnybrook is at vI' near Melbourne. I have endeavoured to make it clear that this Bill is nothing more than a temporary cover of the position until the larger question is dealt with either by this or some other Government.

On the motion of the Hon. Dr. HARRIS (North-Eastern Province), the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, }lovember 8.

FACTORIES AND SHOPS BILL. The House went into Committee for

the further consideration of this Bill. Consideration was resumed of clause 1,

providing, inter a,lia, for the commencement of the operation of the measure.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Labour).-Sub-clause (2) provides-~xcept where otherwise expressly provided,

this Act shall come into operation on the 1st day of February, 1933.

I move-That the words" except where otherwise ex

press sly provided " be omitted.

The amendment was agreed to. The Hon. W. TYNER (South-Eastern

P'rovince).-In speaking on the second reading of this Bill, I pointed out the

1976 Factories and [COUNCIL·l Shops Bill.

neces.sity of its coming into operation at a much earlier date than that stated in sub-clause (2). I emphasized the fact that the legislation was long overdue, and that the shackles of industry ought to be removed at the earliest opportunity. I move--

That the words" on the first day of February, 1933," be omitted, with a view to inserting the words" on a date to be fixed by a proclamation of the Governor in Council published in the Government Gazette."

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE.-I do not oppose the amendment.

The amendment was agreed to and the clause, as amended, was adopted, as was clause 2.

Clause 3, providing, inter aliarSection 13 is hereby amended as follows:

( a) For sub-section ( 4 ) there shall be ElUbstituted the following sub-nection:-

" (4) Such report shall show as liearly as possible the whole number of persons engaged in working in factories in Victoria, together with such other particulars of a general nature as the Minister requires"; and

The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (N orthEastern Province).-This clause refers to the annual report. Representations have been made to me in respect of the expression" of a general nature." There are some important interests in Melbourne which contend that there is not very much reason for altering the existing provision in the principal Act, which specifies that certain information will be given to the Minister regarding hours, the number of operatives, and other matters. I think that the contention of the Minister in introducing the Bill was that the proposed alteration would lead to eoonomy in the printing of the report of the Chief Inspector of Factories. But the neople who have made representations to me feel that if an unsympathetic Minister was in office he might desire all sorts of information. If the matter is debated, and the Committee feels that the proposal should be modified" we mig-ht postpone the clause.

The Hon. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister of Labour).-The proposal embodied in the clause is purely of a departmental nature and in the interests of economy. The Chief Inspector of Factories has told me that in effect it would mean considerably less work in respect of printing. There

are many details which the Department considers are not necessary, and which make for extensive printing. It seems that in these times when savings ought to be effected, the proposal, if gIven effect, would not result in any harm. The departmental head favours it very strongly because of the prospective savIng. The question which the unofficial Leader raised is one that might be debated. I had not looked at the matter from the stand-point that he suggested.

The Hon. Dr. HARRIs.-It was contended that the expression" of a general nature" might in certain conditions lead to very voluminous reports.

The clause was agreed to. Clause 4-(Time-books for employees

under Wages Boards). The Hon. Dr. HARRIS (North

Eastern Province) .-Representations were made to me to the effect that time-books, so far as modern factory management and industrial operations are concerned, are out of date, as nearly all time-keeping is done by machines, because everyone having a number of employees no longer keeps time-books, but has installed machines which record time on and time off. Yet we are persisting in this measure in providing that the Labour Department should have the right to insist on time-books for employees under Wages Boards, and also to order that they be provided in other cases. We know that the system is out of date, and all factories and big industrial concerns record time by clockwork. I have been advised to oppose the whole clause. The Department, for some inexplicable reason, is asking for the continuance of a method of time-keeping that is not in existence.

The Hon. W. ANGLISS (Southern Province).-I support what the unofficial Leader has said. A number of large employers of labour have seen me on the matter, and I have discussed it also in relation to my own business. It is contended that the proposal in effect wouln entail a great deal of unnecessary work. It would probably mean a delay in the payment of wages at times, and that is something with which we ought not to have to contend with, especIally when there is a class of worker who gets very impatient when the hour for payment comes round. The clause should be de-

Factories and [2 :NDVEMBER, 1932.] Shops Bill. 1977

leted, because it will serve no. useful purpDse, cause unnecessary wDrk, and to. a certain extent incDnvenience emplDyers

The HDn. G. M. DAvIs.-Will it 'affect small emplDyers to. any extent?

The HDn. W. ANGLISS.-It will affect bDth large and small emplDyers to. a certain extent. PrDbably, the larger the emplDyer the greater will the effect be upDn him. There will be invDlved a lot of unnecessary work withDut any useful purpDse being served.

The HDn. G. L. GOUDIE (Minister Df LabDur).-The clause has been designed by the. Department to. prDtect bDth emplDyer and emplDyee. Mr. RichardsDn gave an example last week which may have been an iSDlated case, but pDssibly is nDt so.. He referred to. the emplDYmen t Df a man at an esta blishmen tat LDrne, who. subsequently claimed that he had been wDrking in the kitchen frDm 5 D'clDck in the mDrning. He sued his emplDyer fDr arrears Df wages, and the latter had to admit in CDurt that he cDuld nDt persDnally say that the emplDyee had nDt been wDrking in the kitchen at that hDur. Mr. RichardsDn added that the CDurt had decided the case against the emplDyer. The clause under discussiDn shDuld meet cases where a sm;all emplDyer Df labDur has nDt installed the clDck sysoom. The Department might say that if an emplDyer had nDt so. prDtected himself, the next best thing wDuld be fDr him to. have a time-bDDk, and that wDuld prDtect the emplDyee also..

The Ron. H. H. SMITH (M elbournf; Province).-The Chamber Df Manufactures has stated that this prDvisiDn will cause much trDuble, and that it dDes nDt want it. In suppDrt Df that statement, Mr. Angliss has nDW spDken as a large emplDyer. He says that emplDyers will be put to. much trDuble and incDnvenience. I am sure the Minister Df La bDur dDes nDt want to. bring abDut any mDre than there is tD-day Df that kind Df thing.

The HDn. G. L. GDUDlE.-I do. nDt. The Ron. H. F. RICHARDSON (South

Western Province) .-Dealing with this matter, I prDpDse to. ask the CDmmittee to. agree to. a new clause which I shall ~mbmit as fDllDws-

If any person works longer than the hours provided by any determination without being requested by the employer so to do, he shall

immediately inform his employer when signing his time-sheet each day, and if any subsequent claim for overtime is made without such notice being given, such person shall be liable to a penalty of not more than £10.

I appreciate the difficulty Df requiring em;plDyers to. keep time-sheets. If the clause is agreed to., and the Department enfDrces its prDvisiDns, there will be entailed Dn emplDyers a gDDd deal Df additiDnal wDrk and respDnsibility. The case to. which I referred last week was recDgnized by the LabDur Department as Dne Df grDss impDsitiDn. It was nDt a sDlitary case. An emplDyer cannDt be expected to. stand behind the whDle Df his emplDyees to. check the number Df hDurs they wDrk. If my suggested penalty clause is accepted, it shDuld get Dver a great deal Df difficulty. I do. nDt want clause 4 to. be rejected altDgether, but I appreciate that the necessity to. keep timebDD~S may cause much trDuble and incDnvenlence.

The Hon. J. P. JONES (Minister Df Public Works).-I cDnsider that it is necessary to. have some record cDncer:r::ing the time during which an emplDyee wDrks. That would be just as much fDr the prDtectiDn Df the employer as fDr the prDtectiDn Df the employee. With respect to. the installation of machines, it is likely that the Department cDuld devise SDme means whereby the position WDuld be met. Even though employees are required to. punch a machine, there must be a recDrd kept.

The Ron. W. ANGLISS (Southern Province).-I wDuld pDint DUt to. the Minister that even if machines are installed, there will still be required the keeping Df time-books, because I understand that the machines do. no.t prDvide a record which can be examined Dver a periDd. With respect to. the pDint which has been stressed, that time-bDDks will invDlve'much trDuble and IDss to. emplDyers, let us assume that at half-past 7 D'clDck in the mDrning, 500 Dr 600 emplDyees CDme to. wDrk, and are required to. sign their names. There will be a tremendDus waste Df time, fDr the men will nDt do. that in their Dwn time; they will want to. do. it in their emplDyers' time. There are many trades tD-day in which the men will nDt accept their wages in their Dwn time, but Dnly in the emplDyers' time. This provision will make matters WDrse. I want to. say to

LEG IS~LA TIVE ASSEMBLY. - Parliament of Victoria

Documents

Transcript of LEG IS~LA TIVE ASSEMBLY. - Parliament of Victoria