V leT 0 RIA.

SESSIC)N 1940.

Ic~is.latibt QIonncil anb ~tgi61atibt Jl,sstutbiU.

VOL. CCX.

(Oomprising the period from October 9 to December 4, 1940.)

MELBOURNE: H. E. DA W, GOVERNME1\"'T PRINTER.

, ~41 )428/41.

Adjournment. f9 OCTOBER, 1940.] Adjournment. 1045

Mr. J. G. B. McDONALD.-A sum of £1,000 per annum, plus rates and ta~es. This matter calls for the closest possIble inquiry because in his letter the chairman of the tramways Board points out that w hen the Board decided to build a new head office it communicated with the Post­master-General's Department intimating that the old building would be available for purchase or a lease. In view of negotiations in 1936 and 1937, the Post­master-General's Department, or some other responsible authority, mu~t ?f neces­sity have known that the bUlldmg was

. available. It was offered for sale at £20 500 or on lease at £2,300 a year, but the' Oommonwealth authorities declined to accept either proposition. A certain num­ber of floors were then offered for rental purposes at £1,600 a year, but tha~ offer also was not favourably consIdered. There may be legitimat~ .reason~ why t.he Commonwealth authOrItIes reJected It; that is a matter for inquiry. The letter from which I was quqting continues-

In October, 1936, just prior to the com­mencement· of the new office building, the Board, having in view the leasing or sale of the old building, instructed its agent (Mr. J. G. Membrey) to get in touch with the Post­master-General's Department as a likely lessee, the General Post Office being opposite the Board's premises in Bourke-street. A copy of the letter addressed by Mr. Membrey to the Works Director of the Department of the Interior, dated 7th October, 1936, is attached.

The communication traces the negotia­tions and proceeds-

In March, 1938, just prior to my leaving on my tour abroad, Mr. H. Drysdale Bett, Managing Director of the Radio Times, made approaches through the Board's agent in regard to the purchase of the old Head Office property for £20,000-£2,000 deposit with a mortgage for ten years for the balance, my counter sug­gestion, acting upon advice tendered by the Board's agent, being a five years' lease at £1,000 per annum plus rates and taxes, with 1m option of purchase at £20,000.

I believe that, as a result of these negotia­tionR, some one in the Commonwealth De­partment must have known that the Mel­bourne and Metropolitan Tramways Board was having difficulty in letting or selling the building. Having a knowledge of all the circumstances, it is extraordin­ary that the Postmaster-General's De­partment agreed to pay such an exorbitant rental. In the final analysis, the people have to pay it. It is the duty of the Government of this State to direct thl'l

Session 1940.-[46]

attention of the Oommonwealth Govern­ment to this matter. The views I have expressed concerning the serious character of the charges involved should be con­veyed to the proper quarter, and the facts should be made known to the public.

Mr. HOLLWAy.-Am I right in suppos­ing that your chief objection is to the exploitation of the Oommonwealth Go­vernment by the State Government?

Mr. J. G. B. McDON ALD.-Certainly not. My objection is to the exploitation of the people of the Oommonwealth, and to the fact that it was possible for officers of a Oommonwealth Department to enter into such a transaction. Apparently, to the knowledge of the officers, from 1936 onwards the Melbourne and Metropolitan Tramways Board was having difficulty either in renting or selling the building. But, apparently without inquiring what rent was being paid, the Department entered into an agreement to pay for por­tion of the building three and a half times the amount paid by the tenant for the lease of the whole building.

Mr. HOGAN.-Was the Mr. Bett, re­ferred to as the sub-lessee of the building, the gentleman who opposed the Prime Minister at the recent Commonwealth elections?

Mr. BARRy.-Of course he was!

Mr. J. G. B. McDONALD.-The Commonwealth Government, or officers of a Commonwealth Department, must have known that the tramways Board build­ing was available for renting at a much lower rate than it is now paying for a portion of the building. The subject de­mands the strictest inquiry, not only by the State Government, but also by the Commonwealth Government, and I hope that the Premier will communicate with the Commonwealth Government on the matter.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-The honorable member for Goulburn Valley recently directed my attention to a report in the Common­wealth Hansard of a speech made by Mr. Pollard, M.H.R. I communicated with the chairman of the Melbourne and Metropolitan Tramways Board, and asked him to supply me with certain informa­tion. The report from the chairman of the tramways Board was forwarded to

1046 Adjournment. rASSEMBLY·l Adjournment.-

me, and extracts ha ve been quoted by the honorable member for Goulburn Valley. The State Government does not enter into the matter, and it did not even know that the tramways Board owned the building. Any negotiations that took place were between representatives of a Commonwealth Department and the person who had leased the property from the Board. It would appear that there is something radically wrong somewhere, when a tenant can lease a building for £1,000 a year and then sub-let a portion of the building to the Commonwealth Go­vernment at an annual rental of £3,484.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-What a pity it is that this matter was not made public before the recent Commonwealth elec­tions, instead of afterwards!

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-While the country is at war, the Commonwealth Government needs all the money it can get for defence purposes. In a case where it is apparent that exploitation has occurred, undoubtedly an investigation of the posi­tion is justified.

An HONORABLE MEMBER.-Was the lease entered into before the fair rents regulations were introduced ~

Mr. CAIN.-N o. The regulations under the fair rents legislation were intro­duced in July last, but they were made retrospective.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I shall bring the remarks of the honorable member for Goulburn Valley under the notice of the Commonwealth Government. I shall ask, in addition, that I should be furnished with particulars in relation to the matter. Any person regarding it casually might think the tramways Board, in leasing the building for £1,000 a year, was not obtaining a fair and reasonable return.

Mr. ELLIs.-N either it is!

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-In fairness to the tramways Board I shall endeavour to ascertain from the Commonwealth Go­vernment whether it considers the rent it is paying is a fair and reasonable charge.

- :Mr. HOLLWAY (Ballarat).-It may be that the Commonwealth Government has been foolish; it may be that the tram­ways Board has been foolish; or it may be that the matter has been raised by the

honorable member for Goulburn Valley against the Minister for External Affairs, Mr. McEwen.

lflr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Irrespective of the gentleman concerned, if a Minister in charge of a Oommonwealth Depart­ment permits a transaction of this kind to be entered into he is not fit to hold office in any Government In the Commonwealth.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-I think the honor­able member is more enthusiastic than he would be if the Minister concerned did not happen to be Mr. McEwen. I do not desire to arouse a heated debate on the subject, but it should be probed to the fullest extent. Even if it was simply a stupid transaction on the part of the tramways Board, or on the part of the Oommonwealth Government, as the Pai'­liament of Victoria we should know the facts.

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-That is all :r desire.

Mr. HOI .. LWAY.-I now realize that the honorable member has no political motive in raising the subject, but at least we should know the truth about it. Unless the honorable member for Goulburn Valley has more inside kno~ledge on the Federal situation than I have, I should say the Commonwealth elections are over, although there may be another election in the offing. Apart from electioneering, however, and the natural disaffection be­tween the honorable member for Goul­burn Valley and the Minister for Exter­nal Affairs, I support the request to the Premier to endeavour to ascertain who is to blame.

Mr. J. G. B. McDONALD (Goulbtt·rn Valley).-I desire to make _ a personal explanation in reply to thie honorable member for Ballarat. It would have been easy for me to arrange for a colleague in the United Country party to mention this matter and in tha t way clear myself of any sug­gestion that I was taking action because the honorable member for Indi, Mr. McEwen, had been in charge of the De­partment concerned. I have the courage of my convictions, to do what I consider proper in the interests of the community, and that is the only interest I have in

I

I

1

I

Adjournment. p5 OCTOBER, 1940.J Illness of Usher. 1047

raising this question. Irrespective of the person concerned, I would not permit a transaction of that kind to pass unchallenged.

Mr. REID (Oalcleigh).-I desire to refer to a matter that is causing concern to constituents in my electorate, namely, the after-care treatment of victims of the recent infantile paralysis epidemic. Since the epidemic a nurse has been visiting the homes of twenty children in my dis­trict who were affected, giving necessary massage treatment. Most of the children are in movable beds, and recently a depot has been established at the Memorial Hall, Oakleigh, to which the mothers of the unfortunate children, on three days a week, must wheel the children for treatment. I have visited the centre, investigated the cases, and spoken to the sister in charge.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-How many cases are affected?

Mr. REID.-Twenty. The distance from Hughesdale to the centre is about Ii miles, and it is an ordeal for mothers residing there to push perambulators or beds such a long way. I do not know whether the sister has to submit to the petrol rationing restrictions, but I understand that she can do the massage more quickly and effectively by visiting the sufferers at their homes. She told me that the children responded better to the treatment when they were given ita t home. I wish the Premier to rectify these conditions.

Mr. EVERARD (Evelyn).-I am glad that the honorable mem:ber for Oakleigh has brought up the subject of the treat­ment of sufferers from infantile paralysis. When the children were removed from "Stonington" a number were simply sent home, whereas they should have been provided with hospital accommodation. It is surprising that any Government should allow children to be treated in such a manner. and the Premier should take immediate action to see that they are properly cared for. In Oakleigh th£> mothers of these children are expected to perform an almost impossible task.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-The mattei' raised by the honorable member for Oakleigh is en-

tirely new to me, and I shall make im­mediate inquiries to ascertain what can be done. I feel just as sympathetic to­wards sufferers from infantile paralysis as any other member of this House. The Governmen t wishes them to have the best treatment in the most convenient way possible. The honorable member for Evelyn spoke of "any Government" allowing the existing conditions. I did not know that these conditions prevailed. The Government cannot look into every­thing. The Inspector of Charities," as Ohairman of the Infantile Paralysis After­Care Committee, attends to such matters, and the Government cannot be held respon­sible for administrative acts that do not come under its notice. I am willing to hear complaints because if they are made, and they have any substance in them, they can be rectified; but honorable members should not criticize the Government before the particular grievance has been brought under its notice. If it fails to take action then it can be criticized with every justification. I appreciate the manner in which the honorable member for Oak­leigh has submitted his case, and I shall see what can be done.

The motion was agreed to.

The House adjourned at 11.35 p.m." until Tuesday, October 15.

LEGISLATIVE CO'UNCIL.

Tuesday, October 15, 1940.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Frank Clarke) took the chair at 4.52 p.m., and read the prayer.

ILLNESS OF USHER. The PRESIDENT (Sir Frank Clarke).­

I have to announce that the Usher (ltfr. Sarah) is unavoidably absent on account of illness, and that I have directed "the Clerk of the Papers (Mr. Hoyle) to assist at the Table during the absence of the Usher.

1048 Public Service Bill. rCOUNCIL·l Public Trustee Bill.

PUBLIC SERVICE BILL. This Bill was received from the Assem­

bly and, on the motion of Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruc­tion), was read a first time.

RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

CONTRACTS FOR SUPPLY OF STORES.

The Hon. PAUL JONES (Doutta Galla Province) asked the Minister of Public Instruction-

(a) Are tenders called yearly for the supply by contracts of all stores to the Railway Department?

(b) What is the estimated total cost to the Railway Department during the financial year 1940-41 of stores supplied under contracts for which tenders were not called?

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruction) .-The answers supplied by the Chairman of the Railways Commis­sioners are:-

(a) Tenders are invited for most of the items of stores and materials which are in regular use by the Department. In other instances purchases are made under conditions which ensure competition, although they are not publicly advertised. In a number of cases in which there is only one known source of supply tenders are not invited, but supplies are obtained at prices mutually agreed upon.

(b) The estimated total cost of stores and materials obtained or to be obtained during the financial year 1940-41 under contracts or agreements other than those in which h'nderR were invited or quotations were obtained, and exclusive of sleepers obtained from Crown lands, and of coal, is approximately £490,000.

CHICORY MARKETING BOARD.

SALES AND BALANCE-SHEETS.

The Hon. C. P. GARTSIDE (South­Eastern Province) asked the Minister of Public Instruction-

( a) What tonnage of chicory has been sold by the Chicory Marketing Board from the 1939-40 crop, and what tonnage remains unsold?

( b) Will he lay on the table of the Library copies of the balance-sheets of tlie Board as at the end of the trading years 1937-38, 1938-39, and f939-40?

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruction).-The answers are:-

(a) It is considered that it would be pre­judicial to the operations of the Chicory Marketing Board to supply these particulars.

(b) Yes.

PUBLIC TRUSTEE BILL. Sir GEORGE' GOUDIE (Minister of

Public Works).-I move-That this Bill be now read a second time.

This measure is to confer additional powers upon the Public Trustee, and it may be divided into two parts. Clauses 1 to 5 confer on the Public Trustee powers which are already possessed by trustee companies. Clause 6 has been designed to give to the Public Trustee the right to administer estates' under £400 in value by filing an election instead of obtaining a grant of probate or adminis­tration. Similar powers are exercised by the Public Trustees in New Zealand, New South Wales, Queensland, Tasmania, and England. Clause 7, the last one in the ~easure, refers 'to people of u,nsound mind, and requires no explanation from me.

In the first part of the Bill certain sections of the Trustee Companies Act have been copied with verbal altera­tions to apply to the Public Trustee. It may be asked why these powers were not taken in the princiral Act. The explanation is that l\fr. Phillips, who is now the Public Trustee, and who was then advising the Government as to what powers it was desirable to give to the new office. did not realize that the Trustee Companies Act conferred on those com­panies privileges or powers which the Public Trustee would not possess. It was the desire of the Government that the Public Trustee should not have any powers which the companies did not have, and great pains were taken to see that as far as possible the Public Trustee should compete on level terms with private individuals and trustee companies. But it now appears that we have gone too far in this direction, and that the Public Trustee is placed at a ,disadvan­tage when his position is compared with that of a trustee company in regard to the matters dealt with in this Bill.

I think the position will become clear to honorable members if I deal in some detail with sub-clause (1) of clause 2. This is, in substance, section 5 of the Trustee Companies Act. It provides that if a man died leaving a will, but he had either not appointed an executor, or the executor named in the will had pre:.. deceased him, in which case a beneficiary

Public f15 OCTOBER, 1940.] Trustee Bill. 1049

under the will would be entitled to apply for letters of administration with the will annexed, such beneficiary may authorize the Public Trustee to apply for such ndministration. The Public Truc;;tf'f' would then stand in the shoes of the per­SOIl authorizing him, and become entitled to a grant, if the person giving him the authority Wl.lS BO entitled, unless anyone else lodged an application before he did so. A.lthough expressed in somew ha t different language, the right given to the Public Trustee is the same as that which the trustee companies possess. It seems scarcely necessary to argue that there is no reason why the Public Trustee should not be placed in exactly the same position, when authorized by a beneficiary, as a company would occupy. A.s matters stand at present, the l>ublic Trustee OHice has to do a lot of unnecessary work. For in­stunce, in Oi.le case in which the Public Trustee was asked to administer an (It:ltate by one of the persons entitled to apply for administration, he had to give notice to thirty-nine persons, asking for their consent to his application. Under the existing legislation, a company could have gone straight ahead, and when this Bill is passed, the Public Trustee will be able so to do.

Under sub-clause (2) of clause 2, simi­lar provision is made in the case of a person dying intestate. Anyone of the next of kin may authorize a company to apply, and the Bill provides that such a person call authorize the Public Trustee, who is then placed on a footing of equality with the other" next of kin. At present anyone of the next of kin is preferred to him, and clause 3 provides that sub-section (2) of section 11 of the principal Act, which gives such prefer­ence to anyone of the next of kin, is not to apply in a case where the Public Trustee is "authorized" to act. Here again all that has been done is to put the Public Trustee and companies on an equal footing. Sub-clause (1) of clause 3 deals with the position where a person dies testate, and his appointment of an executor or executors is effective. If a sole executor, or if all the executors authorize the Public Trustee, he may apply for probate in the same way as the executors could have done.

Sub-clause (2) of clause 3 provides similarly in a case where there is more than one executor, and some of them do

not join in the authority. In that case the Public Trustee may apply for probate with leave reserved to the other executor or executors to come in, or iointly with such executor or executors. The position under sub-clause (2) is exactly the same 111' in the case of a trustee company, but there is a slight alteration with regard to sub-clause (1). The Trustee Oompanies Act provides that, in this particular case, the company should apply for administra­tion with the will annexed. It has been thought desirable to make' the practice uniform in all cases where authority is given by an executor.

Olauses 4 and 5 give executors, adminis­trators, trustees, and certain other persons the right to delegate their powers and duties, either temporarily or entirely to the Public Trustee. A t present, such persons may delegate to a rompany. When one of thpse perSOIlS is stepping right out of office, he has to get the consent of the Court, but the temporary delegation may be carried out by an ordinary power of attorney, and the legislation is necessary only because there is a general principle of law that a trustee cannot delegate his powers. Olause 6 deals with the right of the Public Trustee to file an election. This is new in Victoria, but, as I have a lready stated, the Public Trustees in England, New Zealand, and three of tl .... four Australian States where there is a Public Trustee have this right.

Briefly stated, the position is that, in estates under £400, gross value, where the Public Trustee is satisfied that he could obtain a grant of probate or adminis­tration, he is not required to apply to the Court. He may file in the Court an election to administer. The object, of course, is to relieve the Public Trustee from the work involved in preparing a number of documents in a small estate. According to' a return furnished by the Public Trustee in June and J uly, h~ applied for a grant of administration in 22 estates, in which the total assets were less than £400, and, in thirteen of them, the assets were less than £100. In eases such as these, the commission payable is not sufficient to cover the cost of preparing the documents. Even when relieved from this burden, the time spent in the office would not be fully recompensed by the commission earned, but this cannot be

1050 Public rCOUNCIL.] Trustee Bill.

helped. Noone else is willing to under­take the administration of such estates, and the Public Trustee has to shoulder the burden. The object of this Bill is to make the burden lighter. The exercise of the power of election has been sur­rounded with various safeguards, which are not in existence in the other places where the right is exercised.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province).-The Bill will confer addi­tional powers on the Public Trustee, and, subject to one point which I shall mention, but which I do not oppose, I consider that the additional powers are warranted. The }'1:inister in charge of the Bill has stated that, not including clause 6, most of the clauses would confer on the Public Trustee powers given to trustee companies under the special Acts relating to them. Speaking generally, I think that is so, except that in sub-clause (1) of clause 3 there is, perhaps, a simpler method of obtaining probate than is at present prac­tised by trustee companies. That clause provides, not for the usual grant of administration with the will annexed, where an executor desires to hand over to the Public Trustee, but for a direct grant of probate. That, I think, is something new . Nevertheless, I do not see anything seriously wrong with it.

1 do not think I can add to what the Minister has said on clhuses 1 to 5 in­clusive. As to clause 6, a new method, and, perhaps, a new principle, in the administration of estates is raised. Under that clause, the Public Trustee may, on taking certain steps, obtain a right of administration of a de­ceased person's estate without applica­tion t.o the Court. That is undoubtedly novel. The en tire legal history of the admillistration of estates of deceased per­sons shows that since the Courts took control from the ecclesiastical authorities, application to the Court for the adminis­tration of an estate of a deceased person is necessary. In earlier days it was an obligation to apply to the Ordinary, an ecclesiastical officer who made grants of probate. Since the ecclesiastical juris­diction has been transferred to' the Courts-formerly in their ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and nowadays in probate .iurisdiction, although nobody troubles much about jurisdictions-it has been ne~(,S8ary to obtain a grant from a

Court to administer. In the main, that has been a very necessary precaution in connection with the recognition of wills as valid wills, and with the recognition of the applicant as a proper person to obtain probate of a will, or, in cases of the absence of a will or the renunciation by the executor, of the applicant as a proper person to obtain administration.

There must always be some authority to ensure that the estates of deceased persons are administered in accordance with the law, and that the grant is made to the persons authorized by law. By this clause, however, if it is agreed to, we shall trust the Public Trustee to the extent set forth in the clause, and, under its limitations, allow that he is the right person to administer an estate; and upon his executing what is called an election­which is a very peculiar word, but which really means a determination that he will administer the estate in accordance with clause 6-he can administer as though authorized by a grant from the Court. The grant, or the intervention of the Oourt, is disposed of in the first place. But as the Minister points out, there are certain safeguards, the first of which is in sub-clause (3), which states-

No election shall be filed . . .

that is, by the Public Trustee' to ad­minister-until-

(a) the expiration of a period of one month after the date of death; and

(b) the expiration of a period of fourteen days after the pUblication in a daily newspaper . . . of a notice of intention to file such election. . . .

If thE: Public Trustee has to wait a month before filing his election, it will give anyone who is interested an opportunity to oppose the Public Trustee's election, or to apply for a grant for himself or herself. The necessity for publication of the notice of election in a daily news­paper would specifically draw attention to the fact that the Public Trustee intends to administer the estate ('on­cerned, under what is called his election. Under the terms of sub-clause (5) of clause 6 the Public Trustee, within a month after the filing of the election, must publish in the Government Gazette a notice that he has made the election . The publication of the notice will be a small precaution, but publications in the

Pllbhc i i.") OCTOBER, 1940.J Tntstee Bill. 1051

(lvl:crnmellt O(Edte are not of much yuInc us publie llotices in the mutter of administration of estates. Sub-clause (6) of clause 6 contains a further safeguard in these words:-

~ot\\'ithstanding the filing of any SlH:it elCl'­

tion any person may apply to the Court for a grant of probate or adm~nis~ration (as thc case may be) and sueh appl1eatIOn may be gra.nted upon such terms and conditions as t~le Court thinks fit, and thereupon such electIOn shall be deemed to be revoked and superseded by such grant.

Notwithstanding the election, and even though the Public Trustee has given notice of it any person who is concerned in the estat~, and who considers that he is pre­judiced by the election in that he has a greater right than the Public Trustee to administer the estate, may submit his case to the Court, and the Court may grant him the right to administer the estate. Application to a Court may, of course, be expensive. The Public Trustee is autho­rized to make an election only where the estate does not exceed in gross value at t he time of election the amount of £400; therefore, the right of election is limited to what one can term small estates. The practical advantage might be relatively n~ry great in many small estates. Con­l'idernble difficulty and cost might arise if the Public Trustee were in all cases re­quired to apply to the Court for the right to administer a small estate. Take, for ('xample, a case in which the deceased left no will, and his next of kin were :fh·c sons. The Public Trustee, before npplying for the right to administer, might have to get the consent of the five sons or he might be in doubt as to whose ('OnS('ll ts he had to obtain. In such a case, the cost of application to the Court would be much greater than the filing of a simple election by the Public Trustee. The pro­cedure provided in clause 6 will save a relatively appreciable sum to the bene­ficiaries of small estates.

The Hon. W. J. BEcKETT.-What would be the effect of clause 6 if an estate, which the }lublic Trustee obtained the right to administer, proved later to be worth more than £400?

The lion. C. H. A. EAGER.-That eventuality appears to have been antici­pated, because sub-clause (1) of clause 6 provides that the .election of the Public Trustee is limited to estates the gross value of which, as estimated by the Public

Trustee at the time of election, does not exceed £400. The test is whether the Public Trustee estimates in good faith­and he would not act otherwise than in good faith-that the yalue of the estate at the time of the election does not exceed £400. Sup­pose that the Public Trustee estimated that an estate which consisted of 700 shares in a mining company valued at lOs. each was worth £350 at the time of the election, and that subsequently the shares increased in value to £10 each. The estate would then be worth £7,000, but in view of the provision in sub-clause (1) the estate would still come within the scope of sub-clause (1) of clause 6.

The Hon. A. M. FRAsER.-According to sub-clause (7) of clause 6, the Public Trustee must apply to the Court for a grant of probate or administration if the estate, after the filing of an election, is found to exceed the gross value of £600.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-That is so; but, in the first instance, the test is the estimate of value of the estate by the Public Trustee at the time of his election. The Minister in charge of the Bill stated that a provision similar to that contained in clause 6 is in operation in some of the other States of Australia and other parts of the world. I discussed the clause with Mr. Phillips, the Public Trustee, and informed him of several matters about which I was doubt­ful, but I felt satisfied after our conversa­tion that the proper safeguards had been provided in the Bill. The Public Trustee must act as an individual trustee in executing the trusts of a will, but, at the same time, he represents the State. There is no reaSOll to suppose that the present Public Trustee-or a future Trustee-would not act with perfect propriety. The additional power proposed to be given to the Public Trustee is not the sort of power that we could give to a private person. However, taking a con­servative view, as I consider I am bound to do in dealing with matters of thiR kind, I think this power can safely be given to the Public Trustee.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (Melbourne Prov£nce) .-The average layman would experience some difficulty in making up his mind on this measure if he did not have the assistance of an adequate tech­nical analysis of its provisions. Mr.

1052 Public rOOUNCIL.] Trustee Bill.

Eager's explanation of the Bill has re­solved any doubts I had. The Bill passed last session creating the office of Public Trustee redounds to the credit of the present Government, and all that this Bill does is to extend to a limited degree the power then given to the Public Trustee. Honorable members who have been placed in an embarrassing position as executors under wills will appreciate, as I do, the creation of the office of Public Trustee. Many years ago a member of the other House, long since deceased, and I were placed in such an embarrassing situation. We learned, after the death of an old lady, that we had been appointed her executors. Because of the peculiar phras~ ing of her will, technicalities arose which caused a great deal of trouble, and we were very pleased when our responsibility ended. If the Public Trustee Act had been in operation then we should· have been able to relieve ourselves of em­barrassment and, at the same time, act with propriety by applying to have the estate administered by the Public Trustee.

This Bill adopts the sound principle of cheapening the process of law. Many years ago a Bill which contained that prineiple would have met with opposition in this Chamber from legal members. I am glad to say that a more enlightened spirit prevails now. Legal members con­sider :first the public interest, when the House is dealing with a Bill designed to reduce the cost to the community of a process of law.

The Hon. A. E. MeDON ALD (S outh­Western Province).-I have examined the Bill, which deals with the ad­ministration of estates-a matter that comes before me every day in my professional capacity. When the Public Trustee Bill was passed last year I, as a practising solicitor, was surprised that the additional powers now proposed to be given to the Public Trustee were not in­cluded in that measu·re. His powers were then limited to such a degree that he could not efficiently carry out the inten­tions of Parliament as set forth in the Act. I am entirely in agreement with the unofficial Leader regarding clauses 2 to 5. hut there is one matter to which I de~ire to direct attention. It is often a difficulty, when dealing with small intes­tatr esta.tr.s, to obtain the necessary bonds uno bonosmen ensuring thflt thp. ~dminis­trator will carry out his duty and

distribute the estate according to law. In many cases, the estate must be put into the hands of a trustee company or a premium paid to an insurance company for the necessary bond. This Bill removes that difficulty by authorizing the Public Trustee to take charge of a small estate; therefore, the estate will be relieved of the expense caused by the obtaining of bonds. Clauses 2 to 5 will serve a useful purpose to the community by enabling the Public Trustee to render better serVIce.

Clause 6 contains a new principle, which ·is a departure from the practice and procedure of many years' standing in the administration of estates-that i~, by obtaining a grant of probate of a will or letters of administration of an intestate estate. Sometimes, where estates of great value are involved, the validity of the will is contested on one ground or various grounds. A similar situation arises in regard to small estates. It appears to me that the provisions of clause 6 do not protect adequately the position of bene:ficiaries of small estates or of those who desire to challenge the validity of a will affecting a small estate. Sub-clause (1) of the clause deals with the election by the Public Trustee to admini~­tel' intestate estates under a gross value of £400. But the point to which I am directing attention affects sub-clause (2) of clause 6, which relates to the :filing of an election by the Public Trustee to administer an estate the value of which is under £400, in a case where a will is left. The Public Trustee, after having advertised the various notices, would then :file the elec­tion and proceed to administer the estate, because under sub-clause (6) the :filing of the notice is tantamount to the granting of probate or administration. Although a person might desire to challenge the validity of a will on at least one of several grounds, it seems to me that the Public Trustee could proceed with the election and administer the estate. At least, there appears to be no provision in the Bill to prevent it.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE.-Does not sub­clause (6) meet the situation?

The Hon. A. E. McDONALD.-I do not think so. That sub-clause provides that notwithstanding the :filing of an election, any person may apply to the

Public [15 OCTOBER, 1940.1 Trustee Bill. 1053

Court for a grant of probate or admin­istration, as the case may be. Only cer­tain persons can apply for grants of probate, namely, those who are ap­pointed executors under a will, and those who apply for administration are the nearest next of kin. A person who is not the nearest next of kin has to eliminate the claim of the next nearest before his application for letters of administration can be granted. It may be that persons who have no right to apply either for probate or administration will wish to test the validity of a will in a small estate, and their interests are not, as far as I can judge, protected under this Bill. The procedure with a small estate at the pl'('sent time is that- application is made for probate, but that if any person wishes to contest the will in question he files a caveat in the office of the Master in E'quity. Subsequent procedure is laid down by the Administration and Probate Act and the rules of Oourt under that Act.

llo,wevel', I see a good deal of use in the cIa use to which I am directing my attention, insofar as expense that is necessarily involved now in connection with small estates will be considerably reduced, with the result that beneficiaries under a will or under an intestacy will receive greater benefits than has been the case hitherto. I do not think any one will object to that. In order to me~t the objection I have raised, it may be that the Bill could be amended to provide that when a notice is filed and a person proposes to test the validity of the wiTI, the Public Trustee should not exercise his power of election until such time as the Oourt deals with the matter.

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

committed. Olauses 1 to 5 were agreed to. Clause 6-(Election by Public Trust,ee

to administer estates under £400 in value, &c., &c.).

,The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province).-The question raised by Mr. McDonald is important, and I am unable to determine whether the Bill provides a solution of it. Under sub-clause (1) of the clause now before the Oommittee, the Pu blie Trustee may file an election only in a case where he is entitled to a grant of a(lministration. Under sub-

clause (2) he may file his election to take probate only when he is entitled to a grant of probate. Therefore, if any questions were raised as to whether he was entitled to such a grant~uch as in the ('ase cited by Mr. McDonald.-on the ground that a will was not really the will of the testator concerned, but was pro­cured by undue infiuen('e 01' some other improper means, the Public Trustee would, I suppose, say, in eifect, "That goes to the foundation of my authority, and if any of those grounds arc established I am not entitled to a grant." One would aSSU111C also that he would in such a case apply to the Court, although I . do not see in this Rill any pro­vision compelling him to do so. An­other possibility is that the probate rules concerning caveats and the provisions of the Act dealing with caveats may require that in all circumstances the procedure relating to applications to a Court should apply. I do not profess to state, however, that that is necessarily so.

The Hon. A. M. FRASER (M elbo1l/rnB }lorth Province). - I, too, regard the point raised by Mr. McDonald as im­portant. My recollection is that sections 51 and 52 of the Administration and Probate Act set out the procedure regarding caveats. With respect to sub­clauses (6) and (7) of clause 6, where an estate is of an estimated value of, say, £380, and five or six beneficiaries are concerned, even though one or more of those beneficiaries believed there was want of testamentary capacity on the part of the testator, or that one of the main beneficiaries had exercised undue in­fluence, it might be thought not worth whilp. to direct the attention of the Public Trustee to the matter. But perhaps, under sub-clause (7), there may be some saving grace. If the estate proved to be of a greater value than the amount estimated by the Public Trustee at thE' time of his election-say, more than £600 -I presume that under that sub-clause the Public Trustee would apply to the Court in the ordinary way by giving the usual notice of fourteen daYR. If he gave that notice, the opposing party would have the right to lodge a caveat. I foresee the same difficulty as was pointed out by Mr. McDonald, namely, that the Public Trustee makes up his mind whether or not he is entitled to a grant of probate.

1054 Public I COUNCILl Trustee Bill.

I fail to see on what ground beneficiaries would have the right to call the attention of the Public Trustee to the fact that the testator might not have had testamrntal'Y capacity. Such is the difficul~y tl~at has presented itself to me after havmg hstened to Mr. McDonald and the unofficial Leader. Sub-clause (6) appears to deal more or less with a matter that could not be determined upon an application. It is for the Public Trustee or some other person to apply for a grant of probate, and it may not deal with the substantive point as to whether a will was valid or whether the testator had a proper dispos­ing mind.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Supp6se that the Public Trustee applied on the basis that he was entitled to a grant of probate and it subsequently appeared th~t . the win was bogus. Would the PublIc Trustee be protected ~ His only autho­rity would be that he 'was entitled to the grant.

The Hon. A. ::tv1. FRASER.-Only yesterday a trustee company had to pay its own costs to the extent of £2,000.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE CMinister of Public Works). - The Public Trustee informs me that in cases of doubt the practice would be to confer with the Registrar of Probates before proceeding to file an election.

The Hon. A. M. FRASER.-It seems as if certain officials make a law unto them­selves.

The Hon .. A ... E. ~rCDONALD.-A caveat is lodged with the Registrar of Probates, who is a different person from the Public Trustee.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-Would the ::tvIinister consider an amendment to pro­vide that if any question of the validity of a win or of the right of the Public Trustee to make an application was raised, the latter should not file an election but should make an application to the Court in the usual way?

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE.-So far as the Public Trustee is concerned, that would prove rather difficult. It would represent a new system of dealing with estates.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-The Public Trustee might not object to the proposal. He might say, "I shall be only too glad, if a question is raised, to refer it to the Court."

'l'he HOll. H. H. OLNEY (.Ai elboltrne Xorfh Province).-vVhiIe there appears to be unanimity among the legal members of this Chamber, the lay members have not a comprehensive grip of the points that have been raised. vVouId it not be wise to report progress to enable further consideration to be given to the matter?

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE (Minister of Puhlic W Grks) .-1 do not profess to have a legal mind, and, after hearing the reasoning of the legal members of the House, I propose that progress be re­ported, to enable me to clear up the questions raised.

Progress was reported.

MELBOURNE (WIDENlNG OF STREETS) BILL.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE (Minister of Public Works).-I move-

That this Bill be now read a second time.

The Bill is for the purpose of enabling the Melbourne Oity Council to widen, in the course of time, the footways in cer­tain "Little" streets of .Melbourne, with­out having to pay undue compensation. Some time ago I was in Sydney when the Sydney City Oouncil was spending an enormous amount on widening and straig'htening certain streets. Up to that time it had spent £8,000,000, and the Town Olerk of Sydney informed me that the council would probably spend another £8,000,000 before the work was finished.

The Hon. VV. J. BECKETT. - The Sydney City Council will make a sub­stantial profit on it.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE. -It was clearing itself financially on the work, but what appealed to me was that in certain streets which were to be widened, recently erected buildings had been constructed to the proposed new alignment. The Sydney City Council had power to enforce its wishes, and similar power is given to the :Melbourne City Council by this Bill. The streets affected by the Bill are I~ittle Flinders-street, Little Collins-street, Little Bourke-street, and Little Lonsdale-street. Large business undertakings have been established in the little streets referred to, but the footways are only 4 feet wide. Where l'C'b1.lilding has been undertaken, the owners have erected the frontages to the proposed new alignment to enable the public to inspect their window dis­plays. For the Melbourne City Oonnril

Melbourne (Widening [15 OCTOBER, 1940.] of Streets) Bill. 1055

to undertake the widening of these streets holus bolus would involve enormous ex­penditure, but the method embodied in the Bill of gradual conformation to the council's requirements would not involve a large amount.

The Bill empowers the Melbourne City Council to compel any person erecting new premises in the little streets men­tioned to go back six feet from the exist­ing; kerbing. 'Vhen the streets. were originally constructed the narrow foot­way provided rna-de it extremely incon­venient for pp(le8trians. The Bill is based on provisiolls in the Sydney Oorporations Act of 1 $)::32. It provides that for the purpose of 1.\'i(lening any footway of any of the littl~ streets affected by the JI1f'asure, Ol any portion of such foot,vays, the city councj} may canse to be prepared a proposed new alignmf'nt of the boundary of the footway and the land abutting thereon, and may acquire, either by agreement or compulsorily from the owners, th€ land between the old align­mf'llt and the proposed new alignment. The proposed new alignment is to be a line 01' lines between points which lie wi thin a distance of six feet of the old alignment. There is great variation in the width of the footpaths in these little streets, some parts of the footpaths being­under four feet wide, while in other parts they are over five feet and even up to ten feet. The maximum . widening of ~ix feet is to permit as far as possible the provision of a regular width of footwny nine feet wide.

It would seem almost impossible to widen the roadway in. the "Little" strp.f'ts, and thf' one-way traffic by-law seems to be the best way of dealing with the traffic problem. In the nalTOW streets in Sydney where one-way traffic is in­sisted on, vehicles travel very rapidly, and one has to be wary at each inter­section to see that on€ is not run over. The pace of the traffic invariably is faster in one-way traffic streets in that city. While it is almost impossible to allow 'more room for traffic, it is possible to widen the footways to nine feet, in that way allowing pedestrians to traverse them with greater convenience.

The Bill provides that aftrr the council has given the naual notice relative to the aCC'juisition of land, it may lease any part '}f the land acquired for the l)Ul'POSe of

re-alignment to the person from whom the land is acquired, or the successor in title, for not more than ten years at a time, subject to whatever conditions the council determines. The lessee may erect a building of not more than one story, or other improvements, on the land. This is to enable the land to be used until the COlmcil is in a position to proceed with a complete section of the widening scheme. So that no unsightly temporary structure shall be erected, the material and drsign of the building will be subject to the council's approval, though the building nee(l not conform to building by-laws in force at the time. The annual r('utal must not exce€d 10 per cent. of the purchase price or compensation paid by the council for the land.

The compensation payable by the eouncil for any land between the old alignment and the proposed new ali,e:n­mf'llt is to be estimated, where the land at the date ou which th€ notice of making the new align­ment was published in the Government Gazette wa~ elrared of buildings and substantial improvements, as at such date. In thE> rase of land not cleared of buildings an(l substantial improvemellt~ when notice of making the new aligllnwnt was published in the .Government Gazelle, compensation is to be estimated either as at the date on which the land is after­wards cleared of buildings and substantial improvements, or as at the date 011 which the council gives notice to the persons entitl€d to sell the land that the land is required for the purposes of widening, whichever is the earlier.

Provision is made that if rebuilding is undertnkpn, the building must a but to the new alignment to the height of on£' floor, but thrn the owner can cantilrvcr the balanre of the building over the foot­path. . \ ~imilar provision is mndf' to enable a basement to be constructed to the oM alignment. The Melbourne City Council will he principally concerned with tlw ,ridcnlng of the footpath and with paying reasonable compensation for land a('qnir('cl for that purpose.

Thc HOll. .r. n. nISN,"~Y (111 elbonrne ltVest ]'rorill(,(,).-Who is to'make the \'alu~tion for compensation purposes W

The 1fe1bnnrnr City Oouncil made a poor iob of it whe11 dealing with a building

1056 Melbourne (Widening rOOUNCIL.l oj Streets) Bill.

at the corner of Swanston-street and Little Collins-street, and the ratepayers will have to foot the bill.

The Hon. G. J. TucKETT.-Olause 8 refers to the question of compensation.

The Hon. A. M. FRAsER.-CIl:j.use 8 sets out the method of making compensa­tion, but it does not show who will undei'­take the work where land is compulsorily acquired.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE.-In the case of land which is not vacant, compensation will be estimated as at the date on which the land is cleared of buildings and sub­stantial improvements. No price will be fixed until a person decides to rebuild, and then a valuation of the frontage up to the first story of the building will be esti­mated. I suppose compensation would be fixed by the usual method set out in the Local Government Act. The following is a brief description of the principal cIa uses of the Bill:-

Clause 3 gives power to the Melbourne City Council to widen any footway of Little Flinders-street, Little Collins-street, Little Bourke-street, and I.Jittle Lonsdale­street, or any portion of such footways, by causing a proposed ne"\v alignment of the boundary between the footway 0,1'

portion thereof and the land abutting thereon to be prepared, and by acquiring, by agreement or compulsorily, from owners of land so .abmtting any land between the old alignment and the pro­posed new alignment. Every pro,posed new alignment must be one or more straight lines connecting two points which lie within a distance of 6 feet from the old alignment.

Clause 4 provides for a plan showing the proposed. new alignment and the land proposed to be acquired to be kept in the (council's office and to be open for inspec­tion at all reasonable times, and for a copy of the plan to be lodged with the Registrar of Titles and the Registrar­General. A notice of making a proposed new alignment must be given to all owners of land affected thereby, and be published in the Government Gazette and two daily newspapers circulating in Mel­bourne. A notice to a land owner may be given by serving it personally or by prepaid letter to the person described in the rate book at the time as the owner ~

or to any person appearing from Titles Office records as the owner of the land. Proof of service by post is sufficient if it. is proved that the notice was addressed to the usual or last-kno'wn place of abode or business of the person and put into the post.

Clause ;) prohibits after publication of notice of the proposed new alignment the construction, reconstruction, or repair of any building or work on the land between the proposed new alignment and the old alignment, except that minor and not substantial repairs and improvements may be approved by the council to per­mit temporary use of the building or work. Clause 6 gives power to the coun­cil to lease to the owner from whom it was acquired, or his successor~ any land acquired for widening a footway for a term of not more than ten years at a time, the rental not to exceed 10 per cent. of the purchase price or compensation paid. The lessee may erect a one-story building or other improvements of materials and design that the council approves, and the council need not require the building to ~onform to building by-laws. Buildings and improvements erected by the lessee are to remain the property of the lessee and may be removed by him immediately upon or prior to the determination of the lease, but no compensation is payable in respect of any injury or damage aris­ing from entry by the council into posses­sion upon determination of the lease.

Clause 7 provides that land acquired for the widening of footways may be sub­ject to a reservation in favour of thp. owner of such of the following rights as the council determines, namely, a right to ownership, occupation, and use of any existing building, room, or basement so far as it is not less than a specified height or depth above or below the level of the footv\'ay; and a right to erect any build­ing, room, or basement at not less than a specified height or depth above or below the level of the footway, and to own, occupy, and use the same. This will r~ duce the amount of purchase price or compensation from what it would be if the allotments on which the buildings are situate had to be purchased and no power were given for portions of the new ibuildings to overlap between the new and old alignments.

Melbourne (Widening [15 OCTOBER, 1940.1 of Streets) Bill. 1057

Clause 8 fixes the date at which com­pensation payable for the land between the old aligilment and new alignment is to he estimated. In the case of land cleared of buildings and other substan­tial improvements when notice of making the proposed new alignment is published in the Government Gazette, compensa­tion will be estimated at the date of such publication. In the case of other land­that is, land which is not vacant-com­pensation will be estimated as at the date on which the land is cleared of buildings and substantial improvements, or as at the date on which the council gives notice to persons entitled to sell the land that it is required for widening the foot­way, whichever is the earlier. In esti­mating the amount of compensation pay­able for land acquired, the value of any right reserved to the owner as. to using above or below the land acqUlred will be taken into account, in addition to other matters required to be taken into accoun t in determining com pensa tion under the Local Government Act.

Olause 9 gives the council, subject to the approyal of the Governor in Council, power to make by-laws requiring or per­mitting buildings erected on land abutting on a new alignment to be cantilevered, so that the face from a prescribed height or minimum height above ground shall project to the old alignment or to a line prescribed not beyond the old alignment, and generally respecting the construction of the buildings; requiring the pulling down of buildings or works erected contrary to this legislation or the council's by-laws, and empowering the councilor a person authorized by the council to pull down, remove, or alter any buildings or works erected or being in breach of this legis­lation or the council's by-laws, and to sell the materials and apply the proceeds in reimbursing the expenses of pulling down, or otherwise to recover from the owner the expenses of pulling down, re­moval, or alteration. The Bill is, of course, rather an important one from the stand-point of the City of Melbourne, because the widening of the footways in these narrow streets is very desirable.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province) .-This Bill is a very useful advance in the legislation relating to the City of Melbourne. At first one might

think that the existing powers were suffi­cient to enable the streets to be widened; and they' would be sufficient if the Mel­bourne Oity Oouncil were in a position to widen them, or anyone of them, as a complete widening scheme. That, how­ever, would be very expensive. If, for example, the city council said, "We will take Little Collins-street and widen the whole of it from Spring-street to Spencer­street," or "a section of it between Swanston and Elizabeth streets," it would not at present, probably, be regarded as a reasona ble expenditure of the money of the ratepayers. Undoubtedly, there would be difficulty, if not impossibility, under the present statutory provisions, in the city council taking the project piecemeal, by widening a 22-ft. frontage to-day, and another frontage of 50 feet to-morrow. This Bill seems to recognize that that cannot be done under the present law and, therefore, it gives power, which is all summed up in clause 3, to "widen any footway or any portion thereof." The important words really are, "or any portion thereof."

The view of the Bill is tha t in the course of time-I do not think anyone can make an estimate of the time-these streets will be fully widened, and the desire of the Bill is simply that they shall be widened to the extent of another 9 feet, or thereabouts. The present standard width of the footpaths of Little Flinders­street, Little Collins-street, Little Bourke­street and Little Lonsdale-street is 4 ft. 6 in., the width of the whole of the street being, I think, 33 feet, or half a chain, comprising 24 feet of roadway and 4 ft. 6 in. of footpath on each side. But the width of the footpaths, in fact, varies greatly. In some portions of a particular street it goes down to only 3 ft. 10 in., and ill another portion it goes up to 10 feet or thereabouts. Merely by walking along any of these streets, one can see very great variations, often within a few yards, continually occurring in the width of the foot,path.

The purpose of the Bill is to establish in the course of years a new alignment, which will be a straight line. As I gather from the measurements set 'out in the Bill, apart from what has been said about it by the Minister, the desire is to have a footpath 9 feet wide on each side, instead of the present footpath of

1058 Melbourne ( Widening rOOUNOI1.1 of Streets) Bill.

4 ft. 6 in. The Melbourne Oity Oouncil is authorized by this Bill, as to any por­tion of the street, to acquire land for such a purpose, either by private agreement between itself and the owner, or compul­sorily against the will of the owner. If it is done by private agreement, an agreed amount of compensation is neces­sarily postulated. Under compulsory acquisi tion, the council will have to pay compensation, and there the compensa­tion provisions of the Local Government Act 1928 will apply. That, I think, answers Mr. J. H. Disney's question. It \s clear that the Bill itself does not provide expressly for compensation, al­though it assumes that compensation will be paid, and sets out one of the factors. Section fin of the Local Government Act of 1934 pl'ovides-

F'ol' section 508 of the principal Act there shall be substituted the following section:-

"508 (1) S'Ubject to the provisions of this Act or of any other Aet providing for the compulsory taking of land by the council of any municipality (including the City of Mel­hourne and the City of Geelong), the council )f sllch municipality may within the municipal iistrict, or with the consent of the Governor In Council in any other part of Victoria, take land compulsorily for the purpose of execut­ing any works or undertakings which it is by or under this or any other Act authorized to eXcclltp."

Then sub-section (2) provides-"Unless in any such other Act express pro­

vision is made with respect to the compulsory taking of land by any such municipality and compensation therefor, the provisions of divi­sions 1, 2, and 3 of this Part and the provisions of Part XL. shall with all necessary adapta­tions take effect with regard thereto."

Therefore, that section, which .specially ~ncludes the Oity of Melbourne, brings III Part XL. of the Local Government Act 1928. That part provides expressly for compensation, and how it is to be determined. I am pleased to see that in section 801, which is part of Part XL. of the Act, and which in my view will be applicable to compulsory taking under t~i~ Bill, there is the following pro­VIS]On:-

"There shall be considered in reduction oi all claims for compensation any and what en: hancement in value of any property of the claimant wherever situated has been or will be directly or indirectly caused, alHI whether any or what other immediate or proximate benefit has been gained by or will become avail-

. able to such cln,ima,nt by reason of the execu-The Han. C. H. A. Eager.

tion of any works with respect to which such claim for compensation is made or of any other works of which the said works form a part."

No doubt, the city council would bear that in mind. It seems to me that, in many of these compulsory acquisitions contemplated under the Act, the amount of enhancement in value by reason of the widening of the streets will either. reduce the compensation payable to the owner to a small sum, or it will be in excess of the mere value of the land taken over. For example, suppose that Little Collins-street, between Swanston-street and Elizabeth-street, is increased in width from 33 feet to 42 feet, and that the footpath on each side is increased in width from 4 ft. 6 in. to 9 feet; the Bill will still allow buildings from the first story upwards-to put it broadly-to come to the old alignment, and a basement to be built up to the old alignment, and all that will be taken from the owner will be a strip of land on the average 4 ft. 6. in. in width, on the ground level. The owner will lose that space, bllt he will have a frontage to a wonderfully different street-one with a 9-ft. footpath. That will enable the public, and his customers, to stand at ease to look through the windows and admire the goods for sale, whereas it is impossible to do so now. If anyone stops in Little Oollins-street to look at the shop windows, he is hustled and bustled, and it is an impossible situ a tion.

If that matter is properly managed by the city council-it is, in the vast majority of cases-the amount of compensation will not be so large as is generally supposed. Owners with claims for large amounts will try to get as much compensation as they can; but the section in the Local Goyernment Act providing for the set-off of enhancement in value by reason "of the works" is a reasonable provision, and I draw attention to it. It is not as clear a.s it might be that this section does apply. I should prefer to' see it expressly stated in the Bill that the provisions of Part XL. shan apply, or, at the risk of repetition, set forth again that owners shall only be entitled to compensation after first deducting from their claims any increase in the value of the property, due to the exerution of any works .

Melbourne (Widening l15 OCTOBER, 1940.] of Streets) Bill. 1059

:Mr. Fraser has interjected that sometimes it is difticnlt to know how much of the Local Government Act 1928, or various other Acts, will apply to the Bill. I think those provisions as to compensation will apply. If land is taken from the present owners for the purpose of widening these streets, no right will be conferred upon any of them to build over the existing street alignment; although, for example, an owner may say, "The provisions of the Act allow of an overhang to the old alignment." The old alignment referred to is that which is stated in the definition:-

"Old alignment" means the boundary as at the commencement of thifl. Act between the footway of a street and the land abutting thereon.

It was put to me by one who is deeply interested in this proposed legislation that, uncleI' the Bill, there will now be autho­rized an overhang to the kerb; but that is not so, and I hope it never will be so. I think it is wrong for any person who builds, unless under statutory authority, or under the provision of some proper by-law made within the authority of the Act, to be allo'wed, even though beyond a particular height, to go over the street alignment, particu­larly in narrow streets. That ques­tion leads me to mention a difficulty that may arise hereafter. At the present time, the 33 feet of width which consti­tutes these four streets severally is land of the Crown. It never has been in private ownership, because when Governor Bourke came here and brought RoddIe with him, they surveyed unalienated land of the Crown. It 'was unalienated land of the Crown because J aga J aga and his tribe, when they transferred it for a few tomahawks, gave a convey­ance which had no lawful effect. When Governor Bourke and surveyor RoddIe came.here, they simply reserved from sale the streets of Melbourne, and sold the blocks which fronted those streets, so that the land of the present streets, 33 feet in width, always has been and still is land of the Crown; but the additional 4 ft. 6 in., 01' whatever it may be, to be acquired under the Bill, will belong to the city council, so that we shall have a peculiar position which may lead to grave complexities, with 33 feet of the

street belonging to the Crown, and some part of the 9 feet of footpath on each side belonging to the city council. That is an important point, because the rights of the owner of the land, even though comprised in the street, are great, and the owner can stringently exercise them. The ownership of the streets hereafter will be vested partly in the Crown and partly in the Melbourne City Council.

Sir JOHN HARRIs.-Would lighting rights be affected if cantilever buildings were erected ~ Suppose I erected a nine­story building to-day and you erected one

. next year. Would I have the lighting right?

The Hon. 0. H. A. EAGER.-The Bill gives the council power to make by­laws-I think the Bill also allows it to be done by agreement-in which it may give the right to an owner to over hang a cer­tain distance above the level of the street, as far as the old alignment. I think it is a pity that that is so, but it appears to be made necessary by financial considerations. If we look along any of the streets, we shall have, under the Bill, when it is given full effect, a straight street 9 feet wider than now, but above it will be buildings coming out to the old alignment, and that will have a rather N eopolitan effect. In answer to the Leader of the Rouse, even though a person can build out to the old align­ment, and to that extent affect the light, he cannot go beyond the old alignment, and beyond what is at present the street. The Bill mentions 6 feet as the distance beyond the alignment to which the land to be acquired may be taken. All that that means, I think, is that not neces­sarily is it to be 6 feet, but it may go up to 6 feet. That is because of what I have already pointed out, namely, that some footpaths at present are only 3 ft. 10 in. wide, and in order to obtain a width of 9 feet, there would have to be nearly 6 feet taken. There is no mini­mum, because some footways are already 7 feet or 8 feet wide, and for them only 1 foot would be required. The Bill is properly elastic, because the council can acquire from within 6 feet of the old alignment, and that seems to cover every case.

1060 Melbourne ( Widening IOOUNOIL.1 of Streets) Bill.

There is provision for the lodging of plans, so that all owners-and, I sup­pose, other persons interested-may be informed, and may make any claims they wish, or do anything they think proper to preserve their rights. The Bill, I think, is to be regarded as an instalment of city improvement, and in palmier days when money is. more plentiful than at present for purposes of this kind, the City of Melbourne may go in for a more pre­tentious scheme, and attempt to widen the streets in a more general and universal way. At the present time, this is a very good instalment of power, and the city council and its traffic and build­ing regulations committee are, and have been for some time, in favour of the scheme, and strongly urge it. I have heard no opposition to it from any source. No doubt, it will be a costly scheme; but all schemes for reclaiming land and widening streets in great citIes are costly.

At the risk of repeating myself, I would urge those who are dealing with this matter to have regard to the enhance­ment provision in the Local Government Act which has been a source of protec­tion in the past, particularly to the Orown in the matter of compulsory tak­ings. As often as not, the compulsory taking of land, or a portion of a man's land, for a public purpose, so impro"e~ the value of the whole area, and of the remaining land of the owner, that the owner loses nothing. If an authority acquires a corner of a man's farm-say, an acre or two-to make a road through 'it, the owner often makes a big song about it being his best land and lodges a large claim. In the majority of cases, however, that improves his land, and, in the long run, he gains inst.ead of losing the few hundred pounds he claims.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (Melbourne Province).-With the concurrence of the Leader of the House, and of the Minister of Public Works, 'who is in charge of the Bill, I move-

Tha t the debate be now adjourned.

This measure vitally affects the interests of the Melbourne Oity Council, and Mr. McNamara and I, as representatives of

the Oity of Melbourne, have not been able to confer with the officers of the council on the Bill.

The motion for the adjournment of the debate was agreed to, and the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, October 29.

The sitting was suspended at 6.27 p.m. until 7.50 p.m.

TRANSPORT REGULATION (OOMPENSATION) BILL.

This Bill was received from the Assembly and, on the motion of the Hon. H. PYE (Honorary Minister), was read a first time.

PUBLIO SERVIOE BILL. Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public

Instruction).-I move-That this Bill be now read a second time.

First, I shall mention the Departments that at present come under the control of the Public Service Oommissioner in relation to matters affecting their per­sonnel. They are the Premier's, the Ohief Secretary's-excluding the Mental Hygiene Department-the Treasurer's, Education, Law, Lands !lnd Survey, Public Works, Mines, Public Health, Agriculture, I,abour, State Forests, and Water Supply. Honorable memb~rs will recollect that some time ago this Govern­ment introduced a measure to bring the last two Departments mentioned under the Public Service Oommissioner. I shall now enumerate a few of the Departments that do not come under that officer. They are the Oountry Roads Board, the Grain Elevators Board, the Transport Regula­tion Board, the State Electricity Oom­mission, and the Railway Department. The fUJlctions of the Oommissioner cover recruitment to and promotion in the Public Service, classification of positions, increments, internal examinations, .fixa­tion of salaries for officers of the Genf'ral Division, gratuities and allowances, tem­porary employment, appeals of officers, including teachers, with respect to pro­motions, &c., disc.ipline, staffing and efficient working of Departments, hours of duty, overtime, and travelling expellses.

U ncler the Bill the Governmen t pro­poses to create a Public Service Board of three to take the place of the Public

Public [15 OCTOBER, 1940.1 Service Bill. 1061

Service Commissioner. The duties of the office, which will not be extended, are set out in the Public Service Act, and the new Boaril will operate under its prin­ciples. I have already named the Departments that are controlled by the Public Service Commissioner in regard to their personnel; they will be trans­ferred to the direction of the Board. The Bill proposes to add to the Departments already specified the Mental Hygiene Department as well as temporary em­ployees under the Milk and Dairy Super­vision Act 1928 and the Vermin and Noxious Weeds Act 1928.

J 11 the past, I believe, Bills were pre­sented t.o Parliament with a view to creating a Public Service Board, but none was passed. This Government con­sidered the matter and decided to submit this measure, of which clause 4 is the kernel. That clause provides that the Board shall consist of three members. The chairman and one other member are to be appointed by the Governor in Oouncil, and the third member of the Board is to be elected by the Education Department, or the Mental Hygiene Department, or the General Division of the Public Service-each of which will have the right to elect its own representa­tive from either inside or outside the Department-whenever any question is being considered in relation to its par­ticular service. That will be done by a vote of all the members of the respective branches of the Service. The Bill pro­vides that the method of election shall be prescribed by regulation, but the Govern­ment has considered that all members of the Service should have the right to vote for their representative on the Board. The Board will consist of three persons, and when matters affecting the teaching service of the Education Department are being discussed, the elected representative of the teaching service will sit on the Board. A similar arrangement will be followed when matters of the Mental Hygiene Department or of the general hranch of the Public Service are being discussed. The respective representatives of those sections of the Service will take their place on the Board at the appro­priate time.

This is a machinery EilJ with many details. For example, jf an elerted repl'e­Flf>ntat:ive is sick, or for Rny reason i~ not

able to serve on the Board, he will have to be substituted by a deputy; therefore, it will be necessary, when the election of representatives takes place, that a deputy representative shall also be elected. One might easily say that the person gaining serond place at the poll should be th(> deputy. That, however, would not be quite right, because the man who gained second place when the votes for the elec­tion of the representative were countedr might not gain a majority of votes in a straight out election. There is provision in the Bill, therefore, that when a repre­sentative is to be elected, the election of a deputy representative shall also take place.

Some one may ask why the Mental Hygiene Department is brought within the scope of this legislation. The reason is that the Mental Hygiene Department represents a large proportion of the Public Service. Provision was made originally in the Lunaey Act for the employee.s of this Department to come under the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commissioner, and that condition still holds with regard to appointments under the Public Service Act. In the time of Dr. Jones, provision was made for the Director of Mental Hygiene to be appointed the Public Service Commis­sioner of the Mental Hygiene Depart­ment, thus taking that Department out of the control of the State Public Service Commissioner. In the same way as the Forests Commission and the Water Supply Department have been placed 'within the jurisdiction of the Public Service Com­missioner, so does this Bill propose to bring the Mental Hygiene Department under the control of the Public Service Board. That will not interfere in any way with the disc.ipline of ment~l patients, or with the right of the Director of Mental Hygiene to make representa­tions to the Pnblic Service Board. The Department will also have its represen­tative on the Board when matters affpC't­ing it are being rOllsicier(>(l.

Honorable members may wish to kno,,' the history of the legislation which re­sulted in the appointment of a single Public Servirc Commissioner. Originally, the Public Sel'yice was under t.he control of the political heads of the State Departments, and jn tho!'e days ther(> W1I8

1062 Public I COUNCIL.l Service Bill.

a considerable amount of political pat­ronage. The first legislation, passed in 1862, was designed to terminate an un­satisfactory condition which had de­veloped in this State since its separation from New South Wales in 1851. Under that Act, control of the Public Service was vested in the Governor in Council through individual Ministers and heads of Departments. A weakness in this Act, however, was that it contained no pro­vision for establishing a central co­ordinating and regulatory authority, and, in consequence, little improvement was effected.

A signal step in Public Service legis­Ip..tion was made in 1883 by the passing of a Public Service Act providing for cen­tralized control of the Public Service by a Board of three Commissioners appointed by the Governor in Council. Many of the main features of this legis­lation have, in fact, persevered, and in some form are contained in the present Public Service Act. In 1893, as part of a scheme of retrenchment which followed upon the land boom, legislation was passed providing for the retirement of the three Commissioners who comprised the Public Service Board, and the transfer of the functions of the Board to three Oommissioners of Audit, who were re­quired to discharge, without additional remuneration, the duties of the Public Service Board as well as their duties as Commissioners of Audit.

Although this arrangement did not work satisfactorily, it was continued until 1902, when, by fresh legislation, the con­trol of the Public Service was vested in a full-time single Public Service Commis­sioner. This system of control has been continued since 1902 up to the present -a period of 39 years-during which time four persons have held the office of Public Service Commissioner.

The difference in the size of the Public Service at present, compared with what it was in 1902, is shown from figures which I shall now quote: Excluding teachers, but including officers in the Mental Hygiene Departm"ent, there were 2,537 permanent officers in 1902, while in 1939 the number was 5,127, showing an increase of 2,590. In 1902 there were 959 temporary officers, while in 1939 the number was 2,379, an increase of 1,420.

Sir Jolt.n Harris

In the teaching service the number of teachers was 4,921 in 1902, as against 8,797 in 1939, an increase of 3,876. When these figures are combined, it is shown that the total number of officers, per­manent and temporary, including teachers, increased from 8,417 in 1902 to 16,303 in 1939, an increase of 7,886 dur­ing that period. Over the same period the population of the State increased from 1,207,000 to a figure approaching 2,000,000.

A great deal of social legislation of various kinds, passed" during the last twenty years, has resulted in the appointment of a number of Boards, which have had a regulatory effect on the com­munity. Boards are now an absolute necessity. Without them no Minister of the Crown could effectively supervise a modern Department, because much of the detailed work is relegated to them. The Chief Secretary, for example, would have no hope of doing his work without them, for he has in his Department 27 separate hranches. He could not possibly do all that the Opticians Board and the Medical Board, and other Boards administering various Acts have to do. No matter ho"", much the unofficial Leader may object l,Q

the appointment of Boards and Commis­sions, . he will find, if he ever undertakes to administer a public Department, that he cannot possibly cope with all the de­tailed work now delegated to Boards.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER. - It is mainly to the marketing Boards that I have expressed my objection.

Sir JOHN HARRIS.-Of course, it all depends on what particular Board we are discussing. Nowadays, the Minis­ter in charge of a Department supervises it, and acts as a sort of judicial head. In this B~n we are endeavouring to sub­stitute a Board for a single individual to control the Public Service. My own Department, with a personnel of nearly 9,000 has a Classification Board, which really sits as two Boards. It has the Chief Inspector of Primary Education as chairman, with an outside legal gentleman as an independent member, and a fir8t­class teacher as an elected member. That Classification Board decides the whole promotion list, and fixes the seniority of every individual person in the Depart­ment. Any officer who objects to its finding

Public [15 OCTOBER, 1940.J Service Bill. 1063

has the right of appeal to the Public Ser­vice Commissioner. No one in the Educa­tion Department can be dismissed by me or by the Director of Education. All we can do is to recommend, and, if the officer concerned appeals to the Public Service Commissioner, he must be heard, and the Commissioner must make a separate in­quiry. The recommendation of the Department is placed before the Com­missioner, and the final decision comes from him.

The Teachers' Union asked me, at a deputation, for the appointment of a tribunal to which its members could carry their complaints and troubles. They wanted some one over and above a single indi­vidual to make the final decision, and they wanted a say. The proposal in the Bill is not exactly what they wanted, but it is a step forward for them, because they will be able to eject from the teaching service a representative to sit on the Public Service Board whenever matters affertinp; them are being considered.

I have not, used the notes pre­pared for me on this Bill. They are, no douht, written very much b£ltter than my speech will read, bu.t possibly they are not quite as interesting, because a spoken speech is better than a written statement. I have told the House of the objective of the Government in bringing down this mea­sure. It is a very valuable contribution to our legislation, and will be exceedingly useful to the Public Service.

One feature of the Bill that I wish to accentuate is that the members of the Public Service, the teachers, and the officers of the :Mental Hygiene Depart­ment can elect t.heir representatives on this Board either from their own ranks inside the Service, or from outside. The emolu­ments of the members of the Board will be determined by the Governor in Council. A public servant elected to the Board will retain his superannuation rights, which will not be affected by any emoluments he gets as a member of the Board. As soon as he has finished his work on the Board, he will go back to his job. The permanent members of the Board are not to be allowed to do any but their own work, and are to be appointed by the Governor in Councn. It i~ proposed under the Bill to appoint. as t.he first cha.irman, the preflent Commis-

sioner, Mr. Harnetty, who has been a very valuable servant to the State, pos­sesses a great deal of vigor, and has all the work of the Service at his finger tips. The other member of the Board will be appointed by the Governor in Council. .

Sir WILLIAM ANGLISS.-Must he he a civil servant, or can be come from ont­side?

Sir JOHN HARRIS. - He can be appointed from outside. I have pointed out very plainly that the public servants generally, the officers of the Mental Hygiene Department, and the teach('l's also will have the right to appoint an outsider. The Teachers' Union could, if it wished, appoint its secretary, 111r. Thomas.

On the motion of the Hon. C. II. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province), tIle debate was adjourned until Tllc~day, Ortober 22.

CO:MP AIDES (SPECIAIJ INVESTIGATIONS) BILL.

The Hon. P. J. CLAREY (Doutta Galla Province) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to provide for the investigation of the affairs of certain companies, and ff'l'

other purposes. . The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and J'pn:; a

first time.

ADJOURNMENT. ~fARKETING OF PRIMARY PRODUCTS En L:

ENROLl\IENT OIr CHICORY PRODl'CERI'.

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Tnstl'uction).-(Ry Zeave.)-I move­

That the House, at its rising, adjourn mtil Tuesday, October 22.

The motion was agreed to Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Put-·Ec

Instruction).-I move-That the House do now adjourn.

The Hon. G. J. TUCKETT (Honorary Ministel').-My attention has been drawn to a Fitatement IDnde by Mr. Gart.f:iof" during the debate on Tuesday last on t.h(· Marketing of Primary Products Bill, and reported in H allsrtl'd on pages 95~ And 959 as follows :-

The Hon. C. P. GART~JDE.-I havE' rerelw,(' a letter from a perf'on who is interested iE the ('hicory industry. HE' says that he know" of four members· of one family-the hm;hl\lId,

1064 Adjournment. I . \ SSE}.IIBL Y·-I Land Tax Bill.

his wife, and son and daughter-each of whom has 2 acres under chicory. In that way they have become em'oIled as chicory producers. The father has given the members of his family a written intimation that each is interested as a share-farmer in a small area growing chicory. That document was presented to the electoral officer, who happened to know that they were in favour of the continuance of the Board, and they have had no difficulty in having their names placed on the roll. If it were known that persons who had done that sort of thing were opposed to a Board, I imagine there would be difficulty in their having their names enrolled. We shall make easy the gerrymandering of the rolls.

The Hon. G. J. TucKE'lT.-The proposal in clause 2 is designed to prevent that.

The Hon. C. P. GARTSIDE.-It will open up fresh avenues of corruption.

The Ron. G. J. TUCKETT.-It will not, in the opinion of the Chief Electoral Officer.

The Hon. C. P. GARTSIDE.-I think it will, because I know what is going on at present. People who are known to be against the con­tinuance of Boards will have their names enrolled at once.

That is a grave reflection on an officer occupying a high and responsible posit\Oll in the Public Service, who is well known to members for his honesty, integrity, and ability. I am sure that Mr. Gartside did not intend to reflect so seriously upon the Ohief Electoral Officer, and that he will be prepared to give the House an assurance to that effect.

The Hon. C. P. GARTSIDE (South­Eastern Province) .-1 have had my atten­tion directed by the Honorary Minister to the extract from Hansard which he has quoted. I can assure him and also the Chief Electoral Officer that I had no intention of making any direct reflection on the integrity of that official. I know Mr. Rowe personally, and I know some of his officers. I also know many officers in other branches of the Public Service, and I am sure that no member of the House holds the members of the Public Service of Victoria in higher esteem than I do. The Leader of the House said just now that it was better to make an extempore speech than to read one, even if the speaker was not very apt in the choice of words. I make a plea along those lines, because I am not as apt in the choice of words as I might be. The passage that has been quoted is an example of my choice of words not being as discreet as it migh t have been. The matter I wished to refer to was one of principle. I still maintain that the amendment of the Marketing of Primary Products Act has

opened the way to gerrymandering, but I do not say that the officers of the Depart­ment in question will be parties to it. I know they will not be, and I hope the House will accept my assurance.

The motion was agreed to.

The If o'Use adjourned at 8.31 p.m. until Tuesday, October 22.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.

Tuesday, October 15, 1940.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater) took the chair at 3.45 p.m., and read the prayer.

PUBLIC WORKS LOAN AND APPLICATION BILL (No.2).

Mr. MARTIN (Honorary Minister) presented a message from His Exellency the Governor recommending that an appropriation be made from the Consoli­dated Revenue for the purposes of a Bill "to authorize the raising of further money for public works and other pur­poses and to sanction the issue and appli­cation for such purposes of the money so raised, or of money in the State Loans Repayment Fund, and for other pur­poses."

A resolution in accordance with the recommendation was passed in Com­mittee and adopted by the House.

On the motion of Mr. MARTIN (Honorary Minister), the Bill was brought in and read a first time.

LAND TAX BILL. The House went into Committee of

Ways and Means.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and TreasUrer).-I move-

That subject to the Land Tax Acts there shall in the case of each owner of land be charged levied collected and paid for the use of His Majesty in aid of the Consolidated Revenue for the year ending on the thirty-first day of December One thousand nine hundred

TVays 115 OCTOBER, 1940.1 and Means. 1065

and forty-one a duty of land tax upon land for every ponnd of the' unimproved yalue thereof aH aH~eHsed under the sai!l Acts at such rate aR is hereinafter set forth (that is to say) :-

"Yhere the unimproved value or total un­improved value of all land or lands of a.ny owner exceeds Two hundred and fifty pounds the rate of tax payable thereon for the said year shall be: On every pound of itR unimpro\'ed value­One half-penny:

Provided that the minimum amount of tax payable for the said year by any taxpayer assessed under the Land Tax Acts shall be Two shillings and sixpence.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Is the proposed I'ate the same as that for last year?

Mr. A. A. DUNST AN.-There is no alteration.

The motion was agreed to, and the ]'esolution waR reported to the House and adopted.

Leave was given to Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premier and Treasurer) and Mr. Lind (Minister of Lands) to bring in a Bill to ca1'l'~Y out the resolution.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) brought in a Bill to declare the rate of land tax for the year ending the thirty-first day of December, One thousand nine hundred and forty-one, and moved that it be read a first time.

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

WAYS AND MEANS.

U NEM:PLOYMENT RELIEF T.kX . RATES.

The House went into Committee of Ways and Means.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I move-

That the rates of unemployment relief tax which shall pursuant to the Unemployment Relief Tax (Assessment) Act 1933 as amended by any Act be charged levied collected and paid for the use of His Majesty in aid of the Consolidated Revenue for the year ending on the thirtieth day of June One thousand nine hundred and forty-one are hereby declared to be as provided in the schedule to this resolution,

SCHEDULE.

The amount of tax shall be an amount calculated on the respective taxable incomes }'efcrred to in Column 1 of this Schedule at the respective rate8 mentioned in Column 2 of thiR Schedule opposite Ruch respec~ive taxable incomes, hut less fifteen per centum of tIll' amount so calculated.

Column 1.

If the taxable Income-

Is not less than £l05 but does not ~1111ount to £208 Is not less than £208 but does not exceed £312 Exceeds £312 but does not exceed £350 Exceeds £350 but does not exceed £400 Exceeds £400 but does not exceed £450 Exceeds £450 but does not exceed £500 Exceeds £500 but does not exceed £550 Exceeds £550 but does not exceed £600 Exceeds £600 but does not exceed £650 Exceeds £650 but does not exceed £700 Exceeds £700 but does not exceed £750 Exceeds £750 but does not exceed £800 Exceeds £800 but does not exceed £850 Exceeds £850 but does not exceed £900 Exceeds £900 but does not exceed £950 Exceeds £950 but does not exceed £1,000 Exceeds £1,000 but does not exceed £1,050 Exceeds £1,050 but does not exceed £1,100 Exceeds £1,100 but does not exceed £1,150 Exceeds £1,150 but does not exceed £1,200 Exceeds £1,200 but does not exceed £1,250 Exceeds £1,250 but does not exceed £1,300 Exceeds £1,300 but does not exceed £1,350

Column 2,

The rate per £100 payable on the taxable Income shall be--

Fifteen shillings and fivepence Nineteen shillings and fourpence Nineteen shillings and ninepence Twenty shillings and twopence Twenty shillings and elevenpence Twenty-one shillings and eightpence Twenty-two shillings and fivepence Twenty-three shillings and one penny Twenty-three shillings and ninepence Twenty-four shillings and sixpence Twenty-five shillings and threepence Twenty-six shillings Twenty-six shillinge and eightpence Twenty-seven shillings and fivepence Twenty-eight shillings and one penny Twenty-nine shillings Twenty-nine shillings and tenpence Thirty shillings and ninepence Thirty-one shillings and sevenpence Thirty-two shillings and fivepence Thirty-three shillings and fourpence Thirty-four shillings and twopence Thirty-five shillings

1066 Ways r ASSEMBLY·l and Means.

SCHEDULE--continued. -- ------ ------------------,-------

Column 1.

If the taxable Income-

Exceeds £1,350 but does not exceed £1,400 Exceeds £1,400 but does not exceed £1,450 Exceeds £1,4.50 but does not exceed £1,500 Exceeds £1,500 but does not exceed £1,5.50 Exceeds £1,550 but does not exceed £1,600 Exceeds £1,600 but does not exceed £1,650 Exceeds £1,650 but does not exceed £1,700 Exceeds £1,700 but does not exceed £1,750 Exceeds £1,750 but does not exceed £1,800 Exceeds £1,800. but does not exceed £1,850 Exceeds £1,850 but does not exceed £1,900 Ex(!oeds £1,900 but does not exceed £1,950 Exceeds £1,f)f)0 but does not exceed £2,000 Exceeds £2,000 but does not exceed £2,050 Exceeds £2,050 but does not exceed £2,100 Exceeds £2,100 but does not exceed £2,150 Exceeds £2,150 but does not exceed £2,200 "Exceeds £2,200 but does not exceed £2,250 Exceeds £2,250 but does not exceed £2,300 Exceed!! £2,300 but does not exceed £2,350 Exceeds £2,350 but does not exceed £2,400 Exceeds £2,400 but does not exceed £2,450 Exceeds £2,450 but does not exceed £2,500 Exceeds £2,500 but does not exceed £2,550 Exceeds £2,550 but does not exceed £2,600 Exceeds £2,600 but does not exceed £2,650 Exceeds £2,650 but does not exceed £2,700 Exceeds £2,700 but does not exceed £2,750 Exceeds £2,750 but does not exceed £2,800 Exceeds £2,800 but does not exceed £2,850 Exceeds £2,850 but does not exceed £2,900 Exceeds £2,900 but does not exceed £2,9.50 Exceeds £2,950 but does not exceed £3,000 Exceeds £3,000 ..

The motion is in keeping with the state­ment I made on the subject when present­ing the Budget. The unemployment relief tax rates will, if the motion is agreed to, show a reduction of 15 per cent .. as compared with the rates last year. As a rule, Ii greater reduction of taxation is demanded than the Govern­ment can make, but on this occasion, Clpparently, the Government is prepared to l'pduce the tax helow the rates some honorable members desire the Goyern­Ilwnt to impose. That question can be drhatrd at a latei' stage.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-This matter Wt\foi discussed during the Budget debate, when I think I was the first member to ~ubmit a suggestion that instead of re­ducing the tax, we shou](l seriously con­sider the wisdom of building up a r{.o.fIerYP fund by setting aside £250,000 or

Column 2.

The rate per £100 payable on the taxable income shall be-

---------------------Thirty-five shillings and tenpence Thirty-six shillings and ninepence Thirty-seven shillings and sevenpence Thirty-eight shillings and sixpence Thirty-nine shillings and fourpence Forty shillings and twopence Forty-one shillings and one penny Forty-one shillings and elevenpence Forty-two shillings and ninepence Forty-three shillings and eightpence Forty-follr shillings and sixpence Forty-five shillings and fivepence Forty-six shillings and twopence Forty-seven shillings and one penny Forty-eight shillings Forty-eight shillings and tcnpence Forty-nine shillings and ninepence Fifty shillings and sixpence Fifty-one shillings and fivepence Fifty-two shillings and threepence Fifty-three shillings and twopence Fifty-four shillings and threepence Fifty-five shillings and fivepenee Fifty-six shillings and sevenpence Fifty-seven shillings and ninepence Fifty-eight shillings and tenpence Sixty shillings and one penny Sixty-one shillings and twopence Sixty-two shillings and fourpence Sixty-three shillings and sixpence Sixty-four shillings and eightpence Sixty-five shillings and tenpence Sixty-six shillings and elevenpence Sixty-eight shillings and one penny

more from the Unemployment Relief Fund for use during a difficult period that might be approaching. Should I be in order, Mr. Chairman, in moving now for the deletion from the schedule of the words" but less fifteen per centum of the amount so calculated"?

The CH-AIRMAN (Mr. Coyle).--The honorable member would be in order in moving such an amendment, and it would be preferable for him to do s() now 1'3 ther than later.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­This matter could be more fittingly de­bated when the Bill foreshadowed by the motion is under consideration. This; resolution ,,·ould not commit the House in any way, but when the Bill is intro­duced honorable members may express their yiews. I agree with your intima­tion, }fr. fihHirmml, that the honorable

Ways 115 OCTOBER, 1940.] and Means. 1067

mClllbm' for ~ orthcotp would be in order in proceeding at this stage as he has indi­-cated, but the custom is to debate a mattcr such as has now arisen on the motion for the second reading of the Bill.

Mr. A. A. DL'NSTAN.-'Vhen honor­able members have agreed to this resolu­tion, they will have agreed to the general principle of the Bill.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-I do not want to embarrass either the Government or the Leader of the Opposition.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Y ou will not ~mbarrass me.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-You might €mbarrass the taxpayers!

Mr. OAIN.-I will not embarrass the taxpayers very much, and even if I do embarrass some, it will not be those in whom I am interested. In any case, the proposed reduction of the relief tax is worth only about 8s. to the average tax­pay<.>r. I do not wish to bring 'about a <lebatc immediately, but I feel that the Government's proposal is wrong in prin­ciple. 'Vhen many people are' receiving adequate incomes, the Government, in­stead of reducing taxation, should take the opportunity to build up a reserve fund for more stringent times.

}fr. TUNNEOLIFFE.-Do you propose all 11l(,l'casc of thr nnemployment relief tnx?

Mr. C:\IN.-K 0, 1. desil'r that the prop08ed reduction Hhould not be made. Howcver, I prefer that dis­cussion should he dcfe1'1'P<1 until the Bill iR beforr the lIouse. Perhaps I have sprung my proposal on the Oom­mittre, but I wish it to be understood that later I shall exercise my right to move to amend the relief tax schedule as it is now before the Oommittee. I do not intend that the Government should be deprived of the right to spend the tax; but I maintain that the existing rates should be maintained so as to build up a reserve, and that there should be safe­guards against the seizure of this fund for purposes other than unemployment Telief. The money must be used solely for the benefit of the unemployed. The Premier's broadcast speech in advocacy of the purchase of war-saving certificates, and numerous other public utterances and activities, are all aimed at in­ducing people to save their money. Here

is an opportunity for the Government to HU ve motley collected under statutory Huthority, and to reserve it for the special purpose for which it was raised, to be drawn upon for that sole purpose in the difficult times ahead of us. I trust the Government 'will give this matter further consideration before the Bill is introduced. I do not regard this subject from a political point of view. Unfortunately, however, the Government is being urged by newspapers and by people outside Parliament to wipe out the unemployment relief tax. It would be entirely wrong to do that.

The OHA1HMAN.-I desire to state tha t I should like an opportunity to in­vestigate the matter of the right of the honorable member for N orthcote to move his foreshadowed amendment, now or Jater. I have intimated that he would be in order in doing so, but, on reflection, it 5leems to me that such action on his part might amount to a proposal to increase taxation. I am not certain at the moment, without having had an opportunity to rxamine the matter, whether that would he so or not. So that the honorable mem­ber shall not lose his right to move at the present stage, I suggest that I should rrpol't progress.

}fr. CAIN.-Ill the cireumstances, I llsk the Premi~lr to agrC(! to progress hpi n~ reported.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) .-1 h~lve no objection to that (·om·RP. I presume, 1fr. Chairman, that the point you intend to investigate is whrther the honorable member for N orth­cotf> would be in order in submitting an amendment that would have the effect of increasing the burden of taxation on the people.

1\{r. OAIN.-In the circumstances, I prevent. the Government from decreasing the tax.

Mr. A .. A. DUNSTAN.-The measure whi('h tl)(! Government is about to sub-· mit will provide for reductions in the rates of unemployment relief taxation. You, }.Ifr. Ohairman, have intimated that you wish to satisfy yourself whether the honorable member would be in order in submjttillg' an amendment which would have the effect of increasing the rates of taxation provided for in the schedule now before the Oommittee ana to be embodied in the forthcoming Bill.

1068 Transport Regulation r ASSEMBLY·1 (Compensation) Bill.

Mr. EVERARD.-That would be, In

effect, a want of confidence motion. Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I am not

suggesting, for that reason, that the amendment should not be debated.

The OHAIRMAN.-To protect myself and this Oommittee from a wrong course of action, 1 wish to ascertain the pro­cedure to be followed. The honorable member for N orthcote has raised a novel point, and I would suggest that I should report progress.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­I should be sorry if, because of some parliamentary form or procedure, the honorable member for N orthcote was denied the opportunity to move any amendment he wished. I suggest to the Premier, therefore, that the simplest way out of the present difficulty would be for the debate to be adjourned. The Bill foreshadowed by the motion before the Chair does not even appear on to-day's Notice Paper; the entire matter has arisen unexpectedly. It is not reasonable that an important debate, such as will take place on the Bill, should be precipi­tated without honorable members having a reasonable opportunity to prepare them­selves.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I have already indicated that I have no objection to progress being reported. I should regret that a situation should arise whereby the honorable mem­ber for N orthcote would be denied the opportunity to move his amendment so that the House could record its decision on the matter.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-Wouid the Government treat an adverse vote on the amendment as a vote of want of confidence?

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The Govern­ment could deal with that matter if it arose. I am agreeable to progress being reported so that you, Mr. Ohairman, may examine the procedure.

Progress was reported.

TRANSPORT REGULATION (COMPENSATION) BILL.

The House went into Committee for lhe further consideration of this Bill.

Discussion was resumed of clause 2, providing for compensation to long­distance hauli~l's in consideration of sur­render of commercial goods vchlcle licences.

The CHAIRlVIAN (lVIr. Coyle).-Clause 2 is practically the Bill, because there are only two clauses, and clause 1 is the short title. As no amendments have­been circulated, and as the subject matter of the Bill was debated thoroughly on the second-reading motion, I appeal to honor­able members to confine their speeches t() the matters dealt with in clause 2, and to refrain from making second-reading speeches.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-As you have said, Mr. Chairman, clause 2 is the major part of the Bill, and I shall preface my remarks by quoting sub-clause (1) ami portion of sub-clause (2):-

(1) ~\lIy long distance hallliPI" may make application in the prescribed form to the Transport Regulation Board for compensation in consideration of the surrender by him of

... any commercial goods vehicle licence held \IY him under the Transport Hegulation Acts.

(2) (a) The :\1inister shall consult with the­Board on such application and shall report thereon to the Governor in Council.

(b) The Governor in Council, after consider­ing the report by the }\Iinister. may fix the amount of compensation (if any) to be paid in consideration of the surrender of su('h licence.

(c) In the fixation of compensation regard shall be had to-

(i) the economic advantage which would accrue by reason of the diversion of the carriage of goods to The Victorian Railways Commissioners in conse­quence of the surrender of 1;111 ('h. licence. . . .

Sub-paragraph (i) of paragraph (c) remind s me of the power which has been given the Government to retire a public­servant or railway officer on full super­annuation at the age of 60, if it can be shown that such retirement would be t() the economic advantage of the Publi(} Service or the Railway Department. I consider it necessary to emphasize that the first proposal made by the hauliel's t() the Government was that they should be­paid compensation based on an amount equivalent to id. a ton-mile of the­licensed tonnage. It appears now that any right that the hauliers would haye~ had in the assessment of compensation,. if their proposal had been adopted, has. disappeared, and that the fixing of rom­pensation is to be the duty of the Governor' in Council. I do not know whether th~ Government has made an arrangement with the hauliers that the basis of COID­

pen~ation sha 11 he that proposed by them original1y-Jd. a ton-mlle of the licensed-

Transport Regulation L 15 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Compensation) Bill. 1069

tonnage. The saving grace in the Govern­ment's proposal, so far as the hauliers .are concerned, is that in the event of a haulier not being satisfied with the .amount of compensation fixed by the Governor ill Council he may remain in business. If the amount of compensation ha:3ed OIL the hauliers' original pro­posal 'vas £500, and the Governor in Oouncil fixed the amount at £100, the haulier, by refusing to accept that latter ~um, could continue to hold his licence.

If hanliel's generally refused to accept the amount of compensation fixed by the Governor in Uouncil, the Government's scheme embodied in the Bill would be a complete failure. I do not suggest that that will happen, but it is a possibility. I want to direct attention to the problems of railway finance, particularly those associated with sub-paragraph (i) of paragraph (c) of sub-clause (2). A little more than twelve months ago, the Government sot up the State Economic Advisory Committee to deal with the financial position of the State. The com­mittee consisted of Professor D. B. Cop­land, who was chairman, Mr. A. T. Smithers, the Director of Finance, and Mr. R. V. S. McPherson, a prominent business man in the City of Melbourne. In the course of its investigations, the ~ommittee went into the question of rail­way finances and their effects on the Bud­get, and it made various recommenda­tions, among them the following:-

As a further means of establishing a greater degree of control over railway finances, we recommend that when the annual estimates ·of railway revenue and expenditure are pre­Hcnted to Parliament, more detailed informa­tion shoul!l ue provided. This will lead not <Jnly to greater 'l'reasury control, uut to more effecth'e parliamentary control, for Parlia­Inent must assume the final responsibility for all governmental expenditure. An amou;lt of £7,313,734 was appropriated by Parliament for thf' working expenses of all railway lines in I {)38·39 in tIle following manner. 'l'his is indicative of the procedure which has been followed for many years.

Then followed the statement which was submitted to Parliament. The report of the committee continued-That 28 pel' cent. of the total expenditure from Consolidated Revenue should be appropriated by Parliament in this summary manner is ~ndesirable, Accordingly, we recom'mend that III future years the estimates of the Railway Department be submitted to the Treasury, and incorporated as a subsidiary statement,

in the Budget papers on the basis of the pro forma statement in Appendix No.8, We fur­ther recommend that the analysis of working expenses in the Appropriation Act under the headings "Salaries and Wages, Materials, and Other," be further subdivided to show the estimated expenditure under each of the above headings in respect of each branch of the Railway Department.

In Appendix No.8 the committee set out the proposed method of submitting the financial statement. The committee sup­plied the following summary of its recommendations :-

(i) That special provision be made for the appointment of a Railways Commissioner experienced in finan­cial administration.

(ii) That capital expenditure be strictly limited to making up arrears of maintenance and to improvements in existing assets where it is con­sidered that the net gain will meet interest and sinking fund on the new debt incurred,

(iii) That a liaison officer between the Treasury and the railways be ap­pointed to keep the Treasurer in­formed from time to time upon the financial position of the railways, and in particular to report to the Treasurer upon recommendations as to capital expenditure, changes in the working expenses and clianges in freights.

(iv) That a detailed statement of the esti­mates of revenue and expenditure of the railways as set out in Ap­pendix No.8 be supplied to Parlia­ment, and incorporated as a subsidiary statement in the Budget papers.

(v) That the railways and road hauliers be given authority to agree upon freight rates and areas of opera­tion, such agreements to be ap­proved by the chairman of ~he Transport RegUlation Board who should also have power to fix economical rates and to determine areas of operation in the event of no agreement bein~ reached.

(vi) That the licence fee of all commercial vehicles be a minimum of lOs.

The licence fee at present is 5s. (vii) That road hauliers operating under

"discretionary licences" and com­peting with the railways, and owner-users operating beyond a specified distance, pay their present fees, subject to a minimum of lOs. as above, plus a fee to be assessed by the Transport Regulation Board on the basis of road use and the element of competition with the railways. In the case of road hauliers operating under " dis­cretionary licences," this fee should be assessed with due regard to in­creases in freight rates under the

1070 Transport Regulation rASSEMBLY.] (Compensation) Bill.

conditions stipulated in (a) above, and to changes in opera.ting costs of road hauliers. On "ehicle,; operating under owner-user licencef5 beyond a specified distance, and carrying general merchandise for sale'lower should be given to the Boar to assess the fee up to a maximum of threepence, but not less than one penuy per ton mite based on the aegregate of the weight of the vehICle unladen and of the weight of the loading it is capable of carrying.

(viii) That before making any permanent or supernumerary appointments in­volving either additional staff or replacements in existing staff, the Railways Commissioners be re­quired to obtain an Order in Coun­cil authorizing the number of ap­pointments involved.

(ix) That a Ministry of Transport be established and be made respon­sible to Parliament for the co­ordination of transport by road, rail, and tram.

(x) That a complete survey be made of all land vested in the "Railways Commissioners and not being used for railway purposes, with a view to its disposal where at present it is not being utilized to the greatest advantage.

Those recommendations followed a thorough investigation of the :finances of the Railway Department. So far as I know, the only recommendation that has been implemented is the suggestion that an officer quali:fied in :financial matters should be appointed a Railways Commis­sioner.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-That was only by accident.

Mr. CAIN.-I do not know whether it was or was not; but the latest appointee as Railways Commissioner, Mr. Wishart, has outstanding quali:fications to deal with questions of :finance.

1Ir. HYI~AND.-There was no accident about his appointment.

Mr. OAIN.-I do not know if a liaison officer has been appointed to act between the Rail way Departmen t and the Treasury, but probably Mr. Smithers would :fill that role. Nothing further has been done to implement the recommen­dations except the Bill now before the Committee. It has not been brought in as the result of the investigation of the State Economic Advisory Committee but at the request of the hauliers.

Mr. TFNNECLIFFE.-At the request of the hauliers who wish to sell out because they have no business.

Mr. CAIN.--It is doubtful whether any haulier may desire to sell out in the long run. It was suggested during the second-reading debate that the Bill was unUN'cssary because the rationing of petrol would put these people out of busi­ness. That may be an easy way to get rid of them, but it is not the fair way. The State Economic A.dvisory Committee suggested that the hauliers and the Rail­ways Commissioners should confer in order to formulate a reasonable scale of charges for the carriage of goods. I pre­sume that recommendation was based on the evidence submitted to the committee. I have had prepared a statement showing the average rate per ton for all goods carried to and from Melbourne. It dis­closes that the following rates are charged:-

Town. Road. Yarrawollga 40s. Rutherglen ~8s. 'Varragul 278.

naU. 19s.4d. 208. 14s.9d.

111'. TUNNEuLIFFE.-Are those rates charged for special goods ~

!-fr. OAIN.-They are the average rates per ton for all goods carried by hauliers and the railways. The reason for the disparity is that the railways carry road metal, manure, wheat, coal, and other low-grade commodities, whereas the hauliers transport wool, groceries, and other goods for which higher rates are charged-

Oruost 42s. 278. 6d. Yarram 38s. 22s. Yallourn 32R. 9s. ;')d.

The average charge of 9s. 5d. a tOll by the railways inclildes the cartage of briquettes, which are carried at 7s. a ton. None of that traffic is handled b.v road hau]jers.- That gives honorable members a picture of the actual posi­tion-

Horsham 42s. 25s.2d. ~ea. Lake (lOR. 28s.7d. Ouyen 66s. 8d. 418. 3d. Nhill fi6s. 238. 2d.

The figures give an idea of the problem. but they do not disclose its worst feature. The special contract system is the worst feature of our railway undertaking. Freight rates can be cut to a ridiculously low and unpayable level in competition with a road transport operator-the " all in ". method suggested by the honor­a.ble member for Brighton last week. With unlimited :financial backing from

Transport Regulation [15 OCTOBER, 1940.J (Compensation) Bill. 1071

the State, the Railway Department is in a position to cut the throats of the private road hauliers. Assuming that the Minister of Transport thinks that in its operation this Bill, together with assistance from the Oommonwealth Government in the matter of petrol rationing, will achieve the desired results, alld that a great majority of the long­distance hauliers will cease operating and will aecept reasonable compensation, the question must arise, "What action will the Goyernment take r('~arding ancillary users?"

In 1939 there were approximately 28,000 ancillary operators, and the num­ber is increasing every day. The figures I used last week are substantiated by the report of the State Economic Advisory Committee, in which reference is made to the case of an ancillary user operat.ing in Victoria and New South Wales who -pays £6,000 per annum under the New Routh Wales Transport Co-ordination Act. It is pointed out that this amount -is a consolidation of the statutor:y ton­mile tax assessed on the basis of the com­petitive mileage. The same owner-user vays transport fees of £4 5s. on a corres­ponding number of vehicles in Victoria, where approximately three times the New South Wales competiti ve mileage is operated. He has the right to travel over' all the roads in this State, and the extra fee for that purpose is 5s. for each vehicle. In addition, he pays motor registration in Victoria.

Mr. DrLT,oN.-He is licensed "as of right."

}fr. OAIN.-That is so. The State Economir Advisory Committee suggested that the fces for all commercial vehicles ~ho111d be raised to lOs. because there was a loss of between £8,000 and £10,000 pel' ann11111 on the administration of the Transport Regulation Board.

~rr. TUNNECLIFFE. - The ancillary ll~('r whose case you quoted does not cover tmything like the distance in New South ~Tal('s that he does in Victoria. If I renH'lllbcr rightly, the much maligned .J ohn I.allg was responsible for the intro­dudion of the New South Wales Trans­-port Co-ordination Acts.

.Mr. CAIN.-The honorable member is correct. In justification of the pro­posed increase in fees, it is pointed out in the eommittee's report that the

revenue and expenditure respectively were, in 1935, £14,996 and £17,410; in 1936, £14,878 an~ £23,170; in 1937, £15,625 and £27,326; in 1938, £15,987 and £27,470; and in 1939, £17,482 and £26,154. The total deficiency for those five years was £42,562. I repeat the most important question that occurs to me nt this juncture: "What does the :Minister propose to do with the ancillary users who have licences, as of right, for 59. per annum per vehicle to cart goods of any kind to and from anyone place to another ?"

1\11'. TUNNEcLIFFE.-Did the State Economic AdviElory Oommi ttee propose to raise the rate to lOs.?

1\!r. CAIN.-No. It suggested that there should be imposed a fee up to a maximum of 3d., but not less than one penny, per ton mile, based on tbe aggre­gate of the weight of the vehicle unladen and the weight of the loading it is capable of carrying. The owners of ancillary vehicles make no greater contribution to the cost of constructing and maintaining roads than does the average owner of a motor vehicle that is used solely for pleasure. If the owner-user, whose case I cited, covered in Victoria the distance covered in New South Wales, and was charged a fee on the same basis, he would pay approximately £25,000 a year. The importance of the subject I have raised is growing every day, and in view of the possibility of many long-distance hauliers abandoning their undertakings under the provisions of the Bill we are now con­sidering, and of appreciable additions to the ranks of ancillary users, the position of the latter should be determined by the Government. Noone could contend against a reasonable charge being im­posed on such persons. They are not entitled to use the roads without con­tributing towards their maintenance.

I do not favour the existing system of motor registration. I am only one of many people who claim. that there is no justification for a flat rate. The person who owns a pleasure vehicle may travel only 4,000 miles a year, using his car mainly at week-ends. Yet he is called upon to make the same contribution in respect of both motor registration and petrol tax as is the owner of a similar type of vehicle who travels, say, 25,000 or 30,000 miles a year. I do not sugg('st

1072 Transport Regulation r ASSEMBLY.1 (Compensation) Bill.

that the private motor owner should not pay for his pleasure, but his registration fee should be based on the annual mileage. The incidence of the present system is unfair and calls for revision. It is true that certain primary producers pay n concession rate; but how many others in country districts enjoy similar ad­vantages? Some of the owners of primary producers' motor cars live in the metropolitan area. When we see a luxurious Rolls-Royce or an 8-cylinder Buick with a primary producers' disc, the probability is that the owner lives in Lansell-rond, Toorak. Even those farmers who obtain the reduced rate of registra­tion pay almost the same fee as the com­mercial traveller who covers many more miles a year.

Mr. W. DUNsToNE.-The farmers also contribu~e, indirectly, through the petrol tax.

ltfr. OAIN.-That is so; but, un­fortunately, the State does not receive half of that revenue back again.

Mr·. TUNNEcLIFFE.-What does the honorable member propose to do about the ancillary users?

Mr. OAIN.-I do not suggest that the Bill should be rejected, although it is of an unsatisfactory character.

Mr. HOLLW.AY.-You wish to ascertain what is the real transport policy of the Governmen t ?

Mr. OAIN.-Yes, and I believe the honorable member is also anxious to know it. I do not seek a statement of the Government's transport policy in a complete form. I desire to learn whether the Government proposes to provide pro­tection to the community generally in respect of the operations of the great mass of ancillary users.

Mr. DILLON (Essendon).-If clause 2 does not represent the heart of the Bill, it should do so. JUdging by the Minister's explanation, and reading into his second-reading speech what I think he wic;:hed to ('on~ey, I think the clause in question should really embrace the scheme of compensation agrc>ed upon between the Minister and the transport operators.

Mr. REID.-Oan you not give us infor­mation on that point?

Mr. DILLON.-I have already im­parted certain information, which I now intend to amplify. During the second­reading debate, I pointed out that the

arrangement was of a dennite character. It will be remembered that the Minister of Transport said he had received two Ylsits from representatives of the road operators. The first proposal advanced on behalf of those operators was to cost the Government £220,000, but the Min­istrr contrnded that the price was too high. He added, in effect, "Reconsider the matter; get down to tin tacks, ana then come and see me again." The repre­sentatives of the operators complied with that suggestion and returned later with a different proposal, based on their fur­ther knowledge of the Minister's inten­tions, and on a review of the scheme generally. They suggested, in effect, that the Government should agree to allow the men yoluntarily to surrender their licences, and that compensation should be paid-the exact ngure stated being £110,OOO-calculated on a basis of a half­penny per. ton of the licensed tonnage of each operator for a period of two years.

:Mr. MULLENs.-N 0 matter whether or not the haulier had operated to the extent of that licensed tonnage ~

Mr. DILLON.-The average operator would have carried more.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-If an operator had run his trucks empty, would he still be entitled to compensation?

~fr. DILLON.-If any of thom do run empty trucks, the figures given by the· _Minister must have been wrong. The Minister, as well as every membel· interested in the problem, is aware that the average transport opel'ntol' did not carry merely the tonnage shmvn on his licenC'f'. Although he may have travelled empty orcasionally, his gros . .;; tonnage exceeded the amount set out in tho licence. Irresprctivf' of the tonnagr rarried, a definite al'rangC'ment was made on the part of the operators cOllcrl'ned, the Minister of Transport, and the Trans­port Regulation Board. At the confer­ence the Minister asked that 41 signed agreement be submitted to him. A sub­committee representing the hauliers visited each interested party and asked to see his licence, which set out the weekly tonnage to be carried. The sub-committee then assessed what each haulier should receive as compensation if he voluntarily surrendered his licence, and went so fa I· as to hand each man a slip showing the

Transport Regulation [15 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Oompensation) Bill. 1073

amount he would be entitled to under the arrangement arrived at. Each haulier then signed the document, which is now in the possession of the Minister. I agree with the honorable member for N orthcote that the clause might provide 3 method whereby the Government could drive a hard bargain. The honorable m('mber supported his statement by say­ing' that tIl(' Railway Department was the (·hid offewlPr ill the rate reduction war. The keen ('ompetition between the hauliers and the Railway Department has resulted in the introduction of this Bill. Goodness knows what the freight war has cost the Railway Department and the haulier in recent years, but the haulier has had such a bad time that he is pre­JHll'rd to surrender his licence.

~rr. 1IrLLENs.-You are aware that while the Railway Department carried manure and other low freight goods, the hauliers carried whisky and other high freight goods?

Mr. DILLON.-Without discussing t.hat sub.iect under the clause, I invite any honorable member who considers that the hauliers carried only high freight goods to visit Edgar's depot in Swanston-street, Carlton. He would there notice that hauliers carry low freight goods includ­ing- cement, manure, barbed wire, and even blue metal. I appreciate the oppor­tunity given me to correct what is a. p:en('ral misunderstanding as to the class of goods carried by road transport. N atnrally, the hauliers secure as much of the high freight as they can, and carry the low grade freight only because in­~ufficient goods of the other class arc offer­ing. The question of compensation was fnlly considered by the Minister, the Transport Regulation Board, and repre­sentatives of the hauliers concerned and au agreement was reached. ,-. Mr. HOLLWAY.-Was there anything m the agreement that no haulier was to be bought out unless all other hauliers in the district in which he was operating were also willing to sell their licences?

Mr. DILLON.-I shall deal presently with that aspect. The agreement h~s been departed from. Instead of the hauliers surrendering their licences and receiving compensation at the amount agreed upon, another method of computa­tion has been adopted. First, each man

must write a letter to the Transport Regulation Board agreeing that he win voluntarily surrender his licence. Secondly, each must get from the Board-after the Board has conferred with the :Minister and the Minis­ter has conferred with the Governor in Council, and so on-the amount of compensation offered, and then each must determine whether or not he will accept the amount of compensation, if any, to be given.

lfr. HOLLWAY.-I do not like the sOllnd of the words, "if any."

Mr. DILLON.-The position was ex­plained by the Premier, who said the men will have the privilege of voluntarily sur­rendering their licences; and the Premier guaranteed that the Government would issue licences to those who did not ElUl'­

render. He added that the Government would stand or fall by the voluntary method of licence cancellation. The hauliers can take it from the Premier that they are running no risk; the only question they must determine is whether they will accept the amount of compensa­tion offered. Surely the Minister is aware that the men will not seek or demand more than the bargain already agreed upon. They expect to keep to their side of the contract; but the Government, as the representative of the Railway De­partment, is seeking to drive a hard bar­gain. That is not fair, and while the situation may be as outlined by the hon­orable member for N orthcote, I trust that this Committee will not allow the Govern­ment to take an unfair advantage of the hauliers concerned.

Mr. MULLENs.-If the haulier is not satisfied and refuses to accept the amount of compensation offered, will he be allowed to continue operating?

Mr. DILLON.-Yes. The Bill pro­vides the Government with a method of bargaining on something already agreed upon. I ask the Minister to give a more definite explanation of the clause, with particular reference to the method of computation of compensation. The only statement made by the Minister on this clause up to the present is as follows:-

Sub-clause ( 1 ) of clause 2 provides for application by any long-distance haul:er to the Transport Regulation Board for compen­sation in consideration of ·che 8nrrellder by him of any commercial goods vehicle licence.

1074 TransJXYl't Regulation rASSEMBLY.11I (Oompensation) Bill.

Paragraph (a) of sub-clause (2) specifies that the Minister shall consult with the Board in regard to each application and subsequently report thereon to the Governor in Council. Paragraph (b) provides that the Go,'ernor in Council is to fix the amount of compellsation­if any-to be paid in each instance of sur· render after considering. the report by the Minister. Paragraph (c) scts out in detail the various factors to be taken into considera­tion in assessing compensation.

I particularly stress paragraph (c), which refers to factors to be taken into consideration in assessing compensation. That refers to the compensation, as already agreed upon. The Minister, or the transport Board, is to be given the privilege of bargaining with the opera­tors, whereas the amount of cOclJ.pensation to be received has been not only assessed but also agreed to by both parties. Surely the Committee will not allow even this popular Government to take advantage of a generous majority to drive a bargain after it has already arrived at an agree­ment with the people concerned!

Mr. MULLENs.-I am a trifle hazy about the agreement. Who were the par­ties to it ~

Mr. DILLON.-The operators con­cerned, on the one hand; the Minister of Transport and the Transport Regulation Board on the other.

Mr. REID.-Who was in the centre~ Mr. DILLON.-Unfortunately, I was

not there, otherwise I might have been able to drive R better bargain for the hauliers.

Mr. CAIN.-What a wonderful bargain it was for the Government-it was easy money!

Mr. DILLON.-The Minister has already emphasized what a. wonderful bargain the Government made, but still hp is not satisfied. He wants that extra pound of flesh from men who already have been nearly driven to the Bankruptcy Court. I. am sure the Oommittee does not eXfect the ~Hnister of Transport to be hard with the hauliers. The Government has a wonderful opportunity, a chance of a lifetime, whereby" it can obtain the surrender of the licences, not compul­sorily but by the voluntary aot of the hauliers concerned, at a rate of com­pensation already agreed upon. I agree with the method of adjustment adopted by the Premier. I have not heard it sug­~ested during the debate-although the Premier thought it had been said-that

. all the compensation was to be handed to an unknown person for allocation by a method unknown to the Premier. When the Premier stated that the Government desired to treat with the individual operator, I, by interjection, agreed with him. Surely the only method whereby the haulier will receive his compensation cheque will be for each individual man to produce his licence and sign for it. I t1'ust that the Government will not allow an agent to receive commission out of the compensation. I invite the Minister to state the method he proposes to adopt in assessing the compensation to be paid. Will he agree to pay on the tonnage car­ried, as the basis of the transaction, or on the amount of tonnage granted by the Board~

The Minister has said that the revenue received by each operator, and the profit ea·rned from the carriage of goods under licence over a set period, will be taken into consideration. The honorable mem­ber for N orthcote has already shown how little profit there has been in the business in the last two year~. If the Government is going to pay compensation on the amount of profit made, either by the Railway Department or by the road operator, it will not have to pay very much. Irrespective of the method adopted by the Minister, so long as the compensa­tion to be paid is the amount of £110,000 agreed on, I shall not take exception to it, but I shall want an assurance that the Minister is not going to use this Bill as a means of bargaining. I do not want him to be able to say, " We are legally entitled to offer you only £100, whereas you should receive £400." Paragraph 3 is the kernel of the sub-clause. It pro­vides that if the operators on ·a particular route are not unanimous and will not all surrender their licences, the Government will not accept the surrender of any licence.

I shall reiterate a statement I made on that point in the course of the second-reading debate. In the £rst place, 80 per cent. of the hauliers have signed the document. Seven of them have since sought to withdraw, and the reason for their desire to withdraw was given by the honorable member for N orthcote just now. No doubt, the seven who want to withdraw, plus the 20 per cent. who did not sign, see in this proposed legislation

Transport Regulation [15 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Oompensation) Bill. 1075

the possibility not only of 80 per cent. of thr hauliers going off the roads, but also of an adjustment of freight rates between the 20 per cent. who are left and the Railways Commissioners. I hav(> suggested, and I repeat, that what will happen will be this: The Railway Depart­ment will derive, as a direct result of this legislation, an increase in revenue of at least £500,000 a year-I say "at least" advisedly-which will mean that the Department will have that additional sum with which to fight the 20 per cent. of hauliers who are left on the roads.

as a result of the passing of the Bill, surely he will have practically a complete monopoly. I do not know of any business man who, if he had an SO per cent. monopoly, would not think he could do as he liked. If it would be a good bargain, and the Minister has not denied that it would be, to buy 80 per cent. of the busi­neSb, what need is there to worry about the other 20 per cent. ?

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-The 20 per cent. of hauliers might do all the business in future.

Mr. MULLENs.-There may not be any Mr. DILLON.-They are to be increase in revenue if the ancillary user limited in the tonnage they can carry jumps in. to the same as they c'arried in

Mr. DILLON.-The ancillary user 1934. The Transport Regulation Board was included in the original Bill only officials, who man the roads fairly well after it had been sent to another place, -and, as a matter of fact, a little following months of debate in this House. too well-will in future be able to confine The Bill came back from there with the ,their offensive to 20 pel' cent. of the two-ton operator eliminated and the an- present hauliers, and I venture to predict cilIary user put in his place. For 30 that the 20 per cent. will not have many hours we debated the amendment made opportunities to travel too fast or to over­by the other House, and the, then Minis- load their vehicles. I believe, however: ter of Railways, who is now the Prime that there will not be 20 per cent. of Minister of Australia, accepted it, and operators left on the roads, but perhaps thi8 House fell into line. The position only 10 per cent., and that they will have of the ancillary user has never yet been an oPDortunity of changing from low­adequately debated in this House. When grade freight haulage to high-grade I referred to the ancillary user in freight haulage. In other words, they my second-reading speech, the Minis- will do what the original operators should ter of Transport interjected, "He have done, and what all our transport has no rights." If that is so, he legislation should aim at inducing them is not entitled to compensation, and to do; that is, they will haul the urgent that should simplify the task of dealinp; and perishable goods that need to be with him. I believe that the ancillary carried quickly. That has always been user will take portion of the revenue th'~ my idea. railways should receive, because, with I have not at any time thought that th(' the passing of this legislation, there will road.operator would handle all the freight, hr more ancillary users. but 1f only 10 per cent. of the hauliers

I suggest to the Minister, quite seri- are left on the roads, they will be auto­onsly, that if one, two, t.hree 01' four matically assured of the high-gradC', operators on any route should volunteer perishable goods on which high to go out of business~ he should rush the freight rates can be collected. When chance of putting them out of business. a haulier, irrespective of what his I believe that, if he would indicate quite mates may want to do, volunteers to dearly the policy of the Railway Depart- surrender his licence, the Minister should ment to the remaining 20 per cent., and be sure that he does not get out of would extend to them the chance under the Minister's office until he has signed this proposed legislation of asking for his name to the necessary document. Such compensation within a given period, a' a surrender would be good business for large number of them would voluntarily the Railway Department, and I want th(' offer to surrender their licences. Inde- :Minister to give an assurance that he will pendently of that, if he obtains an 80 take advantage of the legislation as much

cent. monopoly of the goods haulage as possible, and forget sub-clause (3) of

1076 Transport Regulation rL\~SEMBLY·l (Oompensation) Bill.

clause 2. It would, ill fact, be advisable to eliminate that sub-clause, the proviso to which reads:-

Provided that if any other long distance haulier holds a commercial goods vehicle licence to operate on the same route or routes or in the same, area. the surrender of such licence shall not be accepted and such compensa.tion shall not be paid as aforesaid unless such other long distance haulier has applied for compen­sation under this section in consideration of the surrender of his licence and has notified the Board that he is satisfied with the amount of compensation fixed under the last preceding sub-section.

One man, among a number of operators in a particular district, could, under that provision, prevent the realization of the desires of this Parliament. I put it to the Minister that that would be bad business. If one operator out of five will voluntarily surrender his licence, it will be good business to allow him to do so, and if three or four out of five offer to surrender, it will be still better busi­ness to acce'Rt their offers. The Premier named a number of places where, he said,

. operators would still be running. I asked him by interjection how many licences the list represented. He did not tell me, and I suppose he had not the informa­tion. From memory, I should say that the number of routes covered by the list of towns that he read would not be more than ten or twelve. The list of towns was a large one, Qut there would not be many operators. He read the names of towns like Gisborne and Bendigo, which are on the same route. He also mentioned N arbethong, where there is no railway, and where the licence would, therefore, not be surrendered in any case. I appeal to the Minister to make a definite state­ment. Whether any amendments will be moved will depend on his response to that request. I suggest to him that it is most unfair to break a bargain, and that it is unwise not to take 80 per cent. of 'the business when it is offered.

Mr. HYLAND (Minister of Transport). -The honorable member for N orthcote advocated the substitution of a petrol tax for the motor registration fees now levied, and he suggested that that would be a more equitable way of charging operators, for the use of the l'oads. Personally, I should not be willing to trust the Com­monwealth Government to collect the tax for the State Government. The Oom­monwealth Government grabs too much

out of the petrol tax now. The State receives only 3d. out of lld. It is diffi­cult to estimate how much the State would receive if it allowed the Common­wealth to collect registration fees. What we have we intend to hold, very definitely, and we shall resist any proposal that might ena~le the Commonwealth Govern­ment to take anything from the State. All the States have adopted the method of charging registration fees, because they prefer to collect their own money rather than allow the Commonwealth to do it for them.

The honorable member for N orthcote and the honorable member for Essendon mentioned the ancillary road users. I realize, as most honorable members do, that there is something wrong with the legislation as it affects the ancillary users. When the original Bill left this House for another place, there was nothing in it about the ancillary user, but that provision was inserted in another place and accepted later by this House. Certain particulars came under my notice the other day; I shall not mention the name of the operator, but only the town from which the firm operates. Here are the particu­lars as furnished to me:-

On the 6th of September a motor truck owned by ----, of Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, was checked at Benalla. The operators are storekeepers at Wagga Wagga, and the vehicle concerned is registered and licensed both in New South Wales and Vic­toria. Motor registration fees and other re­quirements under Motor Car Acts legislation can be taken as being comparable in both States. Upon investigation, however, it was found that under the New South Wales Trans­port (Co-ordination) Act 1931 the firm had obtained a permit to operate a trip from Albury to Wagga, a distance of 78 miles, at a fee of 3d. per ton-mile or part thereof upon the unladen weight of the vehicle and the load the vehicle was capable of carrying. The un­laden weight of the vehicle was 3 ton 16 cwt. and the load capacity 8 ton. The total upon which the tax was paid was, therefore, 11 ton 16 cwt. For 78 miles at 3d. per ton-mile, as stated above, the total fee for this one journey was £11 4s.

By comparison the same vehicle could operate anywhere in the State of Victoria, and, irrespective of route or mileage run, the only fee paid under transport legislation would be the ordinary fee for a licence "as of right," namely, 5s. per annum.

Incidentally, in this particular case, six separate offences against the Transport Regu­lation Acts were disclosed. Some of these offences were under section 39 of the Trans­port Regulation Act 1933, relating to

\

Transport Regulation [15 OCTOBER, 1940. J (Compensation) Bill. 1077

of driving, and others were breaches of pro­visions of a Victorian Wages Board determma­tion.

Very considerable difficulty is experienced, however, with interstate operators in proving offences of this kind. In fact, in view of the remoteness of the address of the owner, pro­('eedings of any 1dnd are particularly difficult against interstate operators.

That bears out what has been said time and time again about the ancillary user.

1fr. HOLLWAY.-Are you in favour of t }1(1 New South Wales system for the an('illary user?

~Ir. HYLAND.-N ot wholly. I am ill favour of confining him to given l'outes.

111'. HOLLWAY.-Are you in favour of a tax of 3d. per ton-mile?

.Jlr. HYLAND.-The Government has ~aid that it will not introduce any such system. I am a member of the Oabinet, awl the honorable member knows that what the Oabinet decides is the Govern­ment's policy. I have been investigating tbp matter for some time, in conjullction with the Transport Regulation Board, in Ull pndeavour to submit for the con­~id('1'ation of the Oabinet proposals fo1' amendments of the Act. That i~ t.he usual procedure. It is custom­ary to investigate all the facts with­in one's own knowledge, and the facts Hupplied by deputations and obtainable from other sources, and then to submit a statement to the Oabinet with a view to the preparation of amending legislation.

Mr. OAIN.-Does it not seem that these people should operate for a certain dis­tance, making a further contribution to the State if they exceed that distance?

Mr. HYLAND.-That suggestion has been advanced by many organizations. The hauliers who submitted the petition proposed that there should be a limit as to what should be carried. It is recog­nized that certain commodities should be conveyed by road. It would be ridiculous if a van of household furniture from a metropolitan suburb was unloaded at the Spencer-street railway station and then the furniture was put into another fur­niture van at Yarram, or some other dis­tant place. Various primary products !'hould be transported by road.

~fr. OAIN.-You would not class dried , fruit from Mildura as a product that

'wuld be carted by road? SeRsion 1940.-[47]

Mr. HYLA.ND.-No, and that is ·transported by rail. I have been asked to state the policy of the Government in relation to the ancillary haulier. I shall submit certain proposals to Oabinet.

Mr. OAIN.-Your policy changed after you left the Railway Department.

Mr. HYLAND.-It did not. I have made a complete study of this question, and I have a knowledge of the procedure adopted by the railways and the Trans­port Regulation Board. I shall place my ideas before Cabinet, which will decide the policy relating to ancillary operators. The honorable member for Essendon asserted that if we did not put all hauliers out of business, nothing would be gained by those who were left, and that if one haulier out of four or five on a given route offered to sell out, his offer should be accepted. That would not be fair to the taxpayers. The honorable member admitted that hauliers were carting stone, manure, and other goods at low charges, but thev could not do so for one half­penny a ton mile, as charged by the railways.. They would prefer the goods which commanded higher rates, which the honorable member for Essendon men­tioned, and it is reasonable to assume that if two hauliers out of five on a particular route were bought out, those remaining would carry only -the high-class goods, leaving the railways to transport manure, road metal, and other low grade material. All of these hauliers should be brought into the scheme so that the position in any town would be definite. The state­ment has been made that there was an agreement among the operators, the Transport Regulation Board, and myself, on the basis of a settlement of £110,000, but a definite agreement was not made. I could not commit the Govcrnm('nt to the payment of £110,000.

Mr. O,\.IN.-Although you thought it was a good bargain.

Mr. HYLAND.-Yes. The propoRal was for the compulsory acquisition of all licences, including those of the 20 per cent. who refused to sign the petition. In my second-reading speech I mentioned that from the time the petition was signed different men wished to withdraw from it. Some men located at Gee]ong signed the petition, and then ther~ was a request that the proposal should not

1078 Transport Regulation r ASSEMBLY. 1 (Compensation) Bill.

apply to places within 50 miles of Mel­bourne. The hauliers at Geelong who had signed the petition wanted to wi.th­draw their assent. A list of names \vas submitted by an organization of hauliel's that did not want to come into the pro­posal at all. These people could not make up their minds.

Mr. OAIN.-YOU had an opportunity to make up their minds for them.

number of signatories wished to with­draw. The representatives of certain hauliers stated-

We, the undersigned Victorian Road Hauliers', agreed to the following Lasis of distribution of the compensation money sug­gested in the submission of 'even date to the ?\.Jinister of Transport:-

( 1) £10 for every ton licensed to be carried in anyone week irrespective of distance carried.

(2) One-third of one penny for every ton mile licensed to be carried in a period of two years.

Mr. HYLAND.-Yes. In the petition appears the suggestion to which objection is taken by the honorable member for· That was their suggestion. In another Essendon. It says- instance they asked for one halfpenny

The Government to provide the aggregate for every ton mile. With the vast ton­sum of approximately £110,000 as compensa- nages handled, there is a tremendous tion. difference between one-third of a penny

We have agreed to a basis for the distribu- and one halfpenny a ton. Their request tion of this amount. continued-

There is qtrong objection to that pro­posal.

Compensation to be nllJwed on totlll tonllage prescribed in licences irrespective of class of goods carried. . . . .

Owners to retain their rolling stock. In arranging a plan for distribution of com­

pensation WE: have realized the difficulty of for­mulating a basis which will give exact pa rity of compensation to every road haulie!.'. .

'Ve have suggested a total figure wl1iclJ, in our opinion, would be reasonable to the hauliers though small compared with the value of goods traffic which would revert back to the railways.

Another memorandum sets out how they proposed to allot the money-namely, £10 a ton-on one basis. The Government could not permit them to handle the money. No Government would hand over £110,000 of the taxpayers' money to these people and say, "Do what you liKe with the money."

Mr. DILLON.-I agree with that.

Mr. HYLAND.-I could not make an agreement with these people for several ;'easons, but principally because I had no authority from the Treasurer to agree to any amount.

Mr. OAIN.-The Government ~hould have agreed to the amount of £110,000, and should have reserved the right to dis­tribute the money.

Mr. HYLAND.-The Government could have agreed to the amount of £110,000, and could have forced all hauliers to accept the proposal. After the petition had heen signed, a certain

(3) Any operator whose quota under the formula is less than Five hundred pounds shall receive in addition an amount equivalent to half the differ­ence between his quota and Five hundred pounds.

(4) Any operator whose quota under the formula exceeds Two thousand pounds shall forego half the amount in ex­cess of Two thousand pounds.

Mr. CAIN.-They exhibited a co­operative spirit by· that proposal?

Mr. HYLAND.-Yes'; but 20 per cent. of the hauliers would nO,t agree to it. I emphasize that there was no agree­ment to pay these people £110,000. In the first instance, they mentioned an amount of £250,000, and that was re­duced to £200,000. The Transport Regulation Board was asked to investi­gate the proposal, and it said that, if any limit were placed on it, in one year it would amount to £65,000, and in two years it would be £130,000. During the negotiations, at least five different ideas were submitted.

Mr. DILLoN.-Was mention made of one halfpenny a ton mile for a year?

Mr. HYLAND.-Yes. I have a state­ment signed by Mr. H. J. Fraser, of Bendigo, Mr. H. Smart, and Mr. Law­rence. I have mentioned that, in the first place they asked to be given £10 for every ton licensed to be carried in 'any week; their second proposition was' one-third of a penny for every ton mile.

Mr. DILLON.-You did not agree to that?

1.'ransport Regulation [15 OCTOBER, 1940.J (Oompensation) Bill. 1079

Mr. HYLAND. - I did not. The documents I have read show how hard it was to do anything, be­cause the various parties had different ideas as to who should receive the money, and what amount should be paid as compensation. The honorable member for Essendon also suggested that some person might be paid a commission. We could not agree to that. The only fair and reasonable way to deal with this matter is on a voluntary basis. That is the reason for the Bill. We desire to treat these people reasonably, and the railways will reap the benefit.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Surely, if 80 per cent. of those concerned desire something to be done, that should be authority to do it.

:Mr. HYLAND.-In the first instance, 80 per cent. of the hauliers agreed to the scheme, but, later, some withdrew. The matter was complicated by references to places within a 50-mile radius of Mel­bourne.

Mr. DILLoN.-Those who signed the petition should have been made to stand to their signatures.

:1fr. HYLAND. - Certain ha ulierEl thought the proposal applied to all places, and hauliers operating to Geelong signed the petition in the first instance. When it was suggested that the scheme should not apply within a radius of 50 miles from Melbourne, those people withdrew their assent.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-Was the final position 80 per cent. for and 20 per cent. against?

Mr. HYLAND.-No. Some of them are still changing their minds. The basis of one halfpenny a ton mile will be considered along with the other matters set out in the Bill. As a number who originally signed the petition have with­drawn their names, the amount now will not be £110,000 on the basis of the voluntary surrender of licences.

Mr. HOLLWAY (Rallarat).-I do not wish to delay consideration of the Bill, but with the honorable member for N orthcote and the honorable member for Essendon I feel that the Government has been unfortunate.

Mr. McKENzIE.-The Government has lost a golden opportunity?

Mr. HOLLWAY.-Yes. The matter with which it had to deal was important, and these people at one stage apparently were substantially in agreement. Through some misunderstanding, the agreement lapsed, and the Bill' was introduced. The Minister of Transport will agree with me that the part of the Bill relating to the fixation of compensation is not satis­factory. The measure provides that the Minister shall consult with the Board on the application of a long-distance haulier, and then report to the Governor in Council. Subsequently the Governor in Council may, I understand, fix the amount of compensation. Paragraph (b) of sub-clause (2) includes, after the words" the amount of compensation," the words "(if any)." It S(l('ms to be a pious hope that any compensation will be fixed. Paragraph (c) of the same sub­clause sets out many points to which regard is to be had in the fixation of compensation; in other words, the road haulier has not the faintest idea of the compensation to be paid to him until he makes an application.

Mr. HYLAND.-In the meantime he will carryon.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-The haulier knows that if he makes an application for the surrender of his licence he admits to the Transport Regulation Board that his service is not essential.

Mr. HYLAND .. -Already 80 per cent. of the hauliers have signed a document and admitted that, according to your words.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-An operator will apply in the dark, and he win not know what compensation will be offered to him. The Railway Department's advocate­Mr. Kelly-will say to that haulier, " You were prepared to give up your licence."

Mr. CAIN.-Are you not assuming that the man is not satisfied with the amount of compensation offered?

Mr. HOLLWAY.-Yes. Then he will apply for a licence, but when his appli­cation is being heard Mr. Kelly will point out that he was prepared to sell his service, but that he had not been offered enough. That fact will affect the Board. The :1finister has a mysterious. transport policy that he will not reveal to us. Of course, we know that it must be good, but really we do not know enough a bout

1080 Transport Regulation r ASSEJ\1:BL Y.1 (Oompensation) Bill.

it to judge it. The Minister should have announced in the Bill that the Govern­ment proposed to compensate at a certain rate hauliers who surrendered their licences, and he should have said whether the amount was !d. or a third of a penny per ton-mile. The honorable gentleman must have considered a possible basis of compensation during all the months that this subject has been under discussion. He should have taken the Oommittee into his confidence and told us that he proposed a form of compensation at a specific rate. Then we should have known what we were discussing.

Mr. McKENzIE.-So would the hauliers have known.

Mr. OAIN.-The honorable member for Ballarat- should not forget that his pro­posal has political difficulties, whereas the the Bill has none.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-I do not know that the Bill should have any political sig­nificance.

Mr. IIYLAND.-It should not have any. Mr. OAIN.-But the Government should

have a policy. Mr. OAM:ERoN.-Each case should be

cOllsidered on its merits.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-It is all very well for the honorable member for Kara Kara and Borung to say that the case of each haulier should be considered on its merits.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Coyle).-That point was thrashed out on the discussion of the motion for the second reading of the Bill.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-It is also all very well for an honorable member to say that a separate scale should be laid down for each operator, but I do not believe in that idea. We should say what we intend to do and not agree to all the points raised in paragraph (c) of sub-clause (2) of clause 2. The basis of compensation should be something which could be dis­cussed. I take it that the honorable mem­ber for Kara Kara and Borung means that the scale of compensation should be determined by the merits of each case; but that procedure would open the way to fraud. I do not suggest that there would be any fraud, but that the adoption of such an idea would at least open the way to dissension and injustice.

11r. OAIK.-There would also be a good deal of third degree employed by the Transport Regulation Board.

lv11'. HOLLWAY.-I was coming to tha t. The next weakness of the Bill is sub-clause (3), through which the Minis­ter says, in effect, that he will not buy out any of the road hauliers in a par­ticular district unless he can buy them all out. That seems to me, as it does to the honorable member for N orthcote, to be bad business. If the Minister of Trans­port can purchase any road haulier's business at a reasonable price, it is his bounden duty to do so, but instead he proposes to make confusion worse con­founded. Suppose that in a certain area all the road hauliers are prepared to be bought out. That means that road com­petit,ion with the Railway Department will be completely eliminated. Then the Rail:vays Oommissioners, in pursuance of their policy, will increase their freight rates in that locality, no doubt, to what they should have been all through. There may be another town the same dis­tance from Melbourne where one road operator ont of half a dozen is not willing to sell out. Because the Minister has tied himself up under the proviso to sub-clause (3) he will not be able to eliminate thp. other five hauliers, and so all six will continue. That means that the Railway Department will be compelled to carry freights to that town at a substantial loss.

Mr. OAIN.-The Railways Oommis­sioners will make the competition fiercer, and all the hauliel's will be glad to sell out.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-The immediate effect will be a difference in the ex­periences of two towns. In the one the road hauliers will have seen the light and will have withdrawn, but in the other the hauliel's will not have withdrawn, and two different freight rates will be em­ployed.

Mr. HYLAND.-That applies all over "the State.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-I take it that the Minister of Transport is trying to im­prove the conditions, but instead he is accentuating the difficulties.

Mr. OAIN.-There are towns 150 miles away from Melbourne that have lower freights than those 100 miles from the capital.

Transport Regulation /1;) OCTOBER, 1D40 . .I (Compensation) Bill. 1081

}'fr. HOI,LW .. :\ Y.-In addition, in the 011(' town differrnt. people have different freight rates. The whole thing is illogical. These conditions have caused the bankruptcy of many hauliers, and they also made it necessary to wipe off £30,000,000 from the railway accounts some years ago. The Bill is not satis­factory, and the Government should agree to delete the proviso to sub-clause (3), which seems to have no practical value, and may hold up the legislation. When the measure is being considered by the Legislative Council the Govern­ment should make clear the rate of com­pensation to be paid. If the rate pro­posed were fair I could see no great objection to the measure. The honorable gentlrman has adopted a wobbly policy. He has not been prepared to say that if 80 per rent. of the ha uliers were ready to go out of business on a voluntary basis the Government would compel the others to discontinue also.

Mr. IIYLAxD.-Would you support such a proposal?

Mr. HOLLWAY.-What my policy is is neither here nor there. I wish to know the honorable gentleman's policy. lIe is not prepared to adopt such an idea, or to disclose to the Oommittee a basis of compensation. He seems to suggest t.hat every road haulier will be treated differently.

"1fr. C~\IN.·-In a word, the Minister is a creature of circumstances.

Mr. HOLLWA.Y.-Yes. Instead of improving the anomalous and ridiculous position of the road and railway freights he will make it worse.

Mr. OAIN.-I do not think that IS

possible. Mr. HOLLWAY.-I think it could be

worse, and nobody is better fitted than the :M:inister to make it worse. I do not rega!'d the Bill with any degree of satis­factIOn. The most pleasing feature of the debate has been the speech delivered by the honorable member for N orthcote. If he, and the honorable member for Essen­don, could get together we should have a satisfactory Bill.

The clause was agreed to. The Bill was reported to the House

~ithout .a~endment, and passed through Its remammg stages.

IXDr-STRIAL LIFE ASSURANOE BILL.

l/[r. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary).-I move-

That this Bill be now read a second tillle.

This is a Bill to make provision with respect to industrial life assurance busi­lle~s and for other purposes. In the year 1938 it was my privilege to introduce the first specific legislation relating to the conduct of the business of industrial life assurance ever enacted in this State. The business of industrial life assurance is of great importance to the community, par­ticularly wage earners. This may be shown by some statistics of the business. In the veal' 1938-the most recent for which a~curate statistics are available-801,000 policies were issued in Victoria. The premiums amounted to more than £2,000,000 in that year, and the total ntlne of assurance amounted to £36,000,000. The average amount of each policy was only £45. It has been found necessary in other countries to regulate industrial life assurance, and legislation is in force in .Great Britaill, Northern Ireland, Eire, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and, to some ex­ten t, in Queensland.

This Bill is presented for the purpose of giving effect to a number of reCOlll­mendations made by the Royal Oommis­sion on Industrial Life Assurance of 1938. Soon after the report of that Commis­sion was issued, the Government intro­dllced, and Parliament enacted, the In­dustrial Life Assurance Act 1938, which embodied the recommendations of the Oommission upon paid-up policies awl surrender values. At that time, national insurance appeared to be imminent, and there was urgent need· for protecting many thousands of policy holders who might otherwise have lost rights if they had become contributors to national in­surance. For that reason, the Act of 1938, as an urgent measure, was limited in its scope. This Bill covers the more im­portant recommendations of .the Roval Commission which were not dealt ~ith in the Act of 1938. In t.he drafting of the Bill, it has been found preferable to give effect to the recommendations of the Oom­mission by methods which do not strictly follow the wording of the recommenda­tions. The spirit of the recommendations

1082 I ndustr ial Life r ASSEMBL Y·l Assurance Bill.

hHS, ho·wever, been preserved and given effect to. Because of these changes, which might seem to be variations of the recommendations, the Bill has been sub­mitted to members of the Royal Oommis­sion, who have expressed agreement with it. The work of the Commission has been supplemented by much time and thought given to the drafting of the Bill, and the members of the Commission have collaborated in this" work. It is confi­dentlv believed that it will give general satisf"action and mark an advance in life assurance legislation.

r shall now give a brief survey of the clauses. Olause 1 is the short title, con­struction and citation. Olause 2 defines "participating policy" as one under which the eompany agrees to pay to the policy holder a share of the eompany's surplus in addition to the sum assured. Such policies are sometimes referred to aR "wit h profits" or "with bonuses" policies. Olause 3 prohibits the company from a voiding a policy by reason of any incorrect or untrue statement made in a proposa 1 filled in by an agent unless the untrue statement was in fact made by the proponent to such agent, and the burden of proof lies on the company. The Hoyal Commission found that an agent's success and remuneration depended upon his capacity to acquire new business, and that he used all his powers of persuasion when canvassing. Evidence was also found of certain agents inducing prospective policy holders to sign proposals in blank, and when such proposals were filled in, dis­pute~ arose as to the accuracy of particu­lars supplied by the policy holder or written by the agent.

Sub-clausp (1) of clause 4 requires the company to end.orse on every policy eer­tain particulars of the policy which are of vital concern to the policy holder and a safeguard against misunderstanding. These particulars are:-

(a) Whether the policy is or is not a par­ticipating policy;

(b) The ·conditions relating to-(i) Granting of a paid-up policy; (ii) Payment of surrender value.

1fr. 11cKBNzIE.-Does the term "par­ticipating policy" mean the same as the term " bonus policy"?

Mr. B.\II .. EY.-Yes.

Mr. O.\JN.-Then why not describe the policy as a " bonus policy"? People will understand the meaning of that term more clearly.

Mr. BAILEY.-Evidently the term, "participating policy" is used by insur­ance companies, but if honorable members wish to have the other term substituted, that can be dealt with during the Oom­mittee stage of the Bill.

Provision is also made that, in lieu of setting out the conditions shown in (b), a short statement in a form approved by the Government Statist of the effect of the conditions may be used. It is thought that a concise statement can be prepared of the rights of the policy holder, which he can more readily com- I

prehend than extracts from the law. In ~ order to give the companies an oppor­tunity to re-arrange their policy forms and undertake the necessary printing, sub-clause (2) of dause 4 will be brought into operation by proclamation. That clause is designed to assist a policy holder 4 to become aware of and to understand the , principal benefits due to him under the i policy. ~

Sub-clause (1) of clause 5 provides generally that every company shall, in respect of each policy, issue to the policy holder a premium receipt book in con­formity with this clause, sufficient time being allowed to do so conveniently. The proviso permits of the use of one book in respect of two or more policies of one policy holder, or of two or more policy holders in the same household. After the expiration of twelve months the issue or • use of one book in respect of two or ~ more policies held by "different persons ~ not members of the same household js I prohibited by sub-clause (2). Sub-clause (3) permits the use of existing premium receipt books if they conform, or are amended to conform, to the requiremrll ~'3 of the clause. Sub-clause (4) makes it mandatory to enter in the premium re­ceipt book for the information of the policy holder certain information con­cerning his policy which it is desirable to bring prominently under his notico.

Sub-clause (1) of clause 6 requires that every payment shall be entered in the premium receipt book by the agent so as to show clearly the date to which pre­miums have been paid in respect to each policy, and that the entry shall be signed

Industrial Life 1.15 OCTOBER, 1940.1 Assurance Bill. 1083

hy the agent. Olause 5 sets out the par­ticulars of issue ano use of premium 1'e­C(·jpt books, and sub-clause (2) of clause 6 sets out the procedure to be observed in any case where the book relates to Jl1OI'e than one policy and the premiums of all are not kept up to date. Briefly, a spparate book must be issued in respect of any policy which falls definitely into arrears. Olauses 5 and 6 ar~ based on recommendations of the Royal Oommis­sion, which found that misunderstandings sometimes occurred where there were several policies and one was in arrears. It was found that a policy holder thought he was paying premiums on a cer­tain policy, whereas the agent had allocated them to some other policy. The provisions ma de should overcome any futuro misunderstanding or dispute.

Clause 7 requires the company to give a I'eceipt for allY policy, premium receipt book, or other document of which it may take possession and to return the same within 28 days unless the policy has been terminated by satisfaction of all claims arising under it, or the company is en­titled to retain the policy as security fOl' money owing by the policy holder. Olause 8 f'ntitles a policy holder to return a policy within 28 days of issue and to obtain a refund of any premiums paid. This provision is designed to give a person aftf'r studying his policy an opportunity to refuse it. It may be that through the persuasion of an agent he has taken a policy he does not want, or on which lle cannot pay the premiums, and when he ha:; calmly reviewed the deal in the ah~('nce of the agent he can deliberately df'C'ide whether he is satisfied with the policy and is willing to continue with it. If he is dissatisfied, he can terminate the deal without loss.

The Leader of the Labour party inter­jected a little while ago that he had often usrd his persuasive powers on the electors. Thrre is a difference between the effect of his persuasive powers and of the per­suasive powers of an insurance agent unoer this proposed legislation. If the persuasive agent of an insurance company points out to a prospective client the great advantages of taking out a policy in his company, and impresses him with the idea that advantages will accrue to him and his childr~n by doing so, and even if the man signs the proposal, the policy

will not be effective if, within the time specified, the inan decides that he docs not want to proceed with it. The man thus has an opportunity to discuss the proposal with his wife or with others who Hlav l:e able to advise him. The difference in tlw case of the honorable member for X ol'tlirote is that if an electo~ is per­suaded to vote for him, the voto stands good.

Olause 9 declares void any provision in any agreement whereby a guarantor of an agent may be required to pay to the company commissions repayable by an agent on business which has subsequently lapsed. This important point was dis­cussed before the Royal Oommission. It was intended that when an agent was given a position with a company 11e would have to obtain snreties for his honesty. The agent would, perhaps, ask a friend to be­eome a bondsman for him, hut when the agent severed his cOlll1ertion with .the company the bondsman discovered, greatly to his consternation, that he had become responsible for commissions on all unpaid premiums. Sub-clause (1) of clause 10 declares void any provision in any agree­ment whereby the production of a certificate of an officer of the company may be deemed to be concl usi ve evidence of the indebt,edness -to the company of an agent or guarantor. In the case of exist­ing agreements, sub-clause (2) provides that the certificate shall be construed as prima facie evidence only. The matters referred to in clauses 9 and 10 were ventflated at length before the Royal Commission, and the provision made is based on the recommendations of the Oommission.

Olause 11 requires every cOlnpany carry­ing industrial life assurance and other life assurance to divide the accounts of its receipts and expenditure into two parts relating to (a) industrial life assurance business, and (b) other life assurance business. The principal purpose of this requirement is so that the expense rate of the company can be determined accurately. Sub-clause (1) of clause 12 requires every company to deposit with the Government Statist a statement simi­lar to the statement it is required to deposit with the Registrar-General under Part III. of the Companies Act 1938, setting out on separate forms particulars

1084 Industrial Life r ASSEMBLY·l Assurance Bill.

of its ordinary and industrial business. .Ally person may inspect the statement on payment of the prescribed fee. Sub-clause (1) of clause 13 will enable action to be taken in respect of any company with an unduly high expense rate which it is una ble to reduce. The Government Statist is empowered, after investigation, to apply to u J lldge of the Supreme Court for an order prohibiting the company from i~suing any f11rther policies in Victoria. The report of the Royal Commission dis­closed that certnin companies had expense rat{,R which plainly made it impossible for them to provide all the benefits to which policy holders were reasonably entitled, and that unless the expense rate of these (~ompallies could be reduced their policy holders might well regard their policies with little satisfaction.

Sub-clause (2) of clause 13 prescribes the eonditions under which, and the method by \vhich, a prohibition order may he can('elled. Sub-clause (3) of the same damlC cmpo\vcrs the Judges of the Supreme Court to make any necessary rules for the procedure under this clause. Olaw..;p 14 is intended to ensure that the bulk of the surplus arising from business in C'OllIleetion with participating policies t'llUl"eS for the benefit of such policy holders. The eompanies are forbidden to s]]ocate more than 20 per cent. of the surplus for the benefit of shareholders. Olause 15 obliges the companies to fur­nish the Minister with such reasonable information with respect to industrial insu]"[I11('e business as he may require. This provision should prove particularly useful in the investigation of complaints. (;la118(, 16 deals with penalties for non­e0111plirlllce with the provisions of the law, and clause 17 empowers the Governor in Oouncil to make regulations.

That is a brief outline of the provisions of this very important Bill. The Govern­ment reeently submitted a Bill dealing Ollly with paid-up policies and surrender valnes, and later a Bill dealing with ordinary life assurance policies. The pr('sent Bill will protect wage earners and persons in poor circumstances \"ho take up smalJ policies in order to provide against siekness, or for their children. It will prevent companies from taking advantage of technicalities such as are to he found ill many Acts of Parliament.

Mr. Bailey.

On the motion of Mr. HOLLWAY (Ballarat), the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, October 22.

The siUing was suspended at 6.15 p.m: 'Until 7.36 p.m.

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF TAX e (RATES) BILL.

The House went into CO,mmittee of Wavs and Means for the further con­sid~~ation of the motion of Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premi:er and Treasurer) for the imposition of rates of unemployment relief tax.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and fI'reasurer).-Earlier to-day, honorable members had before them a resolution re­lating to unemployment relief taxation, the object of which is to make provision 'for a reduction of 15 per cent. in the existing rates. The honorable member for N orthcote sought to know whether it would be competent for him to move an amendment with the view of maintain­ing the existing rates. At the time I expressed the opinion that such an amendment would be out of order on the ground that it would impose an addi­tional burden upon the taxpayers. You, Mr. Ohairman, intimated your desire to give further consideration to the ques­tio,n whether the proposed amendment could be moved at a later stage. I should be glad to know if you have arrived at a decision.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Coyle).-When I gave my earlier decision on the question that has been raised I had some doubt as to the procedure, although I expressed to the honorable member for N orthcote my view that his amendment would be in order. However, in devoting further consideration to the matter, I have discovered that it involves a far more important point than I had realized. In fact, I cannot recollect a similar point having arisen in the past. The amend­ment indicated by the honorable member for N orthcote would, in its effect, in­crease unemployment relief taxation. The schedule to the resolution does not continue an existing tax, but imposes a new tax. I now rule that such an amend­ment would be out of order.

U'lbemployment Relief Tax [15 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Rates) Bill. 1085

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-You, Mr. Chairman, have delivered your amended decision On the question I raised earlier in the day. When the unemployment relief tax schedule was before the Chair I considered that the time had arrived for me to endeavour to achieve the object I enunciated when discussing the Budget some time ago. I then expressed the view that the Government was unwise in its proposal to relax its hold on money that the people could afford to pay. I con­sidered that every effort should be made to build up a reserve to meet contingen­cies that must inevitably arise at the con­clusion of the present war-if not before. I held the opinion that there was much to commend my suggestion, and I thought it would meet with the approval of the majority of members of this Chamber. Earlier to-day, you, 111'. Chairman, inti­mated that I ·was entitled to move the amendment I had foreshadowed, but out of deference to the Premier and the I..Ieader of the Opposition-both of whom apparently desired that further con­sideration should be given to my proposal -I consented to submit the amendment when the relevant Bill was before the. House. You then intimated that it would be necessary for you to give further thought to the question, in the light of certain new circumstances that had arisen. As your amended ruling is that such an amendment as I had proposed would be out of order, I desire to point out that an overwhelming majority of the members of this Parliament is, I believe, opposed to the proposed reduction of the unemployment relief tax.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-That cannot be determined unless a vote is taken. -

Mr. CAIN.-I am aware of that, but at least I am entitled to draw a con­clusion from t.he Opl1110nR expressed during recent speeches on the Budget. For instance, the Deputy J..Ieadel" of the Opposition and the honorable member for St. Kilda supported my view.

Mr. HOLLwAY.-What about the strong silent men sitting behind the Govern­ment?

Mr. CAIN.-As usual, they made no cont.ribution to the Budget debate. Thpre­fore, I call1lot hope to include them in tIl(' large number who, I believe, favollr my proposal. The procedn]'(' determi Ile'd hy

the form in which the scLedule to the resolution and the enabling Bill have been prepared renders it ill1po~sible for those members of Parliament who are opposed to the proposed redurtion to take the matter any further.

Sir STANJ~EY ARGYLE.-Yon could move that the item be removed from the Estimates.

Mr. OAIN.--I do not want to do that. If I did, I should be supPol·ting the aboli­tion of the unemployment l'elief tax, and that is not my intention.

Mr. l\1ICHAELIS.-YOU cuuld Illove that the item be reduced by £1.

111'. CAIN.-I am not prepared, and I have never said that I was prepared, to move a motion of want of confidence ill the Government on this issue. I believe an opportunity should be given for hon­orable members to express un opinioll II pon an item in the Budget. Of course, the Government considers eaeh item of vital importance, but every question should be approached in such a way that all members shall have an opportunity to do the right. thing. My view i~ that the )'ight thing to do now is to build up a reserve fund. A great failure of govern­ment under the existing system is that a Government. lives from day to day.

·.Mr. A. A. DrNHTAN.-You mean from minute to minute!

Mr. CAIN.-The Premier and his Go­vernment have had a run of a goud many days. There should be a way out of this difficulty, without necessitating a change of Government. Perhaps I cannot expect sense from Opposition members, when their only thought is to get rid of the Government. I cannot go so far as to attempt to remove the Government on this issue, but my colleagues in the Labour party and I are prepared, if the oppor­tunity presents itself, to vote against the proposed reductioll of the unemployment relief tax. Instead of a reduction being granted, any surplus collected from that tax should be earmarked for the relief of unemployment and distress in the future. God knows, we shall have plenty of it! .I trust that the subject will be debated apart from party politics, or without in­volving the l'emova 1 of the Governrnent. If Opposition meml)ers intend to support me soh .. ly with a vIAw to removin~ the Gov("l'nmC'nt, then T (10 not think thcre i!l\ 1l1u~h in their case.

1086 Police Offences r ASSE~lBLY·l (Dog Racing) Bill.

Mr. HOLI~ WAY.-You are not so keen on the subject that you would go to the length of removing the Government be­cause of it?

Mr. CAIN.-J merely ask Opposition members to assist me in an effort to in­duce the Government not to proceed with a proposal that does not meet with the approval of a majority of members. It may meet with approval outside Parlia­ment, although I am inclined to think that a person who is given reduced taxa­tion for a year or two, only to be forced to pay much more when possibly he will not be in a position to pay, will not thank this House for what it is doing to­day. I must accept your. revised ruling, Mr. Chairman, that I am out of order. and, further, that if I vote against th~ motion I shall be voting against the im­position of an unemployment relief tax. That is the position in which I find my­self, and a11 honorable members are simi­larly placed.

The motion was agreed to, and the resolution was reported to the House and adopted.

Leave was granted to Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premier and Treasurer) and Mr. Lind (Minister of Lands) to bring in a Bill to carry out the resolution.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) brought in a Bill" to declare the rates of unemployment relief tax for t he year ending on the thirtieth day of June, On(' thousand nine hundred and fortv-one" and moved that it be read a first" time.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill wns read a first time.

POLICE OFFENCES (DOG RACING) BILL.

The debate (adjourned from October 2) on the motion of Mr. Bailey (Chief Secretary) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. OLDHAM (Boroondara).-After listening to the sham fight which imme­diately preceded the resumption of the debate on this measure, one feels that it is extraordinary-when the State, with the Commonwealth of which it is part. i~ called on to face one of the most diffi­cult times in its history-that Parlia­ment should be ·asked to devote time to debating a question such as the subject

matter of this Bill. According to its title, this is a Bill "to provide for the regula­tioll of the holding of dog races, and for othet' purposes." III his second-read­ing speech the Ohief Secretary said that the purpose of the Bill was to control dog racing. He traced the history of dog coursing since the introduction of "tin hares" some fifteen years ago. At that time the Hogan Government introduced legislation to prohibit "tin hare" cours­ing, and the Chief Secretary has describ(:'d the various devices adopted to overcome that legislation.

We have now arrived at the stage when, according to the Chief Secretary, there is far too much dog coursing in Victoria. I ask honorable members to mark particu­larly the Chief Secretary's reasons for the introduction of this Bill. He said that its introduction was justified to maintain at the fullest pressure the wheels of industry in these dangerous times. That is the excuse given by t~e Chief Secretary for introduring tilE' Bill. Be­fore proceeding to a detailed examination of the measure I should like t.1) view the ·motives expressed by the Premier and the ·Ohief Secretary, and published in the metropolitan newspapers, concerning the necessity for the regulation of ~pecd coursing. I do so because I doubt-and probably other members share my doubts -whether the Bill is a genuine attempt to regulate speed coursing. If it were, it would have the support of all hOllOr­dblr members. Is it merely a backhanded ·method of establishing a monopoly for this so-called sport to aid certain vested interests ~ From that point I propose to approach the Bill, because I desire to be satisfied that it is a genuine effort to do whn.t it purports to do.

The Bill proposes that the legislatjo:l ~hall take effect from the 26th of June, ] 940. On that date varied reports appeared in the metropolitan newspapers of what took place at a ID88tl!lg of t}:p Cabinet on the preceding day. In the Argus of the 26th of June th(~ f')llowing paragraph appeared:----

Establishment of new dog-racing c1ubs in Victoria is to be prohibited from to-day.

This decision, which is conditional on acceptance by Parliament of a Bill to be sub­mitted when the session is resnmed about thp end of July, was made yesterday by State­Cabinet.

Police Offences [15 OCTOBER, 1940.-1 (Dog Raci1'g) Bill. 1087

Mr. Bailey, Chief Secretary, said reports had beeu received that new dog-racing clubs were springing up in many parts of the State, and Cabillet considered that there were already too many. There were many reasons why those ncti\"ities should be discouraged.

Before the session began Cabinet probably would decide whether it should revive the pro­posal previously rejected by Parliament that an authority should be established to control dog racing in the same way as the V.R.C. controlled horse racing. If that were done Parliament would determine the extent to which the sport was to be limited and the numher of dog-race meetings to be permitted.

r particularly stress the next pllragraph-It would be for the new authority to allocate

meetings to e:dsting clubs. In any case Parlia­ment would be asked to ban new clubs retro­spectively to yetiterday.

I shall now read a report of 1 he same Cabinet meeting which appeared in the l' [11'-

When State Parliament meets at the end of July the Government will bring in legislation to prohibit the establishment of any further speed-('oursing clubs. This decision was reachE'd YE'sterday by Cabinet.

In making the announcement, the Premier su id the legislation would be macl·~ retrospec­tive from yesterday. He hoped, therE'iore, that those intending to establish new course!' would take heed of the warning, and not waste their time and energy on their projects. Cabinet considered that there were far too many rours· ing tracks springing up, and it was lIIust :vl­visable that. any further extensioll should be checked.

Mr. Dunstan added that Cabinet had not yet considered any proposal to reduce the number of dog-racing meetings at present being held.

The Agl' report quoted Mr. Dunstan as saying that Oabinet had not yet con­sidered any proposal, although the Ohief Secretary, according to the Argus report, said that it had. The Sun has no report on the question. T shall not weary the IIouse by reading the report published in the Herald. not because it is not a good report, but because it is merely a repeti­tion of what was said in the morning newspapers. It confil'ms the remarks I have made.

We have to ronsider, first, whether this sport is desirable, and, if we do that, W9 are forced to the conclusion that it is not ::t sport of the type that the average Aus­tralian would feel any great zest in following. Evcr,vbod.' knows that the main attraction of the sport is gambling. The races tlwmselves cannot for one moment be df'sr.]'ihrd as spectacular. A TaN' orcnpips from fifi-rrn to twenty

seconds, and the main rp,ason for the public attendances at meetings is the gambling hazard associated with the sport.

Mr. CAIN.-The same statement could be made of horse racing.

Mr. OLDHAM.-I am not going to debate that to-night. It is of no use say­ing that two wrongs make a right, and I merely emphasize the fact that pro­tagonists of this type of sport cannot even advance the eXCllse put forward by the Chief Secretary, when introducing the Police Offences (Trotting and Dog Races) Bill, that the type of animal used in the sport will be iIll proved. We all know, us a matter of fact, that the tendency of speed coursing is not to improve, but to impair, the type of dog used. It is ob­vious that a proper debate on this sub­ject must tUrn on wh(lther this admitted evil will be effectively restricted by the Goyernment's proposed legislation.

I know· nothing of the interests C011-

cerned. When this IIouse "Tas discussing the night trotting Bill on the 6th of December, 1938, the honorable member for Kew, on behalf of the Opposition, dealt at length with those interests, and disclosed their personnel. If any honor­able member wants to know about that aspect of the subject, I refer him to the Hansard report of the debate on that occasion. I am prepared to debate the subject without reference to such matters. I am not interested in who owns one course or who owns another, but if thIS Parliament is prepared to give a monopoly to vested interests, that monopoly should be given fairly, and a genuine restrietion of speed coursing should be enforccd. I object to ::t monopoly being given to vested interests, but I know very well, in view of the numbers on different sides in this House, that I cannot pl'CVrllt it. I nevrrthe­less make my appeal to the reason of honorable members.

To see the picture in its tl"ll(, per­spective, we shonld consider the num­ber of courses and the extent to which th£'y are being operated in the metro­politan and conntry nl'cas. I suppose that if I speak of the country the Minis­trr of Lands will put forward his usual interjectjon that I am talking about some­thing I do not. undrrstand. I, therefore, pass over that partieulal' phase by saying

1088 Poz.ice Offences r ASSEMBLY·l (Dog Racing). Bill.

111at, except at Geelong, where I un<1er­~tand there are two meetings a week, no . more than 52 meetings a year arc held on Rnv one of the twelve or fourteen countrv coi~rses. I make that statement subject to correction, and I am going to suggest that if we cannot have greater restriction, some such standard should be our aim.

:1ir. BAILEy.-Your figures are not correct. At Bendigo and Eaglehawk 6'7 meetings a year are held.

Mr. OLDHAM.-The Chief Secretary says that my statement is not correct be­cause, in speaking of twelve or fourteen courses, I made a slight error in regard to Bendigo and Eaglehawk. It is un­fortunate that the Minister should have added Eaglehawk. Although he may quibble about it, honorable members generally will agree that the statement I have made is substantially correct. If he wants me to insert a few "'Ivhereases," as lawyers do, I shall be pleased to do so, but substantially not more than one meet­ing a week is held on the country courses, except at Geelong and, as we now hear from the Ohief Secretary, at Bendigo and .Eaglehawk. As Bendigo and Eaglehawk are in the Premier's constituency, per­haps they have been given some special ('onsideration. I am also told that in the celestial areas of Bendigo and Eaglehawk it was suggested that a licence should be given to a club to compete with the one referred to by the Ohief Secretary, and that follo·wing that incident the Premier made certain promises. I make no accusation or charge, but that may have had something to do with the introduction of this legislation.

The whole burden of the Ohief Secre­tary's speech was not the favoured country areas, but the metropolitan area. He dismissed consideration of the country, as he rightly could, because the evil is not rampant there, but he gave column after column of statistics about the J?etropolitan a.rea. Again I speak sub­Ject to correctIOn, but I do not think I shall be corrected this time, because this afternoon the Ohief Secretary himself supplied me with figures that I am now going to quote. At the White Oity course which is described .as "Glenroy" in th~ Ohief Secretary's statistics, 156 meetings a year are held; at Napier Park 78· at Maribyrnong, 79; and at Gracedaie P~rk 104. The figure of 79 at Maribyrnong;

as compared with 78 at Napier l.>ark; is explained by the fact that meetings at those two courses are held on alternate Saturdays.

Mr. HAYES.-Where is Gracedale Park! :Mr. OLDHAM.-This zest for know­

ledge on the part of the honorable mem­ber for :Melbourne regarding gambling facilities is indeed enlightening, and, in my own time, I shall inform him. In addition to the meetings in the metro­politan area, all of which are held at night, there are two meetings a week in the Dandenong district, at a course known as Sandown Park. If the numbers are added up, it is seen that 417 meetings are held in the metropolitan area of Mel­bourne every year. At each of those meetings large numbers of races are held, and, no doubt, large sums of money are wagered on each race. The Government now comes along and says, "There is far too much of this dog racing. It is inter­fering with the munitions supplies and the war efforts of the Oommonwealth, and, therefore, we must restrict it." The Government proposes that on existing courses not more than 70 meetings a year shall be held, but that on new courses--

Mr. McKENZIE.-There will be no new courses.

:Mr. OLDHAM.-The honorable mem­ber for W onthaggi is quite wrong. On :new courses the meetings will be re­stricted to 52 a year.

Mr. OArN.-There cannot be more than the present number of meetings.

Mr. OLDHAM.-What a wise com­men t ! This Bill is designed to restrict dog coursing, so it surely does not need me to explain that there cannot be more meetings than are held at the present time! At White Oity, there are three clubs operating-the original White Oity club, the Glenroy club, and the Gracedale Park club. The White Oity club is the original one. It was floated as a public company when "tin hare" racing was introduced, and it passed through troub­.Ious times when the Hogan Government was in power. The Glenroy club appears to be a nebulous dummy organization which is not registered as a company, but conducts its meetings at White Oity. The Gracedalp. Park club also uses the White Oity ground. AR far as I can ascertain, these t.hree clubs are controlled by the same interests. Formerly the Gracedale

Police Offences L 15 OCTOBER, '1940.1 (Dog Racing) Bill. 1089

Park club conducted coursing meetings nt Springvale, where it had the lease of a com'RP. On the expiration of the lease the (']ul) tran8f(~rred to White City. I understand that the ipterests controlling the Gracedale Park club are building, or have completed the building, of a fully­equipped modern racing track alongside a course owned by a private citizen at Dandenong, but that the Dandenong Shire Conncil has refused the application of the club for a licence. That club appears to be making provision for a future home. The Chief Secretary admitted in his second-reading speech that the new course at Dandcnong might be used in the future by the Gracedale Park club, and special provision is made in the Bill for that clnh to transfer, with the consent of the Chief Secretary and of the other two clubs at vVhite Oity, to the Dandenong course.

Mr, B.AILEY.-You should point out that the improvements were completed at Dandenong before the local council re­fnsed to grant the licence.

~fr. OLDHAM. - T know nothing about that matter, and it does not con­('ern me. My principal concern is to make snre that in the event of Parliament ~ranting vested interests monopoly rights, lllvolving many thousands of pounds, :4uch rights are granted fairly and without injury to the community. It is my duty on behalf of the Opposition to examine the Bill without fear or favour to any particular interest. I am endeavouring to place before the House my view of the possible operation of the measure. A.s I pointed out, three clubs are conducting meetings at White Oity, The White Oity and Glenroy clubs hold 156 meetings a year, and the Gracedale Park club 104 meetings. A.t Napier Park, there are 78 meetings, and at Maribyrnong, 79 meet­ings a year. On week days, in the day time, 104 meetings a year are held at Sandown Park.

Let us examine how the restrictions im­posed by the Bill will work out. On existing courses, not more than 70 meet­ings a year will be permitted, and on new eourses not more than 52 meetings. Where a club desires to transfer from its course to another course, it may do so with the ('onsent of the Chief Secretary, hut it will not be permitted to hold more than 52 meetings a year on the new COUl'se. In the case of grounds on which more than

one club is operating, all the clubs must apply for transfer of the licence to ~illother ground. An exception is made, lJowever, with respect to one club, which was specifically mentioned by the Ohief Secretary in his second-reading speech and is covered in the Bill by a formula based on the annual number of meetings con­ducted during the period of twelve months preceding the 25th of June, 1940.

Mr. HAYEs.-That proposal is unfair. Mr. OLDHA.M:.-I agree with the

honorable member, and I propose to move an amendment dealing with the matter when the Bill is in Committee. At present, 417 meetings a year are held, but under the terms of the Bill, in the event of the Gracedale Park club trans­ferring to Dandenong, and the Glenroy club transferring from White Oity to another course, 314 meetings could be held. Gracedale Park and Glenroy clubs could each hold 52 meetings, an~ the White Oity club, Napier Park and Mal'ibYl'llong could each hold 70 meet­ings. Therefore, the reduction brought about by the Bill would be from 417 to 314 meetings, or approximately a reduc­tion in number of 25 per cent.

}1r. B.AILEY.-Do not overlook the fact that the 417 meetings are held at night, but that there are 107 meetings held in the daytime.

Mr. OLDHAM.-I was 'dealing with night meetings only, and, therefore, I did not include the meetings held in the day­time at Sandown Park. Does not the conclusion emerge from the facts that the ostensible purpose of this Bill-the re­striction of dog racing meetings-is a sham? Is a proposal to reduce by 25 per cent. the number of meetings held annually worthy of the attention of Parlia­ment in the present critical period ? No doubt, the Bill will grant to vested in­terests a valuable licence to conduct a business, unimpaired by the competition of new clubs. Moreover, it will give monopoly values to certain dog racing grounds; further, it will inflict grave hardship on a club like Sandown Park which will be restricted to daytime co urging. All the clubs should be placed on the same basis. If the Sandown Park club is to have as a competitor the Grace­dale Park club after it~ transference t,()

Dandenong, the two clubs should be mad,­to share day and night meetings.

1090 Police Offences r ASSEMBLY·l (Dog Racing) Bill.

Mr. HAYES.-How many shares do you hold in the Gracedale Park club?

Mr. OLDHAM .. -I do not think any honorable member, except possibly the honorable member for Melbourne, would infer that I have one penny invested in any speed coursing concern.

Mr. HAYEs.-Judging by the way you are sP3aking, one would think you have.

Mr. OLDHAM.-I am sure that h0110rable members have such regard for my private character that they do not ex­pect me to deny the inference that I am concerned financially in any speed cours­ing concern. If any honorable member, except the honorable member for Mel­bourne, asks me to deny the inference, I shall do so. l appear to have touched some people OlJ the raw by attempting to deal impartially with the position of the different clubs. I suggest that in order to remedy the weak spots of the Bill, the House should consider seriously the pro­posal advanced by the Premier and the Chief Secretary that an independent authority he established to control the whole sport of dog racing-if it can be called a sport. That i:r;tdependcnt control was promised in the forecast of the Bill, but the measure makes no provision for it. That seems to be the first essential in this legislation. The second essential if that there should be a schedule to the Bill, setting out the various clubs which are to be allowed to continue, and the number of meetings each is to hold a year. If a schedule of that character is necessary for horse racing., it is infinitely more necessary in relation to this sport.

These are practical suggestions. During the Committee stage I shall submit an amendment to permit 52 meetings a year on the present tracks as well as on any new tracks that may be established. There is no logicalreasoll why the old tracks-if I may so term them-should be allowed 70 meetings a year, and new tracks 52 meet­ings a year. I shall also submit an amend­ment to the effect that if there are a number of clubs at the moment controlled by the SRme interests, operating On the same course, they shall not be able to hold an increased number of meetings merely by transferring to a new track. A.t present, at the White City track, there will be 70 meetings a year, divided among

the White City club, the Glenroy club, and the Gracedale Park club. By going to a new location, with the consent of the Uhief Secretary, those clubs could share 70 meetings on the old track, and each club could hold 52 meetings on the new site.

If this is to be a genuine restriction, we should cut down the number to one meeting a week. I would get" rid of dog racing altogether, if I could; but I know that is impossible. If we are to restrict the number of dog races, especially for the noble reason mentioned by the Chief Secretary-that unrestricted dog racing was impeding the war effort of the Com­monwealth-the restriction should be genuine. An authority to control dog racing should be established. This was mentioned by the Chief Secretary in 1938, when introducing the previous legislation. He then said-

We believe an authority should be established to control dog racillg', just as the Victoria Racing Cluh controls horse racing.

The Bill, whether innorently or from some other motive, will not achieve its object. It is to restrict speed coursing, and to restrict it drastically, but it will not do that. It will merely give a few vested interests wealth beyond their dreams. I am not particularly concerned with that aspect, but I am interested t.o see that when we propose to do something, we do it genuinely. We should see that the restriction which does arise from this legislation is genuine, and will bring within a reasonable compass the number of dog racing meetings, as was recently adopted in London, namely, one meeting a week on each track. I trust that the Premier's promise will be carried out and that no new tracks will be brought into existence.

Mr. MACFARLAN (Brighton). - The honorable member for Boroondara and I generally agree on this class of Bill. We agreed on the Police Offences (Raffies) Bill. but I am not clear what attitude hp is adopting towards this Bill. A number of members, when debating the Policp Offences (Raffles) Bill, said the Govern­ment had departed from the paths of virtue and had sunk to a low degree of degradation, It appears to me that with this Bill the Government is struggling to return to the paths of virtue; but its motives are suspected by thr honorable

" I

l

Police Offences 1I5 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Dog Racing) Bill. 1091

member for Boroondara. I cannot under­stand anyone with the beliefs against gambling and dog racing professed by the honorable member for Boroondara oppos­ing the Bill. Whatever the Bill does or does not do, and whatever are the motives behind it-I do not assume they are wrong motives-it at least restricts this sport which is so roundly condemned by the honorable member for Boroondara. It restricts the number of clubs to those existing on the date mentioned in the Bill, and, in the case of those clubs, it reduces the total number of dog race meet­ings by approximately 25 per cent. In those two ways, the Bill doe.s embody an attempt by the Government to restrict what the honorable member for Boroon­dara has termed an evil.

When I was Chief Secretary, I was invited to attend a dog racing meeting, and I confess that I did not see much wrong with it. Apparently, a number of people preferred that type of sport to horse racing. I also witnessed horse races, and I did not see much difference between the two forms of sport. The honorable member for Boroondara said it is a terrible thing to .,9reate a monopoly; but he must remember that in horse racing there is a monopoly in the metropolitan area of some five or six racing clubs.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-They are not proprietary clubs.

Mr. }IACF ARLAN.-Some uf them are.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-There are no proprietary clubs now.

Mr. MACFARLAN.--Until recently, th"ere were 'proprietary racing clubs in the metropolitan area. In senior football there is a monopoly in the metropolitan area among the senior clubs.

Mr. REID.-Only by the League. Mr. MACFARLAN.-The honorable

member for Oakleigh is an Association supporter, and he says "Only by the League," but there is a monopoly of senior football in the metropolitan area. I do not know that harm is done to anyone by a monopoly of tha t description. It is clear that what­ever views we may hold on gambling, on horse racing, or on dog racing-even if we should hold the most extreme views against them which, I believe, would be wrong, as every man is entitled to his own opinion~the Bill restricts the number

of clubs, the number of meetings at each club, and, in that way, the volume of betting indulged in by the patrons of the sport. Notwithstanding my attitude to the Police Offences (Raffies) Bill, I can find no reason for opposing this Bill.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote). - I take the earliest opportunity available to congratu­late the honorable member for Boroondara upon the extensive survey he has made of dog racing in this State. This is his first speech during the present session, and no one can accuse him of not ha ving given this matter thorough consideration. Apparently the honorable member has made 0 investigations into every club in the metropolitan area. He said he would have visited the country clubs were it not for the risk of being accused of in­quiring into a matter about which he knew nothing. In communicating to the House the result of his inquiries in thQ metropolitan area, he has presented what he considers to be a strong case against the Government's present 'Pro­posals. It must be admitted, however, that the Government is moving in the right direction. The Bill probably does not go as far as the honorable member foro Boroondara would like, but as it is designed to control dog racing in this State it is worthy of support f.rom all those who favour the restriction of gambling. The honorable member for Boroondara-to use racing parlance­went safely to the barrier, but when he reached the first jump he did not fall by expressing strong opposition to horse racing. He developed an antipathy to dog racing. As for horse racing, it is generally recognized that 99 per cent. of those who attend the courses do so, not because they wish to admire the horses in the tC birdcage" or to see them race.

Mr. BAILEY.-Thousands of people never see a race.

Mr. CAIN.-There are thousands of others who are interested in horse racing from only one angle; they invest their money without going to the course. Owing to my lack of practical experience, I am unable to speak with authority on the question of gambling, but the honor­able member for Hawthorn commanded my respect last week when he delivered one of the most interesting speeches I have ever heard in this Parliament. He emphasized that those who operated on

1092 Police Offences rASSEl\£BLY·l (Dog Racing) Bill.

racCCOUrRE'S and stock exchanges, and in other avenues where gambling occurs, were actuated by the sole desire to obtain something for nothing. When he criticizes dog racing, the honorable member for Boroondara must remember that those who patronize horse racing have the same object . in view. Parlia­ment has not yet been courageous enough to stop all forms of gambling .. There is no prohibition of racecourse betting or of stock exchange operations, for Aus­tralians are a race of gamblers­they will gamble on anything. That is thp fault of the existing social system under which we are compelled to compete with others in order to make a success of life. The man who prospers by gambling in some form or another is considered "successful." H<.> who re­mains quietly ill an ordinary occupation and refrains from gambling does not seem to merit the applause of society.

The Bill now under consideration does not determine the question of proprietary ownership of dog racing clubs. It does not provide for the establishment of a controlling authority in the same way as horse racing clubs are controlled, nor is it designed to prevent gambling on dog race courses. The absence of such provisions should liot, however, prevent this House from passing the measure. I agree with the honorable member for Brighton that this Bill will, at least, provide for the reduction in the number of meetings held in the metropolitan area. I have not gone to the trouble of ascertaining how many dog race meetings are held at the present time. I have attended but one in my life. It must be admitted that a dog race meeting or a trotting meeting at night is far more spectacular than horse racing at Flemington or Caulfield 'where an event takes about two minutes to rUll off and the patrons stand around for an hour waiting for the next race. The night trotting that I have seen in Adelaide and Western Australia has been colourful and interesting, with a demon­stration of good horsemanship. I feel more confident about the driver in the' sulky than I am about the man in the saddle who may not be trying to win.

.Mr. W. DUNHTONID.-Those who hope to obtain easy money by gambling are -super-optimists.

Mr. (Jaill.

Mr. CAIN.-That is so. Dog racing, horse racing, and the Stock Exchange attract thousands of super-optimists.

Mr. MICHAEUS.-You must not forget that many persons invest money by medium of the Stock Exchange to pro­vide for their old age.

Mr. CAIN.-On the other hand, a much greater number buy stocks to-day to sell them at a profit to-morrow. In some cases they sell stocks that they do not actually own.

Mr. OLDHAl\f.-What about those per­sons who submit their names for the pur­pose of a pre-selection ballot in the Labour party?

Mr. CAIN.-N ominations in that case are always submitted by vigorous young men. In the case of the United Aus­tralia party, tIley are made by a lot of old ladies!

Mr. }IICHAELls.-The honorable mem­ber for Coburg does not agree with you.

:1Ir. CAIN.-In view of the voting at St. Kilda at the last State election, the honorable member should concern himself not with Coburg but with his own electorate. However, this measure is a t least a step in the right direction; all grounds are to be controlled, and meetings are to be restricted. The number of clubs, too, will be restricted, and if it happens that the passing of the measrire creates a monopoly a future Parliament will be able to take the necessary steps to end it.

The honorable member for Boroondara has given the House valuable informa­tion, and he is to be congratulated. He must have devoted the better part of the last two or three weeks to this subject. He has gone into it thoroughly, and has told us of the membership of Gracedale Park, White City, and other clubs, as well as giving information concerning the ownership of those bodies. He eannot he accused, as some members can, of having spoken on a matter of ",hich he knows nothing. He is the critic of the Government's proposals, and his task is to examine them, yet I am sure he will frankly admit that the Bill pro­,rides for a 25 per cent. reduction in dog racing, and will prevent the establishment of any more dog racing clubs in future. In the metropolis, with its huge popula­tion, there are only five such clubs, including GrBcedale Park and Sandown

I .. {

.' { \

I I ...

Police Offences [15 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Dog Racing) Bill. 1093

Park, but Mildura, Sale, Bendigo, Eagle­hawk, W onthaggi, Bairnsdale, and Traralgon conduct 52 dog race meetings in a year. When we compare the pro­vision made for dog races in the metro­politan area with that made in the country, we wonder how many of the rural clubs manage to continue. I may say that if I had my way I should not worry whether dog racing or horse racing ceased.

Mr. ALLNuTT.-Hear, hear! Mr. CAIN.-I note that I have another

supporter besides the honorable member for Hawthorn. I know it is not possible to abolish dog racing or horse racing, because the people claim the right to go to such meetings. At best, Parlia­ment can only express the will of the masses. If the Leader of the Opposition or I were a dictator either of us would do many things. The ,vorst type of dictator is the one who does things, whpl'eas a benevolent dictator is not so bad. Although those who attend dog races and horse races may waste time and money, we must recognize that it is a t.ype of sport or relaxation demanded in thc community, and it may not do as much harm as some people believe. 1 have not made an extensive statement on the Bill, but I think it moves in the right direction and should be supported,'

Mr. HOLLAND (Flemington).-I have not much interest in greyhound racing. However, I recall the complaint of a butcher that women who trained dogs bought the best of rump steak at ls. 6d. a lb. and told him that they would pay his account when the dogs had succeeded n t the races.

Mr. HOLLlNs.-The idea wa::; to get hetter stakes!

Mr. HOLLAND.-Sometimes I fancy that I have committed a grave injury to Victoria. As a young man, in 1928, I was invited by a friend to bring a couple uf ~'hippets from Western Australia with the idea of establishing whippet racing in this State. I am rather afraid that from that small beginning has grown he1'(,) the industry of dog racing.

Mr. REID.-You started the show! lfr. HOLLAND.-The whippet club

is a soeial body, alld is composed of amateurs who do not permit betting . They have for a number of years given rf'U 1 enjoyment to many men and women

who have attended meetings every Satur­day afternoon at Gurney's paddock, which used to be a cock fighting ground in thp bad old days at Flemington. Occasionally the club has been given an opportunity to conduct handicap races at White City. At one time the club had big visions of securing a course for itself, but in a spirit of patriotism it decided to hand over to the Government' free of interest £500 that it took nearly 30 years to save. ,Vhenever there is a call, that little whippet club of 300 members will run a meeting for the benefit of a person iu distress or for a charity. The members do not hoard their funds but make a yearly distribution among charities. 1 had a discussion 'with the Chief SecrE'­tary, who told me that so long as the club posted a notice that it did not permit betting it would llot be affected by this Bill. That is all right, but in the last two or three years the clu h has been afforded opportunities to conduct meet­ings at which gambling has taken place.

The club is rendering good service to working class men and women. They arp not in the category of those whom I men­tioned previously-people who do not pay the butcher until their dog has won a race. I appreciate that the sport as C'onducted by the whippet coursing club at Gur­ney's paddock on Saturday aftl'rnoons is free from the operation of the Bill, as the Ohief Secretary has informed me. I thought that would meet the wishes of the club members, but the secretary told mp, that some years ago the proprietors of the White Oity coursing ground had granted his club permission to organize a night coursing meeting, the proceeds of wbieh ,,,('nt to the whipp('t ('oursing club. The money so raised is used for charitablr purposes or, on occasions, to organizp a picnic for the children in the district. I ask the Ohief Secretary to ('x amine the position, to see if it is pos­sible for that night mf'eting to br. hplcl in future.

Mr. IIo(f.\~ .-]8 bptting pf'l'mittrd at the whippet coursing meetings at Gurney's~

Mr. HOLLAND.-Bettillg is illegal at those meetings, and if betting is resorted to. the bookmakers tAke the risk of }pp:al action, because the younp; constables :l t­tached to the Gaming Branch of the Police Departmcnt are VCl'Y nctive against

1094 Financial Emergency IASSEMBLY.l (Gmltls and Funds) Bill.

starting-price bookmakers. It can safely be said that no betting goes on at Gur­ney's. I shall be satisfied if the Ohjef Secretary will examine the position relat­ing to the one night meeting held hv the club at White Oity.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was read a ~p.cond time und

committed. Olause 1 was agreed to. Olause 2-(lnterpretation).

Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary).­To enable honorable members to prepare amendments that have been foreshadowed, r propose that progress be report('d.

Progress was reported.

FINANOIAL EMERGENOY (GRANTS AND FUNDS) BILL. The debate (adjourned from October

9) on the motion of Mr. Martin (Honor­ary Minister) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toora7c).­The Bill is to renew portion of the finan­cial emergency legislation orginally intro­duced in 1931. In· the depth of the de­pression, when the solvency of the State was seriously threatened, it was necessary for the Treasurer of the day-the present Minister of Agriculture-to cut Govern­ment expenditure to the utmost. For that purpose, the financial emergency legisla­tion was divided into many parts. Part IV. of the Fin ancial Emergency Act dealt with grants that the State had been ac­customed to making from Oonsolidated Revenue to certain activities; it dealt also with the matter of obtaining from reserve funds money originally set aside by Par­liament for specified purposes. The Bill proposes to transfer to Oonsolidated Revenue surplus money from the Licens­ing Fund. It has always been a joke against Treasurers that a needy Treasurer will raid any trust fund on which. he can lay his hands-of course, with the con­sent of Parliament. It has long been recognized that one fund which may easily be dealt with in that way is the fund that was established for compensa­tion purposes when the Licences Reduc­tion Board was instituted to deal with the closing of hotels. It was found that the amount obtainable from existing licensees was not only sufficient to meet all re-

quirements, but that there was a surplus; and the surplus was transferred to the o.onsolidated Rev~nue, with the exception of £20,000.

:Mr. HAYEs.-If there is a surplus, why not reduce the levy upon licensees fruUl 4 pm'· cent. to 3 per cent. ?

Sir ST.A.NLEY ARGYLE.-I do not know if such an arrangement would be found to be practicable. I am not debat­ing the desirability of an amendment on tho:4e lines; I am simply stating that t.here is sufficient money available from this source to meet all ordinary require­ments, and that no one is very much hurt by the imposition, The municipal en· dowment fund of £50,000 constitutes 1\

much more vexed question. Originally the amount allocated from Oonsolidated Revenue to the various municipalities was fixed at £50,000. This was altered later to £'75,000, enlarged again to £100,000, and then reduced to £50,000; and finally, during. the time of the financial emergency legislation, under the aegis of the present Minister of Agriculture, the endowment was abolished. The procedure of removing this subsidy to the indigent municipali­ties of the State was adopted because of the serious financial emergency that existed. The Honorary Minister in charge of the Bill can contradict me if I suggest that the period of financial emergency has passe~l.

:M:l'. MARTIN.-The muniripalities have been helped materially by other funds.

Mr. HOGAN.-The period of financial emergency would not be past, so far as the municipalities are concerned, if they were not deriving the benefit of interest amounting to £1,500,000.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-In a speech on the 15th' of July, 1931, the present Treasurer gave some interesting information. His remarks are worthy of notice, because they represent the views of an independent country member at that time. Debating the Financial Emergency ~ill, he said:-

Part V.-Miscellaneous, provides for a 20 per cent. reduction in various grants. There is one item which I desire to mention. It is in connection with municipal endowments. In the past there has been an annual contribution of £50,000 from the Government to various municipal councils. That has come from the Gonsolidated Revenue, and country municipali­ties have in the past benefited by it. The

j

:Financial Emergency L15 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Grants and Funds) Bill. 1095

whole of the provision dealing with that par" ticular endowment is proposed to be absolutely repealed. There will be no equality of sacrifice 80 far as municipalities are concerned, because the proposal affects only country municipali­ties, and the country people who have really obtained the benefit of the endowment through their own municipalities will be penalized to the extent of £50,000 per annum. Would it not be possible to apply to the £50,000 endow­ment a reduction upon, say, the same basis as is proposed to be applied in other cases-20 per cent.? That would mean that, instead of making available £50,000 annuall~', it would be possible to make available £40,000. I think that it is entirely wrong, and most certainly unfair to municipalities concerned, to abolish the endowment of £50,000 in one fell swoop, and ask those municipalities for all time to contribute to the sacrifice to that extent.

The principle of a subsidy from a body of centr~l government to a body of local government is a good one generally. Several amending Bills have been intro­duced in years past altering the classifica­tion of various municipalities and the allocation of endowment. It was r·ealized that municipalities hud individual needl:l. Parliament has enacted urgent and neces­sary legislation" in times of financial emergency, but when the crisis has passed, the legislation has not been repealed; that is not sound policy. It would be far better if this regular contribution from Consolidated Revenue to municipa.1iticfl were made on the old basis, or' varied according to necessity, or if there were a reclassification of the municipalities from time to time. One never knows what is going to happen in this State. There are at times changes of occupation, and what were once prosperous munici­paliti,es sometimes become needy. As a broad principle, it is better not to practise the kind of opportunism that endeavours to meet merely from day to day the needs of the various municipalities.

A last l'emn~nt of the old emergency ?ays, about whIch I feel strongly indeed, 18 the reduced grant to the Forestry Fund. Tn his second-reading speech the Honor­ary Minister said-

Under the fina,ncial emergency legislation the grant of £40,000 from the Consolidated Revenue to this fund was reduced by £8,00(J from 1931-32 to 1939-40. Clause 4 provides for the payment of the reduced grant-£32.000 -in 1940-41, the benefit to the Bud~pt h('in~ £8,000.

I there interjected-no you propOE:e to gin' r('nf;Ol1~ why th('

FnTp.stry Fund WA~ TN111rrcl?

The Minister of Forests, who is not now present, knows quite well that I men­tioned the subject in this House last year, and that it was also mentioned by the Royal Oommissioner, who definitely pointed out that £40,000 was granted for the specific purpose of paying the salaries of permanent employees of the Forests Commission. Those employees are short by £8,000 a year, and one of the reasons given for the inadequate measures taken to deal with the great fires that broke out in January, 1939, was that the Department was understaffed. The Royal Oommissioner pointed out that one of the reasons for the understaffing was that the cut of £8,000 a year made eight years ago had not been restored.

I have looked up what I had to day last year when the Forest8 Bill was under discussion, and I find that I then made thp. following statement :-

To make proper provision in all of the areas concerned it will be necessary for the ForeRts Commission to construct roads, to make lanes and lines to provide accessibility to the forf'sts in time of fire, to provide a II forms of communication, and to increase its personnel. The present number of skilled employees of the Forests Commission who will be responsible for carrying out this work are too few to deal with the immense area which they are supposed to protect. With extra staff, fires could easily be squelched at thei r origin in a short time, but there is 110 pru­viRion in the Bill for granting additional funds; tha.t rests upon the good will of the Treasurer of the day. ·When the .Forests Commission was first brought into heing, fl

forests fund of £40,000 was established.

When the Bill was brought in to establish the £40,000 fund, it was argued that the Forests Commissioll ought not be depen­dent on the goodwill of the Treasurer of the day, and that therefore Parliament should provide a permanent allocation from Oonsolidated Hevenue for this specific purpose. The fund was also fed by half the surplus over £80,000 from licences and royalties. The Ho.ra1 Commissioner referred to that fund as having hl'('n reduced, but, up to that date, not restored. It was pointed out that ll101H',Y had been madp :1vailable from the l'lll'mplo.vment R.eli~·f Fund. and, no douht, the' same argument \yill be ad\'flTIcpd now. The money votfd from other flllld~. 110\\'{'YPf. had ('onditions nttl'lC'hC'd to it, jnit the FOrf'?tTy :Fllnd KIlR

nneollditional The sum of £40,000 was to be the nucleus of a fund for thf' protection of the' foreRts from a 11 ~nnr('f\S of dRn~rr.

1096 Financial Emergency I.:\.SSEMBLY.-I (Grants ami Funds) Bill.

I maintain that the Government in these times, finding it.self with a very much increased revenue, amounting to £3,000,000 a year more than when the £8,000 was first deducted, ought not still to appro­priate this paltry sum from the Forests Commission. This year we are facing a drought, and the Minister of Forests lias admitted the possibility of another serious outbreak of bushfires. The Government's action is therefore false economy. And what does it mean? The £8,000 that should be restored would make all the difference between the present service and a better one; but in order tha t the Treasurer may present an appearance of affluence, this wretched £8,000, which would have been so valuable in helping to preserve a great national asset, as well as, perhaps, to save human lives, is with­held. I would rather have seen the Treasurer budget for a deficit of £2,000 than continue this emergency deduction from the Forestry Fund. The amount means nothing to the Treasury, but every­thing to the Forests Commission.

That is all I wish to say on the Bill. It contains only three items, which are remnants of the financial emergency crisis. I do not think that the first item matters very much; the money is not wanted in the Licensing Fund, and it may as well go into the Consolidated Revenue. With regard to the second item, I have no doubt that many of the country municipalities would welcome the restoration of the old £50,000 grant t.hat used to be distributed among them. As to the third item, how­ever, I say that it is paltry of the Govern­ment to play with snch a serious thing as the Forestry Fund, from which the skilled employees of the Forests Commission are paid. The fact that the Forests Oom­mission may be short of the skilled men who know 'best how to fight fires is a I'eflection on a Government that is pre­pared to perpetuate something that ,vas agreed to because of a state of emergency, w hen money had to be found from what­ever source it could be obtained.

Mr. HAYES (Melbourne).-I wish to take the opportunity of supporting the Leader of the Opposition to a certain (lxtent. He said he considered the three proposals in the Bill were not now desir­able, or, in other words, that emergency legislation should cease. He claimed that the first proposal, to take money from the

Licensing Fund, did not matter very much, but I would point out that there is no just reason why one section of the com­munity should pay more taxation in pro­portion to their income than any other section pays. There can he no justification under present conditions for compelling hotel licensees to pay a special tax of 4. pel' cent. on their purchases of liquor. It means, in other words, that those per­sons, because they are engaged in the liquor trade, are forced to pay 4 per cent. more taxation than other persons earning the same amount of income. All taxa­tion should be uniform. The obligation to pay the tax of 4 per cent. on purchases of liquor was imposed on licensees for a specific purpose-the payment of com­pensation on account of licences cancelled hv the :Licent:es Reduction Board. "The proceeds of the tax are paid into

the Licensing Fund, and as a result of the Board having, to a large degree, completed the work of reducing the number of hotels, the fund has a large surplus every year. During the financial ye!!r 1938-39, the amount required for compensation was only £14,000. Despite that, licensees. are still compelled to continue the payment of the special tax of 4 per cent. on their purchases of liquor, and through that tax they contribute nearly £250,000 annually to the fund. The statement of accounts of the Licences Reduction Board for the financial year 1938-39 shows that the following amounts were transferred from the Licensing Fund :-to Oonsolidated Revenue, £162,000; annual payment to the Police Superannuation :Fund, £23,000; and annual payment to metropolitan and country municipalities, nearly £60,000; a total of £244,000, which was practically equivalent to the amount received from the tax of 4 per cent. imposed on licensees. If it is considered just to apply to the liquor trade this tax of 4 per cent. on purchases, it would be fair to extend it to proprietors of large businesses. In any case, the money collected by means of the tax should be applied to the payment. of compem~ation, and to nothing else.

Mr. HOLI~wAY.-The unemployment relief tax furnishes an analogy. The whole of the revenue from that source is not used for the purpose for which the tax is raised.

Mr. HAYE8.·-But all the taxpayers contribute on a percentage rate according

)

\.

\ } ( t

-..,

\

\

Financial Emergency 115 OUTOlHm, 1940.1 (Gra·nts and Funds) Bill. 1097

to ilU'OlIH'. Ow' 8ection of the taxpayers is 1lot eompellf'd tIJ pay au additional tax of 4 per cellt. .l\:' I pointed out, in the finau('ial year 19:38-39, only £14,000 was paid out of the Licensing Fund as com­pensation to licensees, uut a sum of £162,000 wab trunsf'el'red to Consolidated Revenue.

Mr. MAI~TI.N .--This Bill provides that a sum of only £20,000 more than was transferred from the Licensing Fund last year shall be transferred to Consolidated Revenue in the current financial year. Approximately a sum of £1'72,000 will be transferred.

Mr. HAYE~.---I cOl1sider that the im­position on hotel licensees of the 4 per cent. tax on purchases should be reviewed. Because a large surplus is left in the fund, after the payment of compensation, the tax should be reduced. Probably a tax of one·half per cent. would be suffi· cient to llleet compensation charges. As I pointed out, a sum of £162,000 is trans­ferred annually from the Licensing Fund to Consolidated Revenue, in addition to the special payments to the Police Super­annuation }'und and the metropolitan and country municipalities.

Mr. 1ffARTIN.-The payments from the ]j(!ensing Fund benefit the Budget.

~fr. HAYES.-Legislation that COlll­pds one section of traders to pay a higher I'ate of taxation than other traders is merely dass taxation. The policy of <livel'tillg money from special funds to Consolidated [{evenue should be reviewed, particularly as a state of financial (lmergcncy does not now exist.

Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda).-I agree with the hOllorable member for Melbourne that taxation should be imposed by a ~tl'aightforward method. It should not be des('ribed as a certain kind of tax when it is really another sort of tax. Money I'aised for certain purposes was diverted during the depression. I support the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition l'elating to the stoppage of payments to municipalities. That money was of great assistance, and was made available for many years. During the depression those payments were discontinued. The time lIas arrived when they should be restored.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The restoration is long overdue.

~fr. MICII.AELIS.-Yes. If it is still necessary to retain the money, the State should raise an equivalent sum by other means. . It is not fair to lead people to believe that the Budget is bnlalH'ed while­payments of that description are retained by the State. I support the protests voiced by previous speakers.

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

passed through its remaining stages.

COUNTRY ROADS BOARD FUND BILL.

The debate (adjourned from October 9) on the motion of Mr. Hyland (Min­ister of Transport) for the second read­ing of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. DILLON (Essendon).-While it may be difficult for me to suggest that it is not logical for the Government to continue legislation that has existed for many years, it is the duty of the Opposi­tion to point out that the circumstances of to-day are different from those which existed at the time this legislation was first considered necessary. The Minister of Transport introduced the Bill, but, unfortunately, he is not present in the Chamber. Apparently, the honorable gentleman satisfied himself that the Bill was necessary by referring to the various factors which haY(' cost the rAvenue of the State different amounts, He men­tioned the increas(ls through arbitration and industrial awards; increased costs of materials; additional intel'pst, pxehunge and sinking fuud paymfmts; national s(lC'urity, and civil defencp. charges; and provision for social scrvi('Ps. I believe the principal .. ,\C't is sound. Motor car l'cgistra tion fees are different from the fees for licences to drive motor cars. The State retains the right to say that citizens shall be privileged to do certain things. When the original Bill was introduced by the present Leader of the Opposition, I expressed the opinion that, because the State was granting rights to certain in­dividuals, Consolidated Revenue was en­titled to receive whatever charge was made for those rights.

In the past, it has been the practice to allow not only the fees froll! the registra~ tiOll of motor cars, but also the fees from the licensing of motor drivers, to be

1098 Country Roads Board r.ABSEMBLY.l Fund Bill.

credi ted to the Country Roads Board Fund. As a corollary uf that payment certain city mnnicipalities were granted £40,000 a year. A considerable pre­·ponderance of the fees paid for those licencflS came from city dwellers. Oount.ry municipalities received £10,000 a year, and r.ity municipalities were given £40,000 a year from Consolidated Revenue. That was the practice for many years, alld it was mentioned by the Minister of Transport when introducing this Bill. His jl1Eltification for the con­tinued withholding of those grants was that it had been agreed to over the year~ since the legislation was first introduced; but tilr honorable gentlemen did not attempt to j11stify for the financial year ] 940-4-1 the :ldion which had to be taken ill 1~32.

The State is in a different position now. It was neces~'!ary during the depression that the Treasurer should steal from any fund at his disposal suf­ficient to endeavour to balance the Budget. To-day we speak unrestrainedly of millions of pounds, and the revenue of the Statu in millions of pounds is in excess of the amount in 1932. What may have been sound financial practice in 1932 is not called for to-day. Every metropoli­tan municipality would appreciate the grant of £40,000 being made available. The municipality of Essendon has been financially embarrassed for many years as the result of the introduction of this legislation. Not one representative of a metropolitan constituency has objected to the Government liberally assisting country interests. In providing such assistance, the Government has had the support of the }.{inisterial corner party-which con­sists mainly of metropolitan members­Hnd of members of the Opposition. If the allnual payment which this Bill suspends for a further year ",ere restored, the Country Roads Board Fund Act would he' the only measure under which the metropolis ~ould obtain £40,000 as com­pared with £10,000 fOl' country munici­palities. . In view of the proportionate amounts provided by means of motor drivers' li('ence fees the metropolis 'would pay seVf'n to one for the privilege. I challenge j'he Honorary 'Minister (MI'. Martin) to COllh'ndict that statement.

:Mr, :MARTT-;\,.-Yoll haY(~ not proyed it. Jf I'. ni/1on

Mr. DILLON.-The Honorary Minister­has at his disposal the means of proving it; whereas I have not. I am glad that the Premier has re-entered the Chamber to hear my challenge. Recently he accused me of remaining outside instead of listen­ing to the speeches of honorable members. I realize, however, that he has to attend to many duties.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-He has had to attend to the Labour party to-night.

!fr. DILLON.-Will the Premiel~ d~ny that as the result of the Bill now before the House, metropolitan munici­palities will again be deprived of a sum of £40,000, and that such action cannot be justified in view of the buoyant revenues of the State? Oountry municipalities will lose £10,000, the ratio between city and country being as four is to one. The­amount paid by way of motor drivers' licence fees in the metropolitan area is seven times the amount derived from country areas. By political manamvring the Premier has persuaded a certain metropolitan political party to support his Government's legislation over a period of years that is almost a record.

Mr. DODGSHUN.-YOU will admit that the legislation has been of a bene-ficia! character.

Mr. DILLON.-The honorable member­representing a drought-stricken area should seize an early opportunity to read the complete report of this debate. r would remind him of a statement made­by one member of the Ministerial corner party to the effect that the "cockies' ,,. party ill this House has begged for certain concessions for their electors.

Mr. MAHTIN.-Those members are satisfied.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W Slater). -I invite the honorable IDp.mber for Essendon to disregard interje~tions, which are leading him away from the subject of the Bill.

Mr. DILLON.-Ft:om now On I shalt take no notice of '3ven Ministerial inter­jections. Because Parliament agreed to a. eertain ~~roposa] .in 1932 that is no reason: why we should do so again in 1940. The­House is entitled to a better explanation. of th(' Hie than that given by the Minis­ter of T l'anSpOI't. He mentioned that the:

~ ( I ;.

J

1 t ? ; (

/

/ / )

: ~

I ~ I

(

\ ~ {

\ } )

"

l t t , ~

\, \, ,

\ \

" "

\

Countr!! Roads B(}a~(l [15 OCT\>BIt.:R} 1940.1 Fund Bill. 1099

legislation had been carried on froID the period of the depression, and for that reason invited the House to pass the mea­,su/'e. I maintain that this is one of the BiI]~ "put over" us, if I ,may use that .expression, because they have been in the interests of the finances of the State. When the Leader of the Opposition was Treasurer, and everyone wondered where we should get the next penny and the next loaf of bread, it was necessary to do these things.

ThE' then Treasurer made an ex­planatory statement extending over half an hour, but the Minister of Transport was content to deliver a speech on this Bill coverin~ only half a column in 11 rtns((,rd, He stated that Parliament l1ad a lread.y accepted the principle, and $0 invited the Housc to enact the Bill. .As a math,!' of fact, the best reasons why tllf' measnre should be critically examined ,are thC' very reasons Rdvanccd by thE' Millister of Transport. If we agree to thi~ kind of legislation simply hl'causp we agreed to it in 1932. we shall continue to do so for ever­more. We should have a candid'statement from the Government that it believes ill the principle involved in the measure,. and that it intends to operate under it as long as it remains in office. The Govp.rn­ment says that it does not believe the mHl1icipaliticR ne('(1 any assistance, and, therefore, they a l'e to get none. The MiniRtm- of Transport did not compare tIl£' prE's('nt financial position of the State with that of 19:~2; I invite him to do so.

Mr. HOGAN.-The Country Roads Board is doing a lot of work in the metropolitan areas.

Mr. DILLON.-It is doing a whole lot morc in the country areas. I do not wish to enter into a discussion about the activities of that body, which is doing a good job at a tremendous cost. I repeat the words" at a tremendous cost," because that Board is one of the State instru­mentalities which believe in day work instead of the contract system. I seri­ously object to the Board becoming Ii

tenderer in competition with private enterprise. I have raised this matter before, but no notice was taken of my comments. You, Mr. Speaker, will recall that the State Electricity Commission invited tenders for certain work, and

among the private firms responding were three outstanding and capable road COIl­

tractors. After consultation the Country Roads Board decided that it would submit a tender, but the price quoted would not enable that body to make a profit. The Board definitely decided to make an enormous loss, and to spend money raised out of motor registration fees and drivers' licences.

Mr. LIND.-Was there a loss?

Mr. DILLON.-I do not know. I had become so disgusted with the whole thing tha t I did not make further inquiries about it. These matters are very involved. I know, however, that the Country Roads Board undertook to do certain work for the State Electricity Commission for £4,000 or £5,000 less than the price sub­mitted by serious competitive private enterprises.

The members of the Labour party have indicated clearly by their actions that they are satisfied with the Government's administration. If I believed in the com­plete socialization of everything in this State I should be equally satisfied. I am glad that the Honorary ::M:inister (Mr. ){artin) who is now in charge of the Bill is satisfied-he believes in extreme socialism. The reason why the members of the )finist2rial corner party are sup­porting' the Government is that it has illtroduced the most extremely social­istic legislatioll ever enacted within the history of the State, and it is submitting such measures every day. The Honorary ~finister admits that what I have said is true. He desires to secure the support of the Labour party. I believe he really thinks in the same way as the members of the corner party. If the great majority of the Government supporters dared to tell the truth, they would acknowledge agreement with the views of the Labour party, but there is a difference between them and the members of that party. The La bour party is manly enough to say that it advocates these things, but" manly" is not the word to apply to the other mem­bel's. I leave it to the Honorary Minister to provide the necessary word to describe their attitude. The Government is delighted to have the help of such mem­bers, and it says to them, " Anything you say will go, provided we stay in office."

1100 Oountry Roads Board rASSEMBLY·l Fund Bill.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -I direct the attention of the honorable member to the fact that he is making excursions far fro111 the provisions of the Bill, and I should like him to come back to the Bill.

l\Ir. DILI~ON.-The State Electricity (Jommission cal1rd tenders for work on the Kiewa schemr, and certain information was supplied by tenderers. The Oom­missioll opclIed the tenders; they wer(' then taken to the Oountry Roads Board, and the Commission was informed that th(' Board would do the work for £4,000 lflf's than the ]o\\'rst tender. It did not matter if the Country Roads Board made a loss on thr ',,"ork becanse the money would come from Illotor rcgistration fees. Thr. Ministf'l' haR introduced a Bill to take certain llloney from t~e Country Roads Board and to place it in Consoli­dated Revenue. The Board would be re­imbursed out of the Unemployment Relief Fund, or from other sources.

1fr. LrXD.-Yon do not think the Board ('onld show a profit on that job?

1fr. DILLON.-Under the conditions of the tender the Board could not possibly show a profit.

Sir STAN LEY ARGYLE.-Why was it necessary to go through the farce of calling for tenders from private contractors?

~fr. DILI.JON.-N ot only did the State Electricity Commission go through that farcr, but it acquired inside information on what th(~ 'work was really worth, and then approaehed another Government in­strumentality. I have asked a number of questions relating to expenditure on plant for the Oountry Roads Board. I suggest to thr Honorary Minister that he should ascertain from the Board what percentage of the cost and interest on plant was provided for in its tender for the State El('ctricity Oommission job, and what pro­vision was made for a proportion of the suprrnSlOll charges, the salaries of members of the BOlncl, and ac1ministration costs. I invite t.he House to say that becanse the fillall('('s of the State have improved considerably since the intro­duction of the financial emergency legis­lation, it is no 101lger advisable that certain fef's should be temporarily removed from the Oountry Roncls Board Fund. r aRk the ~fillister to suggest to the Govern­ment that it sllonlcl ronsider tl1(' advisa­hility of not llHl.killg this a temporary

measure. There is a difference between motor registration fees and the fee charged for drivers' licences.

Mr. MARTIN .. -You suggest that the G0Vel'nment should consider making the transfer of certain fees from the Oountry Roads Board permanent?

Mr. DILLON.-If the Government said it believed revenue from motor registration and drivers' licences fees belonged to the State, and not to the Country Roads Board, I should support it. One fee is paid for the privi­lege of driving a motor vehicle; the other fee is naid to allow a driver to wear out the roids. The :Minister has not advanced sufficient reasons for the continuation of ('mergency financial legislation which WH~. brought about by the depression in 1932.

Mr. EVERARD (E'l'cZyn).-I am at variance with the honorable member fOl· Essendon on rertain aspects of this question. The Minister of Transport ont­lined to the House ccrtaill farts relating t<> the financial position of the State ill his second-reading speech, when he said-

Honorable mel11bl'r" arl' remillded that pro­vision has been made in the Budget to meet additiOllU1 expenditure this financial year, ",hil·h has been occasioned mainly by the followill.!.! factors :-

Arbitration and industrial awards £212,000 Increased costs of materials, &c. 221. OOe} Additional interest, exehallge, and

sinking fund payments ill 1!l40-41 163JH)(} National security-civil defence ;,)O,OO() Further provision for social services 38,000,

no total of Hi84,OO()

That statement was used as justification for t.he Government transferring from the Country Roads' Board licensing fee~ amountinp: to £95,000. The Minister also stated-

Provision is also made in the Bill for the discontinuance for another year of the grants from COJ1f\OJidated Rcvt>nue of £10.000 to the­Country Roads Board Fund and· £40.000 to. municipalities, which are mainly in till' metro­politan area.

I cannot understand a Minister telling­honorable members that because the­Government ha~ to meet increased ex­penditure in certain directions, thnt is: sufficient reason for it to rob the Country Roads Board of an amount that Pa;'­liament said should he set aside annuallv for the purposes of the Board. ThE>' renson· for mnkinp: available t.he fef'S:

/

,I j

.t i 1 I l i.

J i "I )

I

)

/

) i

1 i s

./

)

j

/ i

{-t'

\, , ... , ,

. I

\

~\

'" I

Oount1'Y Roads Board [15 OCTOBER, 1940.] Fund Bill. 1101

received from motor licences was that the Board was charged with the responsi­bility of providing roads in country and metropolitan areas. Because the Govern~ ment is short of money it now proposes to stop that gTan t. The Minister of Transport said, further-~o fa r as t he payment of the grant of

£40,000 to metropolitall nlllllicipalities from Consolidate(\ Revenue is concerned, it is only lo~'ca} that tItis R}lOuld be suspended at a time whell 110 proviHiun iR being made for the endowmellt of cOtllltl'y munidpalitieR.

Did any OIll' (,Y{:,l' heal' anything' so pl'e­-postel'ous? .\ Bill has jw;t been -passed for the sppeiul purpORt' of robbing the municipalities of their endowment, aud one of the reasons given for this Hill is that no provision is made for the endowment of country municipalities. If that is not sheer humbug, cant, and hypocrisy, I do not know what is! I cannot understand the Government advancing such a reason for suspending the endowment when it has just passed a Bill providing that 110

provision should be made. The Oountry Roads Board has donp a magnificent work. It has spent large I'Hnns of mone.v and made th(' country roads passable, but there are still many roads needed to serve the settlers in the outlying centres of the State.

Mr. DILLoN.-Have you seen the Oolac­Beeac road lately? If the Oountry Roads Board spent all this money to build roads in that district, it still would not have too much finance for the purpose.

Mr. EVERARD.-At one time I wad a member of the Pub1ic Accounts COIU­mittee. A certain Minister, in another Ohamber, had said that the roads were all made parallel with the railway lines. That committee gave him an effective answer and demonstrated that the :Milli,,­tel' did not know what he was talking about. It showed that one-fiftieth of the roads of Victoria run parallel to the rail­ways, and that a network of roads had been made throughout the Gippsland aiea enabling the producers in the outlying centres to get their products to market expeditiously, and so make a living. In the district mentioned by the honorable member for Essendon, the Country Roads Board has made splendid roads. The initial efforts to have this work ~arried out were made by the late Mr. McDo~ald.

the predecessor of the recent representa­tive of Polwarth, :Mr. Allan Mcl{. :M:cDon­aId, who was elected to the House of Representatives last month. The roads in that part of the State are of great service to the farmers, but they need to be extended to other ~entres. Various factors that have· involved the Government in an extra expenditure of £684,000 this year do not constitute a reason why municipalities and the Oountry Roads Board should be robbed of their right!! and hampered in their activities.

Victoria is a producing State, hut the teuuf'ncv of this G overnmellt and other Government?! has been to fo)'('e the small farmers off the land. The population of the towns and cities is being' swelled by an influx of people from country dis­tricts, and this legislation is ollly aggra­vating that situation. Statistics show that there are fewer farml3rs on the land to­day than there were 10 years ago. It is the duty of every Government to look after the small farmer. I spent last week-end ill the Western District, in the Port Fairy area, and almost every person I met wanted to know whether the farmers would be allowed to send their perishable products to market by road. I r<'plicd that I did not think any Government, especially a Oountry party Government. would deny the producer that right. ThH people also wanted to know if there would be any curtailment of the Oountry Hoads Board :Fund on account of petrol ration­ing. I said I hoped that would not be so. The Minister of Transport, in his second-reading speech, stated-

It is estimated that from motor registration fees and sums available under the Federal Aid Roads Agreement, the Country Ronds Board will havl' at its disposal this financial YP<lr an amount of £2,105,000, and the Board ngrees that this sum will be sufficient to meet it:; l'equiren1l'llts tor maintenance of the exist· illg '1urfa('eR and :;tructures, and fo), commit­ments in resp{'ct of certain cunRtl"Uct~oll work!'.

The Country Hoads Board would have to agl'l'(' that that sum was sufficient for its work if the Government st!id that was all it eould have. ..\.lthough this Bill will be passed, I hope the Government will not say that this transfer of funds from the Country Roads Board shonlcl be made at n tirn"e when no prOyiHioll ]8 being made for tlw endowment of ('OlUltI·\,

municipalitil'R. The Goverll11lt'llt ,,-ill

1102 Adjournment. r ASSEMBLY. I A (ljournment.

have the same excuse next year, and will introduce another Bill to curtail t]w funds to which the municipalitif's al'e justly entitled. I protest against the Government's action, and I trust it will not be repeated. I hope the' Government will not throw dust i u thE" eyes of the public in an attempt to cover np its actions. There is no excuse for the Government, when it can spend £684,000 on extra activities and when it nnticipates a return of £95,000 from motor licence fees during t.he current financial year.

The motion was agreed to.

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

ADJOURNMENT.

GOVERN¥ENT PRINTING OFFICE: STAFF' PROMOTIONS.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer ).-1 move-

That the House. at its rising, adjourn until ~o-morrow at half-past 2 o'clock.

In other words, the House will meet. at ~ o'clock.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer ).-1 move-

That the House do now adjourn,

Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda).-I V;i6h to bring under the notice of the Premier a matter of considerable urgency. Hon­orable members last week discussed at. great length the question of preference to returned soldiers in the Government Rp.l'vice. To-night I was interviewed by (I l'C'presentative of one of the branche.o; of the Returned Soldiers' League in the Service, namely, the chapel of the Go­vernment Printing Office. The informa­tion placed before me was that. the Go­,'('rnment Printer, Mr. Rider~ is due to 1 ('tire to-morrow, and that his place will he taken by Mr. Daw, who will becomr Acting Government Printer. The next in seniority is the printing sub-overseer, Mr. Gourley, who is a returned soldier. I understand that he has done the work before, and is said to be highly qualified in every way. He has been in the Government Printing Office since 1910, except for a period when he

was away at th€ war. The next officer in ordei' of 8eniority is the night overseer and heao rf'ader, 1\.11'. Boase, who is another returned soldier. The next man i~ the sellior reader, }\vIr. Lawler, who is ::180 a returned soldier. He had service 1J1 the Depnrt.ment prior to the Great ,Val'. Thesr men romplain that, in spite of the fact that three or four returned ~oldiers with practical experience are available, the position of printing over­seer now held by Mr. Daw has been cut and dried for a man who is practically a junior in the office. This officer is Mr. Brooks, and he occupies the position of computer. He came into the office in 1919, when he was fourteen years of age, and, after serving his time as a com­positor, ,vas made a computer.

Mr. CRE:\LEAN.-Who ,,-ill make the . appointment?

Mr. l1ICHAELIS.-The Public Se1'- . virr. Commissioner.

:M:r. CREMEAN.-It is scandalous to make such a complaint before anything has been done.

Mr. MICH1-~ELIS.-It is represented to me that it is proposed to pass over three or four returned soldiers and to place a junior man in the second position ~n the office. The Returned Soldiers' Lengue brought the subject under my notice with a request that I should do what I could to have the matter adjusted fairl,y to the returned soldiers. If ~{r. Brooks is appointed to the position, there will be no further promotions in the office for eight .veal'S, because the new Govern­ment Printer, Mr. Daw, has eight years to go before retiring. The result of the arrangem€nt will be that Mr. Gourley win lose annually £144, Mr. Boase £59, and Mr. Lawler £37. The salary of Mr. Brooks will jump from approximately £371 to about £588 per annum, and he will reach the position of second in the Government Printing Office over thp. heads of the returned soldiers. I have made inquiries, and am informed that the men proposed to be passed over are capable, and have done their work satisfactorily.

Mr. CREnfEAN.-What evidence is there that anyone will be passed over? Is it merely that they want to make quite sure that no one will be passed over ~

(

i (

I

) ~

) f }

{

J (

) \

J

} I ,..

/ ,

\ t

...

Adjournment. [16 OCTOBER, ] 940.] Adjournment. 1103

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-Is your in­formant an applicant for the position?

Mr. MIOIIAELIS.-No. I asked him whether he was an applicant, because I did not want to pull strings for any individual. He came to me on behalf of the chapel to make the complaint officially.

:Mr. ORRMEAN.-Thev have heard T,hat f'omebody may be appointed who, they think, ought not to be appointed.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-Not "may be," but t.hey say that everything has been arranged for the junior man to be appointed. I have tried to ascertain the qualifications of the individuals men­tioned. I am informed that the returned soldiers have had experience in handling men, and that Mr. Brooks is an account­ant, and has had no experience in hand­ling men. It is suggested that it will not be fair to pass over capable returned soldiers in favour of a junior officer. I refer the representations to the Premier, who is head of the Public Service~ and of the Government Printing Office, to look into the matter and make sure that the policy of preference to returned soldiers, an things being equal, is gjven effect to.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) .-All I can say in reply to the honorable member for St. Kilda is that I am not familiar with the circum­stances he has referred to. I know that the Government Printer, Mr. Rider, is about to retire, and that Mr. Daw has been appointed to the position. Beyond that I have no idea as to the next move. r do not think it is fair criticism for any honorable member to rise in this House and say that some position ha'3 been "cut and dried" for a part1cular individual, who ma.r or may not 1101(1 the n('eE'RQary qualifications.

~fr. HOLLWAy.-Tt wonld be of no 111'1'"'

f'omplaining after the appointment had hNm made.

~fr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-It is an appointment for which the Public Ser­"je8 Commissio1l(~r will have' to accept a lnrge measure of responsibility. The policy of the Government, as laid down in legislation, is "Preference to returned soldiers, all things being equal." I am hoping that there will be available a l'f'turncd soldier with the qualifieations necessary to justify his appointment; but, at the same time, it must be remembered

that the position is an important one, and I am sure that honorable members would not like to have any person appointed whose qualifications did not justify his appointment. I shall make inquiries regarding the allegations and try to ascertain, as far as that is possible, what is in the mind of the Public Service Commissioner regarding th~ filling of the vacancy.

The motion was agreed to. The H uuse adiourned at 10.40 p.m.

LEGISLAT'IVE ASSEMBLY. 1-1' ednesday, OciolJer 1 U, 1940.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater) took the chair at 3.12 p.m., and read the prayer.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD.

TRANSFER 'fO NEW PREMISES.

:Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda) asked the Chief Secretal'Y-

]. If the Workers' Compensation Board h~ to be moved to the new building of the State Accident Insurance omcc?

2. What rcnt is to be paid? 3. What rent is being paid at present? 4. Whence the revenue of the Board i8

derived? 5. Whether the Board is in favour of the

move? 6. 'What is the reason for the proposed

change?

For Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary), Mr. I-Iyland (!Enister of Transport).­The answers are-

1. Such transfer is contemplated. :!. This has not yet been assessed. 3. £7:')0 per annum, plus lO per cent. on

special fittings amounting to £40 158. per :~nnum.

4. The expemles <?f the Board are met by ~oJ1tributio1l8 from the insurance companies lllldertaking immrance under the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Acts.

;). The que~tion of the office accommodation :)j"uvilied for the Board is one for the deter­~llinatioll of the Government. A major reason i.nlln(,llcillg the purchaRe of the building in Collins-street, was to provide proper accom­modation for the State Accident Insurance Office and the Workers' Compensation Board, and the housing of the Board at its present address was a temporary arrangement pend­ing the completion of the new State Accident Insurance Office.

6. For the public convenience and in the interests of economical administration.

1104 Government r ASSEMBLY. 1 Pfinting Ojjiec.

HEFORlvfS PROPOSED BY LEGAL PROFESSION.

Idr. FIELD (Dandenong) asked the Attorney-Genel'ul-

If, having regard to its desirable and nOI1-contentiou~ character, the Government will bring down legislation this session, as recom­mended by the legal profession- (a) to pro­vide for the survival of personal actions in certain caseR notwithstanding death; (b) to amend the law relating to joint tortfeasors, as )-ecommended by the Bar Council of Victoria; and (0) to provide for the compulsory audit of solicitors' trust accounts and to establish an indemnity fund to reimburse victims of defalcations by solicitors?

For Mr. BAILEY (Attorney-General), Mr. Hyland (Minister of Transport).­Each of the matters mentioned in para­graphs (a), (b), and (c) is at present being investigated with a view to the introduction of legislation as suggested, but no assurance can yet be given that such legislation will be· introduced during the pn'sent session of Parliament.

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFIOE.

STAFF PROMOTIONS. Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda).-I desire

to make a personal explanation regarding a matter I brought forward last night on tho motion for the adjournment of the House. It relates to proposed appoint­ments in the Government Printing Office. Honorable members who were present last night may recall that I referred to a suggested appointment of an officer to take the place of the second in command in the GoYel'nment Printing Office, Mr. Daw, who hn-s been promoted to the posi­tion of .Acting Government Printer. My recollection of what I said is borne out by the 11 ansard proof of my speech, which I have just received. T~"o of the morning newspapers, the Sun and the Age, have published thjs morning rrports similar to ('a('l1 othrr. 1 shall read extracts from the report appearing in the 811.11,:-

"CUT AND DRIED" CAXDIDATK 1LL.A. ON PRI<:FERENCE.

Although the Government had declared its preference for returned soldiers, It comparative junior who was not a returned soldier wat; likely to succeed the Government Printer (Mr. T. Rider), who would retire to-day, said Mr. l\lichaelis (FA.P.) on the ad iOlll'nment of the Legislative AHsembly last night.

~fr. Miell:lcli:-. saill the presidcnt of the (loVl'rnmPllt. Printing- Chnpel-a representative of fI R.S.L. bran(~h-had told him the position wns "('ut and dried" for the junior offiec)'.

. . . . . . . . . Tf tllis junior got the job there would be no

promotion for eig-ht yeHr~ for three officers, all returned soldiers, who ,,"pn' dire('tly in lin., for thc position.

~fr. OAlx.-That is a fail' statement of the facts, is it not?

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-It is not. The report states that I said complaints had been made a bout the' appointment of the Acting Government Printer. There has, in fact, been no complaint regarding Mr. Daw's appointment, either by the returned soldiers in the Government Printing Office or by myself, and no such conclusion can be drawn from rearling the Hansard proof of my remarks. The suggestion I made was that the position vacated by Mr. Daw might be filled by tho appointment of a junior. In justice to Mr. Daw, and in fairness to myself-I certainly did not desjre to reflect On him or on his appoint­ment-I wish to bring the matter again before the House. The Hansard proof is very clear concerning what I said.

Mr. BARRY.-Is Mr. Da'v a returned soldier?

:Mr. MIOHAELIS. - I do lJOt know whr.thel' he is or is not. He was the: next in line for appointment as Govern­ment Printer, and he did not pass over nnybody's head in Recuring the position. For all reasons, and by common consent of the returned soldiers in the printing office, he is entitled to the appointment, and 110 que8tion has been raiserl in that regard. The newspaper reports make it appeal' that objection has been taken to his appojntment, and that I supported t.he objec60n. The Hansard report of my speech includes this passage:-

Thesp men (the returned soMier!';) ('omplain that, in spite of the fact that three or four returned soldiers with practica.l experience are available, the position of printing overseer now held by :Mr. Daw haR been eut a ncl dried for a man ":]10 is practically a junior in the office.

That quotation makes my attitude per­fectly clear.

Mr. OAIN.-If the honorable member for St. Rilda makes a personal explana­tion every time he takes exception to a.nything appearing in the press, he will have plenty to do.

I

)

f

) (

\

\ I '"~

\ \ i

\

\ j'

"

i

\

. \ .

Income Tax p6 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Rates) Bill. 1105

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-I do not object to anything that is said a bout me in the press, but the reports appearing this morning are unfair to :Mr. Daw, and the~­put my complaint in an entirely wrong light. They make me appear to com­plain about something I did not complain about. Such reports could prejudice Mr. naw in the eyes of some people.

HAWTHORN RETURNED SAILORS A~TD SOLDIERS TRUST

BILL. For Mr. BAILEY (Chief Secretary),

Mr. Hyland (Minister of Transport) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to vest in the City of Hawthorn the real and personal property governed by the trusts contained in a certain trust deed T'e1ating to a club for the use of Haw­thorn Returned Sailors and Soldiers and to provide for the carrying out of the said trusts by the council of the said city, Rnd for other purposes.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a

first time.

PAWNBROKERS BILL. For Mr. BAILEY (Chief Secretary),

Mr. Hyland (Minister of Transport) moved for leave to ,bring in a Bill to amend the Pawnbrokers Act 1928.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill waR brought in and read a

first time.

INCOME TAX (RATES) BILL. The House went into Committee of

Ways and Means.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I move-

That, subject to the Income Tax Acts (including the legislation proposed to be enacted to give effect to this resolution), income tax (including special tax) shall be levied and paid for the financial year beginning on the first day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty, at the rates hereinafter provided in this resolution, that is to say:-

(a) The rate of income tax in respect of a taxable income derived by a person (not being a company) from personal exertion shall be as follows:-

If the taxable income does not exceed £2,500, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income--

shall be 7 253/1,000 pence where the taxable income is One pound; and

shall in('rl'(1:-;e 11lliformly by ;{/1,000 poncc for eyery pound hy whiell tho taxahle income exceed,. One pound.

J f the taxabll' iu('ollle exel'eels £2,500 but does not exceed £5,000. the rate of tax for l'very poun(l of taxable income-

shall be 14 1,879/2,500 pence where the taxable incomc is £2,501; and

shall increase uniformly by 1/625 pence for" every pound by which the taxahle income exceeds £2,501.

If the taxable income exceeds £5,000 but does not exceed £10,000, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income--

shall be 18 3,753/5,000 pence where the taxable income iF! £5,001; and

shall increase uniformly by 3/5,000 pence for every pound by which the taxahle income exceeds £5,001.

If the taxable income exceeds £10,000, the rate of tax for every pound of taxalM income-

shall be 21: pence. (b) The rate of income tax in respect of a

taxable income derived bv a person (not being a company) from property shall be as follows:-

If the taxable income does not exce('d £2,500, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income--

sha]} be 14 3/H2;) pence where the taxahlt> income is One pound; and

shall increase uniformly by 3/625 pence for every ponnd by which the taxahle income exceed~ One pound.

If the taxable income exceeds £2,500 bllt does not eX(,(,l'd £5,000, the rate of tax for every pound of taxable income-

shall be 2H 7/2,fiOO pence where the taxahl(' income is £2,501; and

shall increase uniformly by 7/2,500 pence for every pound by which the taxahle income exceeds £2,501.

If the taxable income exceeds £5,000 bllt does not exceed £10.000, the rate of tax fOl'

every ponnd of taxable income-shall he ~a 7/fl,OOO pence where the tax­

able income is £5,001; and shall increaRe uniformly by 7/5,000 pen('('

for every pound by which the taxahle income exceeds £5,001.

If the taxable income exceeds £10,000, the rate of tax for e\'ery pound of taxable income-

shall be 40. pence. (0) The rates of income tax in reRpect of It

taxable income derived by a person (not being a company) partly from personal exertion and partly from property shall be as follows:-

(i) For every pound of taxable inconll' derived from personal exertion, thp rate of tax shall be ascertained by dividing the total amount of the tax that would be payable under thl' legislation proposed to be enacted to give effect to paragraph (a) of thiR resolution, if the total taxable income of the taxpayer were derived exclu­sively from personal exertion, by the amount of the total taxahle income.

1106 Income Tax I ASSEMBLY·l (Rates) Bill.

(ii) For every pound of taxable income derived from property, the rate of tax shall be ascertained by dividing the total amount of the tax that would be payable under the legislation proposed to be enacted to give effect to paragraph (b) of this resolution, if the total taxable income of the taxpayer were derived exclusively from property, by the amount of the total taxable income.

(d) The rates of income tax payable by a company shall be as follows:-

(i) For every pound of the taxable income of a company (other than a mutual life assurance company) the rate of tax shall be 24 pence.

( ii) For every pound of the taxable income of a mutual life assurance company the rate of tax shall be-

with respect to its mutual life assurance business only, 12 pence; and

with respect to its other business, 24 pence:

Provided that, where the articles of association of a life assurance com­pany provide that a percentage of its profits in the year of income is to be distributed among the life assurance policy holders of the company, then, for the purposes of this paragraph (d) of this resolution-

the rate for every pound of the amount represented by the like percentage of the taxable amount of the income of the company from life assurance business shall be 12 pence; and

the rate for every pound of the taxable amount of the re­mainder of the income of the company shall be 24 pence.

(iii) For every pound of interest in respect of which a company is liable pursuant to section one hundred and eleven of the Income Tax (Assessment) Act 1936 to pay income tax the rate of tax shall l.1e 16 pence.

(e) The rate of special tax shall be as follows:-

If the taxable income-

Does not exceed £1,000 Exceeds £1,000 but does not

exceed £1,250 Exceeds £1,250 but does not

exceed £1,750 Exceeds £1,750 but does not

exceed £2,000 Exceeds £2,000 but does not

exceed £2,500 Exceeds £2,500

The rate per £100 payahle on the taxable Income

shall be-

Six shillings Seven shillings

Eight shillings

Nine shillings

Eleven shillings

Twelve shillings and sixpence

(f) Notwithstanding anything ill the fore­going provisions of this resolution. where a person would, apart from the legislation proposed to be enacted to gh'e etfect to

Mr, A. A, Duns/an,

paragraph (e) and this paragraph (f) of this resolution, be liable to pay income tax of an amount less than Five shillings, the income tax (not including special tax) payable by that person shall be Five shillings.

The motion was agreed to, and the resolution was reported to the House and adopted.

Leave was given to Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premier and Treasurer) and Mr. Hyland (Minister of Transport) to bring in a Bill to carry out the resolution.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) brought in a Bill "to declare the rates of income tax for the year be­ginning on the first day of July, One thousand nine hundred and forty," and moved that it be read a first time.

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

ADMINISTRATION AND PROBATE DUTIES BILL.

The House went into CO,mmittee of Ways and Means.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I move-, ( 1) That in the case of any estate (whether , real or personal or both) of any deceased person with respect to which a statement has pursuant to section one hundred and fifty-two of the Administration and Probate Act 1928 been filed on or after the 23rd day of October, 1930, in addition to the duty payable thereon pursuant to Part VI. of the said Act and Part 1. or Part II. (as the case may be) of the Tenth Schedule to the said Act and pursuant to the Administration and Probate Duties Act 1~29, there shall during the period commen­cm~ on the 1st day of January, 1941, and endmg on the 31st day of December 1941, be paid additional duty of an amount' equal to 10 per centum of the total amount of the duty otherwise chargeable; and

(2) That in the case of any settlement ot property (whether real or personal or both) to be registered pursuant to section one hundred and seventy-seven of the Administra­tion and Probate Act 1928 on or after the 23rd day of October, 1930, in' addition to the duty payable thereon pursuant to Part III. of the Tenth Schedule to the said Act and pursuant to the Administration and Probate Duties Act 1929, there shall during the period commen­cing on the 1st day of January, 1941, and ending on the 31st day of December, 1941, be paid additional duty of an amount equal to 10 per centum of the total amount of the duty otherwise chargeable.

The motion was agreed to, and the resolution was reported to the House and adopted.

Leave was given to Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premier and Treasurer) and Mr. Old (Minister of Water Supply) to bring in a Bill to carry out the resolution.

J I

!

.r I

,J I

/

I

/

f ? j ) (

; f ,i

; I

/ )

f t

I

~ / I , ) ,

\

\ \"

\

\

!

\ l

\

\

Stamps (Increa.sed Duty [16 OCTOBER, 1940.] Oontinuance) Bill. 1107

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) brought in a Bill "to con­tinue the operation of Part III. of thr Finance Act 1930," and moved that it be read a first time.

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

STAMPS (INCREASED DUTY CONTINUANCE) BILL.

The House went into Committee of Ways and Means.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I move-

That on a'nd after the first day of January One thousand nine hundred and forty-one and until the thirty-first day of December One thousand nine hundred and forty-one inclusive there shall be charged (under and subject to the Stamps Acts) for the use of His Majesty his heirs and successors the several stamp duties hereinafter set forth or referred to upon and for the several instruments hereinafter set forth:-

1. Upon and for any Receipt or Diseharge given for or upon payment of money­

amounting to £2, but not amounting to £25-Twopence

amounting to £25 or upwards-Three· pence-

(with the same exemptions with re;;pect to the said instruments as in the Third Schedule to the Stamps Act 1928 as amended by any Ad).

2. Upon and for the several instrumenb specified in the Third Schedule to the Stamps Act 1928 as amended by any Act-

(a) in the portion of the said Schedule under the heading "1. Bills of Ex­change and Promissory Notes" in­cluded in the expression " Bill of Ex­change payable on demand (cheque, &c.) "; and

(b) under the fonowing heading!":-VI.-Sub-heading (A)-Convey­

ance or Transfer on Sale of any Real Property; and Sub-heading (B).-Land Transfer:

VII.-Partition or division of any real property where any consideration is given for equality. Instruments for effecting same:

VIII.-Lease, or agreement for a lease of any lands or tene­ments for any definite or indefinite term:

IX.-Settlement or Gift, Deed of; X.-Annual Licence-

additional stamp duties equal in amount to the stamp duties specified with respect to the said instruments respectively in the said Schedule as so amended (with the same exemptions with respect to the said instruments as in the said Schedule as so amended).

This motion provides for the re-enact­ment of the stamp duties on a basis similar to that of last year. It is in accordance with the proposals indicated in my Budget speech, and does not per­mi t of any var1 a tion in reIn tion to exis t­ing rates of stamp duties.

The motion was agreed to, and the resolution was reported to the House and adopted.

Leave was given to :Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premier and Treasurer) and Mr. Old (Minister of Water Supply) to bring in a Bill to carry out the resolution.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) brought in a Bill "to con­tinue the operation of certain provisions of the Stamps Acts relating to the impo­sition of increased stamp duties on cer­tain instruments," and moved that it be read a first time.

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

L..:\.ND T .. \X BILL. Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and

Treasurer) .-1 move-That this Bill be now read a second time.

A Bill of this typc is submitted annually, Ilncl this measure is required to declare the rate of land tax for the year ending the 31st of December, 1941. It is necessary to enact the rate to be applied to the assessments issued as the rate of land tax is imposed for only one year. This Bill, therefore, re-enacts the samp rate as that which operated last financia 1 year.

The rate is a flat one of one halfpenny for every £1 of the taxable unimproved value of the land. This rate has been the same since 1936-37, in which year a super tax of 5 per cent., which had been in force since 1922, was abandoned.

The collections on account of land tax for each financial year since 1934-35 hav(' been:-

1934-35 £495,000 1935-36 £494,000 1936-37 £492,000 1937-38 £498,000 1938-39 £482,000 1939-40 £490,000

It is estimated that the collections of land tax for the current financial year will amount to £485,000.

ll08 Public Works Loan rASSEMBLY.l and Application Bill (No.2).

No variation in the rate of taxation is proposed, and as the Bill is purely a re­enactment, I hope that the House will be prepared to deal with it as expeditiously as possible.

On the motion of Sir 8TANLEY ARGYLE (Toora7c) , the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, October 22.

PUBLIO WORKS LOAN AND APPLIOATION BILL (No.2).

Mr. MARTIN (Honorary Minister).­J mQve-

Thnt this Bill be now read a second time.

The Bill is to authorize the raising of money and to apply it to the carrying out of various public works. Provision is ineluded that money may be applied from the State Loans Repayment Fund. The total amount provided in the Bill is £449,000. Of that sum, £100,000 will be absorbed in the erection of new school buildjngs and for additions to and the remodelling, removal, and re-erection of existing buildings - including the pro­vision of furniture and fittings-and the erection of residences in connection with primary, technical, higher elementary and high schools, and expenditure incidental thereto. This amount will be mainly spent on technical schools.

The rapid expansion of manufacturing industries in ~ecent years, with their ever-increasing demand for technically­trained personnel, has been reflected in the continually growing demand for tech­nical school training. The national policy of encouraging secondary industries to provide employment for an increasing population and for the purposes of defence is wholly dependent upon a wide­spread and highly efficient system of tech­nical and continued education. The development of such a system requires expenditure, but it is certain that funds devoted to such work are funds well invested, and will give a return to the State.

The sum of £80,000 is included for erection and remodelling of the Russell­street police headquarters. The scheme provides for offic.'es, dining-room, gym­nasium, sleeping accommodation for 150 m~n, and also a wireless section, and it will provide facilities for administratjon of the forces not hitherto nYllilabl~. The total rstimated cost is £100,000., of which £20,000 was provided in a previous Bill.

For the erection of, additions to, remodelling, fittings and furnishings of mental hospitals, £65,000 is included. This amount will be spent mainly on the scheme for replacement of old buildings used as male wards at Ballarat. These buildings were condemned some time ago, and they are unsuitable for further use. Their replacement is urgent, and with the completion of the works now provided for, the old buildings can be demolished.

For mental defectives, £19,000 is in­cluded in the Bill. This will provide for a dining room and scullery at Stawell, for completion of the administrative and nurses' block at Travancore, and for the provision of accommodation at J anefield to enable mental defectives to carry out farm work. To augment the accommoda­tion at Greenvale Sanatorium, the sum of £25,000 is provided. Last year £13,000 was made available, enabling three wards for the accommodation of patients to be constructed. With this new money, the administrative and nurses' block will be erected, thereby completing the unit.

Towards the cost of erection and fittings and furnishings· of infectious diseases hospitals at Geelong, Bairnsdale, Omeo, and Warragul, £18,000 is included in the Bill. Provision is made to replace the building destroyed by fire at Omeo. The accommodation of the other three hospitals is obsolete and quite unsuitable for the treatment of infectious diseases, and new wards will be provided at each of them. In all cases the Government contribution represents one-half of the total cost. Tenders for the new ward at Geelong are now being invited.

Provision of £20,000 is included to allow of the replacement by a three-story building of the ones destroyed by fire at Longerenong Agricultural Oollege. At Dookie Oollege, houses for married em­ployees and a building for single em­ployees will be provided. For the Ports and Harbours Branch, the construction of a new vessel f or the lighterage of explosives, at an estimated cost of £10,000, is a further item. This is consequent on increased business, par­ticularly in connection with the manu­facture of detonators, which must not be carried in a lighter with other explosives. The reconstruction of the hull of the dredge Pioneer, operated by the Puhlic

) .. J /

(

I'

! /

/ ,-

J

;

J < I (

,) I

; ,/

:'

"

I

)

1 \

! ,-

I

Public Works Loan f16 OOTOBER} 1940.] and Application Bill (No.2). 1109

Works Department, has been found to be necessary, and £50,000 is accordingly in­cluded in the measure for that purpose.

Works are at present in progress for the construction of the new public offices at Ballarat. The sum of £28,000 was included in a previous Bill for the pur­pose, and a further amount of £2,000 iH now provided to allow complption at a total cost of £30,000. A new story will b(' added to the Taxatloll Offic(' in Melbourne, at a cost to the Stat€' of £6,ROO. This represents one-third of the totul ('ost, of whirh the Federal Oovernment will provide the balance. ~ \ liew ward for the treatment of tuber­('ulosis patients at Oresswell Sanatoriulll is to be provided, at a cost of £4,000. This is consequent mainly on account of the number of cases detected during the examination of A.I.F. recruits.

The lowering of the Hobson's Day sewer, which is the main outlet for a con­siderable extent of the ~lelbourne sewer­age system, is deemed a necessary work to enable the deepening and widening of the River Yarra shipping channel, ap­proaching the main docks. The dock~ will then be available for more and larger ships. Agreements are being prepared between the Melbourne Harbour Trust, the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, and the Government, provid­ing for the carrying out of the work. The Government contribution is to be one­third of the total. In this financial year it is anticipated that the work will b(' mainly boring and investigatory, and that £15,000 will cover the cost. An amount of £5,000 is included in this Bill for the Government's share. Preliminary estimates indicate that the total cost wiil he in the vicinity of £200,000, and that the work will take three years to complete.

An amount of £44,000 is included in the Bill to allow the State Ooal }fine authori­ties to proceed with the developmenta1 works, which are at present proceeding in the Kirrak area. A.n amount of £60,000 was made available in a previouR Bill, but increased provision is nercssory, mainly on account of the followin~ factors :-

1. An increase of approximately 11 per cent. in wage costs since submission of the original esti­mate;

Session 1940.-[48]

2. Increased cost of materials and equipment;

3. Additional safety provisions neces­sary to comply with the recom­m~n~a tions of the Royal Com­mISSIOn;

4. I~engthy opening out and driving in stone, due to faults and irregu­la"r coal measures, instead of a short opening out as originally anticipated.

This completes a list· of the works, all of which are necessary, and in some cases­urgent, and the Bill is accordingly com­mended to the House for approval. I shall conclude with a bri(~f descrip­tion of the principal provisions of the Bill. Paragraph (a) of sub-clause (1) of clause 2 gives authority to increase the amount of Victorian Government stock by £449,000. Paragraph (b) of sub-clause (1) of clause 2 gives authority to issue debentures in lieu of stock with interest at a rate to be fixed liy the Governor in Oouncil. Sub-clause (2) pro­vides that the provisions of the Victorian Government Stock' Acts shall apply to the stock inscribed. In sub-clause (3), the provisions of the Victorian Govern­lllent Debentures Regulations Acts are made to apply to the debentures issued, while sub-clause (4) brings the clause within the provisions of the Common­wealth and States Financial Agreements Acts. Olause 3 gives authority for the issue and application of the proceeds of the sale of the said stock or debentures, and also of moneys in the State Loans Repayment Fund for works specified in the schedule.

On the motion of Mr. HOLLWAY (Ballarat), the debate was adjourned until Wednesday, October 23.

WATER BILL. The debate (adjourned from October

2) 011 the motion of Mr. Martin (Honorary Minister) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­This Bill is the third instalment of amendments to the Water Act 1928, and, although there is nothing of great im­portance in the instalment, because of the parlous condition of the finances of the State Rivers and Water Supply Oom­mission it is. necessary to peruse care­fully what is intended by the measure.

1110 Water r ASSEMBLY·l Bill.

In October, 1939, when debating the Water Bill then before the House, I directed attention to the finances of the Rtate Rivers and Water Supply Commis­sion, and I propose to repeat what I then said because honorable members should be ~ware of where the State is drifting in thiR regard. In the report of the Auditor-General for ID3S-39-the last report available-it is shown that the dis­bursements of the Oommission were in excess of the cash collected for one year by more than £2,000,000. ~hat is an appalling result for one year s transac­tions. The net return on the average capital liability of the Commission is 14s. IOd. per cent., but the taxpayer, through Consolidated Revenue, has to pay £4 7s. 6d. per cent., which is the interest paid bv the State on the borrowed mOlley of ti~is activity. I shall anticipate the Ullswer to my statement, that there is th.e nnspecified advantage frorp. the expendI­ture of the Oommission in the way of im­proved production, land settlement, and so on. I admit all that, but it does not mean that we should allow a very im­pOl'tant Government Department to drift into a state of hopeless insolvency.

One item in the Bill follows a recom-1lI1'lldation of the Royal Commission on Water Supply. The chairman of t~e State Rivers and Water Supply CommIS­sion Mr. East, has reported on the recom­men'dations of the Royal Commission, but only one of the Commission's recommen­dations is given effect to in the Bill. In two previous instalments other recom­mendations were put into effect, but no effort has been made to implement some of the more important recommendations. I think it is well that honorable members . should remember what those recommen­dations were. One important matter, froUl the point of view of water users, is that the Government has taken action to deal with arrears of water rates. The second recommendation of the Royal Commission was that the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission should be reconstructed on the lines of the State Electricity Commission, with a view to dissociating it from political control.

A number of honorable members, in­cluding, I think, members of the Ministry, consider that the Commission should be under political control. That recommen­dation of the Royal Commission, if given

Sir Stanley Argyle.

effect would involve a great deal of re­adjustment of finances, but it would place the water Commission on a business foot­ing. Another recommendation of the Royal Commission that has not been carried out is as follows:-

That the CommiRRion should then he given complete control of its finances, which should be separated entirely from the Budget, and it should then meet all its operating costs and interest charges from revenue collected each year, .

That recommendation would appear to be a counsel of perfection, but it cannot be denied that the present situation is not satisfactory. The Bill deals particularly with the Carrum Waterworks Trust. Constituted 50 years ago, it went from bad to worse finan­cially until it became insolvent and the Auditor-General had to take over the works, the control of which was later transferred to the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission. This Bill converts that waterworks district into a drainage district under the control of the Oommis­sion. Not only the Car rum district but the waterworks districts of Koo-wee-rup and Cardinia were frequently flooded over a period of years, because of the incapacity of the channels to discharge the flood water. The causes of the siltation of the channels were faulty construction and the lack of money for their proper main­tenance over a period of years. A memo­randum prepared by the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission sets forth the history of the Carrum swamp lands. Under the new arrangement the high land areas surrounding the present waterworks district will be properly drained and the land holders will pay their fair share of the cost of maintaining the drains .

Mr. OLD.-That was part of the pro­posal submitted ·by the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission, but provision for it is not made in the Bill.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The Com­mission will have power to re~assesa the rate over the whole area.

Mr. OLD.-The Bill gives the Commis­sion authority to increase or reduce, by Order in Council, the existing area of the wa terwor ks district.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-In that case, the Commission will have authority to enlarge the area, and thereby spread the burden of cost of flood protection over

.­I

I {

Water f16 OCTOBER, 1940.] Bill. 1111

the whole urea affected. Ulause 2 of the Bill deals with the transfer of capital liability to the extent of £12,000 from the accounts of the Oommission to the State in respect of u number of small towns, 80 that the water rate may be reduced to 3s. 6d. in the £1. The rates now charged in these .towns range from 48. to 58. in the £1, and I note in a memorandum furnished by the Minister that the lowest mte i8 3s. 7<1. in the £1. I suppose this is a forlll of relief that must be given to strup:gling townspeople in outback dis­tri(~ts when' the burden of the water rate is mol'(' than the ratepayers can carry. 1 take no exception to the provision.

Mr. OLD.-The clause relates only to nrhan waterworks districts.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That iR 80,

and the· districts affeeted are named in the schedule to the Bil1. They are mostly small towns. Clause 3 deals with the Carrum waterworks district, to which I have referred. Supplementing the re­marks I ha ve made concerning the C~al'1'um district, I shall quote recommen­dation No. 10 of the Royal Oommission on Water Supply:-

That landholders in the Koo-wee-rup, Car­dinia., and Carrum districts could not meet the cost of dealing with flood waters brought down on their reclaimed lands from surrounding high lands, and that the English system of rating the entire contributing rutclllnent area should be instituted to provide for the maintenance of arterial water course:::; carrying "upland" waters through reclaimed areas. The financial position of these districts was shown to be such that without extension of rating on lines suggested, they could not possibly provide for the adequate maintenance of the works upon which they depend for protection.

As I have explained, the Bill gives autho­rity to the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission to extend the area of the Car­rum wat€rworks district. In that way the disability of the land holders will be re­moved. Clause 4 amends section 56 of the Water Act 1928, which deals with the preparation of a register of lands in an irrigation and water supply district. Section 56 of the principal Act was amended by the Water Act 1939, and in drafting clause 4 of this Bill the Parlia­mentary Draftsman has practically recast the amended section to enable the Com­mlSSlon to revise individual entries in a register at any time. An area may be-

come unsuitable for irrigation through all alteration in the partition of the land, by sale from one person to another, (), some people may be left with areas llOt

sufficiently provided with facilities for. irrigation or drainage. The Commission is to be permitted to alter the register of lands to correct those anomalies. The need for such a provision was overlooked when the original Rill was drafted, and 'when the amending measure was passed last session. This matter was not delllt with by the Royal Commission.

Mr. OLD.-The need for this amend­ment was suggested by the State Rivers and 'Vater Supply Commission.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-...\s a re­sult of experience, the Commission has found thRt land has altered in character, either bpcoming fit or unfit for irrigation, through being subdivided. The machinery is now being provided to enable the Com­mission to deal with individual cases. Clause 5 will rectify a further anomaly which has been discovered. The appoint­ment of district appe-al Boards was pro­vided for by legislation so that an irrigator could obtain relief by hav­ing his water rights reduced; in other words, he might desire less responsibility than he had. There was, ho.wever, no provision to meet the case of an irrigator wanting his water rights increased because some one else had been given water rights, thereby re­ducing the quota available to the first irrigator. This is an important amend­ment because it will provide the means of removing injustices in the allotment of water rights.

Clause 6 lays down certain rules as to what shall be done in relation to the sub­divisions of private lands to which a water right has been apportioned. Will the Minister explain why the expression " in accordance with a plan of subdivision sealed by the Commission" is used in sub­clause (1) ~ I presume the term " approved" was not sufficient.

Mr. OLD.-The official seal of the Com­mission will be placed on the document to show that it was the subdivision ap­proved by the Commission_

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - Have some persons disregarded the wishes of the Commission in respect of subdi­visions?

1112 Water rASSEMBLY·l' Bill.

, Mr. OLD.-Disputes have arisen as to what has been approved.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-In his 'second-reading speech the Honorary Minister in charge of the Bill said-

The Commission already has power to with­bold consent to a plan of subdivision, and has frequently done so until the plan has been amended to meet water supply requirements. TIle usual p~actice has been to approve of the plan, whe~ suitably amended, subject to the subdivider undertaking to carry out the works necessary for the irrigation of the separate portions. In many cases subdividers have failed to honour such undertakings, and the purchasers of the subdivided land have been unable to obtain any security of water supply.

Mr. OLD.-Unfortunately, such cases ha ve occurred.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Does the sealing of a plan make it an official document~

:Ur. OLD.-Should it be challenged in a Oourt, it will be accepted as evidence, if it bears the seal of the Oommission.

Sir STANLEY ... ARGYLE.-It will then be apparent that there has been a departure from the conditions entered into between the Oommission and the sub­divider ~

Mr. OLD.-YeS.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I am glad to have that .explanation. Olause 7 deals with the cost of construction of water supply works and the establishment of a fund to defray maintenance charges. It is an alteration of the amendment agreed to in the Water Act 1937, and it .provides that a sum, to be assessed by the Oommission, shall be placed to the credit of a fund to be used for the pur­pose of meeting maintenance charges which may arise. The remaining clauses of the Bill are purely machinery pro­visions, and they provide improved methods to comply with the Act, as the resu It of the experience of the Oommis­sion. On the whole, I think the Bill is another instalment of the necessary amendment foreshadowed by the Royal Commission, but the big reform dealing with nnance is still being avoided. I am hoping that the Government may still see fit to reconsider its policy in this matter, with a view to rescuing this very impor­tant activity from the prospect of hope­less insolvency.

Mr. FIELD (Dandenong).-I do not propose to traverse the various clauses of the Bill, because they have already been minutely examined by the Leader of the Opposition, and were explained in detail by the Honorary Minister (Mr. Martin) in his second-reading speech. They are for the most part of a machinery and administrative character. Their desirability is evidenced by the support of the Leader of the Opposition; and I think an examination of the Min­ister's speech will show that they are pro­posals to which the House should assent. I feel, however, that' I should devote a I

little attention to clause 3, which relates "'_ to the' Carrum Waterworks Trust. That ~, is my immediate concern in addressing i myself to this Bill. The effect of clause 3 will be to abolish the present Oarrum Waterworks Trust and to provide for the administration of its affairs by the State Rivers and Water Supply Oommission. That will be done by converting the dis-trict formerly administered by the trust into a drainage district. Once the dis­trict becomes a drainage district it will come under the control of the Commis­sion, and, at the same time, there will be transferred to the general body of tax­payers a liability of £27,000.

In the course of the explanation of the Bill by the Honorary Minister, the Leader of the Opposition asked whether the inability of the trust to carry this liability was due to there being an insufficient number of settlers or to the settlers not being able to pay their way. An examination of the history of the trust shows that, in the main, the settlers have been unable to carry the heavy capital liabilities with which they were saddled, and that their inability to do so has not been entirely their own fault. To realize what they have had to contend with, it is necessary to examine the history of the area and the measures taken by the Government to counter-act the difficulties experienced there. Originally, the area, which is now known as the Oarrum district, was the Oarrum swamp. It consists of 13,000 acres which were, for the most part, under water, or ' were inadequately drained and were covered with reeds and marshy growth. On a strip of high land near the beach are the towns of Aspendale, Ohelsea, and Carrum, and other settlements, and lying 4 or 5 miles back of them was the swamp.

\ ')

i

~ {

Water 116 OCTOBER) ] 040. J Bill. ]113

'I

\

) "

, \

'. 1 t waR thought, about the year 1874, thHt some attrmpt should he made to 01'1' in and reeluim the area. The first attempt was made by the Dundenong Shire Oouncil, and,' necessarily, it was of a restricted character because of financ-iul difficulties. The Dandenong ('ouncil was not able to achieve very much, and shortly afterwards an appeal was made to the Government for assistance. At that time there was on the statute­book legislation regarding irrigation and water supply, as opposed to drainage, and it provided for liberal financial assistance to trusts established for the purpose of carrying out water supply or irrigation works. In order to have the work done, the residents decided to make application to the Government for the constitution of a waterwol'ks trust, although the pur­PORP' wnE1 not to supply water or to irrirratc the land, but to drain it effec­ti yely. So, by a kind of fiction, they est:! blished in the area the Oarrum Water­works Trust, which was, in fact, a drainage trust. Later that had a sequel, on '\"hich I do not intend to dilate, but it is interesting to notice that very shortly afterwards the trust found itself in finan­ci n I difficulties, not altogether because of d('faults by the ratepayers in the area served by it, but chiefly because the works had proved inadequate and in­effective, and because of other conditions over which the trust had no control.

Shortly after the works were estab­lished, much siltation was noticed. That affected the carrying. capacity of the drains, and flooding occurred. Later, with the increase of settle­ment in the external catchment areas in the hills in the direction of Dandenong and Ferntree Gully, flood waters came down much more quickly than they had done previously, and the drains proved still more inadequate. It is remarkable that, whereas in 1889 the authorities estimated that in an unusually

\ heavy flood 1,400 cusecs of flood water . came down the Dandenong Oreek, in 1934 ;, the same creek yielded 17,000 cusecs.

\

It is recognized that in these circum­stances extensive works will be required to cope with the flood waters from the upper regions, and, therefore, it cannot be said that the failure of the settlers to meet their obligations was entirely their

own fault. The fact is that their diffi­culties were due to matters entirely be­yond their control.

Although the trust was nominally a waterworks trust, for supplying water to ra tepayers in the district, the ratepayers were without water, and one of the reasons why they were not able to meet their commitments was that they were flooded out during wet periods and without necessary water in dry periods. There is, therefore, the anomaly of an irrigation district where the settlers are unable to pay their rates for the reason that the irrigation trust is unable to supply them with water. The Bill pro­poses to relieve the ratepayers of the Oarrum Waterworks Trust of the pay­ment of interest on £27,000 capital liability, which they have hitherto had to bear; in future, the general taxpayers of the State will have to carry the load. I think it will be admitteu that, in view of the unusual circumstances, and in view of the fact that the Royal Oommis­sion on Water Supply recommended that at Oardinia and Koo-wee-rup the liabilities of settlers should be transferred to the State, it is only just that some provision should be made for the rate­payers of the Oarrum Waterworks Trust.

One matter to which I should like to direct attention has been referred to by the Leader of the Opposition. He pointed out that by this clause of the Bill the Oarrum Waterworks Trust will be­come a drainage district, and that, under the provisions of the Water Acts, it will be competent for the Governor in Council to extend the area. The Royal Oommis­sion indicated that those external catch­ment areas that contribute to the flooding of the Oarrum district should be called upon to bear some of the responsibility. If that recommendation is adopted it will involve an extension of the area, and some persons who have never had to pay water rates will be called upon to do so. I ask the Minister to give an assurance that before any extension of the area is decided upon he win ensure that reasonable notice is given to the municipalities and other parties concerned, so that they can have an opportunity to express their views on the proposal.

Mr. OLD.-I have no hesitation in giving the honorable member that assur­ance, which will apply as long as I am Minister.

1114 Water r ASSEMBLY·l Bill.

Mr. FIELD.-I hope that promises made by the Minister will be honoured by his successor. But as there is no doubt that the Bill now under consideration will soon become law, the Minister may yet be asked to give effect to his assurance.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-How long do you think the Minister will remain in office?

Mr. FIELD.-I do not propose to com­mit myself on that question.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-The reason for my question is that I want to know how long I shall be in office.

Mr. FIELD. - It is clear that the Premier hus read this morning's press, and is apparently in an inquisitive frame of mind. To return to the Bill, I am happy to know that the Minister of Water Supply will consult the parties to whom I have referred, if and when it is proposed to extend the area. Owing to the fiction that the drainage institution is nominally an irrigation trust and a supplier of water, a peculiar set of circumstances arises. Persons who are supplied with water in the residential areas on the fringe of Chelsea and neighbouring towns are within what is described as an urban district, and are not liable to be charged with both an urban water rate and a rural water rate in the trust's area. Consequently, those whose properties were connected with the urban supply were no longer responsible for the payment of rates to the Carrum Waterworks Trust. It has been held that those persons receive a direct benefit from the operations of the trust, and I believe that if an exten­sion of the area is made they will be brought into the scheme. In a large number of cases the persons concerned are earning small salaries, while several others are pensioners.

It has been suggested by the Commis·· sion-this information is from what may be regarded as an unofficial source, for the accuracy of which I am not prepared to vouch-that, if an extension is made, the rate will prob­ably be at about 2d. in the £1 on the unimproved capital value, provided that a uniform system of rating is adopted. That suggestion is contained in the report of the engineer, Mr. Lupson. It is proposed, however, not to institute a uniform scheme

but to establish three divisions-the first of which will embrace those who receive the greatest benefit; the seco.nd, those to whom the benefit is not so direct; and t.hp third, those who receive little benefit. If-as has been suggested-some of the persons to whom I have referred are obtaining a direct benefit, they will be placed in the first division and will pay considerably more than 2d. in the £1 on annual capital. I understand that, in the case of a uni­form rate, the average unimproved capital value per allotment will be approximately £2; but if these consumers are put into the higher class they will have to pay something like £4 or £5 a year. As they are persons who will find it exceedingly difficult to bear that burden, I ask the Minister to take that matter into con­sideration when the question of extending the area is discussed.

As I have already indicated, the re­maining provisions of the Bill have received the blessing of the Leader of the Opposition; they are mainly of a machinery character and are devised for the purpose of the better administration of the Water Act. In conclusion, I can only confirm the statemE'nt of the Leader of the Opposition to the effect that the Water Acts have become complicated. The original legislation has been amended many times, and it can be said that, like numerous others, it is crying out for consolidation. I take this opportunity, therefore, of expressing the view that the time has arrived when the Government should consider seriously the question of consolidating, not only the Water Act and its various amendments, but the statutes as a whole. A similar suggestion was made recently by the honorable member for St. Rilda in relation to the Workers' Compensation Acts.

Mr. CAIN. - A consolidation of the Factories and Shops Acts is long overdue.

I \

~ I

I ,,/

( /

I

... t

Mr. FIELD.-I agree. I could cite many other instances of Acts that are referred to day by day by the lay person in the course of his business. They are / difficult enough even for a lawyer to 1"-fulli~ I

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE .. - Members of Par liament suffer headaches when they try to do so.

Mr. FIELD.-That is substantially true.

( .

, \

\

, , . '\

Water 116 OCTOBER, H140.J Bill. 1115

}[r. CREMEAN.-In the matter of w{Jrkers' compensation there has been 0111)1 one principal Act in twelve years, but' there have been six amending measures.

:Mr. FIELD. - These interjections mprely serve to emphasize the necessity for a general consolidation of the statutes.

Mr. EVERARD (Evelyn).-I congratu­late the Leader of the OpDosition and the honorable member for Dandenong for having thrown so much light on the Bill. Many parts of the State are subject to droughts and fires, to say nothing of floods, which are almost as bad. Valuable work has be~n done in the Oarrum area, which I knew when it had the appearance of a Jake. I sympathize with the small farmers there in their present trouble. Parliament should certainly not hesitate to do all that it can to relieve their neces­sities. The settlers in the Werribee Water­works District, which is included in the schedule to the Bill, are frequently in as serious a plight as are settlers in other parts of the State. That is to say, they are called upon to pay water rates, yet thev are unable to obtain water. It often or'('~lrs that, at the very time when the district needs irrigation supplies, the sources have practically run dry.

I have called the attention of the 1v1inis­tel' on several occasions to the work done on the lower parts of the River Yarra in clearing away debris, with the object of preventing flood damage. The Minister has played a useful part in that direction, and I hope his efforts will not cease. In view of the possibility of floods, the M l11ister should ensure that a substantial sum is spent on similar work in the upper areas of the Yarra. Among the urban distrirts mentioned in the schedule are those at Ohillingollah, Ohinkapook, Lal-

\ bert, Lascelles, l\{arnoo, N ullawil, Speed, . Tempy, Walpeup, Werrimull, Yaapeet and

other dry areas, where the settlers are in a parlous state. They are severely affected by the drought, and Parliament should do everything possible to relieve them.

\ Fruit growers in the Doncaster distric1 are compelled to pay an exorbitant rate for their irrigation supply-a rate which is eight to ten times greater than that charged to fruit growers in the Shepparton district. The irrigation headworks in the

I Goulburn Valley and other northern dis­\ tricts have proved to be a great. asset to

the growers, but the interests of fruit growers in the southern parts of the State should not be overlooked. As the honorable member for J)alldellong pointed out. land ho1fl('rs in the Onrrum district have brought ~nto production a large area of country that would otherwise be !:-:uh.iert to flooding. As I have stated many 6mes, everything possible should be done to keep the man on the land. Excessive water rates are a considerable factor in forcing him off-to say nothjng of the hardships imposed upon him by marketing Boards.

The provision of a special tariff for those irrigators who are unable to pay their rates on account of an inadequate water supply is commendable, and I am pleas('d that the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission will have the power to rC'vise the rates with the vic'w of help­jn~ tho~e settlers.

Mr. W. DUNSTONE (Rodney).-The Royal Commission on 'Vater Supply recommended that district appeal Boards should be appointed because a number of land holders in the il'l'iga tion districts were seeking larger water rights than they already had, while others had much larger water rights than they felt they needed. The Royal Oommission proposed that the duty of the appeal Boards should be the making of adjustments in ·those cases. In the early operatjons of the district appeal Boards a danger was discovered, because in some dis­tricts the applications for larger water rights were likely to involve the supply of a greater quantity of water than could be made available by the State Rivers and Water Supply Oommission. Clause 5 provides that the water Oommis­sion shall not recognize any appeal for increased' water rights likely to endanger the existing water rights of other irrigators. It is a necessary pro­vision, and it will relieve the minds of settlers in irrigation districts who have felt that their water rights might be en­dangered by decjsions of the appeal Goards. I commend the Government for lllcluding this provision in the Bil1.

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

committed. Clause 1 was agreed to. Progress was reported.

1116 Unemployment Relief Tax r ASSE:MBLY.l (Rate~) Bill.

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF TAX (RATES) BILL.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I move-

That this Bill be now read a second time.

This Bill is for the purpose of enacting rates of unemployment relief taxatio.n for the financial year 1940-41. The total s~m avai~able fro.m unemplo.yment re­hef taxatIo.n during last financial year amo.:unted to. £1,996,000, while interest receIved o.n loans granted from unem­plo.yment relief funds amo.unted to. £47~000, making a to.tal o.f £2,043,000 avaIlable fo.r expenditure during the year.

When the Go.vernment submitted legis­latio.n last year for the re-enactment o.f th~ same .rates o.f tax in 1939-40 as ap­plIed durmg the year 1938-39 it was fac~d with the problem o.f pro.viding fo.r an mcreased number o.f unemplo.yed co.n­sequent upo.n unfavo.urable seaso.nal co.nditio.ns during the financial year 1938.-39. Unemplo.yment registratio.ns co.ntInued to. rise until the end of August o.f last year, but fro.m that date onward the unemplo.yment po.sition has sho.wn a gradual impro.vement.

The expenditure fro.m the Unemploy­ment Relief Taxatio.n Fund fo.r the finan­cial year 1939-40 was £1 886 000 leaving a credit balance o.f £157;000 'in the fund at the 30th o.f June last. Details o.f the expenditure are as fo.llo.ws:-

Sustenance and work in return for sustenance .

Interest and sinking fu~d charg~~ on. unemployment relief loans ..

Admmistration (including cost of collecting tax) . . . .

State contribution to the Common­wealth-State (Local Public Works) Fund

Victorian contriu'u'tion to tile sche~~ adopted for the training and phtc?ment of unemployed youths, lI~aklllg a total of £110,000 pro­VIded by the 8tate Government

Various unemployment relief works ineluding improvement of the Zoo­logical Gardens, constructional work on the Yarra llouleyard im­provement of Albert Park 'and Yarra llelld National Park

£

1,237,000

447,000

89,000

27,000

47,000

39,000

1,886,000

It has so.metimes been stated that un­e~plo.Yn:e?t relief taxation mo.ney is bemg utIlIzed fo.r the purpo.se o.f carrying o.ut o.rdinary public wo.rks. That is not so..

.Lis a matter of fact, the total amount of unemployment relief taxation money utilized fo.r wo.rks during last financial year was 'only £39,000. Further:, the wo.rk undertaken, no.t being o.f an urgent na ture, would not have been carried out if it· had no.t been fo.r the use o.f tho.se funds, which were utilized to give the uNemplo.yed an oppo.rtunity o.f securing relief wo.rk in lieu of wo.rking in return for their sustenance.

As the Bill provides for a general re­ductio.n o.f 15 per cent. in the rates o.f u~emplo.yment relief tax as co.mpared WIth tho.se o.perative during the previo.us twelve mo.nths, it is estimated that the sum available fro.m this so.urce during th€' financial year 1940-41 will be appro.xi­mately £1,705,000. That is the amo.unt necessary to. meet co.mmitments in respect o.f unemplo.yment relief, and to. preserve the so.lvency o.f the U nemplo.yment Relief Taxatio.n Fund. . Alth~ugh increased activity in wartime IndustrIes and the enlistment o.f men fo.r the defence fo.rces have greatly affected ~he tr.end o.f unemplo.yment registratio.ns m thIS State, the Go.vernment is still faced with. the necessity o.f pro.viding fo.r a co.nsIderable number o.f perso.ns particularly o.f no.n-military age, unabl~ to. find employment. At the present time unemplo.yment figures in Victoria are as fo.llo.ws :-Metro.po.litan registratio.ns 3,682; co.untry registratio.ns, ~157; benevo.lent cases, 397; and emplo.yed on relief wo.rks, 2,600; a to.tal o.f 10,836. Of that number, 7,569 are in receipt of sustenance. . Details o.f. a~" age gro.up" classifica­

tIOn o.f the regIstered unemplo.yed, which I shall no.w quo.te, sho.uld be extremely valuable to. ho.no.rable members in gauging the present po.sitio.n. These are :----.

Age Group. Married. Single. Total.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Under 21 .. .. '3 '3 '3 21-29 · . . . 1l'3 4'9 S·g 30-39 · . .. 22'6 15'4 19'] 40-49 · . .. 22'7 26'4 24'4-50-59 · . 27'7 34'5 3O'!) 60 years of age and

over · . .. 15'4 IS'5 17'0

100'0 I 100'0 I 100'0

(

I )

) )

j t

( " (

; )

.' ..

! I

J F

/

"

,/

; (

, , \ t'

I

\

\ ,(

(.,

Unemployment Relief Tax p6 OCTOBER) 1940.J (Rates) Bill .. 1117

After consideration of those figures, hon­orable members will appreciate the diffi­culties with which the Government is faced ill finding suitable employment for many of the registered unemployed. Of the total number registered it will be seen that no less than 47.9 per cent. are over 50 years of age, and 72.3 per cent. are over 40 years.

With a greatly reduced loan alloeatioll for the undertaking of both ordinary public works and unemployment relief works, as a result of the plan adopted by the Loan Council for the co-operation of public works, it will naturally follow that whereas during last financial year an average number of 4,800 men were em­ployed on relief works, a substantiall~r reduced number will be employed on State works durillg the current year. That is inevitable on account of the reduced sum made available for all State pur­poses, not only to Victoria but to ever.\' State.

Similarly, the curtailment of loan expenditure by semi-governmental and local governing authorities will mean a considerable reduction in the number em­ployed by those bodies. For instance, in the past, semi-governmental bodies have exercised self-governing powers. From time to time they have raised their own funds for works undertaken by them, but on account of an agreement at a meeting of the Loan Oouncil whereby that body will in future exercise authority not only over governmental borrowings, but also over loans raised by semi-governmental authorities, semi-governmental authori­t.ies will have available for their own works only so much money as lUay be approved by the Loan Oouncil. .A con­siderablv increased amount will be re­quired for defence purposes during the finanrial year; therefore, semi-govern­mental authorities will find that their allo('ntions have been considerably re­duced. That was apparent at a meeting of the Loan Council some months ago, when only a small proportion of the amounts applied for by semi-governmen­tal bodies was approved by the Loan Council

A (·onsidern h1(' amount of employment ha!'l been made availa.ble from time to time by such illstrumenta lities as the )frlbolll'l1C [\ nd 1fetropolitan TramWAY';

Board and the .Melbourne and Metropoli­tan Board of Works. That avenue of employment will be considerably cur­tailed as a result of controllfld borrowing, and the small amount of loan money availa hIe for the purpose. That will con­sider a bly affect the numbrr of unem­ployed, and we cannot expect the' same number of men to be absorbed in works of a semi-governmental nature as have been so employed in the past.

Defence works to be undertaken by the Commonwealth Government, although likely to absorb a number of men dis­placed, ure, generally speaking, of such a nature as to necessitate the employment of skilled men, and the Government feels that many of those displaced, being nn­skilled workers, will not be provided for, thus creating an additional liability on the State's relief funds. Another factor to which due consideration must be gin'n is the effect on industry of the rationing of liquid fuels, but at this stage it is not. possible to forecast accurately the effects of that plan on employment. Seasonal conditions which during the present year hav(' been very unsatisfactory, also hav(' an important bearing upon the unemploy­ment position.

,y c are experiencing one of the mOHt unfayourable seasons in the history of Victoria, a factor which must consider­ably increase the number of unemployed in count.ry districts. It is extremely diffi­cult to determine at this jUllcture the effect of such factors on the unemploy­ment figures. Honorable members, there­fore, will appreciate that although the numbrr of unemployed is comparatively low at present some increases mnst he antiripated.

In vi ew of the increase in the cost. of living over the last twelve months, as disclosed by the Commonwealth Statis­tician, the Government consider('d that it was equitable to increase the sustenance a 110wanecs by a somewhat similar per­cCllbge, the additionAl expenditure in­v'olved this financial year being estimnted at ahout £40,000. The necessary regula­tions to give effect to these increases have now been gAzetted. The sustenanre rateH have bcoll materially increased since the pl'cspnt GOVE'rnnH'l1t rame into office. All a llm\rall(,('~ 11av(' h('(,11 substantially m­('reased from 6111{, to time-that for

1118 Unemployment Relief Tax r ASSEMBLY.l (Rates) Bill.

dependent children having been more than doubled--while the regulations in respect of permissible income have been ,considerably liberalized.

Even after making provision for the increases I have mentioned, the cost of sustenance and work in return for sus­tenance on account of the decreased num­bers should be reduced during the current year as compared with the expenditure of 1939-40, but an additional sum of £50,000 will be required to meet the In­terest and sinking fund charges on loan moneys raised for unemployment relief works. However, as previously stated, the minimum amount that must be ob­tained from unemployment relief taxa­tion in 1940-41 is £1,705,000, the raising of which wil1 necessitate the' enactment of rates of tax as outlined in the Bill­that is, rates 15 per cent. less than those in operation during the financial year 1939-40.

1 t has been suggested by certain honor­able members that there should not have been any reduction in unemployment relief taxation at this juncture, but I feel that that would not have been the right course to adopt. As the numbers of unemployed have shown a substantial decrease, the Government is of the opinion that some reduction should also be made in the unemployment relief tax. We realize that in Victoria-in fact, throughout the Commonwealth-taxpayers are being called 011 to contribute sub­stantially towards expenditure on defence works; therefore, any relief that can be afforded taxpayers in other directions ~hould be granted. The principle of building up a fund to carry us over a difficult period in future may be sound, but while the Oommonwealth is at war, and so much money is required for defence purposes, wherever possible a re­duction in taxation should be effected, provided always that sufficient funds are available to meet the reasonable require­ments of the unemployed. That is the considered policy of the Government.

Mr. CArN.-You believe in living from day to day~ ,

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-No, we be­lieve in living from year to year. This legislation must be re-enacted every 12 months. If the position changes within that period, and at this time next year

the number of unemployed is less than at present, and if the country is still at war, we should provide for a further re­duction in the unemployment relief tax. If, on the other hand, the number of un­employed has increased, and the receipts from the unemployment relief tax are not sufficient for relief purposes, there must be an inerease of the rate of tax.

l\ir. BARRY.-Why does not the Govern­ment give every unemployed man a job ~

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I should like to give every unemployed man a job, but the cost involved to carry out that policy would be very heavy .. ,As the honorable member for Carlton is aware, many of the unemployed have gone beyond the age at which they could give of their best. Many are over the age of 60 years, and when a man has reached that age it is extrem~ly difficult for him to work eight hours a day on ordinary labouring work.

Mr. BARRY.-In that case. the Govern­ment would not have to find .;obs for all the registered unemployed.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-Through no fault of their own some of the men are unable to work for eight hours a day, but the Government must make provision for their relief. It is the policy of the Go­vernment to provide as mueh work as possible for the unemployed within the limit of the funds available. So long as the war continues, and money must be provided for defence purposes, a large number of public works, which would probably be carried out if conditions were normal, will have to be postponed.

Mr. BARRY.-The Government is in despair. It could provide work for the unemployed if it wanted to.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I should be Ycry glad if the honorable member could present a formula that would enable the I

Government to provide work for all the unemployed with the amount of money at present available. As I have already indicated, only £39,000 of the total amount of approximately £2,000,000 raised last year by the unemployment relief tax was expended on relief works. If the Government is expected to provide more relief works, it will require much more money. The provision of large relief works is the ideal policy, but it cannot be put into operation unless

..­I

)

f

J

I

)

)

.I

, \

I \

.~

Unemployment Relief Tax p6 OCTOBER} 1940.J (Rates) Bill. 1119

adequate money is available. Even then, many of the unemployed, because of their age, could not undertake jobs which re­quired eight hours' hard work a day. It would not be fail' to ask such men to try to do that heavy work.

Mr. BARRY.-The Government is not giving work to that type of men now. Only last week unemployed men in my electorate were asked to present their birth certificates.

}rfr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I do not know anything about the instruction to produce birth ('ertificates. Who gave the instruc­tion, and to whom was it given?

1fr. BARRy.-Unemployed men who appral'ed to be about 60 years of age were asked to produce their birth certifi­cates.

Mr . .A .. A. DUNSTAN.-I do not sup­pOR8 that there is. anything wrong in askinp; an unemployed man to state his ap;e. Men over 60 years of age cannot be <'xpectrd to undertake ordinary road­making or forestry work.

Mr. BAuRY.-Thr Government is not providing any of that sort of work for the unemployed. The Premier should not put forward the excuse that the Go­vernment cannot provide relief work because it has not an adequate supply of money.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I assure the honorable member that the Government has not sufficient money available to meet essential requirements for public works. For that reason the Government has had to rrduce considel'a hly the amount of money to be made available for irriga­tion and water supply works this finan­cial year. A number of schemes which the Government would like to proceed with have had to be suspended. The same condition applies to essential rail­way works, the overtaking of arrears of maintenance of public works, and the carrying ont of additional works of a capital nature. Honorable members must bear in mind that the Commonwealth Government has appointed a Co-ordina­tor-General of Public Works to supervise the expen(Jitul'C' of the Governments­Commonwealth and State-on public works. Then·fol'C'. it is impossible for a State GovC'l'nment t.o f'mbark upon a schC'mc of puh1 ir works or obtain the

Loan Council's consent to the raising of loan money for public works unless the . Co-ordinator-General approves.

Mr. CAIN.-The Co-ordinator-General merely reports to the Commonwealth Government.

}Ir. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The Loan Council at its last meeting adopted almost in their entirety the recommenda­tions submitted by the Co-ordinator­General.

:Mr. BARRY.-Hc cannot advise your Government to rednce the unemployment relief tax.

}fr. ~\. .. A. DUNST~\'N.-I have already pointed out that out of the revenue of nearly £2,000,000 obtained from the un­employment relief tax last financial year, an amount of only £39,000 was expended on relief ·work. Most of those works were ca1'ried out in the metropolitan area where the Government d('sires to have relief works conveniently at hand for the purpose of providing employment for men in necessitous cireumstances.

Mr. BARRY.-There was no reason why a sum of £60,000 rould not have been provided for l'plirf workEl, instead of £39,000.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -Order! The Premier is making an important speech, and the honorable member for Carlton should not interrupt him by persistrllt intprjection.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I repeat that out of the revenue of nearly £2,000,000 raised by the tax, an amount of £1,237,000 was expended on sustenance and work in return for sustenance. Fur­ther, an amount of £447,000 had to be provided for the paymcnt of interest and sinking fund chargcs on unemployment relief loans.

Sir STANLEY ARftY.LE.-For this finan­cial year, the interest and sinking fund charges will amount to £500,000.

Mr. 1\.. A. DUNSTAN.-The interest and sinking fund charges this finan­cial year will be in(,l'eased by £50,000, and the total amount will be a charge on the Unemployment Relief Fund.

~f.r. MAcFARLAN.-The payment of £-1,-1-7,000 for inte]'r~t and sinking fund shou 1<1 not have b('r11 ('harged against the TTnemp10ymf'nt. Relief Fund.

1120 . Unemployment ReliPj Tax r .. .\.SSE:MBLY.l (Rates) Bill.

l\1r. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I suppose tLa t if thr unemployment relief tnx were abolished the Government woulel have to obtain by another form of taxation an amount equivalent to that raised by t4e t.ax. But it would make no difference.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-It would. The Government would then have to produce details of the expenditure.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I repeat that it would make no difference. If the un­employment relief tax did not have to bear the amount required for the pay­ment of interest and sinking fund on unemployment relief loans, such charges would have to be provided from Consoli­dated Revenue. Then the income tax would have to be increased in order to raise the sum required. There would be no difference so far as the taxpayer was ronrerned.

Mr. CATN.':"-There would be a great difference in the incidence of taxation.

}Ir. A. A. DUNSTAN.-If the present Goyernment or any other Government attempted to keep 'in force the existing rates of unemployment relief tax and sought to increase the income tax to raise an additional amount of £500,000, in order t.o pay interest and sinking fund chargrs on unemployment relief loans, I am sure that Parliament would not sanction the proposal.

Mr. CAIN.:-The incidence of the ordi­nary income tax could be raised, and the unemployment relief tax could be reduced to raise £500,000 less.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-If we did that, it would not be of value to the unemployed. I understood the desire was that interest and sinking fund payments should not be a charge on the U nemploy­ment Relief Fund, but. t.hat the sum of £500,000 now required to meet those payments should be made available for unemployment relief. If the amount of £500,000 were provided out of the Con­solidated Revenue and the rate of unem­ployment relief tax were reduced equiva­lently, there would be no additional money available for the unemployed.

Mr. CArN.-That would be the just way to meet the interest and sinking fund charges.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-That is not the point. It is contended by some honor­able members that it is not fair or legiti-

mate to charge those interest payments to the Unemployment Relief Fund. That may be a sound argument. The present Go­vernment did not· introduce the system of making the fund bear interest and sinking fund charges-it was introduced by a prpvious .... tdministration. I am not complaining about that, but I am merely pointing out that the present Government has adopted the system inaugurated by a previous Government.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-But the loan money raised by the previous Government was used to provide work for the unem­ployed, whereas that is not done at present.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The present expenditure of loan funds does benefit the unemployed. A small proportion of the loan money has been made available to assist hospitals and charitable institutions.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I heard you say recently in a public speech that your Government had spent more than £1,000,000 in that way.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The Govern­ment has expended, I think, £1,300,000 of loan money in that "vay over a period of years. The interest and sinking fund charges on the amount of £1,300,000 would not equal more than about £50,000 a year. What is £50,000 a year when out of the unemployment relief loan funds laat year, the Government expended more than £2,000,000 to assist the unemployed, and out of taxation it also expended approximately £2,000,000, or a total ~f £4,000,000, in round figures? The Leader of the Opposition considers that the small amount which is to be provided for in­terest and sinking fund charges on loan money made available to hospitals is not fair.

Sir STANLEY l'1..RGYLE.-I quoted that as one instance. You know that there are a dozen others.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-There are not, unless they are very small items. I invite the Leader of the Opposition to quote the dozen other cases. I am prepared to quote all the figures in relation to unem­ployment relief loan money expended on I

hospital buildings. The Government has no axe to grind, and it seeks the full co­operation of honorable members. This is not a matter for party politics. It is easy to criticize what is done to relieve /

f

r'

,. r

'" (

j

! .I

/

"

r' J

\ \

Unemployment Relief Taz [16 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Rates) Bill. 1121

the unemployed, because complete satis­faction cannot be given. On the one hand, the Government has not sufficient money, and, on the other hand, every unemployed man cannot be expected to give the Burnt' l'f'turn for the money he re-Ceives. The Government' realizes those difficulties, but the money provided by Parliament, and that made available by the Loan Council, it has en­deavoured to expend to the best of its ability in the interests of the unemployed in this State. I am, and my Government is, very sympathetic towards the unem­ployed. There is no more pathetic spectacle than a man daily looking for work and failing to obtain it. That is largely due to the system which was in operation for too long, under which young men WNr. allowed to grow up without technjcal training. That matter has been rectified to a certain degree recent.ly. Every skilled man in the State can be employed to-day. I haVf~ examined a list of the names and occupatione of the men at present regis­tered as unemployed, and practically 100 per cent. of them are unskilled. The services of skilled men are in great demand. It is not the fault of this Government that so many men are un­skilled.

Mr. MULLENs.-In my electorate the figures are down to about 100 unemployed.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The Govern­ment is'doing its best, and we shall try to spend the money made available by the Bill in the interests of the unemployed. We shall also try to obtain additional funds from the, Loan Council to finance reproductive' and essential works. A fur­ther large sum could be expended on forestry work, which gives a greater return for the amount expended than any other form of employment. We want to do these things, but we ~ave not the necessary money. We can only obtain money with the approval of the Loan Council and the Co~ordinator-General of Public Works. Honorable members who have not attend­ed meeti,ngs of the Loan Council do not appreciate the difficulties we meet when we .try to obtain money for unemployment rehef and other purposes. The Govern­ment has endeavoured to cater for the needs of the unemployed. Under the Bill a reduction of 15 per cent. in unemploy~ ment relief taxation is proposed. This

will be reviewed at the end of the financial year: and then the policy of the Govern­ment-whether it happens to be the pre­sent or any other 'Government-must be moulded according to the number of unem~ ployed and their requirements. Regard will also have to be paid to the war situation, and whether the necessary funds can be made available by taxation, or through the Loan Council.

On the motion of Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak), the debate was ad­journed until Tuesday, October 22.

STATE FORESTS LOAN 11PPLICATION BILL.

The debate (adjourned from October .9) on the motion of Mr. Lind (Minister of Forests) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. EVERARD (Evelyn).-This is a very short, but a very important, Bill. I heard and read with interest the speech of the Minister of FO,rests, which pro­vided much food for thought and reflec­tion. In 1935-36, the revenue from the forests was £176,626, and the expendi­ture £613,471; in 1936-37, the revenue was £199,360, and the expenditure £610,802; in ,1937-38, the revenue was £213,695, and the expenditure £491,961; in 1938-39, the revenue was £198,157, and the expenditure £406,171; and in 1939-40, the revenue had increased to £218,962, and the expenditure, as com­pared with 1935-36, had decreased by about £200,000 to £414,828. I have al­ways taken a keen interest in bush fire brigades. In 1935-36, a sum of £189 was spent on them by the Government; in 1936-37, £199; in 1937-38, £225; in 1938-39, . £213; and in 1939-40, £1,175. I am pleased to notice the increase in the year 1939-40, but, even £1,175 is quite inadequate for the great 'wo,rk the 'bush fire fighters do. They did magnifi: cent work during the last great bush fires, and they are capable of doing at least as magnificently in the future. If the bush fire brigades had received as much money in the earlier years as they received in 1939-40, much of the loss that occurred last year might have been avoided. In spite of their handicaps, they prevented much damage, particu­larly in Gippsland and in my 'area.

1122 State Forests Loan r ASSEMBLY., A pplicat1,on Bilt

The honorable member for Upper Yarra, talking of the Cumberland Valley, said that the fires had not de­nuded that valley because of the efforts of the people of Marysville, who did great credit to themselves and to the State on that occasion. They worked without fee or reward, and, with the help of the officers of the Forests Commission, saved the Cumberland Valley from ruin. They took their lives in their hands and pre­served what is perhaps the most magnifi­cent forest country in Australia.

Mr. LIN D.-In the world. Mr. EVERARD. - Visitors from

abroad have not seen Australia unless they have seem the Cumberland Valley. We have to thank the splendid residents of Marysville and the officers of the Forests Department for the work they did. There is no finer body of men any" where than those o,fficers of the Depart­ment who work in the timber country. Some of them sacrificed their Ii ves in order to help Victoria in her time of trouble. They are a splendid body of men. The Leader of the Opposition knows that when we went with other members to the N o,ojee country, we, saw the forest workers waiting for the word ,. Uo !" in order to start, their work afresh. Many of them have now answered the call of the .British .Empire by enlisting for active service. Nothing is too, good for us to do for them. They do their wor k well, and they are not afraid of doing all they can for the money they receive.

Mr. LIND. - And generally under rough conditions.

Mr. EVEHARD.-In the N oojee cO,untry we saw a man living in a tin hut. He was a picture of health and good condition, and was ready to "wire in" to his work in the forest. I should like to refer to some of the troubles that .have occurred in certain areas. In the Kinglake area, for instance, fire has gone through the National Park on two occasions, and has swept the valley of the Strathewen from end to end. The fires start on the higher land and come down into the basin. They could be pre­vented by Governments providing the Kinglake National Park committee with Aufficient funds to make fire breaks. U n­less something like that is done, fires will Rweep through that country from time to time. 1 hope that the Government wil1

help national park committees in every way possible to protect not only their own properties, which are in constant dan~er, but also the properties of strugglIng settlers, who battle against bad markets, droughts, and other odds, only to find that after a few years a fire destroys their assets because Governments have not assisted the committees to clean con­tiguous forest areas. I can remember the time when the Minister of Forests and I fought to create a forest conscience.

Mr. LIN D.-We were misunderstood in those days.

Mr. EVERARD.-The Minister knows what has happened in his own district, and I know 'what has happened in mine. and I think we can rlaim to have created some sort of a forest conscience through­out Australia. Anyone who reads the r~­port of the recent Royal Oommission will discover that the forest industries are growing in importance every year. The \Talne of forest p],oducts in 1938-39 in Victoria alone was £1,241,000. ThE' tree planting that bas been done by ehildren in school planta.tions will prove of inestimable value to the State. Our object should be to instil in the minds of the younger generations a love of trees. In latr]' years many of them will demonstrate the effectiveness of their early training by planting trees around their farms. In the Kenya Oolony, British East Africa, there is an organi­zation known as "The Brotherhood of Trees." Such a brotherhood could bE> instituted in Victoria, with the view of teaching the community generally that our trees have a distinct value and should be prote'cted from generation to generation. Some members of this House yisited the Fumina country soon after the last great bush fires had burnt themselves out. It made my heart bleed to see those huge black heaps of ruin. What is being done to prevent a recurrence of such a tragedy? It is true that officers of the Forests Department are not neglecting re­afforestation; I hope they \vill persevere with that important work.

Honorable members will be interested in the following quotation fror:n the Twentieth Annual Report of the Forests Oommission :-

In view of the present scarcity of green pine timber. and the relatively limited resources for supplying the future timber requirements of all important agriculturAl find frnit-

I

f !

\

/

I I

(

{ 1 ,

State Forests Loan [16 OCTOBER, 1940.-1 Application Bill. 1123

growing community, the matter of regenerat­ing cut-over and otherwise denuded timber areas in the north-west is one which merits attention. The indigeuous timber resources in this part of the State have been sadly de­pleted in the past, and it is contended that the very sparse regeneration in these areas is attributable in no small measure to the effects of over-grazing by stock and depredations by rabbits. To what extent these two factors are responsible is a matter for intensive re­search. The position is further complicated by the problem of controlling sand-drift, which is causing such widespread ha.voc in these arid, hot districts. There are extensive areas of reserved forest and Crown land which in earlier days formed portion of grazing run!;, the timber on sections of which was destroyed wholesale by ringbarking and burning. Subse­quent heavy over-grazing a.nd rabbit damage on the denuded areas paved the way for erosion of the unstable sandy soils characteristic of these lueas. Sand-drift is gradually extending, an~ can only be checked by rehabilitation of the vegetational cover. The experimental work proposed therefore aims at re-establishing the indigenous tree vegetation as a measure for erosion control as much as for the purpose of providing future timber supplies for local con­sumption. Sand ridges already badly eroded will require some form of preliminary artificial treatment to stabilize the soil before vegetative cover can be 8u('cesRfully established, and work of this type on a 11 experimental scale is to bE' incorporated in the project outlined above.

Extensive depredation has been caused by erosion, not only in the Mallee and other northern parts of the State, but in areas enclosed by the Minister's elec­torate. Further serious damage will occur unless steps are taken to ensure that timber will soon grow again on the mountain slopes. I compliment the officers of the Lands and Forests Depart­ments who have taken a keen interest in the problem of soil erosion. Some of them arranged to give a series of twelve lectures:

all of which I attended. I was delighted to hear of the valuable work that depart­mental officers had accomplished, together with members of the soil erosion com­mittees appointed by various bodies. I understand that a book will soon be published with the view of -directing the public mind to the extremely important subject of soil erosion.

Mr. CAIN.-That is traceable to efficient Ministerial direction.

Mr. EVERARD.-The lectures I men­tioned were prepared by the officers con­cerned in their spare time; they lasted from 8 p.m. till 10.30 p.m., and were aided by lantern slides. The lecturers emphasized the danger of erosion,

especially III the hilly country, and University professors supplemented their remarks. It was pointed out, among other things, that when the crests and sides of the ranges were denuded of trees the soil was washed off, leaving t.hem bare.

Mr. LIND.-The Government proposes to bring forward legislation this session.

Mr. EVERARD.-I. offer my con­gratulations to the Government, for I have taken a keen interest in this matter. In my own district I have witnessed the effects of soil erosion m mountain areas and along the plains. It is well that the Minister and his colleagues have, at long last, decided to introduce legislation to cope with the problem. The report of the Forests Commission empEasizes only too plainly the need for governmental actio!l. I hope that the prospective Bill will be, not insignificant in character and designed to meet the situation only temporarily, but compre­hensive in its ambit. The problem requires to be handled in a statesmanlike manner.

Mr. LIND.-The honorable member himself has indicated that the Govern­ment has had the matter under considera­tion for a long time. I appreciate the compliments he has paid, particularly to officers of the Forests Department.

Mr. EVERARD.-I should have men­tioned that I attended the lectures during the last recess and enjoyed everyone. Other members of this House would have been able to learn something from them.

Mr. LIND.-Even those members who represent Mallee districts!

Mr. EVERARD.-Those particular members may learn a good deal more in the next six or twelve months. I am glad that the honorable member for Carlton raised the question of the provision of dugouts at the mills in the forests, because it is a matter of national importance. During the recent election campaign, the honorable member visited forest areas in the vicinity of Toolangi, Marysville, Buxton, and N ar bethong, and ga thered a great amount of information. I was pleased that his remarks made the Minis­ter of Forests "get up on his hind legs" and later investigate the progress being made in the construction of dugouts. I appreciate the honorable member's in­terest in this subject, because foreet

1124 State Forests Loan r A.8SEMBLY·l Application Bill.

workers are well worth looking after. As the result of his investigations the Minister informed honorable members last week that whereas the dugouts were in the COUl'se of construction when the honorable member for Oarlton visited those districts, the work had since been expedited. The millers were made to realize that if they did not complete the dugouts before the summer, they would lose their licences.

The Minister has stated that a compre­hensive measure win be introduced to deal with soil erosion and other forestry matters. Erosion goes hand in hand with afforestation and the making of roads through the forests. When this Parlia­ment met in the Exhibition Building, "fuany Bills were introduced containing Pi:oposals to ma ke roads through forests, but very little of the work was carried Olit.

Mr. LIND.-The honorable member for Maryborough and Daylesford, and the honorable memh{']' for Evelyn and I, myself, advocated forest road construction a t til at time, and many miles of good roads have been made in the forest areas.

Mr. EVERARD.-I am pleased to hear that, and I hope that many more miles of good roads wjll be' completed as soon as possible. They will be of great assistance to fire fighters, who must be protected in every way. According to the Forests Commission's report, during the 1938 planting and nursery season the number of trees planted directly and transferred from local nurseries, together with the supplementary stock from central nur­series, amounted to 1,375,944. The plants raised in nurseries for future planting numbered 4,560,851. I have already mentioned the pa l't played by State schools in forestry work, and, according to the report, the number of plants dis­tributed from State nurseries to State schools, to the general public, and to road planting schemes, was 197,914. Ooni­ferous and euea lypt seeds sown weighed 762 lb. .'

The Forests Commission, in conjunction with the Country Roads Board, the Mel­bourne City Council, and other munici­palities and interested bodies.) has done splendid work. During last week end I visited the Port Fuiry district, and I was pleased to see tree plantations along the rOAd bebYeen Koroit and Hawkesdale.

Tree planting on roads should be en­couraged, because the plantations not only have a scenic value but also inculcate a love of trees in the people. I have always been a great lover of trees, and have advocated a vigorous policy of tree plant­ing. I have visited small homes in the distant parts of the State, and although they may not. have been valuable as buildings, they were enhanced by the trees and gardens around them. A State-wide system of tree planting should be inaugu­rated so that a love of trees will be inculcated, particularly in the minds of children. In that way a Brotherhood of the Trees would be promoted in Victoria,

In the Wimmera and Malle~ districts one rarely sees trees planted on the roads or near the farm houses. The lack of water during the summer months may-be partly responsible, but the people in those districts could do more in the way of tree planting. Visitors from overseas, who have noticed Victorian farm houses with­out trees surroulldjng them, have hurried away from this eountry and written books to the detriment of Australia. If double the amount provided for in the Bill were .spent on Victorian forests it would not be too much. vVe should not be parsi­monious in dealing with the forests, and we must do everything possible to en­courage the people generally to acquire a forest conscience.

The :Minister for Forests in his speech referred to the paper-pulp industry estab­lished in this State. He stated-

The company is now operating at Mary­vale, between 1\101'w811 and Traralgon, and it is using small, killed saplings, and pulping the waste after the miller has taken the com­mercial timber out of the log.

Is the company using any big timber? Mr. LIND.-The company is not using

anything but killed timber from the forests, and it is using only that tim bel' which is not suitable for any other ('om­mercial purpose.

Mr. EVERAHD.-I repeat, i~ the com­pany using big timber?

Mr. LIND.-Only if the timber could not be usrd for ordinary sawmilling purposes.

Mr. EVERARD.-Then I have the :Minister's word that the company is not using timber that the sR\\-'IDillerR r.01l1d otherwise use?

, )

~ :> , f i

State Forests Loan p6 OCTOBER} 1940.1 Application Bill. 1125

Mr. LIND.-No, certainly not. Mr. BARRy.-What does the Minister

of Forests mean? Mr. LIND.-Trees that could be used

for other commercial purposes-say, for building houses-and that the sawmillers would cut, are not being taken by the pulp mill. Forest officers mark the timber that may be used by the pulp mill, a~d that is only killed timber that other­WIse would be waste.

Mr. EVERARD.-Then I can give the lie direct to those who say that the pulp mill is using timber that the saw­millers might otherwise use?

:Mr. LIND.-Weare speaking of ash timber. These people have been getting some green timber from private property, and there have been complaints about that, but that is not our business.

Mr. EVERARD.-I was proud of th(, Minister's statement about the establish­ment of the paper-pulp industry, but when I spoke to a friend on the subject, he said, "That industry is not as good as you think it is. It is using green timber, which is useful for sawmilling purposes." When I next see him I shall be able to tell him that he was wrong. The Minister informed the House-

Pulpwood obtained to date from fire-killed timber is G,484.78 units, which is equivalent to 6,500,000 super. feet log volume. A unit is 100 cubic feet solid. The quantity of pulp­wood covered in local contracts is 27,500 units which is equivalent to 27,500,000 super. feet log volume.

!orest districts from which supplies are b~.lllg drawn are Erica, Neerim, Upper Yarra, 1\lagaroon, Yarram, and Otway West. The nUl~ber of foretit workmen engaged. in pru­curmg pulpwood from Crown lands is 110, who need not necessarily be skilled axemen, because they are required to handle only small timber. .

I told my friend that skilled axemen were not required for this work, but he said, "Do not talk such humbug to me. I ~ow t~at the pulp mill is getting green timber m volumes that a sawmiller would like to obtain." 1: shall have another chat with him. The h01lOra ble gentleman annouBced further--

Pulpwood gathering if' now gaining iJllPl'tUR as a. for~st op~ration. Monthly outputs are steadIly mcreasmg, the cnrrent output beil)O' in excess of 1,000 units, or 1,000,000 ~llpel~ feet log Yolume, per month. A yerv consider­able extension of that induHtrv . is certaill during the coming summer monihR. On that enterprise £1.500,000 has h<'cn HP<'lIt h~' th .. (.ompaJ?Y·

The money will be well spent providpd that the paper-pulp company is usin~ forest offal or timber that could not other­wise be used by the sawmillers. The hon­OI'able gentleman has pointed out that the demand is such that there is no difii­culty in selling good timber to box manu­facturers. Being interested in the fruit­growing industry and the dairying il1-dustry, I noted the Minister's remarks on the subject of the use of local timber:-; by: the box manufacturers. I may 1'('­

mmd the House that the people in the constituency of Evelyn are not allowed to establish a butter factory--they cannot ol~en one at Lilydale, but they are per­ml tted to have a creamery. If thl ',Y could have had a butter factory, mOl"P butter boxes would have been required.

~1r .. BARJ.{Y.-'Vhy arc they not allo\n·d to hayc a Lutter faetory ill Evelyn?

Mr. EV ERAHD.-There is aDair\" Produce Board just as there is an Au~­tralian Apple and Pear Board and butter factories can be established ~nly whcrf' the Dairy Produce Board permits. Tit" :Minister commen ted--

:Jlembers of the Hou::le would be intere::ltl'cl if they would vitiit the Yarravitc uux factury. There they. would see 6,000,000 ~uper. feet ;'1 ::lawn ash tImber where less than twelve month,.. ago there were 6,000,000 super. feet of im­ported timber. Boxes can uc made of timber Hum allY size of tree, from tiapling:-; upwaniH. ~aplings are now being sliced down to about une-eighth of an inch in thickllet-iti.

That is a splendid proposition. 1 um pleased that the Forests Commission it'> extending its activities, an(i nobody i~ more pleased than I am to know that. butter and fruit boxes can be made from timber grown in Victoria. That mean~ that more local men are being emploYNL

Mr. LIND.-The Defence Department. is using boxes made of Victorian timbrl" to send munitions and otllC'l' materi81~ overseas.

Mr. EVERARD.--The J\{inister of Forests, the honorable member for U ppr.l' Yarra, and I have for years advoeated the use of Victorian timbers in preference to impnrh,rI timbel'R. There is '110 benefit in having forests if we do not use the timber obtninable from them. I rejoice that thf' honorable gentleman has told the House labout the use of Victorian timber in the manufacture of butter boxes and fruit (·asps.. Although the ilum mentioned ill tIl(' Bill seems to b(' large, it js in­finit('~imal in ('Olllpsuic:on with :£1.241.140,

1126 State Forests Loan I·\SSEMBLY·-I Application Bill.

the gross value of Victorian ·forest pro­ducts in 1938-39; in fact, the amount provided for· is totally inadequate.

Mr. BARRY.-The Government cannot Lope to save the forests if that is all the money it is willing to make available for forestry purposes.

:Mr. EVERARD.-I trust that the Minister of Forests will use his persuasive eloquence to such effect that he will con­vince the Government next year that the amount should be doubled. We all know that the Minister of Water Supply has a forests conscience as well developed as that of the Minister of Forests, because he realizes the value of forest con­servation.

Mr. LIN D.-YOU must assist me to con­vince the Co-ordinator-General of Public Works that the amount of £150,000 is inadequate.

Mr. EVERARD.-The name "Co­ordinator" is like the word "Mesopo­potamia "- it sounds well, it rolls around the mouth, but what does it mean? Of course, if the Co-ordinator­General decided that a sum of £150,000 was all that could be made available for the State forests, probably the Minister would have to accept his decision.

Mr. LIND.-It is not as simpJe as that. Mr. DODGSHuN.-What have you to say

about the replanting of forests? Mr. EVEHARD.-All members know

that the honorable member for Ouyen is u keen advocate of tree-planting to pre­vent soil erosion. Perhaps he has more influence with t.he Minister than I have, hut if the Government decided that only £50,000 was to be made available for forestry purposes, the honorable member would support the Government. I trust that ultimately, when a Bill to deal with ~oi] erosion and tree-planting is intro­duced, the honorable member for Ouyen will see that the Government is prepared to tackle the question in a statesmanlike way. I commend the Bill, although the amount to be made available is much less than I hoped it would be. In these parlous times we must be satisfied; but thE" State would be in a more parlous ('ondition if we were to neglect that won­derful asset, the forests of the State.

The sitting was suspended at 6.16 p.m. until 7.40 p.m.

Mr. BARRY (CarZton).-I listened with a great deal of interest to the speRches made on this important subject by the Minister of Forests and the honor­able member for Evelyn, and I agree with many of their comments. The Bill provides for the expenditure of a sum of £150,000 for certain purposes, among which is one that may assist to some ex­tent in providing protection, not only for the forests of this State, but for the persons who live and work in them or in their vicinity. The desirableness of pre­venting a recurrence of such fires as occurred at the beginning of last year is apparent to everyone. I think the Minis­ter will not hesitate to agree with me that anyone who appreciates the magni­tude of the problem we are now discuss­ing must hold the view that the amount proposed to be provided is completely in­adequate. In fact, it would be better to spend nothing at all than to provide such a small sum for the purposes suggested.

The honorable gentleman and members of this House generally will, I hope, realize that any statements I make arc not actuated by a desire to criticize per­sons, particularly the Minister, who has a closer acquaintance with the problem than any other member of this Chamber. At any rate, I must admit frankly that he possesses a much greater knowledge of forests than I have. A great deal has been said in this House and outside, and a great deal has been written, about the tragic bush fires to which I have already alluded. Among other things, the Go­vernment appointed a Royal Commission to inquire into the bush fires, their causes, and possible means of protection. The report submitted indicated that the Commissioner had been at great pains to discover facts. As the result of know­ledge, probably gained by him for the first time, the Commissioner framed a number of recommendations, and I was among those who hoped that the Govern­ment would bring forward a measure designed to cope with the problem by giving effect to some of the recommenda­tions of the 'Commissioner.

Mr. DILI,ON.-If that were not the in­tention it would be no use appointing a Royal Commission to inquire into the matter.

Mr. BARRY.-Although that comment. is true, I have not said that no considera .. tion has been given to the recommenda-

Stale FMests Loan r16 OCTOBER, 1940.] Application Bill. 1127

tlons. The report of the Royal Commis­sion dealt with various matters, to some of which I shall refer later. Some of the decisions I regarded as ill-considered. In the meantime, there has been relaxa­tion in certain directions that in my opinion has not been wise, although I may be wrong. If I am wrong, then I am in line with certain views expressed in the report of the Royal Commission. Much discussion has centred' on state­ments I made while we were waiting for this Bill to be brought forward. Those statements were made the subject of reference by the honorable member for Evelyn, on behalf of the Opposition. Honorable member:.:: have to consider whethel' the remarks to which I alludr had any bearing on the subject of bush fires, and whether they were directed t(' the necessity for greater effort to save our forests and the lives of those who earn their livelihood in the bush.

It will be admi ttecl that a bush fire is not merely an enemy that will occasionally take many lives and, in the process, injure a highly important in­dustry. In our discussions of this prob­lem we have to consider the value of the State's timber assets, and the effect of bU.'lh fires on those assets. Only one of the harmful effects of a big bush fire may be the destruction of large quantities of timber of the ash species that is now being utilized more than ever before in the history of this State. .A. major fire through ash forests' means their ruination.

Mr. LIND.-..t.\ny fire is a bad fire in ash timber.

Mr. BARRY.-It js now realized that the destruction of ash timber in the fires of last year represents a tremendous loss from the point of view of the industry. Timber of that, variety is used nm,vaday" for the manufacture of almost every kind of packing' case. When I spoke on this subject early this month I referred to mills in the Marysville district, from which are sent ten trnck loads of timber every day to Shepparton, where it is ('011-

verted into fruit cases. Years ago it 'was most difficult to obtain suitable timber for that purpose. The firms that mill the aAh are also interested in the fruit­growing industry to the extent of supply­ing large numbers of gro-\verR in other parts of the State with cases.

The damage inflicted by an enemy in­vasion of our country would be no greater than the damage caused by a State-wide bush fire, which is a per­manent foe. No matter what precautlOns are tak('n, the danger of bush fires always exists. Therefore, the Government should be prepared to spend money in protecting the \Taluable forest assets of the State. I know the Minister desires that that should be done, and any remarks I may make, although critical of the Forests Commission and of the Government, are not intended as a personal reflection on the honorable gentleman. When laws are made for the protection of forests, they should be strictly enforced.

I was interested in the reply of the 1\1 inistPl' to my previous statement on the subject of dugouts in the forests. I was inspired to make my statement by an nrticle which appeared in the Sun of the 13th of Septemher last. It was con­tribated by the Forests Commission una€'f the following headings:-

Serious Bush Fire Warning. Dangerous Forests.

Work in Hills may Cease.

Th(' statement ,vas made in the article that fires had o('('urred during the pre­V!OUR week-end in the N oojee and Upper Yana districts, D s well as other parts of the State, and that these outbreaks emphn­sized the precarious state of the foreRts, due to drought. The article further stated that thl'ee fires hnd occurred during the previous four ,"v(,f'ks, one of which hnd been extinguished hy a snow storm. The firns that had stnrted, however, had demonstrated the apparent lack of appre­ciation by some hush workers of the in­tensity of bush nff' hflzards. The atten­tion of the people of Victoria was drawn to the fact thAt thr Commission is most alert and that the PflfS(\l1S responRible for protecting the forc~ts against fires had he en threatened with :111 sorts of penaltie~ if they did not" (':IITY out the 00111-

mipsion's instrurtion<.;, A suggestion WRS

made to re~ist('l' In hOll1' in the forests.

Last July the )F nistel' of Forests saiel that a number of notices had been issued to the ownr]'s of hllf~h mills and winch('1' ",her(> it W:l~ eonsidered necessar~' tll[lt (lugout8 should. h(, constnh:tf'd. Thp mill owners were given until th(~ 30th of S('l)ten:ht~r to' l'~liM

1128 State Forests Loan I ASSEMBLY·l Application Bill..

dugouts, to clear areas around their mills, and to do the work necessary for the protection of the mills, the forests arouud the mills, and the workers. On the 2nd of October, I made the statement in this House that no dugouts had been constructed, and that the people concerned had paid no heed to the notices issued by the Forests Commission. That statement caused a great storm. The Minister of Forests became very excited and almost suggested that I should wear a helmet, go round the bush in the name of the law, and discover the mills that had built dug­outs and the mills that had not. The next day, the 3rd of October, a statement by the secretary of the Hardwood Millers' Association of Victoria, Mr. Quinn, was published in the lIerald. Mr. Quinn said that he did not know what I was talking about, and, as far as he knew, all the association's mills had completed, or were completing, the construction of dugouts, with the exception of a few mills, the sites of which had not been approved by the Forests Commission. Seeing that the Forests Commission had sent out notices to certain mills to construct dug­outs by the 30th of September, surely the sites for the dugouts should have been {'hosen -before the 3rd of October.

Mr. LIND.-I do not know the mills to which you are referring; it is poosible, however, that a mill site may have been chosen and the licence granted, but the mill itself not established.

Mr. BARRY.-That was not so in the cases to which I am referring. The Min­ister stated in the House that a complete survey of the sawmills had been made in the areas affected by bush fires. He said, further-

The Forests Commission issued notices to 123 mills requiring them to construct dugouts, to 57 mills to cari'y out clearing work, 8:nd twelve centres of other industrial operations were also served with notices. Altogether, 295 cases were investigated in relation to the terms of section 13 of the Forests Act, which pro­vides for the compulsory installation of dug­outs at mills.

I referred to- the Ada mills in the Powell­town district, to - Feiglin's mill, - and to mills at Toolangi. In reply to my state­ment, the honorable gentleman said-

At the Ada River, construction of dugouts is in hand, and early completion is anticipated.

As a matter of fact, the dugouts were not constructed when I spoke, and they have not yet been constructed.

Mr. LIND.-The firm still has a few days to construct them.

l'Ir. BARRY.-The Forests Commis­sion sent notices to the firms intimating that they had until the 30th of Septem­ber to construct dugouts. After that date another notice was sent out extending the time until the 18th of October. Mean­while :fires occurred in the forests. The Forests Act prescribes that if a miller does not comply with the Commission's notice his milling licence will be cancelled. Instead of the authorities dealing with the defaulting millers they have informed. the workers that if the dugouts are not' constructed by a certain time there will be a "blackout" in the forests. A person who will not comply with the Forest~ Act, and who is inflicting damage on a most important -industry, should not receive consideration from the Government in mitigating the penalties provided for. The Minister of Forests also stated:-

The Forests Commission reports that a number of sawmillers have failed to construct suitable dugouts as required by the Forests Act passed last year. 'That is unfair not only to the mill owners, but also to their employees.

The honorable gentleman then quoted from a statement supplied by the Forests Commission-

The Commission is bound by the Act to suspend the millers' licences, wherever dugouts have not been provided as required by it.

Actually no licences have been cancelled.

Mr. LIND.-Y ou would not like licences to be cancelled prior -to the present date. There has been no urgent need -for dug­outs, but there will be. We have been watching the seasonal conditions, and we know that up to the present the employees have been safe without dugouts. I believe that all the dugouts will he eom­pleted within the next day or two~ ,

Mr. BARRY.-Recently 1 spoke to the manager of the mill which has taken over part of the a.rea over which the old State mill operated. He rushed back from the city to the country because he felt there was a real danger of :fires. - He may not be a good forester, although he may be a member of the' Ancient -Order of.

Stale Forests Luan r16 OCTOBER) 1!140.] Application Bill. 1129

:Fol'esters ! The Forests Commission's statement from which I quoted was read by the Minister of }'orests as follows:-

A cloRe RlIl"\"P'; of 29ii sawmills and other industrial oper~tions throughout tllt' State FOl'csts was conducted by the Commission dur­ing the year, and notices for the construction of dngouts were sent out in July last, the date fixed for completion in most instun('es being :lOth September.

This has been the driest season for years, and the Minister in September described it as most dangerous.

Mr. LIND.-Then I did not feel that it was dangerous. Damage could have been <lone to seedling growth, but there was no <langeI' to human beings. Later, there will be danger to human life as well as to the young timber.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -I checked the honorable member for <"1arlton for having interrupted the l)remier, and now I must check the Minister of Forests for interjecting when the honorable member for Carlton is ~peaking.

Mr. nARRY.-I sha11 now quote from the report of the Bush Fires Royal Com­mission. The Commissioner regarded the question of dugouts as very serious, and ()n page 16 of his report he stated-

Tops Disposal. Disposal of Mill Wa!<tl'. T\;t' 1H1eessity for the diRposal of tops (i.E'., tn-tO> tops) a:nd mill waRte has been recognized by the Commission, Imt !<eldom have sawmillerH 1\('('n forced to destroy thelll. Their destru('tiou ml'all~ exp<'nRe and inconvenience to the miller. 'Ill!' fact that any preventive or protective Qperation would cause the miller inconvenience 11as been generally regarded by the Commis­<4ion's officers as a sufficient reason for non­('Oll'pliance by the miller with the Commission's instructions in that behalf. There have been (lxeeptions ('onRtituted by the millers' volun­tary destruction of tops and waste and b~r the o('ca",ional and infrequent insistence by forestr~' otIi('(lJ'R upon their destruction. The officer::; are not to be blamed for their attitude, which 1m!' been induced by the failure of the Com­llliqRion to, force the miller::;' compliance with ille Commission's own rules in these matters.

If I erred in my statement about the saw­mi1lrl's' total disregard of the law, I €rred with the Royal Commission. I feel that my recent charges about the sawmillers' non-compliance with the directions of the Forests Commission hnve been proved. My original complaint that dugouts' had not been completed has been confirmed. If the dugouts had 'been con­structed it would not have been necessary

:0 give any of the sawmillers an extension ,)f time. I hope that no further exten­,ions will be granted to the sawmillers who have flouted the law, and have been ineonsiderate of the lives of their em­ployees and of people living in timber townships. The authorities will fail in their duty if they do not deprive such :-;awmillers of their forest licences.

)11'. LIND.-Y ou lleed not worry about that because I am determined that it will be dOlle. I hope that there will be no " squeals" in the House when it is done.

1fr. BARRY.-I shall not "squeal," and I shall never protest against action that ,,,ill result in the protection of 'workers. I shall llOW refer to the findings of the Royal Commission in relation to dugouts. On page 18 of the report the Commissioner stated-

Dugouts.-After the 1926 fires, the question of illshlting upon the installation of dugouts at mills for protection of the mill workers was ra i~ed bv the Commission. The Commission WUH divided in opinion and the matter lapsed. Aguin, after the 1932 fires, the question was ~-evived. In May, 1932, an engineer's report upon the desirability of dugouts and on their ('onstruction was submitted to the Commis­sion. Further consideration was given the matter, and on the 14th of November, 1932, the following minute was placed on the file:-

.. ('ommiHsion Dceil'lion. _-\ll.awmil1erH to construct effective dug­

outR in dose \'icinit~' of all sawmills, par­til'uiarR of l'Illch to he forwarded to Com-mission.

14th November, 1932."

That minute was placed on the' file in 1932, but still dugouts have not been (,Oll­

structed at all mills. I desire to make it clear that I am not referring to new mills but to mills established before 1932. The Royal Oommission's report continued~

In all letters of allotment of mill areas in what \\':\8 considered to be dangerous country, and iS811ed since 1930, there appeared a re­quirement or condition that the millers should construct dugouts for the safety of their (>mployees.

The position, therefore, was that as far back as ] 9:10, the limited installation of dugouts had been adopted as part of the safety policy of the Commission. In 1932, after further ('onsideration and acting upon expert advice, the Commission formally decided to impose this condition on n 11 millers without exception.

Raving made its considered decision, the ('ommission at no time thereafter tooK any stepR to compel the observanee of the con­dition. Instead, for 8everal years, it wrote to millers H strongly advising" and "urging" that dugouts he instituted. In many casea

1130 State Forests Loan rASSEMRLY·l Application Bill.

the a.dvice was ignored and no dugout w·a.s constructed. In no case was even a threat of coercion made against the recalcitrant miller.

Many of the millers objected strongly to the installation of dugouts. The dugouts were to have been constructed at the miller's expense.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Are dugouts costly to construct?

Mr. BARRY.-No, although the cost varies with the size. The dugout at Feiglin's mill, which was instrumental in the saving of a number of lives during the 1939 fires, was constructed in two days. It is obvious that only ·millers who realize the benefits to be derived from dugouts have provided them. Had the Kers1ake family, who were killed in the big fires of January, 1939, taken shelter in a dugout instead of attempting to travel from Marysville, through N arbe­thong along the Acheron Way, possibl;)-· they would have been alive to-day. The Commissioner, in his report, stated-

At Yelland's mill, near Matlock, a number of people were saved because they did not use the dugout, which was constructed, above ground, of corrugated iron and which stood among !:!tandillg timber.

Hard by Yelland's, at Fitzpatrick's milL a number of people were burnt to death because there was no dugout.

Despite those statements by the Commis­sioner, we are still arguing about an ex­tension of time being allo·wed millers to construct proper shelters for their em­ployees. Apparently, the Commission has adopted the attitude that as there is no immediate danger it will again forgive the millers, as they have been forgiven in the past, for their neglect to do something it considers essential.

Mr. LIND.-The Commission is not adopting that attitude.

Mr. BARRY.-In July, the Forests {;ommission sent out notices to millers in whieh it was stated that if dugouts were not provided by the 30th of September, eC'rtain action would be taken. If the Oommission did not mean what it sa.id, it should not have sent out threatening 1C'ttel's. It was reported in the findings of the Royal Commission-and a similar statement had been made for a number of yr:us previously-t.hat no serious Httention was paid to notices received by tL(l millf'rs. The Minister is wrong in thC' nttitncle he hm:; :tdoptC'd in fll1~Wrl' to ~tatements J hnve made. By hi~ artion hr is bringing upon himself the blam(> for thinA"R for whirh he 8110111(1 not hr h1nmrcl.

. ·Mr. LIND.-Tell the House where dug­outs have not been constructed.

Mr. BARRY.-I have already made a statement on that matter.

Mr. Lnm.-You mentioned Feiglin's mill.

Mr. BARRY.-I mentioned certain mills, including· Feiglin's, but that is a bout the only mill at which a dugout has been constructed, because Feiglin realizes the necessity for a dugout. It would be much easier if the Minister were to teU the House where dugouts have hecn constructed.

1fr. LIND.-Dugouts have been com­pleted at 95 per cent. of the mills in the State, and at the other 5 per cent. probably they have been finished by to-day.

Mr. BARRY.-That information iR satisfactory, jf it is true. I appreciate that the Minister believes his statement ~o be true.

~fr. LIND.-The figm'C's I have quoted prove it.

~rr. BARRY.-Certain figures were mentioned by the :Minister on a previous occasion, and I claim that they were not rorrect.

Mr. LIND.-That statement is a reflec­tion on the Forests Commission.

Mr. BARRY.-It is not a reflection on the Minister. The fact remains that th& dugouts were not completed at aU the mills mentioned. At the Ada mills the <1ugouts had not even been started when the :Minister· made the statement in this Housp that the construction of dugouts at the Ada River was in hand. In the­township· of Powell town there is not one dugout.

Mr. TUNNECI ... IFFE.-How many mills nre there at Powell town ?

Mr. BARRY.-The largest sawmill in the State is in the Powell town district. I invite honorable members to inspect th~ hllmpies in which the workers are forced to live jn that district. The humpies and the mills are in the middle of an ash forest, which cannot be burnt over for fire protection purposes. In the event of a bush fire, probably the forest would he burnt out., and many people would lose their liv(>s in the fire. The Royal Com­missioner reported that a. llUmber of people were burnt to death at Fitz­patl'iek's min hpcause there was no dug­out.

State Porests Loan r16 OCTOBER, 1940.] Application B,a. 1131

Mr. LIND.-Fitzpatrick's mill is not at Powelltown.

:Ml'. BARRY.-It is not far from Powelltown.

:Mr. LIND.-Fitzpatrick's mill is near Matlock, in the woolly-butt area, and some considerable distance from Powell­toWll.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -Order! When the Premier was mak­ing an important speech on another Bill this afternoon, he was subjected to con­~iderable interruption by the honorable member for Carlton, and I had occasion to direct the attention of that honorable member to the disorderly nature of con­tinued interruption. I now appeal to the Minister of Forests to keep the debate on the propel' plane by not persisting in interjecting. Persistent interjections .are disorderly.

Mr. LIND (Minister of Forests).­By leave, Mr. Speaker--

The SPEAKER.-There can be no discussjon on my ruling that persistent interjections are disorderly.

:Mr. LIND.-I desire to make a per­~onal explanation.

The SPEAKER.-The Minister of Forests is not allowed to make a personal (·xplana tion on my ruling.

M 1'. LIND.-Then I shall take an opportunity to reply later.

Mr. BARRY (Carlton) .-1 shall appl'e­(·iate the :Minister's reply. I have dealt with Fitzpatrick's mill. I am aware that YeIland's mill is near Matlock, which is in an entirelv different area from Powell­town. Ther~ is a mill owned by a Mr. Fitzpatrick near Powelltown.

Mr. MAcKRELL.-1 was at Fitzpatrick's mill in the Matlock area some time before the bush fires of 1939.

Mr. BARRY.-There was a mill owned hy a 111'. Fitzpatrick near the boy's camp nt Noojee.

Mr. 1IAcKRELL.-I refer to the Fitz­patrick's mill at which a number of people were burnt to death.

The SPEAKER.-Order! I ask the honorable member for Carlton to debate the Bill and to disregard interjections, which, I repeat, are disorderly.

Mr. BARRY. - The Minister of Forests stated that at the present time H5 per cent. of the mills have provided dugouts, and I trust that by the 18th of this month the figure will be changed to 100 per cent. The Minister believes the statement that 95 per cent. of the mills have provided dugouts to be true, and I congratulate him on the fact that since the 30th of September the percentage has risen from nil to 95. The report of the Royal Oommission discloses the vexed nature of this question, and I urge that action be taken to ensure that dugouts are provided at all mills so that there will not be loss of life in future through the absence of these essential shelters. At page 19 of his report, the Royal Com­missioner stated-

Relationship existing between Commission and sawmillers.-As a reflection of the true relationship which existed between the Forest8 Commission, by itself and its officers and the sawmillers generally, the following' extrQ-cts from a letter written in February, 1937, by ~Ul officer of the rank of forester to the secretary of the Forests Commission is quoted:-

,j A mill dugout is essential to complete the safety of the mill people, but this firm does not appear to regard them as essential as advice from us in this direction has merely bl'PI1 overlooked . . ."

"No dugout and Mr. 'X' . . . has uefinitely intimated that he will not construct one and will contest any efl'ort to force him to do so . . . This mill is by far the dirtiest mill in the district and although Mr. 'X' . . . has the firm opinion that his mill is safe from fin', it is my belief that should even a small tire occur, it will be a difficult task to l:!ave th~ mill. Unfortunately, Mr. 'X J • • • is lIot open to reason in this direC'tion . . . T beli~\'e a dugout at this mill is absolutely l'~~pllt.H~1 . . . Generally speaking, it is surprtsm~ the llUmber of times we must ap­proach Imllers to endeavour to have them clean' around their mills, &c."

Mr. DODGSHuN. - Was lfr. "X" iuterned?

Mr. BARRY.-The authorities should have made certain that he was not allowed to cut further supplies of timber' hut possibly he is au operating miller to~ day. He is an enemy to the country and the timber industry. At page 34 of the report, the Royal Commissioner stated-

The construction of dugouts at all mill settlements and at winches during the fire­danger season, should be compulsory.

I emphasize the recommendation ~hat dugouts should be constructed at all mill settlements and at winches; but in many

1132 State Forests Loan fASSEMBLY., Application Bill.

cases the Forests Commission has not compelled settlements to provide dugouts. The report continued-

Objection to the construction of dugouts at winches was made during the inquiry, on the ground of the expense of ('onstl'uction. Generally speaking, the winch if: liO\'ed to a lIew site about three times in the course of a year. It is probable that the occupation of only one site coincides with the fire-danger "eason. It was admitted by objectors that in most kinds of countty the cost of construction would be small. '

I have ascertained tha t t he Forests Commis'sion holds a different opinion, but I agree with the finding of the Royal Commissioner that dugouts should be con­stl'lleted at all settlements and winches. The cost of their construction would be small.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). - The time allowed the honorable mem­ber has expired.

On the motion of Mr. OAIN ( N orth­cote), an extension of thirty minutes was granted.

Mr. BARRY (Carlton ).-1 thank hon­Ql'able members for their courtesy. The report of the Royal Oommissioner is an important document, as it was prepared independently of the opinions of members of Parliament 01' other interested people, Dealing with the question of the areas of land to be kept clean around the mills and the dugouts, on page 35 of the report, the Oommissioner stated-

It should be mandatory that an area of 6 chains in diameter, having as its centre the entrance to the dugout, ShOll ld he kept clear of all tre('s and scruh, huildings. and material of whatsoever kind. Stores of petrol and oil, stacks of firewood and all other stores of in-· f1amma.ble material should be kept at such ('onsiderable distance from the rlllgout entrance as the State fire authority may decide; aJlf! in !'ll!'h a position that in the e,:ent of explosioJ/ or igllition, smoke fumes or heat Nlllsed th('rf'h~' will be uulike,ly to enter the dugout.

If honorable members were to travel through the forest areas to-day, they would find that little has been done to clear the country immediately surround­ing the mills and the houses in which the employees live. That work has not been undertaken because the men employed in the bush getting out the timber, for which there is a keen demand, have practically no time to construct dugouts or clear the Hreas surrounding the mills and their hOmf'R. In addition, they are not ahle to lNIY,(' the fOl'pst as clean HS it RhOllld be.

The :Minister of Forests stated that it is the intention of the Forests Commission to purchase a number of bulldozers to clear tracks through the bush. Those tracks will be used for hauling timber and as a means of escape in the event of fire. That is, no doubt, very excellent work, but it is comparable with the build­ing of a defensive road by a nation that has no army or guns. It is necessary for this State to do what has been done in some other States of the Oommon wealth­that is, to arrange for an adequate supply of water at every mill. I was pleased to hear the Minister refer to the pur­chase of hose. It is essential, particu­larly in the ash country, where burning­off is impossible and cleaning off is al­most impossible, that there should be an adequate supply of water at every mill.

I listened to the honorable member fo]' Evelyn with interest when he spoke of mounting his thoroughbred steed and fly­ing away from a fire in Gippsland. When I found myself in a bU8]lfire, r was like a man who .ioined the cavalry-I could not be delayed by hanging on to a horse. I am sure that 110 one knows more than the Minister about the difficulties and dangers of bushfires. When the last bi~' bush:6res were raging, he had a more anxious time than anyone in the State, and I s.ympathized with him, as all other members did. That being so, I regret that he should be prone to regard criti­cism of forest policy as personal criticism. Nothing is more dangerous than the practice of sawmillers in leaving a dirty bush behind them; it is a menace to the population round the mills and in the forest. I could take the Minister now to Powelltown and show him a burning heap of sawdust in the middle of a road, within 100 yards of timber which, if it became ignited. would cause a fire that would spread aeross the v:=dley and wipe out the whole township. No doubt, that heap is on private Jand, and to that extent there is a difficulty, but in an area where so much damage has boen done to human life and property, and to the great asset of thE" forest, no consideration should be given to any p£'rS011 who permits an open saw­dust firp at the presf'nt time. I do not ('xpprt tllC ~1ini"ter to know of this fact. hnt T ran show him a photograph of the nrp taken last 8atnrday afternoon. .

State Forests Loan [16 OCTOBER, 1940.1 Apphcalion Bill. 1133

I suggest, quite seriously, that it is not the man who goes into the bush at the week-end and boils his billy who start!:! bushfires; neither does the bush worker start them; but, in my opinion, most bushfil'cS arc started because of the n('glect of millers to keep the bush clean ,,·here they work. I feel that if some­thing is not done, particularly during the present season of the year, and for the l'f1st of this year, the State will lose its valuable ash forests.

Mr. MACKRET~L.-Olll' mol'£' fire and the trees will not grow again.

:Mr. BARRY.-I l'pnlize that. I appre­ciate the difficulties of obtaining sufEeient machinery to defeat the bushfires, and I realize that what the :M:inister has said is true-that chips, bark, broken timber. and undergrowth canllot be burned off in the ash forests. That is why we should take steps to compel persons working in ash forests to be more careful than those working in other parts of the bush. I feel that if we purchase bulldozers and other supplies in sufficient time, we may yet be able to save the few ash forests remaining, and, if we do that, we shall do something important. Apart from that, we have to realize that on each of the mill areaB there are women and children, although not so many as ther'p, were before the last fires. There are Atill large numbers of families that have been. reared in the neighbourhood of the mills, and we must do something to protect them.

I accept the view that we cannot obtain more money to defend the bush againfiit fii'e because of the action of the "co-ordintltor of money." Fire iA an enemy that is probably more 'important than any outside enemy, and it can ruin tbis country and the people in it. Unless we offer the people in the bush some en­('onragement and protection, and give the forests some chance of continuous growth, we are failing in our duty. Having sain so much, I trust that I have said suffi­cicmt to show that if we do what is neces­sary there will be no need for a blackout in the forests this year; there will be no nred to say to the timber workers, " You must leave the forests to do your work"; and there will be no need to close the mills and thus deprive the timber workers of their livelihood. I believe that

there is also no need for the proposed form of registration, and from what has been said, I hope there will be no registra tion.

Mr. LIND.-I am too much interested in the people in the bush to agree to that. I want to know where they are.

Mr. BARRY.-I am interested in the question of compulsory labour, and ~ do not want millers to be able to say to their men, "You are permitted to work at only such and such mill."

~fr. LlxIl.-TllHt does not ('ome into the:! matter.

Mr. fL\HHY.-It does, in the opinion of the men conccrIwd. God alone is re­sponsible for the :M:inister's opinion.

Mr. LINn.-I accept the responsibility for what I 00 in that connection. N othin~ will stop me.

Mr. BARHY.-If the Minister takes the responsibility for all that happens in the bush, he will become much greyer than he is.

Mr. LIND.-I take the responsihility for blackouts.

Mr. BARHY.-I am not referring to blackouts, but to registration.

Mr. LIND.-I accept responsibility for registra tion.

Mr. BARRY.-Legislation or registra­tion ~

Mr. LIND.-Both. Mr. BARRY.-Perhaps I am obsessed

with a different view, namely, that the Minister proposes to adhere to the registration project.

Mr. LIND.-I propose to do what I think is right.

Mr.BARRY.-Probably the Minister has always done what he thinks has been right! However, if I were a timber worker ill the bush, and thought that I had to be registered to a sawmiller who had repeatedly neglected to carry out the law of the State, but had received all the ('onsiclrration possible from the Forests Commission and the Government-par­ticularly the Minister-I should say " You can keep your forest!" I hope the timber workers will decline to be brow­beaten into registration by authorities who do not consider it worth while to demand from sawmillers the provision of dugouts to protect the lives of the workers when fires occur.

1134 State Forests Loan I ASSEMBLY·l . Application B1'1l.

Mr. LIN D.-Your ideas on registration are miles astray.

Mr. BARRY.-I hope they are. If they are not, I trust that the time will eome when the timber workers, objecting to registration with sawmillers who refuse to provide the protection to which I have referred, wi11 leave those millers the task of :finding others who are willing t.o risk their lives, unprotected from bush fires, .T ust fancy a timber worker and his wife and children being, so to speak, tied up hy registration to a sawmiller-Mr. X.­who admittedly has neglected to obey instructions concerning safety provisions!

Mr. LIND.-From where did you get your ideas?

Mr. BARRY.-I obtained them from t.he report of the Royal Commission nppointed by the Government.

Mr. LIND.-Your suggestions are of a mythical character.

Mr. BARRY.-I have already asked the Minister how far he intends to pro­cced with the proposed registration of mill workers.

:Afr. LIND.-I shall be pleased to tell ,vou at a later date.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). --It would be better to leave these interesting exchanges to the Committer stage.

Mr. BARHY.-I have no objection to 11 further discussion along the same lines when the Bill is in Committee. The fact remains, however, that there cannot be divorced from a consideration of the problem of bush fires, with the consequent loss of human life and serious damage to the forests, the element of continual danger to the forest worker, whether in the mill or elsewhere. It is now proposed f·o increase that danger by compelling the worker to undergo a form of conscript la bour. If the Minister does not intend to convey that impression, I am content. However, from :what has appeared in the p1'ess the bush workers regard the pro­posal in the way I have already outlined. As I have said, if their view is correct, I shall be happy if they refuse to be tied lIP to men who decline to give effect to the express wishes of the Government.

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Have you a copy of the registration regulations ~

Mr. BAHRY-I have not. but I read in the Herald of the 13th of September an article headed, "Forest Men Must Register. New regulations will affect 6,000." In that article it was stated that the regulations were designed to do three' things-

KN'P a check on the moYemcnt of all forest workerfl,

Eliminate men who are known to have 9: record as fire-lighters in forests.

lmproye the standard of work in the forests .

:Mr. LIND.-What action would you take against a person who lights a :fire in a forest ~

Mr. BARRY.-I should have him removed from the bush. I should treat him in the same manner as I expect the Government to deal with the sawmillers who failed to provide dugouts by the 30th of September. I have previously referred to the State sawmill. It was pointed out by the Minister that not all of the sum of £18,500 that I quoted from the Budget was to be spent on the cost of that undertaking, but that an amount of about £6,000 was required for the purposes of the operation of the mill for nine months. I pointed out in my previous remarks on this subject that I was coneel'ned not so much with the esti­mated cost of the mill as with the fact that in December last the sawmill was removed from the area in which it had been working, and that private enterprise had been successful in milling a large amount of timber left behind by the State undertaking. The State sawmill was forced to resume work at Erica with re­conditioned machinery-in an area in which, it was claimed, private enterprise could not be induced to operate. At the present time, however, there are either three or five other mills in the same area.

Mr. LIND.-Do you know where the State sawmill is~

Mr. BARRY.-It is at N oojee. Mr. LIND.-It is at Erica. Mr. BARRY.-Then it has been re­

moved from N oojee to Erica. Mr. LIND.-Do you know from where

the logs are obtained? Mr. BARRY.-According to the Minis­

ter's own statement, three other mills have been operating in the area mentioned.

State Forests Loan 1'16 OCTUBER, 1 H-tO.l AJ)plication Bill. 1135

Mr. LIND.-Three other mills will <>perate III the Erica-Thomson area. The logs. have been brought from the Thomson watershed to Erica, in order that the men will not be compelled to work in difficult conditions in the forest.

Mr. BARRY.-My objection is to the removal of the State sawmill to Erica, ~md also to private enterprise being allowed to operate in the area from which the mill was transferred. Is that an unreasonable objection ~

Mr. LIND.-There is a story behind it. Mr. BARRY.-If there is deducted

from the sum of £18,500 the £6,000 for working expenses over nine months, an amount of approximately £12,500 is left. The best sawmill in this State is that at the Ada River, and it did not cost £5,000 to establish. By comparison £18,500 is a huge sum, calculated to saddle the State enterprise and even kill it before it has a chance to develop.

Mr. LIND.-It has cost £3,500. Mr. BARRY.-I consider that there i::;

an overhead of £18,500. Mr. LIND.-Tha t would be in respect of

twelve months' operations. Mr. BARRY.-But operations for that

period would, according to the :Minister's figures, cost £6,000.

Mr. LIND. - What about logging, salvaging, and so on ~

Mr. BARRY.-The Minister must agree that an overhead of £18,500 is destined to crush the undertaking almost before it gets on its feet. There are a number of difficulties. First, there are no men in the bush seeking work; conse­quently it is almost impossible to secure ('ompetent bush labourers.

}'ir. LIND.-Would you suggest that the timber should be left there ~

~fr. BARRY.-N o. I should have left the mill where it was and should have obtained twice as much timber from the forests as the privately­owned mills obtained. Nothing has been done to encourage people to go into the areas where they are needed. The Min­ister admits that timber has been waiting to be salvaged since the fires occurred in January, 1939.

~11'. LIND.-How would you have sal vaged it?

:Mr. BARRY.-If I contemplated establishing a mill, I should have done dO immediately after the fire. I have attempted this evening to discuss the im­portance of salvaging timber and the pro­tection of the forest industry and its workers. I think all honorable members agree that an insuffirient amount of mOlH''y is being made available to do all that is required. I feel sure the Minister wonld 00 more if he had the means. I oisapprovB of the disregard by millers of regulations framed to seeure adequate protedioll of the forests and forest workers. The regulations should be strictly enforced so that there will not be a rep~etition of the disastrous fires of 193~. According to evidence given before the Royal Commission, and the Com­mission'H report, millers have dis­regarded simiIar regulations and notices m the past. I trust that I shall not have to repeat my criticisms, but that action will be taken by the Go­vernment to do all that is necessary to ensure the safety of the forests and the forest workers.

Mr. ZWAR (lleidelberg).-Last week the :JIillister of Forests, in moving the ~ecolld reading of the Bill, made a com­prehensive statement concerning the forests, and there is no doubt that the honorable gentleman is a sympathetic ex­pert who is able to express views in con­trest to those of bushmen. The honor­able member for Carlton has made some serious statements to-night which I am sure the Minister will investigate with the view of taking necessary action. If forestry officers are at fault, they should be dismissed, because we do not want H

recurrence of the holocaust of January, 1939.

I have always been interested in the production of wattle bark on account of its value to the tanning industry, with which I am associated. In preparing the Dill the J\!inlster has not given much eonsideration to the gro\ving of wattle, hut I know he is sympathetic to that branch of the forest industry. Pine is being grown in the forests, but pine trzes take 25 to 30 years to mature. An un­successful attempt was made to grow pine trees in the Otway forest, but if wattles were planted there, they would yield Il

return every six years. There is u pr('R:-;­

ing need for more wattle bark to be

1136 State Forests Loan r ASSEMBLY·l Application Bill.

g-!'own m Australia. The bush fires in 1939 destroyed a considerable area. of wattle:growing country, and. during the present year it has been necessary to im­port wattle bark from South Africa at a high rost. The shorta.ge will be accentuated by the drought. Areas in the Stawell, Portland, and Gippsland dis­tricts arc most suitable for growing wattle, and the expenditure of several thousands of pounds on wattle cultivation would be small in comparison with the profitable return. To illustrate how easily wattle can be cultivated, I would remind honorable members of an occur­rence in the Stawell district. Pines were planted, and when the trees had grown to a height of about 2 feet a fire went through the area and burnt the pine tl'('CS, but wattles came up like scrub. Forest experts-wise or otherwise-cut down the wattles and planted more pine trees. If they had allowed the wattle·s to grow, there would have been a fine harvest of wattle bark by now.

Discussing the Forests Department some time ago, I advocated the growing of the mallet tree in Vic­toria. Mallet trees grow in the warmer parts of Western Australia. The Government of South Australia has been (mltivating these trees, and a fine industry is being developed in that State. The growing of mallet trees could be attempted in the warmer parts of Victoria, such as the Ouyen district. The trees would be valuable for their bark; they would also form breakwinds and prevent soil erOSlQn.

Soil erosion is becoming a serious menace throughout Australia, and the sooner the Governments take steps to combat this trouble, the better it will be for Victoria and Australia. I recom-mend honorable members to read Hat­field's book entitled Australia Throuqh flip Tfindscreen. It is the account of his h")l1l' from Sydney around Australia, via Darwin, Western Australia, South Aus­tralia, Victoria, and Broken Hill. The author gives a fine exposition on soil erosion in Australia and urges Govern­ments to do more than deal with it in haphazard fashion. There are books in the parliamentary Library containing valu­able information and suggestions dealing with tIlis problem.

Mr. Zwar.

Mr. MULLENS (Footsc1·ay).-The in­cidnntal remarks of the honorable member for Heidelberg on wattle bark production have brought to my mind a conversation tha t took place many years ago on the Melbourne Oricket Ground. During the interval between the dismissal of onc batsman anci the incoming of the next, ·A. O. Maclaren, the captain of the English test team touring Australia told Bob Crockett, of Footscray, an umpire famous in Australian cricket, that he had been greatly surprised in his travels through Australia that he had not seen any varieties of the English bat willow being grown. At that unusual con­versation Mr. Orockett asked Mr. Maclaren to send him, on his arrival in England, cuttings of the genuine English bat willow. Six' cuttings reached Port Melbourne, but five of them were dead, and there was one bud on the sixth. From that one bud grafted by Mr. Orockett's brother, an expert horticulturist at Hep­burn, on an Australian willow tree, there has arisen a plantation of more than 3,000 bat willows. From that plantation are cut clefts which, when transportecl to Footscray, are made into estimable and outstanding bats of Australian manu­facture. The bats supplied to the Mel­bourne Oricket Ground, and to the Vic­torian Oricket Association, and those in use in inter-State cricket at the present time, are exclusively these local products. 1 know that the Minister of Forest!=< i~ interested and he will bear with mp although he has heard that story before.

It is extraordinarily significant that, in this time of national stress and crlRis, from that plantation at Hepburn come many hundreds of tons of charcoal of peculiar density and gravity that are in­valuable to the munition factories. That charcoal is sold under contract to the works of Imperial Ohemical Industries, at Deer Park. In addition the Melbourne a.nd Metropolitan Board of Works, with 8. foresight for which I have not given it credit in the past, has planted many thousands of cuttings of English hat willows on the Metropolitan Farm at Wer1'iLee. My reading has in formed rnA that there wi11 be a definite shortage of English bat willow in future, becausl:' it is being used in place of spruce for aeroplane construction. These statements are incontestable, and I should like the

State Forests Loan p6 OCTOBER, 1940.] Application Bill. 1137

officers of the Forests Commission to 8hO\\!

enthusiasm for something new on the horizon. What an extraordinary tree this is! I t supplies the need8 of ~port. and of war, and, last but not least, it is useful in connection with the problem of erosion mentioned -by the hOllorahle member for Heidelberg. One cannot cut a branch off a tree with a hammer and mallet.

Mr. LIND.-The willows make wonder· ful fire breaks. A fire will not go through willows.

Mr. MULLENS.-The House sees the possibilities of the English bat willow tree. Australia will be able to provide the cricketers on the English village greens with bats, because England is being denuded of this timber. The value of each bat willow tree is between £30 and £40. Bats are made from the timber obtained from the tree from the ground level to the first branch. This timber is also used for making charcoal, and it may be applied to other uses through scien­tific research. I was hopeful that when the facts were supplied to the departmen­ta 1 officers concerned, they would dagb off to Hepburn and embark on the plant­ing of bat willows, but there was no stir in the dovecot. TLe authorities of Im­perial Chemical Industries, at Deer Park, set high value on the charcoal obtained from these trees, and manufacturers find that the timber can be used in aeroplane construction; the enlightened Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works plants these trees at Werribee; and, as the willows have been useful in combating erosion, they should be planted on the banks of the Ovens river and the Strat­ford river. In all these circumstances I ask, what are the experts in the Forests Commission doing?

Mr. LIND.-YOU should not say much about planting treflS along the rivers. We have planted them on the banks of the river at Orbost.

Mr. MULLENS.-Was the English bat willow tree used ~ Yes, or no ~

Mr. LIND.-Willow trees were planted there.

Mr. MULLENS.---There is a vital dif­ference between the ordinary willow and the English bat willow. I should like the Minister of Forests to inspire his officers

with some enthusiasm. They should break away from tradition. Let us imagine whrn the shadows of war have left England and dictators are a thing of the past, that the Rradmuns of tlH' future will play at Lord's with bat.s made of Australian bat willow.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­I had in tended to speak on one matter, but the two honorable members who have preceded me have provided me with two more subjects. I was int~rested in the ro­marks of the honorable member for Heidelberg on wattle culture, and they take me back to the Bill, which provides in the schp.dule for the following expen­diture :-1. For the systematic improvement

and development of indigenou~ State forests, including surveY8, cleaning and fire protection, and the acquisition of lands bearing any of the principal kinds of native trees; and for the season­ing, testing, and preservation of timber generally . . ., £100,OO()

2 For work in plantations of soft-woods and hard woods 50,000

£150,000

As one who speaks severely on the over usP. of loan money I propose to adopt an unusual course. I am satisfied that the sum of £150,000 is not enough for thesE' purposes. Still, I realize that it will he augumented from various sources. Thel'~ will be that fairy godmother, the unem­ployment relief loan funds, on which to draw, and quite properly, too, there will be the Unemployment. Relief Taxation Fund. In addition, there will be th0 income received by the Forests Commi~­sion from various sources under its Art.

Now I wish to inform the Minister of Forests of an experience I had in South Africa. I was returning in 1917 from the war, and the ship on which I travelled called at Durban where we spent a da~·. Two or three brother officers and I char­tered a motor car and drove from Durban to Pietermaritzburg, over the bills, wherf> we saw things that were quite new to me. Large tracts of cultivated hill country were covered with wattle plantations, very similar to cropped areas in this country. I shall anticipate the comment that will be made-that they were probably sown with the aid of unlimited native labour. On inquiry, I was interested to learn that

1138 State Forests Loan I ASSEMBLY.] Application Bill.

the seeds for the wattles came from my native country-Australia. Since then I have wondered why we trust to nature to provide us with wattles, the bark of which is essential for tanning purposes. I men­tion this matter because there are two aspects to be considered. Many of our unemployed are incapable of performing heavy work, but they could undertake thp light work necessary for planting seedling trees. An almost unlimited area of land suitable for the growing of wattles is available. Is there not a possibility that what South Africa can do with native labour we can do in the form of unem­ployment reliet' work, at the same time promoting the growth of 8 valuable commodity~

Mr. COTTER.-Wattles are grpwn in South Africa from Australian seeds, and the wattle bark is sold to Australia.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That is so. It was interesting to me to observe how our wattle seeds have been cultivated and grown like crops in that countrv. Without exaggeration, I should say that thousands of acres of land were co vered with wattles, in varioua stages of growth. I ask the Minister of Forests to inquire whether the South African method of wattle cultivation can be adopted in this country, the home of the wattle.

To-night we have heard a great deal on the important subject of bush fire fighting and prevention. We all remember the great tragedy of January, 1939-the human suffering, the loss of life, and the wasteful destruction of a great State asset. I am not approaching this subject as a means of suggesting want of confid­ence in the Government. I am not in a critical mood, but I am trying to be con­structive. I was impressed by the work done by voluntary fire fighters in the 1939 bush fires, particularly by trainees from military camps. The country is now ut war, and we have in course of training militiamen who are not going overseas. It has occurred to me that it is very important that we should have on hand, in case of emergency, a trained body of men for fire-fighting purposes.

I ask the Government to communicate with the Commonwealth authorities and ascertain whether portion of the training period for militiamen can be devoted to training in organized

fire-fighting, under the direction of skilled officers from the Forests Com­mission, with the assistance of other men versed in bush fire-fighting practices. Under skilled officers, and under discip­line, we could have available an organized body of fire fighters. I can assure honor­able members that their work would be. very different from the amateur efforts of the splendid body of volunteer fighters who were called on in the 1939 fires. To show that there is something practical in what I suggest, I shall refer to cabled reports which honorable members have probably read concerning the splendid work done by the Royal Air Force in raids over enemy territory. The R.A.F. has caused terrific fires in the great forests of Germany.

Mr. REID.-They have been using cellu­loid incendiary bombs.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Yes. The bombs have been distributed over a wide area, under climatic conditions favourable to the spreading of fire. I ask honorable members to consider what has happened, and to think what danger would exist on a raging hot January day in our own forests if similar tactics were adopted by an enemy over our country. I shall not elaborate my suggestion, but I offer it because, as a real military objective, the militiamen who are being trained for home defence should be properly trained and fully equipped in the art of bush fire fighting.

The third point suggested to me by pre­vious speakers, relates to soil erosion-a problem I should probably have referred to under another heading. Whether it is a good plan to plant bat willow trees along the banks of Victorian streams is a sub­ject on which I am not competent to offer comment. But I consider the statement of the honorable member for Footscray to be extremely interesting, because it may lead to another industry being established locally, as a result of the war overseas. While the market for cricket bats might not be sufficient to affect the finances of Australia to any great extent, I should say that if the timber from the bat willow tree is useful for aeroplane building­and I have no doubt it is-a large indus­try may develop in that direction.

On the subject of erosion, I shall make a further suggestion which I trust the :Minister of Forests will place before

.1 , I j

State Forests Loa,n f16 OCTOBER, 1940.J Application Bill. 1139

Cabinet. In the United States of America wonderful work has been done in combat­ing erosion, as well as in fire fighting, by the damming of the head waters of the little streams which ultimatc>ly constitut(, the big st.reams. If dams were constructed at intervals of a few hundred yards on the small creeks traversing our forest areas, they would hold a quantity of water that would be available for two or three uses. In the first place, that work would assist to prevent erosion and, at the same time, it would provide stores of water in the heart of the forest which would be available to fight fires. In addition, flora and fauna would be pre­served, especially fauna. The birds and beasts would multiply in the neighbour­hood of those sources of water in the depths of the forest. , This suggestion is not my own. The Minister of Forests will find that the project has been put into effect in the United States of America, to prevent soil erosion. A publication dealing with the subject is in the parliamentary Library, and is a valuable work. The scheme would probably have to be established in a small way and built up by degrees. Undertakings of this simple character could be carried out by untrained men, and would mean work for the unem­ployed; they would provide for the storage of water, the prevention of erosion, and the preservation of flora and fauna. If the Minister will consider the subject he will realize that it is worth bringing to the notice of his expert advisers. The money provided by the Bill will be well spen t, and there is no reason why the passage of this measure should be de­layed.

Mr. LIND (Minister of Forests).­I havA listened to the debate with interest, and, at times, with mixed feelings. I made my second-reading speech in such a way that I hoped to draw from honor­abJe members contributions of a construc­tive character, and I have not been dis­appointed. I regret that the honorable me~ber for ~ampden is not present, as he IS deeply Interested in forestry work. Unfortunately, he is sick. The honorable member intimated to me that he hoped the debate would be further adjourned so that he could submit his contribution. However, I have his views' with respect to the Bill, and I appreciate them. Various

members have expressed their o-piniolls on forestry, and I have been glad to hear them. In certain directions, there has been considerable criticism. I accept the assurance of the honorable member for Carlton that his criticism was intenden to be constructive and helpful. I trust that the honorable member will take the trouble to look a little further into the matter with which he dealt particularly, and that he will visit all the forest areas of the State as opportunities present themselves.

I ask all honorable members to study forestry, not in Melbourne, or in isolated parts, but throughout the State. On Monday next I shall have completed my twentieth year as a member of this House, and I can say that during that period I have taken advantage of every opportunity that has presented itse1f to express my views on the im­portant question of forestry. My COll­

tentions have been contrary to those of almost all other members, and especially to the opinions of the daily press. I now have the satisfaction, however, of knowing that Parliament believes ill the principle I preached years ago, namely, that of fire prevention by means of protective burning-off. We have reached complete agreement on that aspect, and I am glad that the Royal Commissioner advocated it.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-You are now in favour of the Royal Commissioner?

Mr. LIND.-I never disagreed with tha t finding of his-I welcomed it. T believed in it before many people in thf> State would accept it. It is satisfactor~· to me to know that the honorable member for Ballarat and the Royal Commissioner believe in the system; but before they accepted it they had to see what happened on the 13th of January last year. I advocated this course of action twenty years ago, and preached it in Parliament, but a metropolitan paper said that I was a menace to Victoria because I would burn our forests. The difference between protective burning and damaging fire was not realized. I appreciate the contribu­tions made to the debate by the honorable member for Evelyn and the honorable member for Carlton. The latter was critical of the work done by the Forests Commission, but I know he desired to be

1140 State Forests Loan !!\.SSEMBLY., Application Bill.

of assistance. Later, I trust that I shall be able to make a convert of him in certain directions.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-What about his con­verting you ~

Mr. LIND.-We shall agree to differ to the extent to which we have differed to-night, but I shall make every effort to see that we get into step. Honorable members were treated to an exposition on wattle culture by the honorable member for Heidelberg. When I was in Western Australia recently, I visited certain plantations, and I obtained a supply of mallet seed. That is now being grown here in trial plots.

N ow I come to the question raised by the honorable member for Footscray. I greatly appreciated his contribution to the debate. He thought it was a little too long, but I thought it was too short, and I can assure him that we all enjoyed it. I do not want him to think that I have lost sight of his representations. Last week an officer of the Department, whose district happens to be part of the N oojee ('otmtry, came to see me, and he suggested that we should experiment in the growing of bat willow trees on the roadsides in his district.

The Leader of the Opposition referred to wattles and to erosion. I have already informed the House that the Government intends to bring down a Bill this session dealing with erosion. I am aware of what has been done in other countries in the cultivation of wattles', more particu­larly in South Africa. South Africa has prodn.ced from Australian seed good quality bark, which has come into con:­petition with the bark produced in thIS State. We have been able to reduce that ('ompetition by me~ns of a customs tariff. We are faced this year with very high prices for wattle bark. I am not much concerned about that, because the man who strips the bark earns all he receives for it. The man who grows the tree takes great risk. No other tree is so sensitive to fire, for even a light grass fire will kill it.

T know som£>thing that perhaps the honorable member for St. Kilda does not know. Bef~re his time, his people had a big plantation in my district, at a place raIled Romawi, where they planted thousands of aCI'PH with black wattle.

They not only planted the seed after soaking it in hot water, but they also carted loads of small wattles and planted them like orchards. The trees were destroyed, not by fire, but by blight and grubs. The grubs ruined huge areas, and the country was later given over to sheep. Some Orown lands are to-day not growing good timber, and they are not subject to very serious fire hazards-that is to say, they are not bracken country. In such areas wattles will grow, and we could, with a reasonable degree of safety, en­courage their growth there. That, I suggest, should be attempte~. Not many new selections are now bemg developed, and settlers are beyond the stage where they want wattle bark. They value the grass more than the wattle, and they destroy the wattles as soon as they come up. In the early days, settlers were glad of the little money they could obtain for wattle bark. N ow we need to look beyond the settled country, and to try to protect the wattle in . forest and Orown lands. I have taken a note' of what honorable members have said. I assure them that I am glad to have their contributions to the debate, and their encouragement and inspiration in a matter in which I am tremendously interested.

Mr. O.AIN.-Do you propose to promu,l­gate regulations dealing with forest workers?

Mr. LIND.-That question is outside the scope of the Bill, but whatever we do by regulation :will be with the object of knowing where the men in the forests are working. We do n<?t want to dictate to the men as to whom they shan wor~ for ~ we have never thought of such a thmg.

Mr. OAIN.-How will you know where they are? .

Mr. LIND.-We shall know where they are working. It is necessary to know where the men are so as to be able to decide what capacity of dugout is re­quired. If a fire occurs, we have to decide the best way to get the men out .of the forest. Surely there is nothing wrong with that.

Mr. CAIN.-There is. Mr. LIND.-We are faced with

another difficulty at the present time. Already we have been t.old ~hat we must not insist on men workIng In the forests on more than five days a week. If the

State Forests Loan f16 OCTOBER) 1940.] Application Bill. 1141

House expects me and the Forests Com­mission to do all the things that have been suggested to-night. there will be a period this summer when there must be a blackout, or the men must be in the forests from Monday to Monday. Honorable members must make up their minds on that. Men cannot protect the forests without being in them. There is a move at present to take the men out of the forests on Saturday and Sunday of every week. I want to know how we can do that and still protect the forests.

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

committed. Clause 1 was agreed to. Clause 2-(Issue and application of

£150,000 out of loan funds for State forests) .

Mr. EVERARD (Evelyn).-I wish to express my pleasure at seeing the Minis·· ter taking notes of comments by members on all sides of the House. To-morrow will be a day of solemn celebration in my district when, by the unveiling of a plaque, a tribute will be paid to the memory of Mr. Fred Topping, who was the first to lose his life while fighting bush fires at Warrandyte. He was all ideal citizen in every respect, and was highly esteemed in the district. Inci­dentally, he was keenly interested in cricket and played for the Fitzroy club for many years. The ceremony to­morrow will remind the residents of Warrandyte of all those who worked un­selfishly to save the lives of others. We have a deep appreciation of the magnifi­cent efforts made by forest officers and fire fighters generally during the last tragic bush fires. Many of them have since enlisted for service abroad. We honour them for their practical patriotism, as well as for their devotion to duty in the fire-swept areas of this State.

Mr. CAIN (N orthcote).-I should not be speaking at this stage were it not for the remarks of the Minister towards the end of his speech at the close of the second-reading debate, when he referred to the important work of fire fighting and the conservation of our forests. Everyone appreciates the necessity for such work, but I do not think the Govern­ment has any right to propose to register

Session 1940.-[49]

timber workers so that they shall be kept in the forest seven days a week. . That is a blackfellow's idea!

Mr. LIND.-Who said that they would be kept in the forest seven days a week ~

Mr. CAIN.-The honorable gentleman said so.

Mr. LIND.-I did not. How can you expect the forest to be protected if men are withdrawn every Friday night ~

Mr. BARRY.-How can you expect the men to work on Sunday without being paid?

Mr. CAIN.-When I telephoned the Minister a few days ago he gave me a reply which was different from his statement to-night. I understand that registration of all forest workers is to be insisted upon, and that careless or indis­criminate use of fire in the forests by workers or licensees will result in the immediate cancellation of their rights. In the first place, the new regulations are designed to keep a check on the move­ments of all forest workers. Secondly, it is intended to eliminate men who are known to have a record as fire-lighters ill forests. That would embrace half the graziers of this State.

Mr. BARRY.-And mill owners as well. Mr. CAIN.-That may be so. The thiru

object is to improve the standard of work in the forests. In order to register, men will have to apply to the local forest office and the particulars will be sent to the head office of the Forests Commission in Melbourne. A complete record will be kept, and this may include a record of a man's "efficiency and as to whether his conduct in preserving the safety of the forests is satisfactory. Befo,re any man can leave one forest district to go to another he will have to obtain a clearance from the local forest officer. The Commission will then have complete information of the where· abouts of all men in the forests, and it says that will be of great value at a time of bush fires. Workers engaged in the mill itself, and not in the open forest, will not have to register. Included in the register of names will be the addresses and occupations of all persons engaged or employed in any industry in any State forest. The Minister says he desires to safeguard the forests of this State-

Mr. LIND.-And the persons who live or work in those forests.

1142 State Forests Loan r ASSEMBLY.l Application Bill.

Mr. OAIN.-I appreciate that inter­jection. If the men who are ~mploy~d in the outback have agreed wIth theIr employers to do a week's work in five day~, surely they are entitled to have theIr week-ends free, to return to their homes if they so desire. Some of them own motor bicycles or have other means of transport, and may live in towns near to their place of employment.

Sir STA1\Tl<:;Y ARGYLE.-Is it proposed to prevent the worker from leaving the forest ~

Mr. CAIN.-The Minister said that it was.

Mr. LIND.-Would you suggest that if a fire was raging in the bush the men should leave?

Mr. OAIN.-I have no desire to attri­bute to the Minister a statement that he did not l11ake. He said that it was not the duty of bush workers to spend only five days in the forest. Their job, he added, was to be available from one Mon­day to another.

Mr. LIND.-If they were wanted.

Mr. CAIN.-The Minister did not use those words.

Mr. LIND.-That is bunk! You re­entered the Ohamber after I had spoken, and what you now say is not correct.

Mr. CAIN.-I ask any member of this House who listened to the Minister's speech whether the honorable gentleman did not say that he was opposed to the men working only five days, and that their job was to remain in the forest from Monday to Monday.

!fr. LIND.-If they were needed.

111'. CAIN.-Again I say that the honorable gentleman did not use those words. If I can prevent it, the Minister will not impose a regulation to allow the Forests Commission or any other authority to determine where the forest workers shall spend their Sundays. Assuming that such a regulation was issued, it would have to he extended to include mill owners in the forests.

Mr. LIND.-Every one in the forests must be included; otherwise there will be a blackout. .

Mr. OAIN.-I cannot understand the Minister's reference to "a blackout."

Mr. B.ARRY.-The Minister's experience must go to show that when there is a fire in the bush the tendency of the workers is not to run away from it.

Mr. CAIN.-Their tendency is to stay and risk their lives.

Mr. LIND.-Honorable members need not tell me what the men's tendencies are. I know all about the forests.

Mr. OAIN.-The Minister is becoming impossible-he will not listen to what honorable members have to say. He is unreasonable on this question because he is firmly convinced that he, and he alone, is fully acquainted with the problem.

Mr. OLDH.AM.--God and Lind! Mr. CAIN.-Exactly. Without any

display of heat or any desire to embarrass the Minister I wish to suggest that he should refrain from giving effect to his presen t propo,sals on the ground that they are unfair, and that it will be found impossible to impose upon timber workers such a condition as that to which I have already referred. There is no law in this country by which the Government can compel a timber worker in the bush to approach a forest officer for permission to visit his family in a nearby town at the week-end. The forest workers are justly entitled to a five-day week, and they should have the right to visit their families during thA week-end. The most conservative person in the community would agree with that statement. I hope the Minister will not act unwisely in this matter. If he does, he will find himself in trouble with the forest workers, because they will not be bluffed.

Mr. LIND.-N either will I. Mr. CAIN.-The Minister is not

qualified to impose provisions like this upon forest workers. In fact, qualified forest workers are not obtainable at present. Those cutting timber to-day are doing so in hundreds for defence purposes.

Mr. LIND.-Where ~ Mr. CAIN.-In the forests. Mr. LIND.-N ot in the forests we arA

talking about. Mr. CAIN.-Does the Minister suggest

they are cutting it on the plains of the MaHee?

Btate Forests Loan [16 OCTOBER, 1940.J Application Bill. 1143

Mr. LIND.-No, but they are not cutting the ash tim bel'.

Mr. CAIN.-It will be an impossible situation for a forest worker if he has to go to the forest officer at the week-end, cap in hand, and ask, "Please, sir, may I go home for the week-end~" If this regulation is imposed on forest workers, it should also be imposed on the people who really start the fires-the graziers located around the forests. I would suggest that the Minister should consider this matter calmly and ascertain whether his proposal, which originated in the Forests Commission's office, should not be modified. He informed me the other day it was not proposed to do anything more than enforce the regulation for the con­struction of dugouts. I hope the honor­able gentleman will realize the injustice of imposing on forest workers an obliga­tion that they should not leave the forests without permission.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-What IS tho object of keeping the workers in tho forests?

Mr. CAIN.-According to the Minis­ter, the object is to keep them there to fight bush fires if the occasion arises. Such an occasion may arise at any time during a spell of hot weather. Therefore, during such a period these men will not be permitted to leave the bush to visit their homes, even if their homes ar(l situated nearby, unless the forest officer thinks there is no imminent danger of a fire. If a fire does occur and it spreads, neither bushworkers nor anyone else can stop it. Tha t has been the experience of years.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-But what about preventing it from spreading ~

Mr. CAIN.-How will that be done ~ Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-On the last

occasion the fires had spread long before an attempt was made to stop them.

Mr. CAIN.-I do not think the forest workers would leave the forests if there was any danger of a mill being burnt; they would stay there voluntarily. An incident associated with the burning of Fitzgerald's mill at Matlock was men­tioned this evening. Fitzgerald and his brother stayed there, with other experi­enced men, and altogether 15 men were burnt to death. The on~y way in which the suggested regulation could be ~n-

forced would be under the National Security Act, but it is unnecessary. There is ample evidence that forest workers have always been prepared to render the best possible service. To compel them to remain in the forest over the week-end is repugnant not only to .A.ustralians generally, but to the industrial movement and the timber workers of the State particularly.

Mr. LIND (Minister of Forests).-. It is evident thBit the Leader of the Labour party has not as much knowledge of the subject of forest control as he should have. I am sorry for that, and, from his statement, the honorable member appears to be a novice. He spoke to­night of a situation that is more mythical than real. The Government intends to do two things, and, if they are not done, I shall not remain in office as Minister of Forests. The first is to have a check made of every person in the forests, so as to ascertain who he is and where he is. That is necessary in the interests of the safety of people in the forests. The Government intends to do everything possible to ensure that when a fire breaks out there will be workmen in the forests to control it. The Leader of the Labour party has been thinking only in terms of fires the men cannot stop, but I am thinking in terms of small fires. "A stitch in time" is the policy to be applied in forest fire fighting. Men must be on the spot when a fir(l starts. I told the House last year, and I repeat the statement, that during tho summer of 1939 in Western Australia more than 180 fires started, but not one spread beyond an area of an acre.

Mr. CAIN.-There were no graziers there.

Mr. LIND.-There are no graziers in the ash country of Victoria.

Mr. CAIN.-They are on the fringe of it.

Mr. LIND.-They are not in the ash country nor on the fringe of it. There are small settlers all around the edge of the ash country in Victoria.

Mr. CAIN.-Read what the Royal Commissioner said a bou t tha t rna tter.

Mr. LIND.-I do not care what the Royal Commissioner said about it; I am prepared to voice my opinion against

1144 State Forests Loan r ASSEMBLY.l Application Bill.

that of the Royal Commissioner, or any one else. The forest workers appreciatfl what the Government is trying to do. They want to save the forests from fire, and they do not want to run away during a dangerous period. They will not appreciate what the Leader of the Labour party has said to-night. I have my finger on the pulse of the forest workers, and I know they are keen to preserve the forests. They are not keen on run­ning away where there is dangel'.

Mr. BAItRY.-They have never yet run away, but they should not be made to stay there.

}Ir. LIND.-The honorable member for Carlton would not do much good if he were out there. I assure the Committee that the Forests Commission is doing its utmost to see that the forests are pro­tected, and that the forest workers receive the treatment to which they are entitled. I appreciate the helpful attitude adupted by some members.

~fr. CAIN.-Do you propose to impose regulations on the men employed in the forests?

Mr. LIND.-We shall impose regula­tions that we think are in the interests of the forest and of the men.

Mr. CAIN (N orthcote) .-1 am pleased that the Minister of Forests has revised his original statement.

Mr. Lnm.-I have revised nothing so far as you are concerned.

Mr. OAIN.-When I asked the Minis­ter a civil question, whether he intended to impose regulations on the forest. workers, he told me definitely that thE' Forests Commission intended to refuse the men the right to work only five days a week.

Mr. LIND.-I did nothing of the kind. Mr. CAIN.-If ansard will have the

Minister's reply on record. Every mem­ber of the House knows that the honorable gentleman told me that. He has now revised his sta tern en t and he says, " We want the men from Monday to Monday."

Mr. LIND.-If necessary. Mr. CAIN.-The Minister did not say

" If necessary," and those words will not be in the Hansard report-or if they are I shall want to know why. It is unfair to impose regulations on the forest

workers when regulations are not imposed on anybody else employed in those areas. The Minister revised his statement and said: " We propose to do everything pos­sible to save the forests." He also de­clared that he had his :finger on the pulse of the forest workers. Whatever may be his opinion of the timber workers, I know they have more respect for their organiza­tion than they have for him. It must not be forgotten that 70 or 80 forest workers lost their lives in the terrible fires that occurred last year because they re­mained in the forests in defence of their homes, and of the mills where they had been employed. Regulations are not needed to keep such men in the forests when there are :fires. If the Minister im­poses regulations on the workers prohibit­ing them from going out of the forest areas until they have consulted forest officers, they will resent such restrictions and will take no notice of them; they will simply walk out of the forests. The Minister of Forests 'is not doing justice to himself, the Government, or the Forest~ Commission, becauso he could talk quietly and reasonably to the men on the matter. Really they do not need ta1king to, but if they were told that a certain week-end was a dangerouH period they would be ready to help. If, however, the honorable gentleman thinks he can impose regula­tions under the National Security (Emer­gency Powers) Act, that is another ques­tlon altogether.

Mr. LIND.- -.:1 do not think the question was fair.

Mr. OAIN.-It was my question. When the Minister has cooled down and discusses this matter in Cabinet with his c'olleagues--

Mr. ULDHAM.-They will get on to him for ha.ving caused this row.

Mr. OAIN.-When the Minister dis­cusses this matter with his colleagues he will appreciate the seriousness of imposing regulations on these forest workers.

Mr. LIN D.-You were not here to hear the debate.

Mr. CAIN.-I heard every word the Minister spoke the other day. To-night I heard the honorable member for Foots­cray as well as the excellent contributions made by the honorable member for Carl· ton and the Leader of the Opposition. If

Administ'tation and fI6 OCTOBER) 1940.] P'tobate (Wa't Service) Bill. 1145

the Minister says that I was not present here, I shall put Ply record of atten­d ances against his.

Mr. HOLLwAy.-Perhaps you missed some of his speech to-night!

~Ir. CAIN.-No, I heard eyery word of it. When the J\lIinister discusses this matter with his colleagues, I do not think they will agree that he would be justified ill using regulations that were not de­signed for this purpose. The National Security (Emergency Powers) Act was not framed with the purpose of compel­ling men to fight bush fires, but was de­signed to protect this country against a foreign foe. No one can tell me that a timber worker is an enemy of this country; on the contrary, he is among its best friends. I hope the Government will not think of using the national emergency regulations in the manner suggested. If it does, I shall use all the powers I possess -and I have some powers-and the Go­vernment will hear of them.

)11'. A. A. DUNsTAN.-Are you not hay­ing an argument with yourself ~

~Ir. CAIN.-I am having an argument with one of the leading Ministers-he is the Deputy Premier-who should not make irresponsible statements. When I argue with him, or with the Premier, I hope I am not arguing with myself.

}Ir. LIND.-You put up Aunt Sall~es.

)Ir. C.t~IN.-N 0, the Minister is a fair Aunt Sally! If the :Minister of Forests, or thc Go\crnment, attempts to use national cmergel1(,,Y regulations to ('ontrol the forest workers he, and the GoYermnent, will hear about it.

The clause was agreed to, as were dause ~1 and the schedule.

The Bill was reported to the House ~vitl10ut .a~1endment, and passed through lts remauung stages.

ADMINISTRATION AND PROBATE (WAR SERVICE) BILL.

The debate (adjourned from October 1) on the motion of :Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premier and Treasurer) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. OLDHAM (Boo1·ondara).-The Bill proposes, with respect to persons killed while on aeti \'e st'l'vice oyerseas,

that their estates up to a maximum of £5,000 shall be exempt from probate duty. The Premier said that the pro­visions of the Bill followed the lines of an Act passed during the Great War of 1914-18, and were similar to legis­lation already passed by the Common­wealth Parliament.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-If the deceased person left an estate which did not exceed £5,000, no probate duty would be pay­able. If the estate exceeded £5,000. the first £5,000 would be exempt.

:Mr. OLDHAM.-I appreciate that statement of the purpose of the Bill, and, so far as Opposition members are concerned, there is no objection to the Bill. The only point I shall make relates to the militia forces within the Oommon­wealth. I do not suggest an amendment of this measure, but the House and the Government might consider further the caqe of militiamen. Although the continent is free from illvasi(m, certain militiamen might be killed in the course of their military training. Per­haps we should look ahead and face the prospect of invasion. If that possibility eventuated, members of the militia forceR would be called upon to play their part in repelling the invaders. We all hopp. an invasion will never take place, but if it does, members of the militia forces should be granted a similar privilege of exemption from probate duty. My only doubt with respect to the Bill is whether it goes far enough. It is not a subject for party discussion, but honorable mem­bers should consider whether we ought to extend the concession in the way I have suggested.

Mr. CAIN (1Vorlhcote) .-In the calmer atmosphere that now preyails, with the Premier in charge of the House, I shall mention one provision in the Bill that should be given some consideration. Not only is it proposed to exempt from pro­bate duty estates up to the value of £5,000, but the Bill goes further, and grants certain exemption where the value of the estate exceeds £5,000. I realize that there will be border-line cases, but are we justified in exempting the first £5,000 of every estate?

1146 Administration and r ASSEMBLY.l P'i'obate (War Service) Bill.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-If a person on active service left an estate valued at £100,000, probate duty would be payable on £95,000.

Mr. CAIN.-My difficulty is whether the exemption should not be extended to apply to estates of the value of £6,000, and then stop there. I realize that that would be a disadvantage where the estate was valued at £6,500.

Mr. OLDHAl\I.-It would have been. easy for me to suggest terminating the exemp­tion at £10,000, but I approached the discussio.ll in a fair way, and I trust that you will not attempt to outbid me.

Mr. CAIN.-Should we apply the exemption in all cases, or should we make it on a sliding scale, discontinuing the exemption on an estate valued at £20,000 or over?

Mr. OLDHA:\r.-I appreciate your point, but difficulties would arise whatever limit was agreed upon.

Mr. CAIN.-The object of the Bill is to assist the dependants of soldiers or others who are killed while on war service overseas. I have not raised my suggestion with a view to outbidding the honorable member for Boroondara; neither do I suggest that the Government is wrong. The exemption is liberal, and no serious objection can be taken to it. In reference to militiamen who are in training for home service, if our shores were invaded further legislation would be necess·ary to include them.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­One pqint mentioned by the honorable member for Boroondara may require further consideration. I admit that if an emergency arose and it was necessary to extend a similar benefit to militiamen, amending legislation would have to be introduced. I would point out, however, that there is a possibility of the emergency arising at present. The Bill provides for persons who die from injuries received or from disease contracted during active ser­vice. In times of war, when men are con­centrated in camps, such things as serious epidemics are experienced. Members of the militia forces who are in camp for three months' military training are potential defenders of the Common-

wealth within our shores. While under­going that training, a militiaman might contract a fatal disease in camp. I may be opening up a debatable subject, but I cannot ignore it. When a soldier has been called up for military service within Australia, are his dependants to be asked to pay probate duty if the man's death was caused definitely through home service? I ask the Premier to consider that aspect, to see if it would be possible to provide that, in the event of a man in a training camp contracting a fatal disease, his case should come within the provisions of this measure.

Mr. lL A. DUNSTAN.-I shall look into that aspect.

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

passed through its remaining stages.

A.DJOURNMENT. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE-COM:\ION­

WEALTH DEP ARTl\fENT OF INFORMA­TION: CENSORSHIP OF N EWS-F A WXNER CEMETERY: CONSTRUCTION OF SOUTHERN BOUNDARY-ROAD.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I move-

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until Tuesday next, at 3 o'clock.

r take this opportunity to intimate that w hen the House meets on Tuesday next­the actual time of meeting will be 3.30 p.m.-the Government will introduce two or three short Bills so that they shall appear on the Notice Paper at their second-reading stage. That will take only a little while. Then it is pro­posed to depart from Government busi­ness and to consider certain general busi­ness. Th~re is only one item listed under the heading of Orders of the Day­General Business, namely, the Health (Amendment) Bill, from the Legislative Council, which measure is in charge of the honorable member for N orthcote. It is better known as the "Beef Measles Bill," but it correctly comes under the category of a health Bill. I feel that honorable members should record a decisioll on the measure. The other House has passed the Bill, and it has been presented to this Chamber for considera­tion. The people of Victoria sh(mld know once and for all if the ban is to

~

1

1

I

Adjourmnent. f16 OCTOBER, 1940.J Adjournment. 1147

remain on the sale for human consump­tion of cattle from the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works farm at Werribee, or whether there is· a desire in Parliament to lift that embargo.

Mr. OAIN.-If the Bill is passed, you will not raise the subject again?

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I think the will of Parliament, as expressed in the first instance, should remain. If Parlia­ment desires, however, it should not be deprived of an opportunity to express a further opinion on the matter. Reason­able time for this purpose should be made available. Agitation or suggestions from time to time for the removal of the ban are not in the best interests of the State. When legislation is passed on a question such as this, the decision should be carried out.

Mr. MICHAELIs.-You have been amending legislation ever since you have been Premier.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-This particu­lar legislation was not approved by one party al<;me-it was approved by all par­ties, and by a previous Government.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-Do you hold the same opinion in relation to the State Electricity Commission (Trading) Bill?

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-We shall deal with that Bill when it is before the House. At the moment, we are considering a matter which is more vital to the people of the State, as it affects the health of the community. Whatever decision is reached by Parliament, I think it should stand, and should not be sub­ject to agitation for a change from time to time. One can take risks in regard to. certain matters, but not when the health of the community is in question.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -Interjections are being fired at the Premier, who is really making a second­reading speech. I have allowed him con­siderable latitude.

}fr. HOLLAND.-May I ask the Pre­miel' a question arising from his statement?

The SPEAKER.-That would not be in order.

Mr. HOLLAND.-The Premier referred to the health of the community, Thf.' removal of the cattle yards. from their present site is agitating the minds of many citizens.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN,-I presume., the discussion on the Health (Amend­ment) Bill will be fairly lengthy, but the Bill will be dealt with on Tuesday next. No doubt, the discussion will occupy most of the sitting.

Mr. CAIN.-And also part of Wednes­day.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I trust that it. will not do that. Honorable members can rest assured that it is the intention of the Government that the debate shan proceed on Tuesday until a decision is reached on the motion for the second reading. I do not anticipate that the Bill ,viII pass its second reading.

:Mr. CAIN.-YOU are an optimist!

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-If it should pass that stage, I do not suggest that it should be taken through Committee with­out an adjo.urnment. A number of mem­bers, including representatives of the Go­vernment, will submit amendments.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­I wish to raise a question of procedurp.. On the Notice Paper appear certain Notices of Motion, and then there is the heading, "Government Business." Then appears, "General Business," followed by c; Government Business," and "General Business" again. Do the words " General Business" include all the motions to be moved by various members? For ex­ample, the Notice Paper for to-day pro­vides for Notices of Motion which con­tain "Government Business." The Go­vernment submits the motions of which Ministers have given notice, and then there is "General Business," and "Go­vernment Business-Orders of the Day." Then follows "General Business."

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -As I understand the Standing Orders, " Notices of MQtion-General Business" would, under present sessional conditions, precede "Government Business-Orders of the Day," but that is overcome daily by a Government motion transposing those items until after the consideration

1148 Adjournment. fASSEMBLY·-1 Adjournment.

of Government business. I presume that the Government will follow the same course on Tuesday next, and place in priority the items of business it desires to have debated,

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­I am still a little in doubt as to the exact situation. It' the Premier should move his motion that Government Business take precedence of General Business, that must also be applied to 1;he General Business under "Order of the Day" at the end of the busin~ss sheet.

The SPEAKER.-Except that that is an Order of the Day. The terms of the Premier's motion on Tuesday will pro­vide, I presume, for the postponement of Notices of Motion-General Business un­til Orders of the Day have been dealt with, and Orders of the Day will consist of Government Business.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Why is not" Orders of the Day" printed at the head of Government Business ~

The SPEAKER.-That is done. The Notice Paper before me states, "Govern­ment Business-Orders of the Day", and "General Business-Order of the Day". The result of the Premier's motion on Tuesday will be to postpone the con­sideration of Notices of Motion, which, according to the Standing Orders, would otherwise take priority over Orders 0f the Day. If the Premier's motion is carried, Notices of Motion will be post­poned until after Orders of the Day, both Government Business and General Business, have been dealt with.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) .-I understand that on Tues­day next it will be competent for the Government, after having secured the postponement of General Business under the heading, "N otices of Motion"­which means private members' business­to introduce two or three Bills and then switch over to General Business under the heading, "Order of the Day." I assume that that can be done at any period.

The SPEAKER.-That is so, but it will have to be done by motion.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Will the motion be subject to debate ~

The SPEAKER.-It will be subject to debate.

The motion was agreed to. Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier· and

Treasurer).-I move-That the House do now adjourn,

Mr. CREMEAN (Clifton Hill).-I wish to direct the attention of the Govern­ment to the attitude of the Oommon;. wealth Department of Information re­specting the publication of reports of events of very great interest to the people of Australia. I preface my remarks by saying that I believe, as most persons do in time of war, in some kind of censorship. I agree that it is very necessary not to permit the publication of reports that might be of interest to an enemy power, or that might result in due course in the loss of hundreds of valuable lives; but it seems to me that we have, because of the necessity for such a censorship, entered into a silly censor­ship season imposed by the Department of Information largely without justi­fication. The remarks I intend to make are principally concerned with the arrival in Melbourne the other day of a ship containing a very valuable cargo of young lives. As we now know, 477 English children arrived at Port Mel­bourne on Monday last, and were received with much enthusiasm by the people of Victoria. I and other members of the commi ttee known as the Overseas Ohil­dren's Committee were on the Port Mel­bourne pier when the vessel arrived, and we saw not merely ourselves and various officials there, but also the largest army of camera-men it has been my pleasure to see on any such occasion, newspaper men almost b'y the dozen, private citizens who came merely to watch, others who were attached to some of the children or to whom children on board had been nominated, officials of the shipping com­pany, wharf labourers, and dozens of others.

After the vessel had berthed, more than 300 children were sent by train to the Zoological Gardens, and entertained there. On the way many hundreds ()f persons saw them, and at the Zoo they were welcomed cordially by large crowds. When those children who were to remam In Victoria came off the

Ad;'ournment. [16 OOTOBER, 1940.] Ad;'ournmeul. 1149

boa t, they were taken to the Yarra Bank, and Cinesound Productions Pro-. prietary Limited took motion pictures of them. They were then driven in motor vehicles through the streets of the city, to the United Services Club, where a group of hundreds of people had to be pushed to one side or the other to allow them to enter the cafe. Literally thousands of Victorian citizens saw the children arrive, and probably tens of thousands more had knowledge of their arrival. Ou Monday night when I looked in the evening newspaper for a report of the arrival, I could find no mention of it, nor was there any mention of it in the morning papers on Tuesday.

On inquiry, I discovered that the absence of a report was due to the fact that the Department of Information con­sidered that the arrival should be kept a close secret although thousands of Vic­torian citizens knew that the vessel had arrived, and others had seen the children in the United Services cafe. Even when the members of the committee were leav­ing the cafe, it was necessary for the crowd to be held back so that we could pass to our waiting cars. The withholding of such news seemS to me to be totally un­justifiable, particularly as every section of the community was already aware of t.he event. The action was absurd. J suggest that the Government should ask the Department of Information for the reason that prompted it in preventing the newspapers from publishing their reports( which most people in the State woulct have been pleased to read. Few news­paper readers want stale news about such events, and news published to-day or to­morrow is undoubtedly stale when almost everyone knew on Monday that the children had arrived. The maj'ority of people, however, did not know the details of the arrival, or the little stories that make such an occasion interesting.

This is not the first time the Depart­ment, although it has been prepared to take every measure possible to pre­vent news from being disseminated, has not succeeded. I was intrigued to read, when the first contingent of Australian troops arrived in the Middle East, report~ that were published in the daily news· pa pel'S of the departure of those troops from these shores. I am

Session 1940.-[50]

not going to say that the detailed news of their departure should have been broadcast throughout t.he country, but I do say that little harm would have been done if, after the troops were safely away, some public statement of the facts had been permitted. Almost everyone in the Oommonwealth knew that the troops had gone and knew some of the details of their departure. I shall quote from a report I read in one of the morning news­papers on the 13th of February concern­ing the departure of the troops on the 10th of January. This was the "close. secret" kept by the Department of Jnformation! It ,vould not allow any information to be given to the public, ostensibly on the ground that they mi~ht learn when the troops had left. The newspaper report relates to th(' departure of troops from Sydney and states:-

Wildly cheering crowds that thronged every bay and headland of the harbor made a tumultous farewell to the first contingent, when the troops sailed from Sydney on the afternoon of January 10. Although the date of departure was not disclosed, and the em­barkation was carried out wit'h. great secrecy, nearly 100,000 people watched the giant troop· ships steam slowly down the harbor and put to sea in line ahead. A great fleet of launches, yachts, and ferry steamers, their decks packed with cheering people, followed the transports to the Heads.

Either these matters should be kept as close secrets, or a fair measure of news should be released to the people. I object to the withholding of information similar to that withheld from the news­papers on the occasion of the arrival of children from overseas. It is in­formation which, in my. opinion, can­not possibly harm the persons mostly concerned, but is of particular interest to the people, and would be welcomed by them while it is still news. I suggest, therefore, that the Government should ask the Department of Information to be more careful in future in the ad­ministration of its censorship provisions, and to exercise more judgment than apparently it has displayed in such matters.

There is only one other comment I wish to make, and I am not taking upon myself the right of speaking for the Overseas Ohildren's Oommittee-the Minister has that right. I think that everyone who was present on the arrival of the ship was

1150 Adjournment. r ASSEMBLY.l Adjournment.

agreeably surprised at the appearance of the children and at the initiative that almost every child seemed to possess. It was 'felt that that was largely due to the care that had been exercised in the control of

,the children on the way from England to Australia. Furthermore, I was much impressed by the splendid arrangements made by Mr. Pittard and other officers of the Children's Welfare Depal'tment for the reception and care of the children in this State. I personally record my gratitude to those officers for their work.

Mr. MUTTON (Coburg).-On two previous occasions I have brought under the notice of the House an important matter relating to the new Melbourne General Cemetery, at Fawkner, the boun­dary road of which, on the one side, is 'in the Shire of Broadmeadows and, on the other, in the City of Coburg. I sin­eel'ely hope that the Government will pay serious heed to my statements, as some of its members realize the truth of thpm ana should be able to bring pressure to bear on one of their colleagues in another place. After I had !eferred to thiR question on the 21st of August and thp 26th of September, I received a reply datpu ,the 2nd of October, and since that date I have been endeavouring to bring the matter to a successful conclusion. I urge the Government to appreciate the wisdom of the claim submitted, and to settle the issue once and for all. The reply to which I have alluded came from a Ministei' in another place, and is as follows:-

With reference to your remarks in the Lt!gis­lative Assembly on the 21st August and the 26th September' 'relative to the construction of a road alongside the boundary of the Fawkner Cemetery, I desire to inform you that my attitude is that if the cemetery trustees are allowed to participate in the construction of roads, the fees which they collect will be diverted right throughout the State in the direction of public works, instead of toward's the upkeep of cemeteries, generally, as they should be. This is not a question of one cemetery, it is a question of legislating for all. I am, therefore, opposed to cemeteries being granted the' right to use their funds for J'llhlic purposes.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-Which Minister wrote that letter ~'

Mr. MUTTON.-Sir John Harris, the , Minister of Public Health. I should say

tha.t that reply would be correct if the new Melbourne General Cemetery at .Fawkner wa.s Crown land, but the fact is

that it is freehold property. Several con­ferences were held between the cemetery trust, the municipality of Broadmeadows, and the City of Ooburg, the outcome of which was that the Crown solicitor ex­pressed the opinion that there was very grave doubt in relation to the legal aspect of the matter. There is 'also doubt among the legal advisers of the municipalities concerned and the cemetery trust, and they came to a conclu.sion that the best way out of the difficulty was to effect a compromise. It was suggested that the cemetery trust should give to the Shire of Broadmeadows £1,150 to carry out the work.

Mr. CArN.-What was the total cost~ Mr. MUTTON.-I am not concerned

about the cost to Coburg, because that municipality' realizes its responsibility, but as regards the north side of the cemetery, which is in the territory of Broadmeadows, it is known by the legal authority of the latter municipality that the responsibility belongs to the cemetflry. The cemetery trust itself recognizes that fact. The cost of the original scheme was estimated at £1,194. As a result of the conference, that amount was reduced to £1,150 by making certain alterations, for which the cemetery trust was agreeable to, PB;Y. I have lived in the locality in questlOll for 40 years, and kllow the de­sirability of having this road constructed. There are three entrances to the Fawkner Cemetery from this road, and, when it is constructed, the Fawkner Cemetery Trust will get the greatest benefit from it. Since the 2nd of October, I have trayelled through the metropolitan area and visited every cemetery. There is not a case parallel with that under consideration, and, I doubt if another like it could be found throughout Victoria. The Fawk­ner Oemetery is a wonderful place. Wi tL the revenue received from cremations. the managers of the Trust are improving the cemetery, and eventually it will be one of the most beautiful cemeteries in the country.

This matter has been dragging on since 1937, and, as I have already stated, the legal advisers of the three parties concerned have come to the con­clusion that a compromise should be reached. That compromise has been reached, and I am astonished to know that a member of the Cabinet should he

Adjournment. [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 Public Trustee BiU. 11tH

hostile to permission being given to put that compromise into effect. I, therefore, trust that Ministers in this House will bring pressure to bear so that the neces­sary consent may be obtained.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I shall be pleased to bring the matter ,raised once again by the honorable member for Coburg under the notice of the Minister of Public Health. Without being conversant with all tht' particulars, I should' say tha t therE" seems to be some merit in the ease pre­sented by the honorable member. It may be advisable for the Minister of Publi~ Health to visit the locality, and, as a result of inspection, a solution of thfio problem may be reached. The Minister is familiar with the circumstances and it is a question 'for him to determine.

The matter raised by the bonorablp member for Clifton Hill with regard t(l censorship is one over which the State Government has no control, but I shall be pleased to bring his representations under the notice of the Prime Minister. Censorship, as exercised in this in­stance, is, in my opinion, in many cases unnecessarily severe. I agree with the honorable member that in­formation of value should be kept from the enemy, but I do not see that any useful purpose has been served by pre­venting the people of this State from knowing that a large number of chil­dl~en from Britain have arrived safely on our shores. The people of Victoria would have been pleased to give them a cordial welcome, and many citizens would have been glad to learn of the safe arrival of the children. During the last few days, I have had' many inquiries. as to whether any of the children had reached Victoria, and I have only been able to answer, almost with bated breath, that they had arrived, but that it must not be too widely broadcast.

Mr. CAIN.-Probablv the information had been broadcast alr~ady by the B.B.C.

1fr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-Probably it had been. I hope that a more reasonable a.ttitude will be taken in matters of this kind by the censorship authorities.

The motion was agreed to.

The House adjourned at 10.56 p.rn. 'Until Tuesday, October 22.

LEGISLATIVE CO'UNCIL.

Tuesday, October 22, 19'40.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Frank Clarke) took the chair at 4.52 p.m., and read the prayer.

FINANCIilL E1IERGENCY (GRANTS AND FUNDS) BILL. This Bill was received from the

Assembly and, on the motion of Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruction), was read a first time.

COUNTRY ROADS BOARD FUND BILL.

This Bill was received from the Assembly and, on the motion of Sir GEORGE GOUDIE (Minister of Public Works), was read a first time.

STATE FORESTS LOAN APPLICATION BILL.

This Bill was received from the Assembly and, on the motion of Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister' of Public Instruction), was read a first time.

ADMINISTRATION AND PROBATE (WAR SERVICE) BILL.

This Bill was received from the Assembly ,and, on the motion of Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruction), was read a first time.

PUBLIC TRUSTEE BILL. The House went into Committee for

the further consideration of this Bill. Discussion was resumed of cIa use 6

relating to election by Public Trustee to administer estates under £400 in value, &c.,.&c.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province).-When this clause was last before the Committee Mr. McDonald drew attention to the danger that even tho'ugh some person interested in an estate might object to the Public Trustee filing an election, the Bill provided no means for giving effect to that objection. Mr. McDonald suggested that an election might be filed notwithstanding the objec­tion, and I think Mr. Fraser commented on the same point. I have since spoken

1152 Publio rCOUNCIL., Service Bill.

to both the Parliamentary Draftsman, who had the task of framing the Bill, and the Public Trustee, and, as a result of those conversations, an amendment, which has been printed and circulated, was prepared. The Public Trustee still thinks the amendment is not essential. He takes the view that when once a caveat is lodged by any person a Public Trustee would not, in practice, file his election, and that there might be other checks. However, I consider that the amendment will not do any harm, but will be an assurance of protection to the public in circumstances such as those already out­lined. Even if the amendment does no more than give legal sanction to the action that the Public Trustee himself would take without such sanction, it is probably desirable in a Bill of the character of that now before the Committee. I, therefore, move-

That the following sub-clause be inserted, to follow sub-clause (3) :'-

( ) No election shall be filed pursuant to either of the said sub-sections in any case in which a c.aveat against any application for probate or administration has been lodged with the registrar of probates and administrations and has not expired or been withdra.wn.

B'y that amendment the rights of any caveator will be absolutely protected.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE.-I accept the amendment.

The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, was adopted, as was clause 7.

The Bill was reported to the House with an amendment, and passed through its remaining stages.

PUBLIC SERVICE BILL.

The debate (adjourned from October 15) on the motion of Sir John Harris (Minister of Public Instruction) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra PrO'l.'ince).-This Bill is an important one, although on reading it in detail I found that it did not go so far as one might have expected from the public dig­cussions upon it. The proposed Public Service Board will be a new Board, in the nature of a tribunal. The main change made 'is that the powers at present exer­cised by the Public Service Commissioner

will be exercised by a Board of three persons. That, in itself, does not seem to be a matter that should give rise to any ob.iection, or that should be viewed other­wise than favourably. It is one of the two main proposals in the Bill. The other main proposal is to bring under the juris­diction of the Board the officers of the Public Service employed in the Mental H,ygiene Department. That proposal has given rise to much controversy.. Those are the two main provisions of the Bill. There are one or two subsidiary proposals, and there are a number of machinery pro­visions that call for little or no comment.

As to the constitution of the Board, it will consist, according to the way the Parliamentary- Draftsman has expressed it, of three persons, although actually it. "in hayc five members. Three of those five members, however, will be occasional members, and at no time will the Board when sitting consist of more than three active members. The draftsman has attempted to cope with the problem aris­ing' out of the fact that in the Public Service there are Departments dealing with widely divergent matters, as, for example, the General Public Service, the Education Department, and the Mental Hygiene Department, and he has evolved the scheme, which seems to be a good one, of saying that two permanent mem­bers of the Board shall sit on all occasions, and that the third member shall be changed from time to time according to the class of sub.iect being dealt with. If questions affecting the Mental Hygiene Department are being discussed, a repre­sentative of that Department will sit on the Board. The same procedure will be followed when questions affecting the Erlucation Department or the General Public Service are being dealt with.

One objection occurred to me when look­ing at that aspect of the Board, and I do not know whether it can be remedied within the scope of the Bill. The repre­sentatives of the three branches of the Service will be in practice, if not by the legal requirements of the Bill, members of what may be called the General Service, and if a matter should come before the Board affecting a large number of pro­fessional, technical, or scientific men, and if, as would usually be the fact in such cases, special knowledge was required, it might be that the representatives of those

Public

tIt r('c branches "would not bp capable of dt·uling with it. Suppose, for example, t !tat the appointment of and conditions of scrvice of scientists and agricultura1 (·hemlsts in the Department of Agri­('ultu)'C' came beforo the Board. I should say that it would be desirable that those men, as a class of learned men in the service of the State, should be able to place their views before the Board through their own direct representative. They might consider that a representative of the General Service would not be the best possible person to protect their in­terests before the Board.

I throw out the suggestion-I should not think of moving it as an amendment to the Bill-that sHeh men might be allowed to appoint an assessor who would assist th(' Boar(~ without heing a memher of it. The pro­("r<lure would be the same as that followed ,,·hen a Judgc dealing with maritime matters has the assistance of a nautical eaptain as an assessor. When under the \\T orkel's' Compensation Act matters re· quiring medical knowledge arise, a Judge ean call in the aid of medical assessors. The judgment is still the judgment of the Court, but the Judge has the assessors to assist him. I felt when reading the Bill that, while the interests of the general body of public servants seemed to be well protected, those in the technical and seientific Departments might not be so well protected. "

Sir JOHN HARRls.-The Public Service Commissioner has always had power to eH II for evidence from the Department concerned.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-a matter might arise affecting the Mental Hygiene Department, where many professional persons are employed, including psycholo­gists, psychiatrists, physicians, and mem­bers of the nursing staff. It might not always be sufficient to call evidence from such' persons, who might prefer to sit with the Board and advise it. I feel, howevcr, that it would not be proper fOl~ me to move an amendment of that kind in this Bill, so I merely throw out the suggestion.

Sir J ORN HARRls.-There would have to be a large number of assessors.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-They could be assessors ad hoc. Suppose a question affecting the medical and nurs-

1153

ing staffs of the :Mental H.n~iene Dcpnrt­mcnt was being considered. For the pur­po~c of that particular inquiry, the staff affrcted f:hould appoint an assessor. There "'(,(,lUS to bt, a tendency in the Publie Set'· \'i('e, as elsewhere, not to recognize, as ndequately as it should be recognized, the w'ry g-reat vtllue of the skilled scrvices performed in the professional division.. There are officers doing highly skilled work associated with medicine, law, in· dustrial and agricultural chemistry, and othp.r branches of science, but, bccam::c they have no trade union to watch tLeir interests, and because they sometimes think it is beneath their dignity to prcss for increased emoluments, they receive lesR then they are entitled to. Roth iYlRide and ontsidp the Service, skilled men frp· quently receive far less than unskilled mrn of about the same r.ge and the same general experience. Tlw reason for that I do not. know, but I do know that the Public Service of Victoria has lost many skilled professional men because of the higher emoluments and greater advuu· tages offered by outside employers.

Sir JOHN HARRIs.-They have not the same security of tenure in outside em­ployment.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-To 111e young-er generation in these war days security of tenure does not seem to he valued as much as it was formerly. I wal'! rather sorry to notice that a representative from outside the Service can be appointed. It would have been better if the original draft had been preserved, providing, aJ

it did, that the representative must be a person inside the Service." Of course, members of the Service will elect their representative, but the permitting of 011t:­

side appointments may lead to, agitators securing the position, and no agitator will be able to serve the Public Service as well

as a bona fide public servant can. There can be no reason for suggesting that among the thousands of public servants in Victoria there is not a large number well qualified to present the claims of the Service before the Board.

The representatives of the Service till

the Board ",·ill become the advocates for the particular part of the Ser­vice they represent, and, perhaps, not wrongly so. Nevertheless, the spirit of advocacy should not be pushed so fat that a man who is merely a professional

1154 Public rCOUNCIl.l Service Bill.

advocate comes in to represent the mem­bers of the Public Service on the Board. I do feel that a bona fide member of the Service who is on the staff would be, in the majority of casoo, a far better repre­sentative. It is a pity that the, Bill does not limit the representation to such persons, as I believe it originally did. However that may be, it rests with the public servants themselves, and, if they think there is no man in the Department who can adequately represent them, they may go outside the Service; but they may conceivably find one day that they have only an advocate for their representative.

There may be a good deal to be said both for and against the inclusion in this ](lg-islution of the :Mental Hyg-iene Depart­Inpnt. Th(, general tend(>llc:v of legis­lation in the last few years has un­doubtedly been to bring all bl'[lllChes of the Service before the one tribunal and within the jurisdiction of the one body. This Bill is in line with that tendency. I am not prepared to oppose the inclusion of the officers of this Department, but we must remember that, in addition to many thousands of lower paid men in the general division of the Service, they comprise a large number of professional men and women in skilled occupations. All these will be brought within the autho­rity of the Board instead of remaining, as at present, within that of the Director of Mental Hygiene. It has been thought that this Department is nowadays 'so specialized, and deals with matters of such importance, that its best adminis­tration can be carried on only if the POW(ll'S now proposed to be handed over to the Board are still retained by the Director.

The treatment of the insane has through the centuries passed through: various stages. First, they were regarded as being possessed of evil spirits, which had to be exorcized by vel'y curious methods. Within the last 100 years their treatment was thought to be a matter of prison discipline. Later it became one of cus­todial treatment, and mental hospitals were merely places of custody. They have now become, and will increasingly continue to become, what they should be -hospitals for the treatn;lCnt of the men­tally sick, and institutions which, if sufferers are taken to them in time, will prevent tlH~ serious results tha.t follow

The {-Ion. O. H. A.Eager

the upsetting of mental and nervous con­stitutions. The Department is now so large that' it ought no longer to form, as it has for many years, a sub-department within the Chief Secretary's Department, which deals with prisons and asylums. It should become either a separate Depart­ment of Public Hygiene or a consolidated section of the Health Department, because it really deals with an important branch of public health. I have no doubt that -at some time in the future such a re­organization will come. I mention that now only because it has something to do with this Bill.

If what I have said is right, it strongly supports the view that this is a specialized department, with officers specially selected and appointed by reason of their skill in this particular branch of public health and preventive treatment. It is thought by some, although I do not think the danger is very great, that the proposed Board, having control of the staff and of appointments, may not be so suitable and well selected personally to carry out the work of this Department. A body called the Mental Hygiene Officers' Association has taken some interest in the matter, and put before me certain views that I think can be crystallized in the following four or five points: It. says, firstly, that the Director will be deprived of the powers formerly exercised by him in relation to his Department. No doubt, that is so. Secondly, it says that the proposed Board will be an entirely lay body, without medical or psychiatric knowledge. That of course is so, but, as the Minister pointed out, the Board will be quite at liberty, and perhaps will find itself occasionally under a duty, to hear evidence of, and consult with, those who have knpw]edge of the subject.

Sir JOHN HARRIs,-The Health'Depart­ment has a medical personnel, and so has the Education Department.

T~ H@. O.'R A. EAGER-T~ officers' association which I am quoting' takes the view, which I think is well founded, that the service of the Mental Hygiene Department is a particularly specialized branch of public health. The third point it mentions is that the elected member of the Board is certain to belong to the general division, and therefore to he 011(> of the group of less qualified and

Public [22 OCTOB}<~RJ 1940.-] Service Bill. 1155

]e~~ I'Psponsiblc ~('1'yallts of the Depart­mrllt, and that, being one of the three members of the Board, he will Rit in judgment upon the Director of Mental H.vgiene, should the Director do some­thing with which the Board disagrees.

Sir JOHN HARRis.-The same may be said of the Education Department, be­cause the Director of Education will be in a similar position.

The Hon. O. H. A. EAGER.-That is so. There is always that difficulty with a huge public service, and with the ideal of democracy which, I have heard it said publicly, underlies this Bill; that is, ~hat the tendency will be for the less qualIfied to govern the more qualified. Tha t may be a fault in the whole system.

Sir JOHN HARRls.-That will not alter the fact that the Board can ask the Direc­tOl' of Education or the Director of M(>ntal IIygiene for advice, if it wants to inform itself.

The HOll. O. H. A. EAGEH.-That funetion, however, will be purely consulta­tive, and the Board will be at liberty to diRl'egard the advice after it has been gi \'en. The fourth point made by the as~;ociation is that the Director, if this Bill is passed, will find himself placed in a position subordinate to the Public Service Board, merely administering a sub-department of the Chief Secretary's Department, and possessing little or no responsibility in the final analysis. Those four points have a great deal to rr('ommend them, and should, I thiuk, be nll t before the House. There is a great deal to be said in favour of the view that the Department should still be kept separate under the control of the Director of Mental Hygiene, who, of course, will be responsible to the Minister. His Minis­ter at present is the Chief Secretary, but should, as I have said, be the Minister of Public Health.

The other matters in the Bill are of detail. The branches will select their representative by election, pursuant to regulations to be framed by the Governor in Council, which win probably mean a very great upset in the Public Service at election time. There are provisions for deputy members, and so on, but this seems to be the day of democratic methods, although most of us talk about democratic methods without really understanding

rh(>m. The general body of the Public S(,l'vi('e, which, in the main, must consist of the lower-paid Bnd non-professional mrmbers, . will have the destinies of the -whole Service in their hands so far as their membership of the Board is con­(,P1'11(>(1. I suppose that is in accord with the general system operating nowadays. They will be elected by a show of hands, or rather by its modern equivalent, ba!lot by the great mass of the Public SerVIce. One does not know what that may lead to, but I still would rather see that it led to no more than this, that some bona fide member of the Service, and not some outside advocate, became a member of the Board.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (j1;J elbournp. P}'o/11:nce) .-Defore dealing with the geneI'd principles of the Bill, I take this opportunity of expl'essing my pleasure, n nd congra tula ting the Leader of the House on his lllethod of introducing the Bill to this Ohamber. It is refreshing to hear, on the motion for the second reading of so important a measure, an extempore speech from the Minister, in­stead of a folio of stodgy matter pre­pared by a departmental officer. I say it is refreshing, because, if we hear from the :Minister a lucid explanation, we can gras]) the salient points of the Bill. 1 hesitate to speak on this aspect of the question, but there are a number of new members in the Chamber, and that prompts me to mention that it is on1,y in recent veal'S that the practice has de­yeloped h~re of allowing an honorable member to read a speech. I have a vivid recollection of an occasion 11 or 12 year::; ago, when I occupied the position of a :Minister in this House, and a Bill which I had never seen or heard of before-a last hour measure-came forward at about two o'clock in the morning. All I knew about it was contained in the notes pre­sented to me, and, having no knowledge of the Bill, I proceeded to rend them. I was immediately, and rightly, called to order by the President, but circumstance!:! have recently changed. On several occa­sions honorable members, instead of put­ting their O\vn views before the House, have read thoughts and expressions put into their hands by some one who did not represent a constituency. I should like to see a reversion to the old practice of extempore speaking. It would make this

1156 Public rCOUNCIL·l Service Bill.

Chamber a very much better debating one than it is, and would on many occasions lead to a shortening of debates.

This Bill is almost a landmark in the progress of our legislation, and I regret exceedingly that only about 50 per cent. of the members of the Legislative Council can be' present when so im­pOl'tant a measure comes before the Chamber. A Public Service Board has been discussed for 25 or 30 years, as long as I have been a member of Parliament. We now have on the Treasury bench a Government sufficiently progressive to place bach a measure as this before rar­Ii ament, and I regret that more interest is not being takel1 in it. In discussing the gellcral principles of the Bill, and why it is brought forward, I have no illusions regarding the attitude of a large section of the present governmental party. I believe in speaking plainly. It is true that wc have several progressive Minis­ters, and members of the rank and file are radical in their views, but we could not have expected a measure such as this Bill to be presented to Parliament without the inspiration and driving force of the Labour party behind the present Govern­ment. 1 give the present Administration every credit for what it has done. During the past five years, legislation that I never anticipated Parliament agreeing to has been placed on the statute-book. The combinatIon of the present Government and the support of the Labour party has worked well for the people of the State. The Labour party is not con­cerned with parties or with individuals, but with legislation. A Government that will bring forward progressive legislation will have the active support of members of the Labour party. Our slogan is " Measures, not men."

The establishment of a Public Scrvic(' Board has been a burning question for many years. On looking through the Bill, and reading the speeches made in the other House, I cannot say that I am altogether satisfied. The general body of public servants are not satisfied with the measure either. However, if we cannot get what we want, we should want as much as we can get. From that point of view, the Labour party, the members of the Public Service Association, and pub­lic servants generally accept the measure, not as a settlement, but as a commencing

The "on. W. J. Beckett.

point, in that there will be placed on the statute-book a measure that can be amended from time to time so that it will conform with modern requirements.

N ow that the Bill has been introduced, it appears to meet with the approval of all parties. The principle of the estab­lishment of the Public Service Board is accepted by all members, and one wonders what has brought about that unanimity of thought. If a Labour Government had been In power and had sub­mitted a measure on the linea of the Bill, it would have been opposed strongly-possibly, by many among the most ardent of the present supporters of the Bill. That would not have been strange, in the light of our experience in submitting legislation to the other House and this Chamber. However, the Government, the Labour party, and the Opposition in the other House, have agreed that the appointment of a Public Service Board will end the numerous arguments that have arisen. I am strongly in favour of the Arbitration Oourt prescribing wages and conditions for the general body of wage earners, and, therefore, I must support what it is hoped will eventually be a Wages Board 01' Arbitration Court for the general body of public servants. The members of the Public Service Board are to be experts, and they will not be in the same position as men who are appointed to a marketing Board-that is, because of service rendered to a political party, without any capacity for carrying out the functions of the Board. The Public Ser­vice Board will do splendid work, and it will lay the foundations for what should prove to be a well-satisfied body of public servants.

I shall not \vorry honorable members with a recapitulation of the various stages throngh which we have passed in relation to the control of the Public Service. At one time, each Departmeut was a separate entity, and its employees were under the authority of the head of the Department and, through him, th{' Minister copcernecl. Various legislatiye enactments were passed, and it was decided finally that a Public Service Com­missioner-an officer with specialized knowledge of the Service---..,.would give greater satisfaction to the Public Service generally, which would result in better

I t }

I f 'J

~ ~

Public [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 Service Bill. 1157

servire to the community. From the Act appointing the Public Service Commis­sioner tt'rtain departments were omitted. Recent legislation has extended the con­t.rol of the Public Service Commissioner to ('mbrace the employees of the State RiYf'rs and Water Supply Commission and the Forests Commission. The employees of the Mental Hygiene Depart­ment are included in the present Bill. The officer8 of that Department, up to the present, have been controlled by the Dil'eetor of :Mental Hygiene; that is to say, the Dirertor has been the "Public Service Oommissioner" for that section. The official head of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission was the "Public Service Commissioner" for his section; and the Minister of Forests was the "Public Service Commissioner" for the employees under his control.

The powers of the Public Servire Board will exreed those of the present Public Service Commissioner. It is pro­vided that the Board shall control the appointments, promotions, dismissals, reductions, nnd transfers of public servants. That is one of the most iml)Ol'tant functions of the Board, as it wiil enable transfers to be made freely between Denartments. In the future, it will be possIble to transfer an officer from the General Division to, say, the :Mental Hygiene Department. I cite that as an example. Instead of each Department being in a water-tight compartment, transfers will be permitted from one De­partment to another where the special knowledge of an offirer will be of benefit to a Department. The powers of the Puhlic Servlre Board also include the making of investigations and inquiries, and the prepa ring of reports. Those reports will be submitted to Cabinet, and will, no doubt, deal with future require­ments of the Public Service. Apart from those particular duties, there is the ques­tion of the adequate rates of pay for these sections of the community. We have long passed the stage when wages and work­ing conditions can be fixed by the employ­ing class only. The employees in the Public Service, just as in the rRse of persons governed by Wages Boaras and the Arbitration Court, should have the right to place their case before a tribunal and be represented on it. The wRge-fixing tribunal shoulc1 know not only tlH' official

point of view, but also that of the em­ployees concerned. I trust that, in future, one of the most important functions of the Board will be to prescribe the salaries and conditions of officers.

The Board will be required to frame regulations. That is important, because, I presume, that power "'ill enable the Board to fix the hours of labour in the Service. I have arrived at the con­clusion, not only from my knowledge of the Public Service, but also of the con­ditions applying in the community generally, that if a man devotes his time on five days a week to his employment, that should be sufficient to enable him to earn a livelihood. Therefore, we may expect in the near future that a regula­tion will be issued by the Board-apart from what the Government may do­restricting the hours of the Public Ser­vice to five days a week. These powers concern the administrative division of the Public Service and the :Mental Hygiene Department. The teaching service is not. affected to the same extent, for all ap­pointments and. promotions in that see60n are controlled by thE: Board of classifi.ers. ..:\.S honorable members know, the salaries of teachers are fixed by statute.

I now wish to comment on the ~ug­gested division of the Public Servjce. In the Bill, there are three divisions, namely, the teaching service, the }Ielltal Hygiene Department, and the General Division, and each of them will elect a repl"esenta­tive to the Board. I have a knowledge of the ramifications of the Public Ser­vice, and I should have preferred the three divisions to have been" educational," " medical," and "general." In the medical division, I would include all services tha t could be classified in the schedule to a :Ministry of Health Bill. A measure on those lines was approved by this Chn m­bel', but, unfortunately, apparently o"'ing to the jealousy of certain heads of De­partments, it was not passed by thr other House. I would include in the lllediral division the officers of the "M ental Hygiene Department, the profes~ional officers of the Public Health Depal'tm<>nt, the medical service of the Ohildl'{'n's Welfare Department, and the medical and dental services of thr. Edura­tion Department. When the Ln hOllr party came into office some years ago, two Departments attracted its atten­tion from the soeiological point of yiew.

1158 Public I COUNCIL.l Service BiU.

Oue \\;as called the Lunacy Department, the name being a survival of the old idea tha t n stigma attached not only to the unfortunate individual classified as a lunatic, but also to his 01' her relatives. It is to the honour of the I .. abour party, whose policy is humanitarian-and I am proud to belong to that party-that it changed the name of the Lunacy JJepart­lllent to the Mental Hygiene Department. The other Department was called the N eglecte<l Childreri'il Department. Under the system then prevailing, a pOOl' woman who was left a widow with a number of young children had to go before a police Court on a charge of neglecting her children before she could obtain an allowance from the generous Nationalist Government. It stands to the credit of the Labour party that it abolished that system. Now the Depart­ment is called the Children's Welfare Department, and a poor mother who, through force of circumstances, cannot maintain her children, is regarded as their rightful guardian, and as such is entitled to assistance from the State.

~fr. Eager referred to the proposed l>ublic S('J'vice Doard as one of five mem­bers. I prefer to describe it as a Board of eight members, and as such I regard it as a remarkable Board. There are to he two members appointed by the Govern­ment, three elected members, and three deputy elected members. It would be interesting to ascertain the genesis of the novel idea of having three substitute members. I do not know any precedent for deputy elected members on a Board, because the Acts of Parliament con­stituting many Boards make ample pro­vision for the replacement of members H s a resnl t of illness or inca paci ty to act.

Properly, the Bill provides that the present Public Service Commissioner­l\1:r. Harnetty-shall be the first chair­man of the Public Service Board. I consider that the Public Service generally has been fortunate in having as the Pub­lic Service Commissioner gentlemen of the calibre of Mr. Harnetty and his pre­decessor, Mr. McPherson, because both had a wide knowledge of the ramifications of the Service. The Bill is silent, how­ever, as to the period of Mr. Harnetty's appointment as chairman of the Board. It is true that the measure provides that

The Hon. W. J. Beckett

the members of the Board may be ap­pointed for a period of :five years. The Bill, as originally drafted, provided for a period of four years, but an extension to five years was made by an amendment movcd in the other House. Perhaps the Leader of the House may be able to in­form honorable members, when the Bill is in the Committee stage, whether it is the intelltion of the Government to ap­point the first chairman for a period of at least twelve months, so that the machinery of the Board may be put into good working order under the chairman­shi p of Mr. Harnetty.

1 stated that there are really to be six rcpresentatives of the Public Service on the Board-three elected members and three deputy elected members. I'had some doubt whether those members should be elected or nominated. I am aware that the argument was advanced that selection by election was the most democratic method. There is a great deal of weight in that argument, but one important considera­tion is that those who 'will have the right to . the franchise will be only the per­manent employees in the Public Service. Thousands of temporary employees will come under the control of the Board, but they will have no voice in the election of the members on whom they will have to rely to put their case before the Board. Probably the temporary employees, who are on the lower scale of wages., will need the greatest protection.

One factor supporting nomination, as against election, is that membership of a number of other Boards whose functions affect groups of· persons is decided by the oi>ganization directly representing those groups submitting a panel of nominations ·for the selection of the member or members by the Government. It may be contended that that method is not democratic. I have always been a supporter of unionism for employers 'as wen as the employees. I believe that if a worker joins a union and does not regard it as worth his while to sacrifice a little time and money to try to obtain better conditions, he is not de­serving of the benefits obtained by that organization. I understand that the Pub­lic Service Asso'ciation comprises about 80 percent. of the public servants, in­cluding the temporary employees, and the view has been put forward that that-

\ !

!

Public [22 OOTOBER, 1940.-1 Service Bill. 1159

orga?ization should have the right to nommate the Service representatives. However, the Government and the other House have adopted the system of elec­tion of representatives by permanent em ployees of the Service, and I presume we shall have to be satisfied with it.

Sir JOHN lliRRIS.-You believe in the principle of one man one vote?

The Hon. W. J. BEOKETT.-I be­lieve in the principle, and also that of one vote one value, but the Minister believes in one man one vote only when it suits his purpose. The effect of an amendment made m the Bill by the other House, on· the motion of a representative of the Labour party, is that an elected member of the Board need not be a member of the Public Ser­vice. The amendment ~erely follows established practice. Employees some­times prefer to be represented on wages Boards or other wage-fixing tribunals by men not closely associated with the par­ticular trade. Sub-clause (4) of clause 4 is important. It provides-

Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of thi~ section any elected member not sitting as a member of the Board when engaged in any particular matter may, if the chairman considers it expedient and consent~ thereto, attend the meeting of the Board when so engaged, but shall not be entitled to any vote on any question arising in respect of such matter.

I should like to learn whether, in the event of the chairman of the Board having no objection, the three elected members and th.e three deputy elected members will have the privilege of attending meetings of the Board, al­though only three members-the chair­man, the appointed member, and onE, elected member-will have the right to vote.

The Hon. A. M. FRASER.-I do not think the proposal is that the deputy elected members shall have the right to attend.

The Hon. W. J. BEOKETT.-The Bill provides that each appointed member shall be entitled to a salary fixed by the -Governor in Oouncil, and he will not be permitted to engage in any other duties when acting as a member of the Board. As a matter of fact, the sittings of the Board will be continuous. Whenever the Board is sitting one or other of the representatives of the employees will be present. I should like to know what is

in the mind of the Governmell t as regards the elected members. Will they be paid a small allowance over and above their salaries? I believe the Government has some ideas on this subject and knows what it intends to do. An elected member may be an ofllcer of the Public Sel'yice. Would the fce fixed for him be different from that paid to a person elected fro111 outside the Service?

The Hon. O. H. A. EAG.I<~R.-The ser­vices relldered by both will presumably be the same.

TIll' HOll ... w. J. BEOKETT.-We should lmow what fee the Government proposes to pay.

The lIon. A. M .. FRAsER.-If an officer of the Public Service is elected, apparently he will receive nothing extra.

The Hon. W. J. DEOKETT.-Sub­clause (3) of clause 7 is important. It states-

~\IlY allowance payauic under this section to allY l'il'eted member who il:l all oflieer of thc Pl1hlil' !'-il'l"vif'c or an offil'pr withill the mcanillg of the Snperannuation Aetf' Rhall not be taken iiltO Uf'l'OllJlt for the purpose of any pemlion superannuutioll retiring allowan{'c compensation or gratuity to which he iR entitlcd under the Public Service Acts or under the Super­annuation Acts.

Most members may not recognize ·the importance of that sub-clause, but the significance of such a provision was brought home by an experience of the Labour Government of which I was a member. I rather think that the Minister of Public Works was responsible for the appointment of an officer to the Agent­General's office to perform certain duties. 'Vhen the Labour Government assumed power we found that a number of officers were performing duties which were not required. That was something for which the Labour Government got no credit; it did not have a press to boost it. At any rate, we did not think this officer was necessary in London. We believed that this State could do without him, and that it should live within its means. Apparently it is all very well to preach economy, but it is another thing to prac­tise it. We did not think that officer was necessary in London, n or did we think an Agent-General or a State Governor was necessary, and we did not appoint either.

The ROll. C. H. A. EAGER.-There nll1~t be a State Governor, under the Oonstitu­tion.

1160 . Public I COUNOIL.l Service Bill.

. The Hon. W. J. BEOKETT.-I con­.8idCl· that the office of State Governor should be abolished. It is unnecessary, like the fifth wheel of a coach. I shall J'lot mention any name, but the officer of whom I have spoken received a contract which provided for increased, salary and allowances. When the Labour Govern­ment brought him back to Victoria to resume his old Job we found that by the computation of his higher salary and allowances he would get much more as a pension than he would receive as salary. An incident of that kind makes it im­portant to have such a provision as sub­claul:lf:l (3) of clause 7. It was grossly absurd that the Government had to pay more as a pension to a superfluous officer than he would ha ve recei ved as salary for his post in this State.

I think the passing of this measure will lead to a better Public Service. This is an instalment of an excellent system. We must have' a contented body of em­ployees, and when this Bill becomes law it will be possible to have a contented Public Service, and that will be to the benefit of all the taxpayers of Victoria.

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

committed. Clauses 1 to 3 were agreed to. Clause 4-( Constitution of Board). The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (~1 elbourne

Pro'vince) .-Sub-clause (4) of this clause pl'ovides-

Notwithstullding anything in the foregoing provisions of this section any elected member not sitting as a memLer of the Board when engaged in any particular matter may, if the chairman considers it expedient and consents thereto, attend the meeting of the Board when so engaged, but shall not be entitled to any vote 011 any question arising in respect of such matter.

This provision is important, and I should be glad to know whether the Leader of the House has any information about it.

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruction).-The sub-clause seems to be understandable. There may be many borderline questions, and one elected member may be invited by the chairman of the Board to sit even though some of the matters to be inquired into may con­cern the other elected members. Never more than three members will sit on the Board at one time. The chairman will tiay who is to sit, but he may haye doubt

as tu who should be invited. I presume that the purpose of the sub-clause is to allow the other two elected members to be present hut not to vote, if they are con~ernecl with a question under dis­CUSSIon.

The Hon. W. J. BEcKETT.-The Board lllay be considering the transfer of an officer from one Department to another.

Sir JOHN HARRIS.-Yes, that is· the kind of question that will be con­sidered, and it might concern another elected member. But only three members of the Board will be entitled to vote.

The clause was agreed to. Olause 5-(Term of office of members). The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (Melbourne

P.rovince).-Will the Minister tell me whether it is the intention of the Govern­ment to appoint the present Public Ser­vice Commissioner as the chairman of the new Board for at least twelve months?

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public lnstruction).-The Public Service Com­missioner is under the Treasury Depart­ment at the present time. One does not like to talk a great deal on this subject, but Mr. Harnetty is an exceedingly valuable officer, and he is in possession of an his mental and physical faculties, but he i~ more than 65 years of age.

The Hon. W. J. BEcKETT.-Weare entitled to know the Government's m­tentions.

Sir JOHN Hll.RRIS.-A recom­mendation will be made to the Govern­ment by the Treasury Department, but, of course, I cannot say what it win be. The Government will not neglect to take the valuable services of Mr. Harnetty into account.

The clause was agreed to, as was elause 6.

Olause 7-(Payment to members). The Hon. A., M. FRASER ( Melbourne

North Province) ;-1 know that it is im­possible for the Government to look into the future and to know what will happen in regard to either elected or appointed members of the Public Service Board. However, I should like the Minister to enlighten me on one point. If one of the appointees is an officer of the Public Ser­vice, win he receiYe the salary appertain­ing to his classification in the Service,

)

\ \ ~ , I

~ ~

Public [22 OCTOBER) l!HO.l Service Bill. 1161

whereas, if the appointee is from outside the Service is he to get a larger salary ~ With regard to elected members, will their payment depend on whether they come from inside or outside the Service ~

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruction).-I should say-although I cannot be positive, because I do not think the point has ever been discussed-that the two members of the Board, apart from the chairman, will have equal powers and equal salaries. As Mr. Beckett has pointed out, the Bill provides that the emoluments received for membership of the Board shall not be considered in relation to superannuation or other rights.

The Hon. A. M. FRASER.-If the appointed member happens to be an officer of the Public Service, is he to get his salary as well as the emolument of the position?

The Hon. W. J. BEcKETT.-The appointed member will not be a member of the Service.

The Hon. A. M. FRAsER.-Clause 4 says, "Where an appointed member is a member of the Public Service."

Sir JOHN HARRIS.-The appointed member will be a member of the Public Service, with all his rights preserved.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-But he will not be entitled to any emolument qua public servant.

The Hon. A. M. FRAsER.-What I want to know is, will the outsider be paid more?

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province).-There can be no distinction as to allowances between an elected mem­ber from outside and inside the Service. He is to be entitled to such allowance as is fixed before his election. If a man inside the Service and a man outside it were candidates, it would not be possible to fix a differential rate depending on which one was elected. I should hope the Government would not attempt to make any differentiation. It would upset the whole scheme of the Bill if a representa­tive from the general division of the Service was paid, while on the Board, a low fee in addition to his Public Service salary, w4ile some one from outside the Service, doing precisely the same work, was paid a higher fee. I trus t the Go­vernment will make the one rate applicable to all those appointed, and, seeing that

public servants will retain all their rights, I hope the additional fee, while reason­able, 'will not be excessive.

The clause was agreed to, as were clauses 8 to 11.

Olause 12-(1) In the case of the suspension illness 01'

absence of a member or in the case of.an extra­ordinary vacancy in the office of an elected member the Governor in Council may appoint some person to act as the deputy of such member during such suspension illness or absence or until such vacancy is filled (as the case may be), and such deputy may exercise the powers and perform the duties of such member accordingly.

(2) Where the appointment is required of a deputy of an elected member the person so appointed as deputy shall be a person elected to be such deputy in the manner prescribed by the regulations and at an election held in con­junction with the elecrlion of such elected member:

Provided that where no such person is avail­able and capable of acting as deputY' the Governor in Council may appoint a. person as deputy notwithstanding that such person has not been elected as aforesaid.

(3) An election of a. deputy shall be held in conj unction with every election of an electp.d member.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (Melbourno Pro1)in('e).-"ViII the Minister throw some light on this extraordinary and novel clause? Apparently, a salary is to be fixed for the deputy. Number 1 has to be paid, and Number 2 will have to be paid. One remarkable feature is that there will not be another election. The first past the post gets the job, and the second past the post is the substitute. Who is responsible for this extraordinary and novel provision ~

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruction).-It may be the product of the combined brains of the Government. I do not know that anyone individual can claim the whole credit for it. What would the honorable member like to have explained?

The Hon. W. J. BEcKETT.-Why a par­ticular person should be elected to the Board and another person elected as deputy. The Governor in Council will have power to appoint somebody else in the case of suspension, illness, or absence.

Sir JOHN HARRIS.-The Governor in Oouncil may require power to appoint a deputy for a short period. A man is to be elected to represent a certain num­ber of 'people; if anything happens to him and he has no deputy, then for a time

1162 Country Roads Board rUOUNOIL.l Fund Bill.

there will be no representation; therefore a deputy is to be elected nt the same time as the elected member. If neither the elected member nor the deputy is avail­able, the Governor in Council must have the right to appoint somebody else for a short period.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT.-Is the deputy to be paid a fixed salary?

Sir JOHN HARRIS.-He will receive . the same fee, when acting on the Board,

as the other man would get. ' The Ron. W·. J. BECKETT.-The Minis­

ter is now indicating that it is proposed to pay a fee for each sitting.

Sir JOHN HARRIS.-I am not pre­pared to say whether the payment will be a fixed salary .or a fee, per sitting. A man who sits for a certain period on the Board will probably be paid at the fixed -rate for the time he is sitting, and he 'may sit at different times throughout the year. '

The Hon. W. J. BECKE'l".r.-Does the Minister mean that if the elected member is sick he gets no fee, while the appointed member is paid all the time?

Sir JOHN HARRIS.-He will be paid if he is doing his ordinary duties in the Public Service.

The Hon. A. M. FRASER (Melbourne N orfh Province) .-Does this clause mean that the Governor in Oouncil may appoint to the office of elected member some per­son who has been, elected as the deputy of an elected member?

Sir JOHN HARRls.-The appointment must be made by Order in Oouncil. He is a sort of Zoc'ltm tenens.

The Hon. A. M. FRASER.-Then we get the further position that, in the event of the Governor in Oouncil not having a person to appoint who was elected as deputy to an elected member, he can, under the proviso to clause 12, appoint some other person to act as deputy for the elected member?

Sir JOHN HARRls.-Yes, that would be for a short period of time. All these elections will take some time and will be controlled by the Ohief Electoral Officer.

The clause was agreed to, as were the remaining clauses and the schedules.

'The Bill was reported to the House without amendment, and passed through its remaining 8ta.gP~.

The sitting was suspended at 6.31 p.m. unfil 7.52 p.m.

OOUNTRY ROADS BOARD FUND BILL.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE (Minister of 'Public Works).-I move-

That this Bill be now read a second time.

The measure is a renewal of legislation that has been re-enacted from year to year during the past eight years. It deals with motor drivers' licence fees which, under that legislation, are paid into Oon­solidated Revenue. The anticipated amount of revenue for the current year is approximately £95,000. Provision is also made in the Bill for the discontinu­ance for another year of the grants from Oonsolidated Revenue of £10,000 to the Oountry Roads Board Fund, and £40,000 to municipalities which' are mainly in

'the metropolitan area. Under a Bin introduced some years ago, the Oountry Roads Board has expended £253,000 on road construction in the metropolitan area, and £66,393 on the maintenance of outer metropolitan roads and bridges. The nearest bridge to the Oity of ~{el­bourne is the RoddIe bridge on Punt-road. Last year a grant of £69,000 was made from the Unemployment Relief Fund to the country municipalities, and altogether during the last five years £419,000 has been granted to assist those municipalities to carry out what the Government con­sidered was good work, and which absorbed a considerable number of the unemployed.

The revenue of the Oountry Roads Board this year is expected to amount to approximately £2,105,000, which the Board agrees will be sufficient to meet its requirements for the maintenance of the existing surfaces and structures and for commitments in respect of certain con­struction works. Apart from the amount granted directly to the municipalities, the Government has expended an enormous amount of money through the Employ­ment Council to assist the Oountry Roads Board to construct roads through shires. The mileage of such roads has been so great that almost all the revenue of the Oountry Roads Board has been required to pay its share of maintenance. Honor­able members will agree that new roads should be constructed wherever necessary and practicable, hut the work of maintain­ing existing roads is just as important. In addition to the' money granted to municipalitlf'f3, the Government hat? had

~ 1 I

Oountry Roads Board [22 OCTOBER, 1940.] Fund Bill. 1163

to meet ndditional expenditure this finan­cial year, occasioned mainly by the following items:-

Arbitration' and industrial . awards £212,000

Increased costs of materials, &c. 221,000

Additional interest, ex-change and sinking fund payments in 1940-41 .. 163,000

National security - civil defence ;. . 50,000

Further provision for social services 38,000

Total £684,000

With the exception of those members who were recently elected to this Chamber, the House is conversant with the circum­stances under which motor drivers' licence fees were withdrawn from the funds of the Country Roads Board. When the first Bill dealing with this matter was int~·o­duped it was pointed out that the Pohce Depa;tment was involved in great expendi­ture in issuing motor drivers' licences, and it was considered that that Department should be recouped to some extent from the revenue obtained from drivers' licence fees. The State was in the midst of the depression at that time, and the then Treasurer was looking for means to reduce an anticipated large deficit at the end of the financial year. I do not know why the Government has found it necessary to re-enact this legislatjon annually, but possibly it has considered that the finances of the State may improve in the future and thus enable the Treasurer to restore the revenue from 'the drivers' licence fees to the Country Roads Board:

In spite of this legislation, the Board has been able to carry out its own ,pro­grammeof construction and maintenance of roads, and has also undertaken the responsibility of paying off interest and sinking fund commitments on loans amounting to £11,000,000, borrowed dur­ing the earlier stages of road construction. The Board has also relieved, country municipalities of interest and sinking fund to the extent of approximately £230,000 a year, under what is known as the Hyland plan. ,U nder the previous main road's legislation, municipalities were obliged to pay interest and sinking fund on one-half of the amount so

expended. This relief, together with the large amounts received by the country municipalities from the Unemployment Relief ~\md, per medium of the Board, haF: been of material assistance. It will be clear, also, ,that the Government h~s assisted the Country Roads Board ill

every possible way. .L\Jthough payment of the sum of £40,000, which was granted annually to the municipalities many years ago, has been suspended, the fact is that for necessary work .the municipalities have received assistance from the Go­vernment to a much greater extent. Admittedly, the Police Department is doing valuable work in the direction of issuing motor drivers' licences and mot~r registration certificates, and it only fall' that a certain portion of the revenue should be refunded to the Treasury to cover the cost of administration of the Department, apart from that incurred in the administration of the Motor Regis­tration Branch. That is one of the reasons actuating the Government in again pr~­posing the transfer to the Consolidated Revenue of the am'ount received in motor drivers' licence fees.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (Melbourne Province ).-It is widely realized that the Country Roads Board has rendered valuable service to the State generally, and to road users in particular. Some years ago, there was in vogue a policy that was deprecated both by my­self and other members of this House, but I am unable to say whether that policy is still in force. At the time to which I refer, it was the practice to delegate the work of the Country Roads Board, apparently on the butty-gang principle, to foreigners who could not speak the English language. They worked both day and night, and lived, so to speak, on the smell of an oil rag. I, suppose that by that means the cost of the work was considerably reduced.

Sir GEORG1<~ GOUDlE.-That system is not in operation to-day.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT.-I am glao to hear the :~Minister~s statement, and to realize that the revenue raised is being spent in a proper manner in the interests of those who have to contribute it. The Minister gave to the House the details of the increased expenditure incurred by the Country Roads Board, but he did not refer to the huge increase in the revenue deriv.ed from motor registration and

1164 Oountry Roads BOQ/fd rCOUNCIL.] Fund Bill.

drivers' licence fees. A comparative table would, I am certain, indicate that an enormous sum has been dragged from the pockets of road users, although I realize that a large proportion has been applied to their benefit by the provision of excellent roads. As an old motor driver, I can recall that years ago I was accustomed to paying week-end visits to my family at Queenscliff. For the privi­lege of driving over a road like that which has since been constructed, I would willingly have paid a toll of 5s. each way, for the old road was bad, more especially that part then known as the" glue pot," Ileal' Little River. .

Although the registration fees de­manded from motor car owners are excessively high-a matter to which I shall direct my attention more particu­larly when another Bill is before us-­we have to realize that motorists have received a useful return for their money. As a metropolitan member, I suppose I have a King Charles's head obsession. I do not expect any sympathy from a Country party Government, but it must be admitted that seven-tenths of the revenue derived by the method to which I have already referred comes from metropolitan motorists, and is spent mainly in the country. Year after year I have pleaded for some recognition to be given to municipalities adjacent to Melbourne. After having driven along 100 miles of good concrete road, the motorist approaching one of the muni­cipalities close to Melbourne finds that he has to negotiate a broken-down macadam­ized portion that is often water-logged. That shakes the life out of him.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE.-There are not many such roads to-day.

The HOll. W. J. BECKETT.-Like many other metropolitan motorists, I am almost too scared to use country roads where there are so lllany service cars and motor lorries, and I confine myself to motoring in the metropolis. Naturally, I should like lllOre money to he spent on metropolitan roads. I do not wish to anti­cipate Government policy, but I have learned, through the medium of the news­papers, of a suggestion that the present method of collecting fees from motorists and of controlling the fund should be changed. It is proposed that the adminis­tra tion should be l'cmoved from the Pollf'P Df'partment to anothf'r authority.

That, however, would be a retrograde step, particularly in view of the fact that the fees in question are collected in an economical manner by the Motor Regis­tration Branch, thus giving to the police control over the issue and transfer of licences, and the supervision of motor traffic in a general sense.

I have no criticism to offer regarding clause 2 of the Bill, to which objection has been taken in certain quarters. Nevertheless, it must be realized that the Country Roads Board has practically completed its major works, although much yet remains to be done. From the huge amount collected from motorists a certain proportion should revert to Oon­solidated Revenue for the purpose of relieving taxpayers in other directions. I am thoroughly in accord with the clause.

The Hon. J. A. KENNEDY (Higin­botham P1'ovince).-My views concerning the last clause of the Bill are in line with those expressed by Mr. Beckett. I agree with the transfer from the Country Roads Board Fund to the Oonsolidated Revenue of the revenue derived from motor drivers' licences. No relationship can be estab­lished between the issue of such licences and the construction of roads; otherwise it could be contended that fees of all other descriptions should be paid to the Government for a similar purpose. It is true that certain country members of Parliament and representatives of motor car users have advocated that all the money from motor drivers' licences should be paid to the Oountry Roads Board. We have been informed that an amount of about £95,000 is obtained from that source annually. In reference to Mr. Beckett's remarks concerning the claims of the metropolis, I· may mention that some time ago it was proposed to decla re as major roads certain metropolita.n thoroughfares. The Government said th.at it would gazette that proclamation only if the municipalities provided a "stop" sign at every street leading into those roads. In considering that proposal, the municipalities took the view that the major roads 'were really arteries from the city; that they were not largely used by local traffic within their borders, and that " stop" signs were of no value to pedes­trian traffic. In view of all the circum­stances, it was suggested that a sum of £6,000 should be allocated ont of the rfW(,11lH' derived from motoJ' drlv('l's'

Oountry Roads Board [22 OOTOBER) 1940.! Fund Bill. 1165

licences to pay 'for the signs. When the main roads were gazetted as such, the municipalities concerned had to meet the cost of the "stop" signs. That is in­dicative of the treatment meted out to such municipalities.

Reference has been made to the trans­fer of a sum of £50,000 from the Con­solidated Revenue to the Country Roads Board Fund. That sum used to be paid, as to £10,000 to country municipalities, and as to £40,000 to metropolitan muni­cipalities. In the depression year, 1932, that payment was suspended, and the suspension is continued by the Bill now before the House. I admit that a few years ago the Country Roads Board carried out certain work on the borders of metropolitan municipalities, although there is not much evidence of it.

Sir GEORGE GOUDlE.-The work 'was done ncar tram termini.

The Hon. J. A. KENNEDY.-We have been informed that the Country Roads Board spent £253,000 on that work. I have no knowledge of the muni­cipalities in which the work was done, hut, as I mentioned on a previous occasion, before the municipalitiy of Brighton, with which I am closely associated, concreted Point N epean-road some years ago, it approached the Go­vernment of the day, expressing this view :-" This road will be taken over by a duly constituted authority some years hence, and we do not wish to spend £40,000 or £50,000 on a road the control of which will be passed to another authority, leaving us to meet sinking fund and interest payments amounting to about £3,000 a year." The Government there­upon gave us a written undertaking that, in the event of this road being taken over by a newly constituted authority, it would recoup to us the value of the road at that time. ,

The Country Roads Board decided a few years ago to take over Point N epeau­road from the junction at Glenhuntly­road. We approached it with· a' view to its taking over t.he liability, but it hns taken over the road, and we still have the liability of £3,000 a year. Point N epean-road, from where the tram line turns off into Glenhuntly-road to where our COllrl'ete starts, is a shockingly pot­holey area. That bas been taken over by th€' Board, Rnd is thE' only piece of work

we have asked the Board to do in Olll' district. We interviewed it about twel-\'e months ago, and suggested that to havp the Point N epean-road entrance a chain of pot holes all the way was a shockingly bad advertisement for the City of Brigh­tOll. The then chairman said, " We will :fix that up for you." N ow we are in­formed that the Board has no capitH 1 funds and no maintenance funds, in spit,(> of its revenue of over £2,000,000 a year. This particula r work would cost only about £5,000. We are willing to payout of our revenue OU! proportion of tllP capital cost, but we must now wait until some . time in December to know whether it is possible for this small attention to be given to one of the most important artNiHI roads in a metropolitan muni(·i­r~c lity.

The lIon. W. J. BEcKETT.-And so f~ll' aR the Brighton municipality is con-· cerned, it is mostly" foreign" traffic that passes over that road.

The Hon. J .. A. KENNEDY.-That is so. It is an example of the sma 11 n.mount of Country Roads Board fund:;.; diverted to metropolitan municipalitips. I do not know where the sum of £250,000 has been spent, but my experience is that very little of it has gone to the areas in our direction. Under the old system, WP

used to receive at least £1,000 a year ont of the £40,000 voted to the municipalitif'!= for arterial roads. That was taken a\\,:1\­during the depression, and has never ber~ restored to us.

We appreciate the wonderful work tllf> Country Roads Board is doing. ThoRe who attend the Municipal Conferenre realize how appreciative the countr~· delegates are, from the way they gather round the members of the Board and praise them. That is natural, seeing that the country districts receive such wonder­ful service from the Board, but thp metropolitan representatives do not hang round the Board members, because therf> is not a great chanre of getting much out of them. T agree with Mr. Beckett that 70 or 80 pel' ('ent. of the revenue is con­tributed by metropolitan motorists. I do think it is time, if the £40,000 is not restored, that we f'3W some evidence of 1'ome of thr monry which is supposed to be spent in the nearby metropolitan nreas hcing exprnoc·d on the artprlnl rORds.

1166 Transport Regulation ~OOUNCIL·l (Oompensation) Bill.

The Hon. C. P. GARTSIDE (South­Jj}astern Province) .-1 was gr:atified to hear the Minister say that the Country Roads Board .had earmarked sufficient fmids to meet its requirements for the. current financial year. I feel sure that will sound very sweet in the ears of country municipalities, which regard the Oountry Roads Board as the greatest public benefactor. in the State.

The Ron. D. L. McNAl\fARA.-A fairy godmother!

The Hon. O. P. GARTSIDE.-Yes. The Hon. W. J. BEcKET'l'.-They have

reason to. The Hon. C. P. GARTSIDE.-They

have, and we who are representatives of country constituencies add our tribute to the wonderful work the Board is doing. The Minister referred to new roads, but while it is a very laudable object to add to the exis6ng thoroughfares of the State, that which is exercising the minds of the municipalities throughou~ the country is not so much the provision of new sections as the adequate maintenance .of roads already constructed. It must be patent to all members that there is a falling off of revenue, so far as municipal under­takings are concerned. There are g~eatly depleted incomes in country districts, compared with what existed in prosperous times. The municipalities are faced generally with a rather stringent period, find for that reason I should like an assurance from the }.1:inister, to be re­('ol'ded for the benefit of municipalities, that he will see that the Oountry Roads Board has ample funds, and will use his influence with the Board to ensure that it adequately maintains existing roads in ('onntry districts.

Sir GEORGE GOUDIE.-I have. an oral a~surance .from the Country Roads Board that the amount 'of money which it has in hand for its present financial year will enable it to maintain all the roads which it has· to control.

The Hon. C. P. GARTSIDE.-That is a very fine assurance, for which I heartily thank the Minister. I feel certain that the country municipalities will add their qnota of thanks. '

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

passed through its remaining stages.

TRANSPORT REGULATION (COMPENSATION), ,BILL.

The Hon. H. PYE (Honorary Minis­ter).-I move-

That this Bill be now rea.d a. second time.

This measure relates exclusively to long distance competitive road hauliers who· are holders of what are termed "tran­sitory" "D" licences. These people ex­perienced many difficulties in pioneering the roads before the Transport Regula­tion Act was passed in 1933. There are at present 138 holders of such licences, covering 196 vehicles. They nearly all serve main line to,wns, which are already well served by the railways. Under these transitory licences the hauliers are limited to the number of trips per week and the tonnages carried by them as at the 31st of August, 1933-that is, prior to the introduction of the Transport Regulation Acts. In no instance has any increase in carrying capacity, 'ability to operate on any other route, or permission to transfer the licence from the original holder been granted by the Transport Regulation Board. Under the transitory provisions of section 54 of the Act of 1933, the operators were permitted to continue until December, 1934. The hear­ings in these cases were not finalized before the end of 1934, and the applicants wer~ granted temporary licences after the end of December to enable them to continue until a decision was reached. Early ~n 1935, the Board, whose decisions at that time were final, refused applications for full-term licences to operators carrying general go,ods to most of the towns, in the Goulburn Valley and the D;orth­eastern area of the State. Some operat~rs ,exercised the right of appeal to the SupremE;:l Oourt, and the proceedings went to the High Court, which upheld the Board's decision to refuse the licences. This deciSIon was then enforced, so far as the north-eastern district . was con­cerned, towards the end of H,)35. Through­out the early part of 1936, the Board proceeded to deal· with similar applica­tions from other districts, and decided to refuse full-term licences to all operators serving the Riverina.

In the meantime, the Act of 1935 was passed, and the Board's. decisions became subject to review by the Governor in Ooupcil. A committee, of which I was a

Transport Regulation [22 OCTOBER, 1940.-1 (Compensation) Bill. 1167

member, was brought into existence to examine all decisions of the Board, and I can assure honorable members that many times we had headaches in arriving at our conclusions. Many applicants had invested all their capital and put in a great deal of hard work pioneering routes, but, unfortunately, we had also a respon­sibility to our own Stated-owned railways, and we felt it our duty to uphold the refusals. Licences in their present form were first issued in July, 1936, by order of the Governor in Council after the Board had recommended refusal, and these included the Goulburn Valley and the north-east, where the services -which had ceased in 1935 were reinstated. The committee, taking all the facts into con­sideration and having in mind that the hauliers themselves were advocating compensation for removal from the roads, felt it desirable to grant injunc- -tions in nearly every case.

In 1938, the Board recommended that the licences should not be rene'ived, for economic reasons. However, a formal decision granting renewal in all cases was recorded and approved by the Governor in Council, which authority took into consideration the amount of capital involved, and also had in mind the introduction of a Bill of this character to give relief to the hauliers. The Bill provides for adequate compensation. We must realize that some hauliers have had a bad time lately, have worked long hours, have gone without sleep for long periods, and have not been able to grant fair conditions of employ­ment to their employees. Many of them would be glad to accept compensation and get out of the business.

The principle of paYlllent of compensa­tion is not new. In 1938 a number of hauliers made representations to the Transport Regulation Board on behalf of a majority of the transitory hauliers. It is realized that it is difficult to obtain unanimity -on a subject of this descrip­tion, but unanimity was almost attained. The amount of compensation provided for is to be spread over two years, on a basis of one halfpenny per ton mile, according to the licence. If the compensation sought hAd been fixed on the quantity of goods ('arried, that would have been reasonable; if it had been fixed on the amollnt the hanliers were licensed to carry but did not earry, it would havC' b(,C'l1 C'xr{'ssiyC'.

In June, 1940, a number of oper,ator::. waited on the Minister of Transport, anrl repeated their request for compensation for the surrender of their licences. TIH' Minister of Transport insisted that ther(> must be unanimity, a reasonable basis £01' compensation, uniformity in the surrender of their licences, and an assurance th3 t the place of those who went off the rond would not be taken by others. The Minis­ter of Transport also insisted that thp hauliers must be in agreement amon~ themRelves before he would entertfl ill their request.

In July last a concrete proposa 1 In writing, setting out the amount of compensation agreed. to by tbf' hauliers at £110,000, was placed bef01'" th<' 'Minister. I think the method of ralculating the compensation was based on the payment of one halfpenny per ton mile on the quantity of goods· carried, Of the 138 hauliers affected, 92 sigll('(l the proposal Rubmitted to the ~{inistpr of TmTIsport, but later 7 withdrew. TIl!' propo:rtion of those wilJing to lmrrenOf'l' seems to indirnt~ that the majority arf' anxious to get off the road, The compen­sation and surrender sr.heme submitted bv the hauliers is conditional on their retain­ing their vehicles and plant. I understall(l some honorable members are anxious about how the ha uliers will dispose of their vehicles and plant. That has been met by the Minister of Transport communi­cating with the Commonwealth Govern­ment, which has indicated that th(~ Commonwealth will take over the heavy yehicles. It is calculated that the haulier~ concerned carry approximately 5,000 tons of goods weekly, in competition with the railwavs. When· we realize that that quanti'ty comprises, in the main, high freight goods, we mu:,t appreciate the im­portance of retaining that trade for the Railway Department.

The Ron. W. J, BECKETT.-Thp

Dunstan Government was responsible for building IIp that trade. .

The Hon. H. PYE.-The hauliers werp on the road long before a Country party Government took office, and the Dunstan Government did not in any sense build up th::lt trade, The Government is trying to tl'eat t.he hnuliers in a fair and equit­:l h1e '\':l:V by givjng them compemmtion in~t('ad of pushing thf'm off the 1'oa(1-rompen~ntion on the mrrits of each rr.!'f'.

1168 Transport Regulati01i I COUNCIL.] (Compensation) Bill.

having regard to certain considerations outlined in the Bill, wDI be assessed by the Minister, after consultation with the Transport Regulation Board. The Minister will then report to the Governor in Council, who will :fix the amount of compensation, if any, to be paid in consideration of the surrender of each licence. A condition attached to the surrender of a licence is that all other operators from the same area shall sur­render their licences. It is realized that if four out of five hauliers operating to one district were to surrender their licences, the remaining operator would obtain all the trade offering. That would probably make it a commercial proposition from his viewpoint.

There is nothing contentious in the measure. Perhaps we should investigate what is being done in other parts of the world in this regard. In the United States of America hauliers have been cleared off the roads, while co-ordination of transport has been successfully applied in many countries. In New Zealand, a eompulsory acquisition and compensation scheme obtains; the New Zealand G.overn~ ment retains the right to take over a route at any time upon the payment of com­pensation. In this State we have been more liberal, with the object of treating the hauliers fairly. I commend the Bill as one that will be for the mutual benefit of the Railway Department, the motor hauliers, and the taxpayers.

It must be remembered that through­out the State differential freight rates have been in operation because of com­petition. Unfortunately, those persons who have remained loyal to the Railway Department have been called upon to pay the high freight rates, whereas those who have patronized road transport have been given the advantage of a cut rate. I commend the Bill to the House as the first step to what the Government hopes will ultimately be the co-ordination of transport.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER (East Yarra Province).-The Honorary Minister in charge of the Bill, as usual, has com-' mended it to the House. He has done more, and has presented an attractive picture of the Bill. Personally, I think the Bill is not very satisfactory, the main reason being that it is an attempt to put

into statutory form, while expressing as little as possible in tho Bill, some kind of gentlemen's agreement between the Pre­mier and certain motor hauliers. The Honorary Minister said the hauliers are prepared to accept compensation amount­ing to £110,000, but he does not say how that amount is arrived at. Probably the way it was arrived at is this: Originally the hauliers said, "Give us £220,000." The Premier probably replied, "Make it a little less." The hauliers went away, returned, cut the amount in halves, and said" Give us £110,000."

The Bill is a snare and a delusion to every one concerned. The kernel of the Bill is this: If the haulier is so inclined, he can apply to the Government for com­pensation for the surrender of his licence. The Government can offer him compen­sation, which he can take or leave. The amount to be accepted is to be arrived at by agreement. There is this further fact, that even if the principal haulier, or anyone haulier in a district, asks for compensation and has been offered and has agreed to take it, that is not sufficient unless everyone else operating in respect of that district also applies for compen­sation and agrees to take what the Government offers.

As a scheme for getting the men off the road it is a very poor one, because everything is in favour of the haulier. The Honorary Minister said the hauliers have had a bad time lately. Of course, they have, and times win be worse, with the petrol restrictions. If that be so, the amount of compensation paid should be small. Un­doubtedly, of the 138 hauliers concerned, many would be glad to get off the road at any price, but if they can get £110,000 to go off, so much the better for them.

I do not know, and I shall not ask the Honorary Minister, what is the real agreement between the Premier and' the hauliers. It may be cut and dried, but I do not like this matter of agreementB. In the Margarine Bill a similar provision applied. There, apparently, an agreement was arrived at between certain parties and the .Government; and, as a result, a Bill was introduced without specifically mentioning what the agreement was, which really concealed from the public and Parliament what was going on.

Transport Regulation [22 OCTOBER, 1940:1 (Oompensation) Bill 1.169

In effect, this Bill says no more than this: If any haulier who wants to get Q:ff the road applies for compensation and is satisfied with what the Government offers, he can get off, but only if he can persuade all other hauliers in the district to consent to accept the Government's ()ffer. The haulier is told that if he does not want to get off he need not apply, .and he can remain on the route. But behind it all there is this important point -that the Governor in Oouncil has a very strong lever, if he wishes to exercise it, because the hauliers have been dependent <m the goodwill of the Governor in Oouncil for the past five or six years.

A peculiar story relating to the Trans­port Regulation Board is disclosed. Honorable members will recall that when the Transport Regulation Bill was be­fore this House in 1933 it created con­siderable discussion, and I moved almost 50 amendments, of which about 20 or 25 were incorporated in the Bill. In thp Act which was passed in 1933 there was .a provision inserted that, notwithstanding anything in the Act, men who had beeu on the routes before the Bill came into operation would be entitled to continue their operations until the 31st of Decem­ber, 1934. They were given one year of grace.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT.-We thou~ht that ·would be the end of them.

The Hon. O. Il. A. EAGER.-Yes. They were transitory for one year. At the end of that time they were to be embraced in the provisions of the Act, and it was generally expected that their licences would be terminated. At the end of the year the Transport Regulation Board considered their applications for a renewal of their licences, and refused them. But Parliament did a curious thing, against the protestations of many members; it made provision for an appeal from the decision of the Transport Regu­lation Board to the Governor in Oouncil. The Governor in Oouncil was constituted a kind of judicial tribunal-an appellate tribunal-from the Board. Of course, the Governor in Oouncil means the Govern­ment for the time being, and, generally speaking, the strongest member of the Government. Over a series of years the Governor in Oouncil, on the advice of the Executive Oouncil, reversed the decisions of the Transport Regulation Board, which

had continually refused to renew tlH' licences of transitory operators. I have related this matter broadly, but my account is substantially accurate. I think the licences actually expired in July last. In 1938 the operators said they were not doing well, and that if the Government would give them £220,000 they would surrender their licences. The hauliers were not unanimous in their request for compensation-as the Honorary Minister said. After bargaining, to some extent, the hauliers reduced their request for com­pensation from £220,000 to £110,000. It certainly looks as if they are to get £110,000 from Oonsolidated Revenue be­tween them. I hope it does not develop into a ramp-that is all!

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (Melbourne Province).-I think the present Govern­ment must be one of the most fortunate Governments that ever occupied the Treasury bench, in having a Legis­lative Oouncil that is apparently willing to say " Yes" to everything submitted to it. This Bill will pass, yet it is one of the most extraordinary measures I have ever looked at. I am glad that Mr. Eager has grasped the real meaning of the Bill.

One factor which is of importance in considering the measure is that a State railway system, which has contributed largely to Victoria's development, has been buil t up by the expenditure of the taxpayers' money. Despite that fact, GoverUllwnts have encouraged rond transport operators to compete against. the people's railway system. Tlw result IS that the stage has been reached whell one transport authority is neces­sary to control all transport in both the metropolis and tlle country districts. I should like to learn whether the present Government has any definite policy for the control of transport. In the metro­polis we have the railway authority, the tramway authority-which was recently given power by legislation to buyout its competitors-and dozens of private bus services, some of which have providec1 facilities that the other two public trans­port systems did not cater for. Eventually, we shall have to follow the example of London, by placing all transport under the control of one authority.

The Hon. O. P. GARTSIDE.-An authority free from political control ~

1170 Transport Regulation rOOUNOIL.] (Compensation) Bill.

The Hon. W. J. BEOKETT.-I be­lieve in political control. I have been sufficiently long in Parlia~ent to realize that without political control there is danger of corruption. Bodies like the State Electricity Oommission have thrown money down the gutter because they are not under political control. Does the in­troduction of this Bill mean that for the future there will be only one transport authority for the carriage of goods in Victoria?

The Hon. H. PYE.-Yes. The Hon. ,V. J. BEOKETT.-Road

transport firms competing with the rail­ways have been allowed to build up a goodwill in· their business, and the prc:;cnt Gm'ernment is partly responsible for that state of affairs. ,Mr. Eager pointed out that when certain road bauliers applied for renewal of their ann~al licences the Transport Regula­tion Board reported adversely, but the Government agreed to the renewal of the licences. The Government has allowed t.hese competitors with the railways to huild up a goodwill in their business, and now the Government has to buyout the goodwill. One important question is whether these road transport services are necessary for the community. One hon­orable member, by interjection, says they are, but the Government, by introducing the Bill, implies that they are not necessary to develop the country. In the event of the Railway Department not being able to carryall the goods re­quiring transportation, authority should be vested in the Railways Oommis­sioners to place auxiliary vehicles on the roads as feeder services to the railways. Every year for some time past, the Go­YPl'nment has agreed to the renewal of road hauliers' licences because, ap­parently, it considered that their services were needed, but the Honorary Minister (Mr. Pye) has stated to-night that those ~prYices are not necessary. This Bill will not solve the problem. It will give the Government power to buyout tbe good­will of the hauliers j but one question til he answered is, what will they do with their plant?

The HOll. H. PYE.-I cannot answer it. The HOIl. W. ,r. BEOKETT.-I can.

The GovernmclIj· \\'ill buyout probahly thf' mORt reputable of tlle halllicl's-thosc

who cannot make the business pay be­cause their competitors will not observe the same fair working and trading· conditions as they do. There is more unfairness, such as sweating and illegiti­ma te methods of getting trade in the road transport activity than in any other class of business. Trucks which the Government expects will be taken off the roads will pass into the possession of men who will become merely the nominal owners. They will operate the trucks ostensibly for a firm-they may even carry the name of the firm on their trucks-but they will operate them out­side the scope of the Transport Regula­tion A.ct. ~Iany of the men driving these trucks undertake long trips; they drive as long as their endurance allows, stop, boil a billy by the roadside and sleep in their trucks. The passage of this Bill will not remedy that state of affairs because the worst offenclers are private firms who are termed ancillary users of motor trans­port. I do not know why the word U ancillary" is employed, but I do know that these allcillary users do not comply with any Wages Board determination. The procedure sometimes adopted is for one of these firms to sell a man a truck in which he is required to haul their goods. 1 t may be a second-hand truck. worth £300, hut they book it up to him at £1,000. The truck might earn £20 a ,,'eek, but the driver will get about £4 a week and the balance will go to the ancillary user.

The trouble is that there has not been in power in recent years a Government with sufficient business knowledge and. courage to insist on the observance of a set of fair conditions for the motor road transport of goods. We are proud of the roads built by the Country Roads Board. The taxpayers' money has provided the fund for the construction of the roads~ but the heaviest use of the roads is made by hauliers, chain-store proprjetors~ and other ancillary users. They pay H bOll t one-tenth of the rate they should lle charged for the use of the roads.

I should like to learn the genesiR of the Bill. I think it is to be found in a recent report of the State Econo;mic­Advisory (1ommj ttee on railv;ray finance~ which has been a troublesome quest jon to :111 Gov('rnnwl1 ts for many years. It

l."ranspo'Tt Regulation' [22 OOTOBER, 1940.J (Compensation) Bill. 1171

was thought that the problem would be .solved years ago when an Australian with 'American experience was brought to'Vic­toria and appointed Chief Commissioner {)f Hailways at a salary of £5,000 per annum. This heaven-sent railway expert was expected to put the railway system {)n a proper basis. However, despite the fact that millions of pounds were written {)ff the capital liability of the railways, they still do not pay; moreover, millions {)f pounds have been expended on the con­struction of roads that have provided highways for road transpo,rt operators .competing with the railways. Those com­petitors have not even been charged a fair rate for the use they make of the roads. One large ancillary user in Vic­toria sends trucks into the Riverina and pays more in one month to the New South Wales Government for the right to use the roads than he would pay in ten years in Victoria. I wonder how many members know the rate these ancillary users pay for the use of roads in Victoria. It is a mere fraction of the rates charged similar operators in New South Wales and Queensland.

I referred to the genesis of the Bill, but I did not mean the genesis of the "gentlemen's agreement" on which the Bill is founded. I do not· know how and when that agreement was arrived at. It seems to me that the idea to compensate hauliers competiug with the railways arose out of a report of the State Economic Advisory Committee on rail­way finances. That committee consists of Professor D. B. Copland, who is chair­man, and lvIr. A. T. Smithers, the Director of Finance, and Mr. R. V. S. McPherson, a prominent business man in the city of Melbourne. Paragraph (v) of the com­mittee's report on the subject of railway nnan('('s recommended-

That the railways and road hauliers be given ~LuthoritJ' to agree upon freight rates and areas of operation, such agreements to be approved by the chairman of the Transport Regulation Board who should also have power to fix economical rates and to determine areas of operation in the event of no agreement being reached. '

The committee suggested that that authority should be placed in the hands of the chairman of the Transport Regu­lation Board, and, no doubt" .after his .vears of experience he would be fitted to

exercise such power. Paragraph (vi) of the report read-

That the licence' fee of all commercal vehiclps be a minimum of lOs.

If that licence fee were illel't~ased it would mean thousands of pounds of revenue for the State. Paragraph (vii) of the report stated-

That road hauliers operating under .. dis­cretionary licences" and competing with the railways, and owner-users operating beyond a specified distance, pay their present fees, sub­ject to a minimum of lOs. as above, plus a fee to be assessed by the Transport Regulation Board on the basis of road use and the element of competition with the railways.

The Bill does not deal with the road hauliers referred to in that paragraph, although they are the biggest competitors with the Railway Department. There are legitimate owner-users, and there are so-called owner-users: Parliament allows producers using motor vehicles to pny lower fees, and so we see Rolls-Royce~ registered in the names of country pro­ducers whose city addresses are given as Toorak. These people should be charged according to the use they make of the roads. I am a motorist and cover P(ll'­

haps 2,000 miles a year, but I am chargrtl the same fee as a man who does 25,000 mi1f's a year. If I have a commercial vehicle and use it only occasionally I am dwrged the qarne fee as a man who has one and uses the roads morning, noon, and night. Motorists arc charged the Rame fees no matter what use they make of the roads, The sallle paragraph continuc[.:--

In the case of road hauliers operating under .. discretionary licences," this fee should be assessed with due regard to increases in freight rates nnder the conditions stipulated in (a) above. and to changes ill operatin~ costs of road haulie~s: On vehicles operatIng under owner-user. heences beyond a specified distanC'e, and carrymg general merchandise for sale, power should be given to the Board to assess the fee up to a maximum of threepence, but not less than one penny per ton mile based on the aggregate of the weight of the vehicle un­laden and of the weight of the loading it is capable of carrying.

That means that owners such as O. Gilpin Ltd. would pay a reasonable proportion of the cost of maintaining the roads, whereas now they are free. Such a con­dition does not apply to either New South Wales or Queensland. That is whv I asked whether the Government has a ;oad

1172 Transport Regulation IOOUNOIL.] ( Compensation) Bill.

transport. policy. The Government ·ap­pointed the State Economic Advisory Committee, which went into the questioll of the railway finances, and made certain recommendations. Has the Honorary Minister any idea of the amount of reven ne t.ha t wou] d be received if the Government followed the advice of the State Economic Advisory Oommittee and charged 3d. a ton mile?

The Hon. H. PYE.-I have not the faintest idea. I cannot answer your question.

The Hon. ,V. ,J. BECKETT.-I have not gone into the matter, but I know that the' adoption of that suggestion would im>olve hundreds of thousands of .pounds. ,Vhv should the Government drive off the roads a man who is gaining a living, and yet allow so-called owner-users to monopo­lize the roads and build up a trade that has been the curse of many country centres? !lany storekeepers complain of the btld times they have suffered through thi~ form of motor competition. Of conrsf', the Bill will be passed, because this has become a "Yes" House. The Rtnte Economic Advisory Committee was appointed, and it presented a valuable rf'port. Every man who has studied the transport problnlll will admit that the recommendations of that rommittee should be printed in letters of gold as offering thn solution of the transport problem. ThE' Government should ndopt a policy that would save the general tax­payers from pRying the enol~mous amount in motor fees that they now pay for little use of the roads, and that would prev€'nt the so-called owner-users from monopolizing the roads while they are paying for not. even a tenth of the use to which they put the roads.

The Hon. P. P. INCHBOLD (N orth­Ea~tern Province).-I approach this dis­rnR~ion with amazemf'nt. I have not a long memory for politirs ano I do not 1ik(, to hark back on the past records of politir.nl parties, but it is necessary to mark the oiffeJ'el1r(l lwtwe('n the attitude now ndopted by the Country party Go­vernment and the policy ndopted beforE> the party obtained office. When the late 13ri~Rdier Bourchier, as Leader of the ~ountry P1Uty, fought an election several years ago, OIle of the main planks in his plfltform WM thn t 'w~ Rhon1d he very

careful about restricting road transport. That aspect of the case was emphasized in the electorate of Lowan, aud the result was a change in the representation. When ] (lntered this House as a member of the Oountry party I think that body was primarily interested in looking after the welfare of the people living in the rural districts and in providing them wi th 8r.r­vices required.

If members allowed their minds to ron back to the years following the Great War they would recall some of the conditions prevailing in the Railway Department. I know that on variow~ occasions I had to stand in [\ carriage corridor while travelling from Wanga­ratta to Melbourne. I waited for days for the delivery of parcels by the Railway Department, and I know that other tax· payers found that they received very little service from the railway~. Then a wonderful transformation < occurred. Motor trucks were introduced, and men began to offer them for hire, and there was a marvellous volte-face on the part of the Railway Department. The practice of differential rates was introduced. That is a most immoral type of business, par­ticularly when it is perpetrated by a State-owned instrumentality. Big busi­hess firms established in the country were ~ble to carry thousands of tons of goods In motor trucks at a great advantage as compared with their small competitor~. We all know .towns where the people al'e still paying higher railway freights than the residents of towns served by the motor hauliers. Therefore I say it is astounding that such a Bill should be brought for­ward by a Oountry party Government. This measure is to destroy the last vestige of that competition which brought about a revolution in the Railway Depart­ment's attitude towards its customers. In recent years we have received fairly good ~el'vice from the Railway Department, bur; that was only so because it was possible for the Department's customers to go. elsewhere for haulage if they were not sntisned.

When Mr. Beckett was speaking I interjected that it was Uf'cessarv to have the dual transport system, and I think it is still necessary. When the competition provided by motor hauliers has been elimiuntcd the g-reat 8tate monopoly will slip back to the woeful inefficiency that it showed when jf hncl no ('ompetitors. I

Transport Regulation [22 OCTOBER} 19-:1:0.-1 (Compensation) Bill. 1173

am astounded that the Country party Go­vernment should sing the swan song of the road hauliers of this State. As Mr. Beckett has pointed out, the passing of this Bill will eliminate the motor haulier, who is doing a good job for the small Htan. The big owner will still have his motor trucks with which to compete with the Railway Department, and to carry his goods as cheaply as he can. The small storekeeper and the man on the land will be placed at a great disadvantage by the .adoption of this measun~.

The Government haH elaimed that com­pUlsion is not exercised under its proposals. but if there is nO compulsion, I do not know what it is. Let us take a concrete example. Let us suppose that three hauliers are operating on a certain route. Two of them so mismanage their businesses that they desire to cease operations, but the third wishes to continue his. Can w(~ imagine the Transport Regulation Board permitting that man to continue ~ All ~orts of pressure will be brought to bear on him to induce him to join ,he 0ther two firms and give the Railway Depart­ment a monopoly over that route. The G?vernment has introduced proposals thlJ.t wlll .not be for the well-being of the com­mnnity. When we agree to the Bill we shall ha ve placed in the hands of the Board and the Government power to in­fluence a man who is otherwise prepared to carryon his business. There is in the Bill a dangerous proviso to a clause sta~­ing that the hauliers must be unanimous before they can sell out. I feel that this Bill will do a grave disservice to the primary producers. Thousands of us have had our primary products trans­portro to the Melhourne markets by road llauliers. .

The Hon. J. A. KENNEDY.-Did the producers get their wheat carried by roao h~llliers ?

The Hon. P. P. INCHBOLD.-No, lmt we could have done so. There is no primary product that cannot be conveyed successfully by road transport. Every bag of wheat, every bag of manurc, every sheep, lamb, and bullock could be trans­port.cd just as cheaply as, and much more effi(']ently . than, on ~he railways, if the road haulIers were gIven the opportunity to do the job.

Sir GEORGE GouDIE.-They could not do long hauls of wheat.

The Hon. P. P. INOHBOLD.-It could be done with decent trucks. It is not only the rail freight that the farmer pays to have his wheat delivered on the railways, but also cartage from the farm and agents' commissions. All told, he pays 25s. a ton to have his wheat de­livered to the port to-day, and it could be done by road hauliers for lOs. a ton up to 200 miles, by means of properly constructed trucks. The Railway De­partment was relieved by Parliament of the burden of £30,000,000 of borrowed capital, and its finances were entirely re-adjusted. We were told that the rail­ways were then going to carryon in competition under existing conditions, give service and pay their way, but during the intervening period they have not paid their way. Rather have they gone back, and more borrowed money has been put into them, including millions of pounds from the unemployment relief tax. The Premier stated that no public works had been carried out with money from that source, but I know that a great deal of work done on the railways, if it had not been so provided for, would have had to be paid for out of Oonsolidated Revenue or loan funds. These were public works in the real sense of the word. All this has been going on, and now the taxpayer is to be asked to pay £110,000 to bolster up this State monopoly in the shape of our railway system.

Mr. Beckett has referred to the endea­vours of past Governments to make the railways pay. Men were brought from other parts of the world paid huge salaries, and given almost 'a free hand, but we have received neither service nor profit from the railways. This Bill is a definitely retrograde step. It will elimi­nate the little competition that keeps the railways up to the scratch, and take away from the primary producer the opportunity of choosing what form of transport he will use to deliver his goods. It will lay a burden upon the country to,,:nspeople by increasing their rail freIghts when this competition with the railway~ i~ eliminated. The public of AustralIa m general, and of Victoria in particula~, are paying too much, through excess freIghts and through lack of service to keep t?e railways system going. WhCl; the war IS over, as please God it win soon be, air transport will take from the rail­ways thousands of the passengers they a l'f'

1174 State Forests Loan rCOUNCI1.] .Application BiU.

carrying to-day, and road' transport by private cars alone will take many more.

I doubt whether we can bolster up the system much longer without a great in­crease of taxation, involving more bilfdens upon the producing public. I would rather see, as Mr. Beckett suggests, taxation in­creased on these vehicles, and let them run in competition with the railways, so that. we may find out what is the honest system of transportation for Victoria. Let us have a system that will give service, that will pay as it goes, and pay for its roads, and let us have proper scientific adjust­ment of motor taxation in order that we may achieve that end.

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

passed . through its remaining stages.

STATE FORESTS LOAN APPLIOATION BILL.

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instl'uction).-I move-

T~lat this Bill be now read a second time.

In the Bill it is proposed that expenditure shall be for indigenous forests £100,000~ and, for plantations of hardwoods, soft­woods, and acacias, £50,000. The Forests Department has already had granted to it £105,025 for the year 1940-41. The further loan authority is requested so that works in hand in the forests may be proceeded with when the present autho­rity is exhausted. Honorable members will recall that, when the bush fires tra­versed the State early last year, a large portion of the forest areas was denuded of· young growth and many thousands of thin-barked trees were killed. After that tragic occurrence, a Forests Bill was passed, and, under that Act, what is being done in the forests now follows largely the procedure laid down in the United States of America, Western Australia, and other progressive countries. Oertain pro­tected areas were defined in that legisla­tion, and provision was made for breaks to be cut through the forests, for look-outs, fire-fighting apparatus, and patrols to deal quickly with small fires. This money will be used to carry out the procedure as laid down in the latest· Act. That procedure was recommended by the Royal Oommis­~ion appointed to inquire into the causes of the fires of 1939. In addition, the Forests Commission has been exceedingly cAreful of the young growth that has been

developing. I understnnd that the young trees are growing well. They have to be taken care of and thinned out. The useless growth has to be destroyed, and proper care must be paid to the young trees, if we are to regain the condition

. of the forests prior to the' fires. An amount of £50,000 is to be spent

in p}'oviding nurseries, not 'Only for hard­wood, but also softwood trees, and in the culture of the softwood forests which have been planted, so that profitable growth may result. Oonservation work costs money. I recollect that years ago the annual vote to the. Forests Department was £40,000. That was when Mr. McNamara was Minister of Forests, and he thought his Department was well treated. But for many years now, the forests have been used as a means of providing labour for the unemployed, a~d large sums have been expended in pro-

. tecting, conserving, and improving those areas. The hardwoods now being cul­tivated by the Forests Oommission are the types that resisted the recent fires, namely, the grey box and iron bark. The trees with thin bark were killed. Unde~ the scheme assented to last session £450,000 was made available to the Forests Oommission to carry out work necessary to encourage sawmillers to operate in the forests and salvage dead timber. That scheme is proceeding, but it is Hot concerned with this Bill.

A portion of the sum of £50,000 men­tioned in the schedule will be used to defray the cost of .planting acacias. By that means the Forests Oommission hopes to obtain quantities of bark that will be of commercial value. The aim of the Commission is not only to regrow the forests, but also to conserve water supplies. If there is not a proper growth of trees in the forests, the water supplies will be detrimentally affected: Honorable mem­bers may be interested to learn that Victoria possesses 4,850,145 acres of permanent forest land, reserved per­manently under the Forests Act 1928. There are also 10,800,000 acres of unoc­(mpied Orown land in the State under the control of the Forests Oommission, which is responsible for the timber on the areas I have mentioned.

The total grant for forestry this year is £150,000. It is necessary to pass the Bill so that the work of the Forests Com­mission may continue. Well-grown

State Forest Loan [22 OCTOBER, 19-10.1 Application Bill. 1175

forests of hardwoods will be valuable be a sufficient return from the trees that assets for future generations. The present were planted 30 or 40 years ago to make generation will not again see forests unnecessary the expenditure of further ·equal to those that were destroyed by fire loan moneys to develop the forest areas. last year; but if the trees now growing The Hon. W. J. BECKETT (Melbourne are protected during the next 40 or 50 Province).-When a measure relating to years, the forests will have been the Forests Oommission is under con-rejuvenated. sideration, it is generally expected that _

The Hon. C. H. A, EAGER (East Yarra I should have something to say. "Mr. Province) .-A reasonable excuse for the Mc.,x amara and I have both held the further expenditure of £150,000 of loan P?rtfolio of ~i?ister of :Fol'ests. I occu­money is that it will be used for the. pled the posI~lOn for ~ore. t~an three creation of new assets, or the protection .ve~rs, and durlllg that time I trIed to O?­of existing assets. Although some part ~alll a general kn~wled.ge of forest condI­of this sum, strictly speaking, ought to ~lOns ~hl'oughont y lCt?~·Ia., 'Ve have to be~l' be spent out of current revenue-for m ~llnd t~at ~cIent.Ific !Ol'est cult~re IS

example, the amount necessary to give an mllovatlOn m. VlCt01'la. Mr. Iittard employment to otherwise unemployed ~·eferr~d. to the ll~come that we should men-in substance, the objects of the Bill ne derIVIng from timber planteu 40 ye~Hs can be regarded as being suitable for ago,. and spoke of the revenue bemg capital expenditure. obtamed from t~e reserves o~ the Ballarat

Water Trust. rhat authol'lty uses land Th~ Hon. A .. J. PIT~~RD (Ballarat rich enough to grow vegetables-it will

Promnce).-It IS surp1'lsmg to me that grow anything; but most of the land culti­the State forests have not reached a stage vated by the :Forests Commission is practi­in ~'hich they are self-supporting. A cally useless for any other purpose. If, consIderable n?-mber of the trees have 40 years ago, there had been an organiza­reached matul'lty, and ar.e 30, 40, or 50 tion on the lines of our present Forests .veal'S old. No doubt, tI~ber has. been Commission, under its present manage­sold for firewood, and the mIlls establIshed ment, the State would have had u. throughout the f?rest areas must be a valuable asset to-day. We have source of substa~tI~1 ~evenue to the State. spent hundreds of thousands of pounds I do not know If It IS the custo.m of the planting timber of a useless type Government to pay that money mto Oon- in localities where neither the rainfall solida~ed .Revenue. If it is, I contend nor the altitude warranted the expendi­that .It IS not the proper procedure. tUre. Some 40 or 50 years ago, we Sufi.1clent of that revenue should be ma~e planted the You Yangs with pinus avaI~able to do the worl~ now under dIS- insignis, one of the weeds of forest (!USSIon. In common WIth othe~ hono.1'- growth. It is true that that type grows able members, I have had expel'lence 1ll better in Australia than in its native relation to the growth and sale of timber habitat. The timber which is under the in the electorate. I represent: I have supervision of the Ballarat Water Trust f?und that certaIn types of tImbe~', pa.r- is grown on land worth £20 to £25 an tlCularly softwoods,. reach mat1!nty III acre. That is not a commercial proposi­about 30.years. It IS of substantlal value tion. Even when trees are grown under ('omn;erClally, and retur.ns more than those ('onditions, not more than 40 per suffiCIent to pay for a conSIderable amount cent. of saleable timber is recovered from of clearing and replanting. It is a pro"' the 100's. fitable proposition. The State forests TheoHon .. C. H. A. EAGER.-How did should have reached that stage. they get on in the You Yangs?

The Leader of the House has men- The Hon. W. J. BEOKETT.-Pinu.s tioned that £50,000 is required to be spent insign·is grown under ordinary Victorian on the culture of trees. The majority climatic conditions yielded only 20 per of the seedlings at present are self sown, cent. of merchantable timber, and about and they develop into better trees than 15 to 20 per cent. of scantling timber; seedlings raised in a nursery. We should the rest was rubbish. replant our forests in order to create an The Hon. A. J. PITTARD.-I have hcal'(I asset. I was hoping that there would that denied.

1176 State Forests Loan IOOUNCII··l Application Bill.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT.-That is possible, but the Ballarat Water Tl'11Rt

has grown trees on land suitable for growing cabbages or other garden produce. Thousands of pounds were spent in planting with pinus insignis the You Yang ranges, where the rainfall is approximately 18 inches a year. To grow any type of exotic timber successfully, one must plant it in an area that has from 30 to 35 inches of rain annually.

The Hon. A. J. PITTARD.-I consider that we are able to use between 70 and 80 per cent. of the timber cut.

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT.-I beg to differ. I could grow wheat in a garden, and, in proportion to the size of the plot, I would harvest many bushels to the acre; but if I planted 1,000 acres of the same seed wheat in the Mallee, I should prob­ably harvest nothing. An inspection of the Y ou Yang ranges was made, and I, as Minister in a Labour Govern­ment, realized how useless it was to continue to grow timber there. A small sawmill was erected, and all the timber was cut on the face, and yielded about 100,000 shooks; so there was some small return to the State. The :Forests Commission then decided to plant that country with wattle, which should have heen done years before.

Black wattle is one of the most profit­able or timbers that can be grown, be­cauSe under ordinary conditions a ni~e­year rotation of mature trees can be obtained. If a 100-acre plot were taken and divided into portions of 10 acres each, the planting could be 80

arranged that from now until time immemorial each of the 10-acre plots would mature successively in nine years from the time it was planted, and so yield a regular annual harvest. The wattles could be stripped, cut down, and replanted, and in due time be ready for a further harvest. Victorian black wattle makes one of the finest extracts in the world; the bark is immensely valuable, and the timber, after stripping, is eagerly sought after in Geelong and elsewhere, more especially for burning in bakers' ovens. The planting of pinus insignis was continued in several parts of the State, but, as the Minister of Forests at that time, I ordered the men to be with­drawn from that work. After I had vacaterl office, however, I think the men went back again.

The 11inister in charge of the BiH spoke about the cultivation of hardwoods. Although much can be done with exotic' timbers in Victorja, some of the finest hardwoods in. the world can be grown here. After a bush:6.re, nature provides the nursery, and the seedlings that come up are far better than any seedlings that can be grown artificially. Three years· after the 1926 fire, I saw mountain ash seedlings growing in the Upper Yarra: valley, in the hilly country near the Yarra Falls, as thick as reeds in a lake; they could have been transplanted in any part of Victoria. Although a return cannot be expected from these trees for many years, a long-range view of forestry cultivation should be adopted. The mountain ash is one of the finest hardwoods in the world, and it matures at about 70 to 75 years, but it yields merchantable timber after about 40 years. With the exception of the English oak, when mountain ash is processed, it make&. the finest of flooring timbers. It is the softest hardwood grown in Victoria r and has been used for a variety of pur­poses, apart from building. Woolly-butt has also been mentioned this evening;. it is a species similar to mountain ash. But there is no immediate return from these timbers. In all parts of the world, the old timbers are being cut, but they are not being replaced. In Tas­mania wonderful timber of natural growth, 150 years old, has been obtained, but it will never be replaced, and the great kauri pine forests of New Zealand are fast disappearing. In 'Victoria the old timber is being replaced by inferior timber, and the same applies to New Zealand and South Australia.

I have advocated the policy of growing better types of softwoods, because Vic­toria can grow any type of softwood that is found in the world. Some of the celebrated redwoods of California were growing when Moses was in the bulrushes. Redwoods, about 40 or 50 years old, are to be found at Beechworth; if forests of those trees had been planted 40 years ago the Forests Department, instead of asking for £150,000 a year, as it does now, would be contributing that amount to Consolidated Revenue. The finest timber in the world for building purposes is the Douglas fir, otherwise known as Oregon. I

State Forests Loan [22 OCTOBER, 1940.' Application Bill. 1177

have seen that timber growing in Oregon State, North America. In the corner of a small churchyard at Beechworth a Douglas fir is growing, about 40 to 50 years old, and that tree would be worth £40 to £50 if it were cut. It is regrettable that men in charge of forestry operations 40 or 50 years ago were not possessed with a desire to exploit the commercial possi­bilities of this species of timber. During my regime as Minister of Forests, tens of thousands of acres of better class soft­woods were planted. One of the first areas was at Stanley, and a flourishing forest grows there now. In 25 years' time that will yield a wonderful return, because there is a suitable rainfall to nourish the timber; and similar climatic conditions exist in the Otway ranges.

The Forests Commission, and the pres€nt Minister of Forests, deserve every commendation for their efforts to preserve timber in certain localities, where in years to come we shall be able to take peopl(' and show them the classes of timber we can grow. Some years' ago the British Forestry Commission, under the chair­manship of Lord Clinton, visited Victoria, and, as Minister of Forests, it was my privilege to give the visitors a first-hand impression of our forests. We visited the Cumberland district, and Lord Clinton said that, acre for acre, it was the most valuable area of country he had seen in any part of the world. I showed him how the timber was cut and processed. and I showed him the finished artie' Ie; and he said that from what he had been told by people in the Old Country, apart from English oak, there was no timber for flooring superior to our mountain ash. We also visited the old mining areas where, years ago, the timber had been cut on the face-grey box and iron bark-and by a regrowth of that timber, forests had been regenerated. Lord Clinton said that Victoria was one of the few countries in the world that had adopted that system, and had practically regrown from old stumps a better forest than nature had ever planted. The Minister of Forests, and the officers of the Forests Commission, are tree lovers, and they appreciate the scenic as well as the commercial value of trees. When one visits old Creswick and sees beautiful timber where once bare, gaunt, hungry mining dumps existed, one is convinced

that the money spent on afforestation ill that locality has been well·used, amI that the result achieved will always he an asset to the State.

Thf' HOll. PA{;L JONEH.-Is not timber being grown satisfactorily on the dredged lands in the Ovens Valley?

The Hon. W. J. BECKETT.-It is, to a limited extent. The Minister referred to the expenditure necessary to protect our forests from fires. The Government has introduced very useful legislation to provide protection for forest workers, but I have heard of a debatable proposal to register all those engaged in any work in the forests. There is much to commend the suggestion, but it is not desirable to introduce legislation that will hamper the worker and compel him to be almost a slave t~ his occupation. The prevention of forest fires is a difficult problem. The forest worker is not always responsible; the biggest menace to the forest is the 'grazier, coupled with the fact t~at the land adjacent to the forests IS held by graziers. The FOl'f'sts Dep~rtme~lt, through the Lands Department, IS gam­ing revenue from graziers, who use the floor of the forests for grazing purpose8. It must he realized, however, that it is a difficult rna tter to preserve the forests and allow grazing in them, even though fees are collected from graziers for that privilege. The tendency of the grazier is to provide for his stor.k, and he will burn off in season and out of season, and in that way he is a grave menace to the forests. Steps must be taken to deal with graziers. because they start 90 per cent. of the fires. I would not allow a grazier to operate in a forest area. The small sum received from that source by way of licence fees is not worth while. In a rather obscure work I read of a seriC'i' of experiments of an almost miraculom; character. It is suggested that these experiments may lead to a solution of the bush fire problem. Apparently a spetial gas contained in a bomb is dropped from an aeroplane on to the scene of the fire. When the bomb explodes, oxy­gen is removed from the air and the firf' goes out.

The Hon. A. J. PITTA RD.-It is like a fairy tale.

1178 State Forests Loan rCOUNCIL.] Application Bill;

The lIon. W. J. BEOKETT.-lt is, but we are in a progressive age. Things that were regarded' as fairy tales fifteen years ago are to-day accomplished facts. I cannot say what real value there is in the experiments to which I have referred, but it was pointed out in the book that if the invention was a success it was possible that the same type of bomb could be dropped on' a township, killing all its inhabitants. It is true that many inventions intended to benefit humanity arE' llsed finally for its destruction. In ('onclusion, may I say that I continue to take an active and keen interest in forest administration and am pleased to com­mend all those associated with the Forests Commission, from its chairman down to the humblest forest worker.

The Hon. P. J. CLAREY (Doutta Galla P7·ovince).-I support the measure and think it demonstrates the efficient policy now being pursued by the State for the development of forest areas. The Govern­ment's administration in this direction can be regarded as a long-term invest­ment that will prove profitable from the stand-point of the productivity of our forests, the conservation of water supply, and the general protection of the State against erosion. One question that arises in my mind is whether the amounts set out in the schedule to the Bill are suffi­cient for the purposes outlined. I have no doubt about the capacity of the Forests qommission to do valuable work, but I am deeply concerned about the problem of keeping the forest floors clean and of fire protection in the State generally. Frankly, I am rather alarmed about the present outlook.

About ten days ago I had occasion -to visit Yallourn and was amazed to find no fewer than 30 fires burning between Ber­wirk and Yallou~n, not more than 4 to 5 miles from the main road. Most of them were in forest lands. If that number of fires were burning in a Gippsland dis­trict on a warm day in October, when . apparently no one was taking any particu­lar interest in them-probably becaflse the district was regarded as one of the dampest in the State-what is likely to happen in th(l forcsts in the north and north-west parts of the State early next ,veal' if conditions similar to those ex­perienced at the beginning of 1939 arise? Townrn~ the fnn of the previous year

there was a drought. This year there has been very little rain, a great deal of the land is parched, and in the forest areas the timber and undergrowth are dry. Present indications are that, as summer progresses, temperatures will rise and all the elements favourable to the starting of bush fires will be present. When we have all these portents and signs early in October, what will happen in January, February, and March of next year?

The Hon. W. J. BEcKETT.-Perhaps what you saw between Berwick anel Yal10urn was merely burning off.

The Hon. P. J. CLAREY.-I am doubtful on that point. I should like to be assured that the lessons of the 1939 fires have led the Forests Commission and the Government itself to take the necessary precautions to ensure that the State is saved from a catastrophe similar to that of early 1939. I am not altogether satisfied that our fire protection measures have advanced so far as to enable such an assurance to be given. A few weeks ago the Minister of Forests said, in effect, that if a fire broke out this year in certain forest a'reas where young native timbers are growing, their destruction would mean their extinction in this State. Should that possibility become an actual fact the economic loss to the State would be such as we can ill afford to bear. I am also gravely concerned regarding the steps taken by the State for the protec­tion of the lives of the workers engaged in the forests. The last great bush fires demonstrated that mill owners had not taken satisfactory measures to protect mill hands, many of whom, as a conse­quence, lost their lives. As ~ read in the press recently that the Timber Workers' Union considered that proper dugouts had not been provided at certai.n mills, I wish to know' whethe;r the legis­lation passed last year is being enforced and whether, before the summer is well advanced, the Government will ensure that every mill owner operating in a forest area provides adequate dugouts for his employees.

.The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-If any mills fail to comply with the legislation the owners may find themselves faced with a charge of manslau~hter.

IncorM Tax [22 OCTOBER} 1940.] (Ra,tes) Bill. 1179

. The Hon. P . • T. 'CLAREY.-I agree. Eut even if a mill owner is prosecuted for manslaughter that will give precious little consolation to dependants who lose their breadwinners.

The Hon. C. H. A. EAGER.-The Go­vernment hopes there will be some pressure on the conscience of the mill owners.

The Hon. P. J. OLAREY.-I should prefer pressure by the Government on the mill owners to provide dugouts so that the forest workers may be given some chance of saving their lives should bush fires occur again in the near future. I sound this note of warning because the present circumstances seem to suggest the approach of conditions similar to those of early 1939. I'should like to feel that the Government, in co-operating with the Forests Commission, was grappling with the situation and ensuring effective compliance with the law.

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

passed through its remaining stages.

ADJOURNMENT.

Sir JOHN HARRIS (Minister of Public Instruction).-(By leave.)~I move­

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until Tuesday, October 29.

The motion was agreed to.

The House ad,iourned ~t 10.15 p.m. until Tuesday, October 29 ..

LEGISLATIVE .ASSEJ\fBLY. TUEsday, October 22, 194-0.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater) took the chair at 3.43 p.m., and read the prayer.

AUDITOR-GEN~RAL'S REPORT.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater) presented the Treasurer's statement of the receipt.s and expenditure of the Consoli­dated Revenue and other moneys for the year ended June 30, 1940, accompanied by the report of the Auditor-General and by the documents specified in section 55 of the Audit Act.

It was ordered that the report be laid on the table, and be printed.

INCOME TAX (RATES) BIL]~ . Mr.' A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and

Treasurer) .-1 move-That this. Bill be now read a second time.

This measure provides for the rates of tax for the financial year 1940-41, and its passing is essential to the issue of assessments as income. tax rates are fixed for only one year. The rates are tIl(' same as last year's, and the passing of the Bill will be merely 'a re-enactment of the present provisions. The collections on account of income tax-including the special tax-in recent years have been: -1936-37, £3,299,440; 1937-38, £3,976,958; 1938-39, £4,370,656; and 1939-40, £4,738,000. The estimated collection for the current financial year 1940-41 is £4,700,000.

Clause 2 is the general charging sectioll imposing the rates for the financial year 1940-41. Clause 3 and the first schedule provide the personal exertion rate. This commences at 7 253/1,000 pence and rises uniformly by 3/1,000 pence to 14! pence at £2,500. It then rises b~· 1/625. pence to 18! pence at £5,000. From this point it rises by 3/5,000 pence to 21! pence at £10,000, and thiR rate is maintained for all incomes over £10,000. The property rate is provided for i.n clause 4 and the second schedule. ThIS commences at 14 3/625 pence and rises uniformly by 3/625 pence to 26 pence at £2,500. It then rises by 7/2,500 pencE' to 33 pence at £5,000. From this point it rises by 7/5,000 pence to 40 pence at. £10,000, and this rate applies to all in­comes over £10,000.

Clause 5 and the third schedule Het out the rate to be applied to composite in­comes. The existing principle in this regard is being continued-that the rate for each class of income is the same as that which would be applicable if the total income were from that class. Th(· rate of tax on companies is covered by clause 6 and the fourth schedule. The general ra te provided is 24 pence; -mutual life assurance companies, how­ever, benefit by a much lower rate-12 pence in the £1. The rate of tax payable on interest paid by companies to absentees is 16 pence.

The special income tax is dealt with in clause 7 and the fifth schedule. No alteration in its Incidenre 01' 1'ateR nns

1180 Administration ana Probate i ASSEMBLY.-I Duties Bill.

been made. As will be seen in clause 7, a married person, or a widower, or widow with a child under sixteen years of age, is exempt up to £2~O, and all other, persons are exempt up to £104. Honor­able members will recollect that the basis of the special income tax is similar to the unemployment relief tax in that there is no statutory exemption and concessional deductions are not allowable. The measure provides for no increases or decreases in last year's rates.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-Why are you so modest?

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.--':'I do not think it advisable to increase the income tax or any other form of taxation more frequently than is absolutely essential. At the present time, when money is re­quired by the Commonwealth Govern­ment for defence purposes, the State should be content to allow the existing rates of taxation to remain.

On the motion of Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak),' the debate was ad­journed until next day.

ADMINISTRATION AND PROBATE DUTIES BILL.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) .-1 move-

That this Bill be now read a second timt:.

This Hill is for the purpose of continuing the existing rates of probate duty. The basic rates, including a 10 per cent. in­crease in 1929, are incorporated in the principal Act. An additional duty of 10 per cent., imposed in Part III. of the Finance Act 1930, No. 3889, has been renewed each year and expires o,n the 31st of December, 1940. This measure proposes its continuance to the 31st of December, 1941. The collections on account of probate duty for the last five years were as follows: - 1935-36, £1,340,701; 1936-37, £1,509,693; 1937-38, £1,431,057; 1938-39, £1,374,355; and 1939-40, £1,456,752.

Honorable members will observe that although the rate of duty has remained constant during the five-year period, the amount of the annual collections has varied considerably. This is obviously due in the first place to the' varying number of large estates assessed, and secondly, to fluctuations in the value of all estates submitted for assessment of probate duty. The rlifficulty in eRtimat-

ing the annual col~ections for Budget ~urposes will, therefore, be appreciated. The amount to be collected on account of probate duty fO,r this financial year, assuming the proposals in the Bill are enacted, is estimated at £1,456,200, which is practically equivalent to the actual sum received during last financial year.

Receipts from probate duty during the first three months of the current financial year amoUlited to £325,021, being £53,952 more than the amount received for the corresponding period last year. Probate duty collections are not received at a uniform rate throughout the year, but it is considered that the estimate of £1,456,200 for the year' will be realized. This will be contingent upon the con­tinuance of the present rates, and clause 2 of this Bill achieves that object by sub­stituting the words " forty-one" for "forty," relating to the calendar year. The Bill is, therefore, a re-enactment of existing legislation, and I commend it to the House.

On the motion of Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. (Toorak), the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, October 29.

HAWTHORN RETURNED SAILORS AND SOLDIERS TRUST BILL. The Order of the Day for the second

reading of this Bill was read. The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater).

-I have examined this Bill, and am of opinion that!it is a private Bill.

Mr. BAILEY (Attorney-General).-­In deference to your ruling, Mr. Speaker, and by leave, I move-

That all the Private Bill Standing Orders be dispensed with, and that this Bill be treated as a public Bill.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (CoZlingwood).­I have no intention of raising an objec­tion to the motion, but I would point out that the usual procedure in these cases is for the Minister to move that all Stand­ing Orders relating to private Bills be dispensed with, except those relating to the payment of fees. I am wondering why in this instance the matter of fees is being 'waived.

Mr. BAILEY (Attorney-General).­This Bill relates to land set aside for the benefit of returned soldiers of Hawthorn, and, a~ that is so, the Government thinks it would be expedient not to insist on the pa:vmcnt of fees.

Hawthorn Returned Sailors [22 OCTOBER, 1940. J and Soldi~rs Trust Bill. 1181 '

The SPEAKER.-The procedure ref('rr~d to by the honorable member for Collingwood is not general. A Bill may be deemed by the Speaker, on examina­tion, to be a private Bill; but it may affect a variety of interests, and the House, in such circumstances, has usually decided that the Private Bill Standing Orders relating to the imposition of fees be dispensed with.

:M:r. TUNNEcLIFFE.-The explanation of the Minister is quite satisfactory.

The motion was agreed to. Mr. BAILEY (Attorney-General).­

r move-That this Bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this Bill, as indicated by its title, is to vest in the Oity of Haw­thorn certain property held in trust by certain trustees for the purpose of pro­viding a club for Hawthorn returned sailors and soldiers, and to transfer the powers, functions, and 0 bliga tions of the trustees to the council of that city. The property that is to be transferred under the Bill is held under a trust deed dated the 12th day of February, 1924. In or about the year 1923, an unincorporated body, known as the Hawthorn Soldiers Citizens League, which is now no longer in existence, raised a sum of about £4,500 for the purpose of providing a sailors' and soldiers' club. Of that amount, about £1,600 was subscribed by certain donors, whose names are set out in the trust deed, to pay for a piece of land with a building upon it in Glenferrie-road, Hawthorn; the Council of the City of Hawthorn contributed £500; a sum of about £100 was contributed by residents of the City of Rew; and the balance was provided principally by residents of the Oity of Hawthorn. A body of trustees was set up, representative of the particular donors of the £1,600, of the Hawthorn City Council, and of the soldiers and citizens in the Hawthorn Soldiers Citizens League. The land and' building in Glenferrie-road were purchased and vested in those trustees, and the building was adapted for use as a club, and furnished out of the balance of the moneys so raised.

Under the trust deed, the trustees agreed to provide and maintain the pre­mises as a club for the use of Hawthorn returned sailors and soldiers for as long as they, the trustees, should consider such a club necessary, and, if and when they

Se8sion 1940.-[51]

should consider the maintenance of such a club no longer necessary, they would hold the trust premises and income for the purpose of providing scholarships for the children of sailors and soldiers, giving precedence to the children of Hawthorn returned sailors and soldiers, but with a proviso allowing of the expenditure of a portion of the trust funds on the children of Rew returned sailors and soldiers. The trust deed permitted the trustees to enter into any agreement with any cor­porate or unincorporate body of returned sailors and soldiers concerning the management and conduct of the trust premises. In exercise of that power, the trustees entrusted the management and conduct of the trust premises to the Haw­thorn branch of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers' Imperial League of Australia, and that arrangement is still in operation. The trust premises in Glenferrie-road in­('lude a confectionery shop and 'dwelling, which have been occupied at a rental of £1 a week by the secretary of the branch, under an arrangement made under the trust deed, whereby he has been caretaker for the whole of the premises and the supplier of such refreshments as are required from time to time by the club.

At the present time, the property governed by the trust deed 'consists of the premises in Glenferrie-road, to which reference has been made, and the furni­ture and fittings thereof, including two billiard tables and a piano, and about £50 in cash. There are no liabilities, and the only revenue is the sum of £1 per week paid as rental by the secretary. The building is very old, and is now in need of extensive repairs and alterations, which will cost Rome hundreds of pounds, and ill order that the club run by the Hawthorn branch of the R.S.S.I.L.A. may continue to function, the trustees have asked the Hawthorn City Council to undertake the necessary renovations. This the council has agreed to do, pro­vided that the trust property is trans­ferred to the City of Hawthorn. The trustees have at present no power to transfer their trusts or trust property to the council, 1101' has the council in law any power to accept such a transfer, though both the trustees and the conncil a.re willing that such transfer should take place, and the Hawthorn branch of the League also desireR it.

1182 Business of rASSEMBLY·l the House.

The Bill will give effect to the wishes of all the persons concerned by vesting the property in the Oity of Hawthorn, by transferring the trusts to the council of the city, and by permitting the council to expend out of the municipal fund of the city such sums as it considers neces­sary from time to time for rebuilding, renovating, repairing, and maintaining the building, and fitting and furnishing the same, and maintaining the fittings and furnishings.

Sub-clause (1) of clause 1 sets out the short title of the Bill. Sub-clause (2) of clause 1 defines "trust"· as including "term condition stipulation and provi­sion." The purpose of this is to make the Bill consistent in its wording with the terms of the trust deed. Olause 2 vests the property, real and personal, in the mayor, councillors, and citizens of the Oity of Hawthorn, and the powers and functions of the trustees in the council of that city, and discharges the present trustees from their obligations under the trust. Olause 3 gives the neces­sary authority to the mayor, councillors, and citizens to hold the property subject to the trusts, and to the council to carry ont the terms of the trusts. Olause 4 authorizes the Registrar of Titles to register the mayor, councillors, and citi­zens of the Oity of Hawthorn as the proprietors of the trust premises.

Olause 5 authorizes the Hawthorn Oity Council to· expend moneys out of the municipal fund for or towards rebuilding, renovating, repairing, and maintaining the said premises; fitting, furnishing, and equipping the same; and maintaining the fittings, furnishings, and equipment for the purposes of the trusts. Clause 6 con­tains a saving of existing rights, and is intended to preserve continuity of the existing arrangements with the Hawthorn branch of the Returned Sailors and Sol­diers' Imperial League of Australia and with the secretary of the club, who is also the caretaker and the proprietor of the confectionery shop which forms part of the premises. The purpose of the Bill is to give legislative enactment to an arrange­ment made by the parties named in the Bill.

On the motion of Mr. MIOHAELIS (St. Kilda) , the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, October 29.

Mr. Bailey

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier al!d

Treasurer).-I move-That the consideration of the remaining

Orders of the Day, Government Business, be postponed until after the Order of the Day·, General Business.

The object of the motion is to enable consideration to be given to a private Bill entitled the Health (Amendment) Bill, shown on the Notice Paper in the name of the honorable member for N orthcote. Its purpose is to provide for the removal of the ban on the sale of cattle for human consumption from the Metropolitan Farm, Werribee. The Bill has been passed by the Legislative Oouncil, and its passage has created considerable interest. I feel that it should now be dealt with by the Assembly. It is only fair that members of this House should be given an oppor­tunity of expressing their views and recording a decision on the important principle involved.

Mr. Or_D.-Honorable members should have the right to record a vote against the Bill.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-That is so. Not only is the Leader of the Labour party particularly anxious to submit the Bill for the consideration of this House, but I am sure the Leader of the Oppo­sition is also anxious to express his views on it. It has been mentioned to me by certain members that they think it is not right at this juncture to seek a decision on this private Bill. The Government, however, desires a decision on it, and I am sure that the public wish to hear the views of members and to have a decision recorded. I go beyond that, and say that not only is it not fair to Parliament but also it is not fair to the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works that a decision on the Bill should be held in abeyance. All things considered, I take this to be an appropriate time to seek· an expression of opinion on the Bill. If a decision is not obtained on it in the way I am now providing­after an explanation of its contents and a full discussion by the House-probably an opportunity will be sought to test the House in another way, either by an honor­able member submitting a motion for the adjournment of the House or by moving, at the appropriate time, for the reduction of a specific item of the Estimates.

Business of [22 OCTOBER} 1940.1 the House. 1183

To my mind, the proper way to deal with the subject is to enable honorable members to argue as they think fit for and against the Bill, to have the whole case properly presented, and to enable the House to give a con­sidered vote. Whatever decision is arrived at to-day, I hope it will mean that the issue has been settled for all time. In the public interest, the Government does not desire that the subject of the ban should bc raiscd from time to time in Parlia­ment, or hy representatives of the Mel­bourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, or by way of letters in the press. The correct course is for Parliament to express its opinion whether the ban on the sale of cattle for human consumption from the Metropolitan Farm at Werri­bee should be removed or continued; and the view expressed by Parliament should be final and conclusive.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­I must confess that I have listened to the Premier's remarks with considerable astonishment.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-And so say all of us!

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The Bill to which the Premier proposes now to subordinate all Government business is identical with one already appearing on the Notice Paper under " General Business-N otices of Motion," in the name of the Leader of the Labour party. When the House assembled this after­noon, the Premier moved, as usual this session, that" General Business-Notices of :M:otion "-which is private members' business-should be set aside to give priority to Government business. After that motion had been agreed to, three small Government Bills were introduced. The Premier now proceeds to scrap the balance of "Government Business­Orders of the Day" for the time being, to enable the House to consider a small private member's Bill which has been sent here from the Council. It is a con­troycrsial measure, and I shall not deal with its subject matter at this stage. I understand that the Premier and the members of his party will oppose the Health (Amendment) Bill when it is brought on. But if the honorable gentle­man had not moved the motion which I am now debating there would have been no necessity for the Premier and his

party colleagues to oppose anything of the kind. The legislation at present on the statute-book would remain.

Mr. A. A. DUN~TAN.-I thought you desired the Bill.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I am now speaking about the Premier's method of dealing with this matter. If anyone is responsible for what may happen as the result of a debate and a vote on the Health (Amendment) Bill, it is the Pre­mier, because he has opened the door for a debate on the Bill. My views on the subject are well known, and will be given a t the proper time.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-I think you will be responsible for what happcn~ if you vote for the Bill.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.--There is one man, and one man only, who can permit this Bill to be discussed in this House, and that man is the Premier. As the Leader of the House, he must take responsibility for making the debate possible at this stage.

Mr. LIND.-Do you not think we should know where members stand on this question?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The . Minister of Lands thinks we ought to know where members stand. We'do know, definitely; the members of the Govern­ment party have what they want. Why should the Government give anybody an opportunity to take something away that it desires to retain? The whole procedure is extraordinary, and requires a more complete explanation than has been given by the Premier.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-The trouble is that the United Australia party is divided on the question, and you do not want to show your hand.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I have no doubt that each member of the party of which I am Leader will, as an individual, disclose his views on this Bill. The party is not discussing the matter now, but as the Leader of the Opposition I am taking objection to the Premier subordinating important public business to a private Bill, which is already on the Assembly Notice Paper, but which has actually been already postponed by him. One private Order of the Day has b'3£>n specially selected to be dealt with to-day~ and I, with many other people, want to know why. I wonder whether Bupportct'F

1184 Business of fASSEMBLY·l the House.'

of the Government understand exactly why the Premier proposes to make pos­sible a debate on this subject at this stage. Many rumours have been circulating in eonnection with how members propose to vote.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-The Health (Amendment) Bill has already been dealt with in the Council.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I am aware of that, but I am not aware that because a Bill has been dealt with in another place the Premier considers that it must be debated in this Chamber.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-We must show respect for another place!

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Hearing that comment, I feel like the man in the story, who said, "Don't make me laugh -:-1 have a split lip!" The time is not opportune for a debate on this private Bill to take precedence of other private members' business as well as Government husiness. I took no exception to the wmal motion of the Premier to enable Government business to precede general husiness because I had acquiesced in the pEl ssing of a similar motion day after day throughout this session. I am not· B party to this present procedure. When the Bill comes before the House, as I have no doubt it will, we shall be able to express our views on it.

Mr. LIND.-The Government cannot be held responsible for the submission of the Bill.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - The Premier and his supporters are respon­sible because they have made it possible for the debate to take. place.

Mr.' A. A. DUNSTAN.-Why are you apologizing for your attitude?

Sir STANLEY A.RGYLE.-I am not. I ask, why is the Premier accepting the responsibility of permitting the forthcom­ing private member's Bill to be debated ~

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I know that you favour the principle of the Bill; there­fore, you should be given an opportunity to debate the measure.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I am not blaming the Leader of the Labour party, whose attitude is legitimate and under­standable; but I cannot understand the attitude of the Premier in allowing the measure to be debated-that is, UlJess he bas an jdea how honorable members will vote.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Does anyone understand the Premier?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I do not wish to' discuss that.

Mr. TUNNEcLIFFE.-The· Premier is one of the world's mysteries.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I repeat that I am surprised at the action of the Premier. He will be responsible for what may happen.

Mr. HOLLWAY (Ballarat).-I support the remarks of the Leader of the Opposi­tion. This is a peculiar method of con­ducting the government of the country.

Mr.CREMEAN.-This is a peculiar method of showing your approval of the Bill.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-My attitude to the Bill will be' made clear. To calm the fears of the honorable member for Clifton Hill, I can now inform him that I am opposed to it. It is peculiar that the Government should give the Leader of the Labour party an opportunity to move the second reading of a Bill which, in the opinion of the Premier, will have a disastrous effect on a rural industry.

Mr. GAIN.-Tha t was not the reason advanced b.y the Premier.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-I submit that that is the real reason.

Mr. CAIN.-The Premier has said that it is a health Bill.

Mr. HOLL"\VAY.-It is the health of an industry that is at stake. The Premier has gone out of his way. to postpone a number of important Bills to be sub­mitted by private members. One of these is to be introduced by the honorable member for Flemington; it refers to the pl'ovision of employment for youths in this community.

Mr. HOLLAND.-It is an important Bill; but it is up in the moon now!

Mr. HOLL W A Y.-It . may not be as high as the moon, but apparently it will not be debated during this session. The Premier has announced that he is the most democratic member of the House, and we must take his word for that. I should have thought the Premier would have been concerned with the employment of the youth of the community, and that he would have said, "I am in favour of the proposed Bill, and I shall give the honor­able member for Flemington an oppor­tunity to bring it forward."

Hnsiness of [~~ OCTOBER. 1940.1 the House. 1185

Mr. CAIN.-In this case, the Premier lR looking after the health of the Government!

Mr. HOLLWAY.-There is no doubt [l bout that. If the Premier had said to llw honorable member. for Flemington, "I believe in the principle of your Bill and I shall allow you to bring it forward, because something should be done to assist youths who are unemployed," the House would have commended him. But in this ('ase the Premier says, "Here is a Bill to which I am entirely opposed. I do not believe in it, but I shall give honorable members an opportunity to pass it."

Mr. McKENzIE.-That shows how democratic the Premier is!

Mr. HOLLWAY.-It does. }Ir. OREMEAN. - The other House

passed the Bill. Mr. HOI,LWAY.-The Premier has

neyer beel! a respecter of the other House, and I do not think he ever will be; no doubt, that feeling is reciprocated towards the Premier by members of the other House. The fact that the Bill has come from the Oouncil does not mean anything. In the items of "General Business­Notices of Motion," the Leader of the Labour party is listed to introduce a Bill having the same subject matter as the Bill from the Oouncil which he has sponsored in this Ohamber; but there has he en no suggestion from the Leader of the La bour party that his own Bill should be brought forward. The Premier again has turned one of his spectacular somersaults.

Mr. OAIN. - V{e out-manoeuvred the Premier by getting the Bill through the other House and bril1ging it here.

MI'. HOLLWAY.-That kind of thing has to be done very deviously indeed to mislead the Premier. ,Vhat is the real reason' for bringing forward this Bill? Is it that the Premier, as a democrat, desires the House to discuss a measure to which he is entirely opposed?

~Ir. TUNNECLIFFE.-I really think he has the numbcrs to beat it. That is what he thinks.

Mr. OLDHAM.-The Labour party will see that there is a majority in favour of th e measure.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-It is unusual for the Premier to allow the Leader of another party to take the affairs of the House out of the hands of the Government. That, however, is what the Premier is doing here, in effect. The reason is that the

La bour party at last is beginning to dis­play independence. I t may be due to the resuscitating presence of the honora hIe member f01: Collingwood, who may have " gingered up" the party. He may have pointed out some of the wrongs they have b('cn suffering. He has been leading a sort of semi-respectable revolution.

1\fr. TUNNECLIFFE.-I thought you were . about to say, "a semi-respectable life," and I was blushing.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-I do not know whether we could accuse the honorable member of that, but we will let it pass. The Labour party has reached the stage of saying that it wants action. Oonferences have been held, and the Australian Labour party has decided that the beef ban should be lifted. No doubt, the honorable mem­ber for Collingwood has been prodding fellow members of the party into activity, saying, "We should do something about the beef ban." The result has been that the Leader of the Labour party, who is generally quiet and even-tempered, has become impressed with the injustice of this ban. He has approached the Premier and has said, "It is either the beef ban or you for it!"

Mr. OLDHAM.-It is a question of who goes into the boiling pot!

Mr. HOLLWAY.-Yes-the beef or the Premier! With such a choice before him, honorable members know the Premier well enough to understand that the beef industry will be sacrificed. The Premier will not be affected. He would be quite prepared to sacrifice this important in­uustry, or risk its future, if the non­introduction of this Bill meant his defeat. Therefore, 1 say the proposed Bill is a piece of political' chicanery. I do not believe there is any great demand for it.

Mr. OLD.-N ow you are talking sense! Jlr. HOLL"\VAY.-I always talk

sense. There is no great demand for this measure, and there is no justification for the Goyernment's postponement of the list of Goyernmellt business on to-day's N otire Paper in order to give the Leader of the Labour party an opportunity to introduce a private Bill that the Govern­ment whole-heartedly opposes: The forms of the House are being abused, and the Government has not acted in a right and proper manner. If the Government thinks the Bill should be introduced, then let it introduce the Bill. It should be flOnest enough to say it agrees ,vith tho

1186 Health r ASSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

Bill, and that, as a Government, it intends to bring in the measure. To allow it to be introduced in the round­about fashion that the Premier is now permitting, indicates not only political dishonesty on the part of the Government, but a shirking of its duty as well.

Mr. OLD.-YOU should withdraw that statement.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-I shall withdraw' nothing.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-You are annoyed because you are voting in one direction and your Leader in another.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-My Leader and I can settle our own differences. What the Premier is concerned about is that on this occasion he is voting in one direc­tion and his leader is voting in another. The Premier's lc-~ader, at the moment, is the Leader of the Labour party. I repeat that the Premier is prepared to sacrifice a great industry merely to preserve his Government.

The House divided on the motion (the Hon., W. Slater in the chair)-

Ayes 4] Nors 11

:Majority for the, motion 30

AYES.

Mr. Allnutt " Bailey " Barry " Borthwick

Mrs. Brownbill Mr. Cain

" Cameron " Cook, A. E.

(Bendigo) " Cook, F. A.

(Benalla) " Coyle " Cremean " D(,lligan " Diffey " Dodgshun " Dunstan, A. A.

(Korong «; E'hawlc) " Dunstone, W.

(Rodney) " Field " Hayes

Hodson Hogan

" Holden

Mr. Holland " Hollins " Hyland " Jewell " Kirton " Lemmon " Lind " Mackrell " Martin ., McDonald, Alex.

(Stawell «; Ararat) " McKenzie ., Mullens " Murphy ., 'l\'futton .. Old ., Paton " Reid .. 'runnecliffe.

l'elle1's:

1\11'. Lamb McDonald. J. G. B.

(Goulburn Valley)

NOES.

Sir Stanley Argyle Mr. Cumming " Dillon " Ellis " Everard " Macfarlan

nIr. Oldhalll " White " Zwar.

Tellers: Mr. Holiway " Michaelis.

HEALTH (.c'l.MEND11ENT) BILL. Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-I move­That this Bill be now read a second time.

The Bill, which is to amend the Health Act, deals with. a question that has evoked much discussion in this House for some years. I intend to submit the measure fairly, and irrespective of side issues, and I shall endeavour to devote my attention to the alleged sole consideration on which it rests, namely, the health of the community. I trust that honor­able members will do likewise even though the Government has shown op­position to the subject with which the measure deals. When speaking on the Health (Amendment) Bill on the 11th of August, 1938, the Premier, as reported in Hansard, stated-

As I said to a deputation some time ago, in this matter the only concern of the Govern· lllent is that of public health.

The Government has manifested its C011-

cern by maintaining a restriction on the use for human consumption of beef raised on the :Metropolitan Farm at Werribee. If we debate this matter on its merits, and in the manner in which the House appears to be desirous of dealing with it to-day, I feel sure that a satisfactory con­clusion will be reached. There are honor­able members present to-day who have been absent for some time, mainly 011

account of indifferent health; they are in their places now for reasons best known to themselves. To those members who are present in the House in season and out of season, while all classes of legislative proposals are discussed, the Bill before us has no outstanding import­ance compared with other Bills, but to some members, and their constituents. this measure appears to be one of specia I interest.

Although I shall base my arguments on the sole consideration of the health of the community, there are other members who will oppose the measure on othel' grounds. They may oppose it for economic reasons. They may think some restriction should be placed 011 a publi(', or semi-public, enterprise responsible fol' the est a blishment of a farm in the metropolis, which, up till 1933, had supplied more than 100,000 head of the primest cattle that ever entered the Victorian markets, and had provided the

Health [22 OCTOBER) 1940."1 (Amendment) Bill. 1187

primest ca.ttle placed on the world's lll:trk('ts. ]Juring the long period of years ,dlCn beef from the Metropolitll1l .Farm -the best beef in Australia-was con­sumed by the people of the metropolis: there \vas no talk about the danger of infection of the cattle bv beef measles. The cattle were slaughter~d and the car­casses examined under the strictest super­vision, and the public of Melbourne re­garded the beef as of high quality. However, the people who, later, posed as (·hampions of the health of metropolitan residents did not eat that beef.

The pure foods laws of Victoria have been designed to ensure that the best quality type of food shall be manufac­hIred or otherwise provided for the con­~umers, and they make no discrimination between the metropolis and the country districts. Unfortunately, that condition does not apply in the case of meat which is a staple food. In more than 90 per cent. of the area of the State there is no supervision of meat. Supplement­ing that statement, I shall quote the names of a number of large towns where thore are no regulations in force govern­ing the supervision of meat. Those towns are shown on the map which 1 display, and I recommend the Premier to have the map hung in the room of the Country party and reproduced for the information of the people of the State. Tt shows that in 58 towns with popula­tions of more than 1,000, there is no system of meat inspection. In other words, meat affected by anyone of the !) 1 diseases listed in the health regula­tions relating to meat supervision may pnss into human consumption in those towns without inspection.

Mr. CAII1.J<JRoN.-Every shire has its health officer.

Mr. PAToN.-Stock inspectors visit ('very country town.

Mr. CAIN.-There may be health officers and stock inspectors, but there are no qualified meat inspectors at those 58 towns. The facts speak for themselves. Outside the metropolitan area, the only places in Victoria where there is inspection of meat before it goes into human consumption are, Mil­dura, Shepparton, Horsham, Hamilton, Ararat, Bendigo, Ballarat, Colac, Warrnambool, Portland, Morwell, Sale, and a portion of Strathfieldsaye

shire. I shall not give the names of all the 58 towns in Victoria with a population of more than 1,000 where there is no meat inspection; I shall give only the names of the towns with a population of more than 2,000, and it ,vill be noted that most of them are in electorates represented by mem­bers of the Country party. One is Bairnsdale, with a population" of 4,000. I understand that part 0.£ the town is in the electorate of the Deputy Premier. Then there is Beechworth, with a population of 2,600.

Mr. DODGSHuN.-ls not Beechworth in the province of the Minister of Public Health ~

Mr. CA.IN.-It is represented by a mem bel' of the Country party in this House. Bellalla, with a population of 4,000, has no meat inspection, nor has Cainperdown, with a population of 3,600, or Eaglehawk, with a population of 3,800, adjoining the City of Bendigo.

Mr. A. A. DUNsTAN.-Cattle are not fattened on a sewage farm at Eaglehawk.

Mr. CAIN.-Cattle may not be fattened on a sewage farm, but cattle slaughtered there for human consumption may be affected with tuberculosis or other diseases which are more in­jurious to health than beef measles. I shall not pay any attention to a.ny member un the Ministerial back bench who contends that tuberculosis is not a more serious disease than beef measles, unless he produces definite evi­dence to support his statement. Other towns which have no meat inspection are Korumburra, population 3,000; Swan Hill, 4,800; Terang, 2,300; Traralgon, 3,000; Wangaratta, 5,200; Warrackna­beal, 2,900; Warragul, 3,200; Werribee, 2,500; W odonga, 2,900; W onthaggi, 8,300; and Yarrawonga, 2,300. The quotation of that list of towns reveals an almost tragic position. There is no in­spection of meat passing into human con­sumption in those large towns and a number of smaller ones. The situation can only be fully realized whel;l. we bear in mind that in a meat supervision area every beast slaughtered is inspected by competent meat inspectors, and carcasses infected with disease are not allowed to go into human consumption. Before the ban was imposed, every beast from

1]88 Health f·\.8SEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

the Metropolitan Farm was subject to in­spection after slaughter. The great majority of the beasts were killed at the metropolitan abattoirs because they were bought either for consumption in the metropolis or for export.

lvIr. W. DUNsToNE.-They could he p.urc~ased for slaughteil' in a country dIstrIct.

lvII'. CAIN.-They could, but I believe that the great majority were slaughtered at the metropolitan abattoirs. If the view is advanced that any cattle raised on the Metropolitan Farm and purchased for slaughter in the country should be subject to inspection there, I should be prepared to agree that a regulation to that effect should be made to apply. The Premier stated, by interjection, that cattle are not grazed on a sewage farm at ~aglehawk. I desire to direct his atten­tion to the Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary SC'ience published by the De­pal'tment of Agriculture in the Union of South Africa. The statement is made in this publication that beef measles are found ill cattlf-' which have not been grazed on a sewage area. The statement is made that beef measles ar(l found in cattle grazed on the plains of the Transvaal. The fact appears to be established beyond doubt that beef measles are not confined to cattle grazed on sewage areas.

The regulations under our Health Act lay down the procedure to be adopted by meat inspectors in the examination of c~rcasses at the abattoirs, and the condi­tIons under which they must condemn car­casses. When a carcass is found to be infed('d with one of a number of specified diseas('s, the whole carcass must be con­demnp(l. lio,v can this system be given effect to in tlIp portion of the State where there is no meat inspection? In the absence of meat inspectors, there is no guarantee that hundreds of head of cattle . suffering from, say, tuberculosis-the most prevalent amI dangerous disease in cattle-do not g'o into human consumption. No move has been made by the residents of some large towns, where there is no meat inspec­tion, to have the scope of the meat inspec­tion regulations under the Health Act extended to those towns, but they appear to be keenly interested in the need for the most rigorous inspection of all meat consumed ill the mC'tropolitan area.

Honorable members are aware that a compensation scheme is provided un~er the authority of the Cattle CompensatIOn Act. Figures which I have obtained show that during the year ended the ~Oth ~f June last the number of cattle In V lC­

toria destroyed because of tuberculosis was 5,023, and CO,mpensation was paid on that number of cattle. Honorable mem­bers arc aware of the usual procedure. If an owner of cattle suspects that a beast is suffering from, say, tuberculosis, one of the stock inspectors of the Depart­ment of Agriculture is called in. In the event of tuberculosis being diagnosed, the value of the beast is agreed upon, and the owner receives seven-eighths of its value as compensation after It. has bee11 dest.royed, The owner of a. heast slaughtered for human consumptIOn at the mf'tropolitan abattoirs and found to have been suffering from tuber­culosis is entitled to receive as com­pensation the actual price paid for t.he animal; therefore, a butcher who buys a run of cows or bullocks, and has them slaughtered at the metropolitan abatto~rs, will obtain from the Cattle CompensatIOn Fund the full amount he paid for any beast condemned provided it was suffer­j ng from one of the diseases specified in the Cattle Compensation Act. Of the 5,023 beasts on which compensation was paid during the year ended the 30th of June last, 1,711 were slaughtered in abattoirR.

Mr. H YLAND.-Who said there ·was no meat supervision ~

Mr. CATN.-I admitted that t.here was some supervision over the meat where the cattle were killed in slaughter houses that werC' under supervision.

Mr. lfARTIN.-Probably it was not herf stock.

Mr. CAIN.-I ask thf' Honorary :Minister (Mr. Ma~tin) not. to jump to concluslon!';, and not to let his prejudici>s run awr..v with his better judgment. This is not. a' fllIC'stion of my views. I have, fllIoted figures '3upplied by the Dep~l't­ment of Agrieulture, and the Honorary 1finister eQuId have them dissected.

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNAu).-The fignres yon hav(' flnoted show tha! there must he sn11<:>1'v1sion of tuberculosIs.

Mr. CArN.-Thore is no supervision of tubel'cnloRis in districts where there is no mC'nt. snpf'l'Yision, I wonld advi:.<e

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Amendment) Bill. 1189

the honorable member for Kara Kara and Rorung and other members to ascertain the qualifications of meat inspectors. A. person cannot get a certificate simply because he calls at an offiee, but he must study for years and be qualified to pass certain exam ina tions.

~t[r. CAMERoN.-A heaHh o'(£cer has qualifications.

~fr. C.'\.IN.-The local health officer is a doctor; .he is not a butcher, and he doee:; not exumine meat at abattoirs. The honorable member is in difficulties; in fact, he is in deep water and will probably drown. Before any honorable member reaches a conclusion on this ques­tion he should examine the facts. I have already mentioned 58 towns, which have a population of mol'P than 1,000, but in which no official meat supervision is exercisetl. The Premier says that he opposes this Bill in the interests of public health. If that is so his first step must he to ('xtend the mrat supervision laws to the whole State. It is true that the' scheme of supervision is being gradually extended, but there are difficulties in the way of its being more rapidly extended, and they 19 rgely arise from the lack of funds. In various parts of the country a butcher may conduct a private slaughter house ill a paddock where flies are prevalent and every undesirable feature is to be seen .. Some honorable members may attempt to horrify the House by tell­ing us that cattle walk in slush up to their hocks on the :Metropolitan Farm. It is not necessary to rome near 1felbourne to see unsatisfactory conditions.

Mr. DODGSHUN.-But it is necec;sary for you to go to the country.

Mr. CAIN.-I have been there.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -The debate is becoming extremely dis­orderly, and I again ask honorable mem­bers not to intedect.

Mr. Q.AIN.-I know something about rural conditions. I have spent more of my life in tllf' cOllntry than some of the United Country party members, who are interested in this problem, have spent in the city. I am arquainted witll the ~onclitiolls obt:1inillg' in some slaughter h01.1SNl in country distrirts where there is 110 propP1' mp.1 t supervision. I also know

som(>thing about the eonditions on the :Metropolitan Farm, and I have acquired from officers in the De­partment of Agriculture knowledge of slaughter houses operating in districts where there is no official meat supervision. I say to the Premier, " Here are the facts." He has announced. that he is opposing this measure in the in­terests of public health. No reasonable per­son can helieve that that is the only reason for th(' maintenance of the ban against thf' sale of beef from the Metropolitan Farm. In 1933, before the detection of b('ef l11f'[lsles on the Metropolitan Farm, the honorable member for Benambra de­livered an interesting speech from which I shall make one' or two quotations. I like a man who has the courage of hi8 convictions and tells us that he opposes a snggf'stion which, if ('arried out, wonlcl injure a section of his constituents. I romplimf'nt the honorable member for Benambra on his honesty.

~fr. PAToN.-I always llave been :-;lll­

cpre on the question.

~rr. CAIN.-Did the honorable l11Plll­bel' approach it rxclusively from a hr:llth point of view?

Mr. P AToN.·-N o.

:M:r. CAIN.-I welcome a frank rrply. In the COlll'Se of a speech delivered dur­ing the Address-in-Reply debate 011 11)(' 28th of ,June, 1933, the honorable l11(>m­ber said-

I take this opportunity of asking the Gon'rJ1· ment to extend consideration to a section of the community which I represent-tIle sll1('\,­raising people-- by curtailing the activities of :I

semi-governmental institution which is activp\y engaged in competition with us. I refer to j Itt' Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of 'Yol'\\~ farm at Werribee. The contention of many of ~n)' constituents and thousands of other peoplP lJ1 all parts of the State is that the competiti()n on the part of the Board farm at 'VerribN' is unfair.

The honorable member ma(lc that statr­ment long before beef measles were thought of. I have no quarrel with him, personally, nor with any other honorable member, who says t])at governmental or semi-governmental in­stitutions should not come into rom­petition with private enterprise. The Opposition advancccl that view for many years. Although beef measles had not hren detected, the honorable member for

1190 Health r .\.SSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

Benambra said that the Board's com­petition was unfair, and he went fur­ther-

).rIy cont(!ntion is that the competition of that farm is unfair to cattle owners, and although we do not ask that the farm's opera­tions should be restricted absolutely, we do !"uggest that the farm management should sell its stock to exporters. This would entail little or no hardship on the Melbourne and Metro­politan Board of Works, as a highly favour­able report was received some time ago on the quality of a consignment of 3,000 bullocks purchased from its farm and forwarded to Smithfield market by H. local freezing firm.

The honorable member suggested that the Board should be prepared to sell its stock for export so that it would not come into competition with local graziers on the Melbourne market. We must give him credit f.or honesty of conviction.

Mr. MAcFARLAN.-Will he adopt the same view in relation to the State Elec­tricity Oommission (Trading) Bill?

Mr. OAIN.-Let us deal with one sub­ject at a time. I shall now quote from a report which appeared in the Melbourne. II erald on the 31st of :Marrh, 1939, as follows :-

MUTTON FROM BOARD FARM. V.C.P. DELEGA'l'E'S COMPLAINT.

Bendigo, Friday.-That mutton from the Board of Works farm at Werribee was being sold on the Melbourne market was stated by Mr. Clarke, H. Ballarat delegate, at the United Country party conference to-day.

Mr. Clarke said that the conference had succeeded in having an embargo placed on beef, but since then the farm had been stocked with sheep. Large quantities were sold in Melbourne and no name was disclosed.

The facts were known in London, he said, and rival countries would make the most of them.

A motion protesting against stock raising on the farm was passed without dissent.

Mr. Olarke and others at the conference were honest because they carried the motion referred to without dissent. I believe there is much more behind the advocacy of this ban against the Metro­politan Farm than com;ideration of the health of the community. I am strengthened in that belief by mentioning an incident that occurred when the Hogan Government was in office. The Leader {)f the Opposition, and probably the Pre­mier, will recall that during that period there was an agitation to have meat which arrived in Victoria from Queensland branded "Foreign." At that time the

northern State was a prolific beef pro­ducer. Several deputations representing Victorian graziers approached the Labour Government and advocated the adoption of steps to prevent the importation of beef from Queensland, but, of course, such a thing eonlc1 not be clone under the Oommonwealth Constitution. Then the graziers suggested the gazettal of a regu­lation under which all beef that was imported into Victoria should be marked " Foreign." The object was to prevent competition from the other States in the supply of beef to the Melbourne market.

I shall quote figures to show the quantities of frozen and chilled meat imported into Victoria smce 1929. We find this remarkable position, that in 1929, 525,170 lb. of frozen meat and 5,902,375 lb. of chilled meat were im­ported into this State. The figures dis­close that a tremendous amount of meat is imported into Victoria, particularly from Queensland. The figures I am quoting have been supplied to me by the Secretary to the Health Department, Mr. J. Whitlock, and have been prepared from official figures in the records of the Department. In 1939, 438,944 lb. of frozen meat, and 2,019,593 lb. of chilled meat were imported.

Notwithstanding thA desire of the hon­orable member for Benambra to protect the graziers, he must not forget. that the major proportion of the meat imported comes from Queensland. It is true that the Government has protected the grazier by banning the sale of Werribee beef, but since the institution of expert methods of chilling beef the protection afforded has been less formidable. The result has been that beef has been imported from Queensland in large quantities each year. The Premier says. that while this is going on the Government must refuse, in the interests of the health of the community; to allow the magnificent stock at the Metropolitan Farm, Werribee, to be marketed locally. On the other hand, the honorable member for Benambra says thaOt the ban has been instituted be­cause of economic competition from the Metropolitan Farm with graziers. What­ever the reason, the result has been that some of the best stock in the world has not been made available for human con­sumption.

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1191

The beef measles problem is not as serious as we have been led to believe. But if it is, who is to guide us on what we should do ~ Who would guide the Chief Secretary in relation to matters affecting the patients in the care of the Mental Hygiene Department, or prisoners in penal establishments ~ The Chief Secretary would ask the chief medical officer who inspects the various gaols for a report on the subject. He would not consult a Northern District farmer. If the Premier found that he was in ill health, vwuld he go to the Country party ~onfel'ence for advice on the matter ~ No, he would consult a leading physician, and he would endeavour to get the best expert medical advice obtainable. If I wanted to know something about stock diseases, naturally, I would approach the Chief Veterinary Officer in the Depart­ment of Agriculture, as a man who at least has made a study of stock disease probl(lms.

VVIICIl I approach the subject of beef measles, and its effects upon the con­suming public, I, like every other rea80n­able person in the community, am forced to take expert advice. I am not acting for the butchers, or the Board, or the con­sumers in this matter. The last thing I should desire to do would be to permit the sale of meat that would adversely 'affect the health of members of the com­munity. We are not actuated by a desire to buy cheaper beef. Meat is never cheap if it is unhealthy. The question is whether in the present unsettled times we are justified in continuing a ban upon the use of beef that is recognized by every expert in the community to be magnifi­cent meat. I shall wait with interest to see if the Government submits further medical evidence on -this point, because all expert medical opinion so far ex­pressed proves to the hilt that the beef from the Metropolitan Farm, Werribee, is not injurious to public health. Let us consider the opinion expressed by Dr. E. Robertson, the late chairman of the Com­mission of Public Health. He said-

The rules laid down for the examination of earcasses adequately protected consumers.­Age, 14.4.34.

Supervision was quite adequate. The re­striction~ were more stringent than those in force ill other countries where beef measles was more prevalent than in Yictoria.­A 7'fI 11 8, 27.4.34.

There could be no objection from the view­point of health to marketing the cattle if the meat were inspected ill the normal way during slaughtel'ing.-Argu8, 15.3.35.

-Professor H. i'1.. Woodruff, Professor of Bacteriology, University of Melbourne, in reported statements at meetings of the Commission of Public Health, said-

There was no reaSOn for any alarm so far as thc public health wa!:! concerned.­Age, 28.2.34.

The scare was never warrallte(l. It is an ab~;o]ute :-icandal. It shows no enlightenment or common sense. No other country in the world would allow such a thing.-Argus, 30.1.35.

:Mr. Kpndall, ·",ho was the Ohief Veterin­ary Officer in the Department of Agriculture, said-

It was impossible under the rigid conditions laid down for any of the infected meat to get into butcher shops and to the consuming publk-Age, 20.10.33.

Dr. J. A. Gilruth, D.V.Sc., who, along with others, reported on this question, expressed his opinion as the Ohief of the Division of ..Animal Health, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, in his rcport of the 31st of May, 1934, to the GOYNllment, and said-

The prescnt regulations and instructions hy the Health Department are a sufficient Ha fe­guard of the public health. Thcy e,-en ex('ced what is necessary.

Dr. John Dale, IIealth Officer to the :Melbourne City Oouncil; Dr. C. H. Kella way, Director of the W al tel' and Eliza Hall Research Institute; and Professor H. A. Woodruff, were ap­pointed by the British Medical A.ssocia­tion to report on the public health aspect of the question. In a report to the Go­vernment, they said-

The rules for the guidance of meat inspectors contained in the memorandum of the Health Commission, if generally applied, are more than adequate to provide safeguards for the public health.

So we haye Dr. Robertson, Professor \Voodruff, l\fr. Kendall, Dr. Gilruth, Dr. Dale, Dr. Kellaway, and Dr. W .• T. Pen­fold-who was Director of the Thomas Bakel', Alice Baker, and Eleanor Shaw Medical Research Institute-n 11 support­ing- a proposal that the meat fr0111 i-he :Metl'opolitan Farm, subject to adE'quate supervision, should he ma(Ie available for human cOllsnmption.

1192 Health r .ASSE11BL Y·l (Amendment) B~ll.

1.1r. McKENZIE.-Was not Dr. Pellfold eallcd jn by the Melbourne and ~letro­Ipolitall Board of Works to make a special report on this subject?

·Mr. OAIN.-He was. If the Premier had doubts on the value of the expert opinions expressed, he had five years in which to call in anybody he liked to re­port further on this question. If he has not a better story to tell than he told the House two years ago, he has not answered the expert evidence submitted. The Pre­mier was temporarily absent from the Ohamber when I previously referred to his seeking medical advice on his own health. On everything else, including his own health, he is prepared to accept expert medical advice, but on this question he, and the members of his party, become a law unto themselves, and talk glibly about protecting the health of the community. When the Prf'mier spoke on this subject some time ago, he said that he asked Dr. Feat.onby, as chairman of the Oommission of Public Health, to furnish him with a report. One could not expect anything further than the report supplied by Dr. Fcatonby, as reported on by the Premier, when he said, on the 11th of August, 1938 :-

To-day. I asked the Chief Health Officer of the Health Department, Dr. :Featonby, to furnish me with a mcmorandum on the matter, and the following is his reply:-

Up to the present no method of treatment hils been put forward which will with 'cer­tainty remo\'c tapeworm eggs fr0111 sewage. No certain n'pans is known of removing tape­worm cggs from pastures, nor is there any autllOritative evidence as to the length of life of the tapeworm eggs on theRe pastures.

The law now requires that all cases diagnosed aR suffering from tapeworm must be notified. While this measure wiI] bring the majority of cases under medical treatment, it is certain that an cases of persons suffering from tape­worm will not he brought under medical treat­ment, and it is therefore prohable that tapeworm eggs wiI] continue to paRR with the sewage and be deposited on the pastureR of the sewage farm.

If cattle are fed on land irrigated with sewage, some of them will contract beef measles.

Beef derived from such pastures will un­doubtedly infect some human heings, for while it is true that the cysts are destroyed by thorough cooking of beef, it is certain that many people consume beef in a state which has not in the process of cooking been raised to the temperature necessary to kill the cysts.

Of course, everyone knows that the general statements made by Dr. Featonby are true.

I shall now quote from what I consider to be Ol1e of the greatest authorities on the question of beef measles. The report to which I shall refer probably dealt more extensively with the beef measles problem than any other report I have had an op­portunity to peruse. I refer to a publication from the Department of Agri­culture, Union of South Africa-The Onderstepoort J ournaZ of Veterinary Science Q.ndAnimal Indltstry. It is a continuation of the annual reports of the Director of Veterinary Science and Animal Industry, Onderstepoort, Pretoria. The journal is edited by P. J. Du Toit, Director. In an extensive treatise on the question by Mr. N. F. Viljoen, which covers approximately 200 pages of the journal, there is a section relating specifi­cally to the treatment of beef measles. The report by Mr. N. J. Viljoen was so extensive that I was most impressed with it, because it referred specifically to a definite opinion he had formed about cysticercosis in swine and bovines in Aus­tralia. The report refers to almost every country in the world, and it mentions specifically the Penfold report. It will be remembered that a number of Syrians were found to be suffering from tapeworm in Victoria. In his report Mr. Viljoen said- .

Penfold, Penfold and Fhilli ps (1936) give a suggestion of the extraordinary incidence of T. saginata infection among Syrians. These authors conducted a survey of the incidence of tapeworm infection in the State of Victoria, Australia, and they found that 90 out of 1,830,000 people in that State had Taenia saginata. Of that number 42 were Syrian-born Australians. In the entire State of Victoria there were only 377 people who were born in Syria, and 42 were infected, or 11,000 per 100,000. The survey was conductcd under the aegis of the Victorian Government, who offered a reward of £5 to carriers for the production of a complete Taenia. In addition, a very thorough questionnairc was sent to . all physicians and (·hemistR.

That is a brief statement of what hap­pened in Victoria between 1933 and 1936. In the concluding stages of his report, Mr. Viljoen stated-

Cystice1'cosis-taeniasis can he eradicated by-

(a.) Close co-operation between the veterinary and medical professions.

(b) Clmier inspection of swine and bovine carcasses at abattoirs in the larger urban areas with, possibly, veterinary ~olltrol in towns WIth more than 7,500 Europeans.

Health [22 OCTOBER) 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1193

( c) Compulsory meat inspection at all other slaughter poles, llY qualified meat in­spectors. These slaughter poles to be grouped, and the inspector stationed in the central urban area must control its inspections. Butchers in small villages, where no inspection exists, must not unfairly compete with their colleagues in the larger urban areas, who suffer losses from condemnation. The farmer must have absolutely no loophole for the sale of his measly stock, without suffering the loss.

(d) Education of Europeans and natives ill elementary hygiene, embodying studies of the life-histories of the two para­sites. The assistance of extension officers, stock inspectors and sanitary inspectors can be obtained to further this elementary teaching.

(e) The abolition of all insurance schemes which include indemnification for measles at abattoirs. These insurance schemes, which serve no useful purpose, have the effect that the careless farmer shows no appreciation of his responsi­bility for safeguarding his stock from infection.

Mr. McKENZIE.-I do Dot agree with the suggestion of doing away with com­pulsory insurance, and I am sure that you do not agree with it, either.

Mr. CAIN.-The honorable member for Wonthaggi has missed the point. Mr. Viljoen was referring to conditions in South Africa, where there is a tendency on the part of agriculturists not to take sufficient care in eradicating tapeworm from their farms. The South African Department of Agriculture endeavoured to make the farmers more careful, and Mr. Viljoen suggested that a scheme to pro­vide compensation for stock destroyed should not be introduced,. because if that were done the farmers would become less careful. In Victoria, no compensation is paid if animals suffering from beef measles are destroyed. The report continues-

(f) The compulsory slaughter of all pig carcasses intended for sale on urban markets at urban abattoirs. The custom of many unconscientious farmers who dispose of pig carcasses they have noticed on dressing to be measly, to their unfortunate natives, is very strongly deprecated.

(g) Free treatment of Taenia carriers, and the offer of rewards to all such treated carriers for the production of either an entire tapeworm, or a pOl~tion with its head attached. .

The report I have quoted i·s the considered view of a man who has given this ques­tion of beef measles more thought than any other person I have been able to

locate. If supporters of the Government continue to base their justification for the ban on the ground of public health, they must produce evidence in support of their claim. The honorable member for Ben­ambra has said, in his usual frank and conscientious way, "I believe the Metro­politan Farm, W erribee, is a menace to the cattle-raising industry." To the hon­orable member I say, quite frankly, that the Metropolitan Farm is not as great a menace to the cattle-raising industry as is the unrestricted importation of beef from other States. The industry will have one or the other to contend with. It must remember that the price of meat cannot be raised beyond a certain level. As soon as that level is passed, consumption must fall.

Mr. CAMERoN.-The public would eat something else.

Mr. CAIN.-That is so, or they would go without meat.

Mr. MARTIN.-If the ban on beef from the Metropolitan Farm is lifted, the public will not eat beef.

Mr. CAIN.-I do not accept the llon­Ql'ary Minister as an authority on that issue. The question must be left to the judgment of honorable members. It seems remarkable that those who advocate the retention of the ban on the ground of public health do not live in the area where the'3t' things happen. They live where no meat inspection takes place, where cattle suffering from all kinds of diseases are slaughtered; yet they set themselves up as authorities on what is beneficial to the health of the community. On the other hand, certain members desire to destroy the Metropolitan Farm because it is publicly owned, and produces beef that can hold its own in competition with beef raised elsewhere.

Mr. CAMERON.-N 0 one wants to destroy the Metropolitan Farm.

Mr. Cl\IN:-It may not be the desire of honorable members to destroy the Metropolitan Farm, but they certainly want to put it out of action.

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-We shall be satisfied if we stop the filthy practices adopted there.

Mr. CAIN.-That is magnificent, com­ing as it does froni the honorable member for Goulburn Valley! I can stand some things, but are ,the practices adopted at the Metropolitan Farm as filthy as the

1194 Health r ASSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill,

practices adopted in slaughter houses in some parts of the honorable member's electorate?

Mr. DIFFEy.-Two wrongs do not make a right. .

Mr. CAIN.-I ask mem bers not to describe what they saw at the Metro­politan Farm without, at the same time, describing what takes place at some country slaughter houses.

\fl'. CREMEAN.-YOU cannot see any­'hing there for Hies!

Mr. CAIN.-Should we be told some­thing about t.he slaughter houses at Swan Hill, or Wangaratta, or Benalla?

Mr. DIFFEY.-At Wangaratta, an abattoir is in course of construction.

Mr. CAIN.-.And not before it is due! Shall we be told about the slaughter houses at W odonga, or even at W on­thaggi? I invite honorable members to examine those places, and, having done so, to express an honest opinion whether they are being carried on in the interests of the health of the community. Once t]u1Y have remedied that position, mem­bers will be qualified to talk about tne marketing of beef which is subjected to the most. strict examination .possible.

Mr. BAILEY.-Do you argue that be­cause conditions are not as they should be in another part of the State, the Go­vernment should lift the ban on beef from the Metropolitan Farm?

Mr. CAIN.-My argument is that neither the Chief Secretary, nor any other member of the Government, nor any mem­ber of Parliament, is entitled to determine whether beef from the Metropolitan Farm ~s fit for human consumption. I argue that it is a matter for the medical ex­perts, and they have already spoken. They undertook a careful examination, and I accept their verdict.

Mr.· J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Of course, sometimes ev~n the experts disagree.

Mr. CAIN.--Even members of the United Country party disagree on some things.

Mr. DODGSHUN·.-We all agree on this question.

Mr. OAIN.-That is unusual. I ask those who say that the MetropoHtan Farm beef is not fit for human consump­tion to produce evidence to support their contention that a 11 the beef from the Metropolitan Farm should be con(Jemned, irrespective of infestation·. I defy them

to produce expert evidence from any part of the world that would support the con­tinuation of this ban. If they are doing all this in the interests of public health, why do not Oountry party members agitate to extend the meat area over the State?

I shall leave the problem to the judg­ment of Parliament. I believe there is no justification for continuing the em­bargo. If the Government believes other­wise, it has had five years in which to produce sufficient medical evidence to justify the continuation. ·All expert medical advice is in favour of lifting the ban. Once it has been lifted, I am agree­able that legislation should be introduced to have an beef from the Metropolitan }'arm, and elsewhere, subjected to the strictest su pel'vision. I should not mind if the Premier desired to impose a con­dition that every beast from the Metro­politan Farm must be slaughtered at a givrn abattoir, and that all those trades­men who sold the meat must mark the product as "Werribee beef," so that the public would not be misled. I should not mind what restrictions were imposed, nor how stringent they were.

~lr. BAILEY.-You can safely say that because you know the Bill cannot be amended 'in that way.

~Ir. OAIN.-I do not know that the Bill cannot be amended. If the Govern­ment so desired, it could do many things. It could impose the most stringent super­visory regulations, and it could ensure that the public was provided with a clean article of foodstuff. I think the Govern­ment, by regulation, some years ago, forced butchers to mark "chilled" beef as such.

Mr. BATLEy.-Under the wording of the Bill no amendment ~ll('h as you sng­gest could he made.

~11'. CAIN.-I know that the Govern­ment rannot amend the Bill in thnt direction.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-It can! Mr. CAIN.-The Government could

impose whatever conditions it desired £01" the safeguarding of public health. I am as desirous as anyone else to :protect the health of the community, but I do not believe a case has been established for the continuation of the ban on beef from tbp. :~1\f etropolitan Farm, on thf' ground thn t

Health [22 OCTOBER) 1940.1 (Am£.ndment) Bill. 1195

it is lllJurious to public health. I trust that the Bill will receive the support it deserves.

Mr. MACFARLAN (B1·ighton).-I agree with the honorable member for N orthcote that the main issue in relation to the Bill is that of public health. Having stated that, the honorable mem­ber strayed from the issue, and referred to two or three matters that seemed to me to be .irrelevant. First, he pointed out that throughout the greater part of the State there is no system of meat inspec­tion. Assuming that to be true, if the Government is entitled to protect the public from beef measles under the exist­ing Health Act, it does not carry the matter much further to say that the Government has not carried out its duty so far as tuberculosis and other diseases are concerned. Notwithstanding the apparent importance attached to the absence of meat inspection throughout the State, actually it has nothing to do with the Bill, which must stand 01' fall on the public health issue. Secondly, th(O honorable member strayed in pointing out that public health was not the real ground of the objection to the continuance of the ban. That statement was supported b~' reference to a view expressed by the hon­orable member for Benambra some time ago, when he directed attention to the fact that the actions of the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works in­volved the graziers in unfair competition with governmental enterprise.

My views are well known on the subject of governmental enterprise. I have dropped the fetish of private enterprise versus Government enterprise, as I stated in this House during the debate on the Bill relating to compulsory third-party motor insurance. I believe we . cannot lay down a general rule, but that each caSe must be decided on its merits, accord­ing to whether or not it is in the interests of the community. I wonder what the United Country party members will do when the State Electricity Commission (Trading) Bill is being considered in this Chamber, because they, like members of the United Australia party, are pledged to support private enterprise as against Government enterprise. No, doubt, they will support the Government in its pro­posal to lift the ban on the trading activities of the State Electricity Oom-

mIssIOn. So far as I am concerned, the question of State enterprise plays no part in the decision I have come to on this Bill.

The third diversion on the part of the honorable member for N orthcote related to the fact that there are immense imports of meat from other States. He said that the graziers are not protected from those imports, although they claim protection from the sale of beef from the Metropolitan Farm, Werribee. Of course, under the Commonwealth Constitution the graziers cannot be protected against imports from other States. It does not seem to me that that argument is of value in attempting to decide how we should vote on the Bill. The whole question relates to safeguarding the health of the public. I agree with the honorable mem­ber that the medical evidence, once we understand it-and I have tried to under­sta~d it-is all one way. The experts ?lalm that tapeworm as a complaint, even If one were to contract it is something like. toothache-very un'pleasant, but not fatal. One would rather not have it b

. , ut It does not cause death or serious

illness. As I understand the medical evidence

it is to the effect that the disease is not dangerous. I accept that view but at the same time, the disease 'is ~ost unpleasant, and everyone would wish to avoid the risk of infection. Any person known to be suffering from the disease is regarded with a kind of loathing by his or her fellow creatures. The Collins­street doctor who, after an examination, determines that a patient has this trouble, probably says to him, "Don't worry, old man! It is only a tapeworm. I cannot congratulate you on having it, but you will not die from it." As I do not think I have strained the real meaning of the medical evidence on the subject, the question that arises is whether we should allow on the market beef as to which there is any likelihood of consumers being infected in the way I have mentioned.

While, from the health aspect, the medical evidence is all one way, it is also all one way on the question whether there are, in fact, at the Metropolitan Farm, cattle infected by live or dead cysts. From the point of view of medical hygiene, or of decency, or lack of repulsiveness, it

1196 HeaUh r ASSEMBJ .. Y·l (Amendment) BiU.

does not matter much, in one sense, whether a person swallows a live tape­worm or a dead one. If it is dead, he may not suffer physically. The man who finds a fly in his glass of beer does not

, worry whether it is alive or dead. An old dodge is to drink half of the beer before putting in the fly, and then to direct the attention of the hotel licensee to the pre­sence of the :fiy, whether it is alive or dead. Usually that means a fresh glass of beer for the customer. We have to con­sider the feelings of the ordinary man or woman who is about to enjoy a steak, and is told" This meat is from Werribee, where there arc somc beasts with tape­worms. 'However, most of the cysts are dead, and if you happen to eat a dead cyst ~o harm will result to you. On the other hand, you may eat a live one." To my mind the reaction of consumers in such circumstances preseJlts the strongest case against beef from the J\ietropolitan Farm, Werribee, being allowed on the market for human ('onsumption.

Mr. MrcHAELIs.-Are you referring to the condition of the meat before it iH cooked, or afterwards?

Mr. MACFARLAN.-The consumer has no desire to eat a cyst, dead or alive. I do not believe there is any public agita­tion for the lifting of the ban. Further­more, if the public realize that there is a possibility of, their purchasing beef infected with cysts, either dead or alive, they will refuse to eat such meat, and win be glad to have the ban continued. Those two statements probably sum up the issue on the Bill now before the House.

Other arguments have been adduced in an endeavour to stir up public agitation over this measure. One of them relates to the question of rates imposed by the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, but that is entirely irrelevant. No one would send measly beef on to the market merely to effect a reduction, or prevent an increase, of metropolitan rates. In any case, according to the analysis of its finances, as published by the Board, that body has made just as ~uch profit out of mutton as it made on its beef before the ban was instituted. Consequently, there is no reason for the Board now to say "If this Bill does not pass we shall be forced to increase rates." A further attempt has hef'n made to stir IIp the

public by stating that, by the removal of the embargo, they will obtain chp-ap beef, and-if that statement is correct-it would have been a particularly cogent argument for the Leader of the Labour party to use in favour of this Bill, ha ving regard to the class of persons ,,,hom he and his colleagues claim to represent. But would 'the re­moval of the ban provide those persons with cheap beef? Dr. Gilruthadvocated the raising of the ban, or the non-imposi­tion of it, because he thought that Werri­bee beef would be cheap. That conclusion, ho'wever, was based on the premise that the b€ef would be branded. I agreed wi th him. If beef displayed in a butcher's shop bore a brand indicating that it was from the Metropolitan Farm, Werribee, it certainly would be the cheapest beef on the market! However, the Board will not agree to that being done.

MI'. CAIN.-It will. Mr. :MACFARLAN. - When this

question was discussed on a previous occasion, I stated that if it was 'practic­able to brand the beef so that the public would know what they were purchasing I would have no objection. But it is not practicable to brand it. When a person orders roast beef in the parliamentary Refreshment Rooms, or in a restaurant, how is he to know what kind of beef is supplied? Of the meat sold to house­wives in the metropolitan area, 50 per cent. is delivered to the door by motor vehicle, or some other means of transport. How is the housewife to tell whether she is being supplied with beef from t.he Werribee farm ~

Mr. CAIN.-The housewife who was afraid of being misled into purch~ sing­beef from the Metropolitan Farm could go to the shop and get what she required.

Mr. MACFARLAN.-It would be im­possible for a customer to tell, either in a butcher's shop or an hotel, the kind of beef supplied. The public would not obtain cheap Werribf'e beef unless it was branded, and I have always understood that the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works was afraid to brand its beef. With bl'anding, the beef would be ('beap; but, as I have already said. brand­ing is impracticable. I quote Sir William Angliss, a member of another place, who, I presume, knows more abont hf'd

Health Pi OCTOBER) 1940.] (Amendment) Bill. 1197

than all other members of this Parlia­ment put together, and more than all the professors in this country, as my authority on this phase of the question. Recently in the parliamentary Refresh­ment Booms he said-although, for cer­tain reasons, he is in favour of lifting the ban-that owing to its goo,d appearance beef from the Werribee farm would bring 1d. a lb. more than any other kind. That information is of no use to the people represented by the Labour party.

Mr. OAIN.-W.e will take the risk in that respect. I have never argued for cheap meat.

Mr. MAOFARLAN.-The question is whether the honorable member is justified in taking any risk. I have endeavoured to show that there does not seem to be any ground for the argument regarding rates, nor for the argument that the lift­ing of the ban will result jn providing the poorer class of people with cheap beef. Therefore, disregarding the conten­tions concerning chilled beef, the lack of meat inspection, Government competition and the other two factors to which I have already alluded, we are brought back, once again, to the matter of health. I have already indicated how the imposi­tion of the ban appeals to me in that con­nection. We do not want meat about which there is any suspicion of cysts, either alive or dead, and I believe that when the public knows that they ,are being protected against that risk, they will be particularly grateful.

When the Argyle Government, of which I was a member, considered the problem, it obtained an undertaking from the :Mel­bourne and Metropolitan Board of Works that, pending an investigation of beef measles at the Metropolitan Farm, it would not send its beef on to the market for human consumption. There was also an announcement by Mr. 'Menzies, which was reported in H (Jff/;sard) that in addition to the then pro­posed investigation the Government of the clay would arrange for an expert inquiry into the system of disposing of metro­politan sewage. As far as my memory ~oes, that matter reached a stage where it was proposed to obtain from America or England an expert opinion on the general question. While the Argyle Go-1"C'rnment was considcril1~ the steps to he

taken, the hammer came down on it. I urge the present Government to take up tbe matter at the point at which it was left by the previous Administration. J t will be realized that the system of allow­ing raw sewage, to be distributed, year after year, over the 10,000 or 12,000 acres of which the Metropolitan Farm, Werribee, is comprised, is wrong. The farm is not more than nine or ten miles from the second large~t city in this State -Geelong-where, on a hot day when the wind is in the' right direction, one can actually smell the Metropolitan Farm. It seems to be far from right that this sewage farm should be practically at th~ front door of the second largest city of t.his State, gradually developil)~. as it is, towards Werribee.

Mr. MICHAELIs.-Are you able to say that Geelong is extending in the direction you have mentioned?

Mr. MAOFARLAN.-In any case, the people of Geelong complain about what could be called an undesirable neighbour. The system followed in Sydney under which sewage is discharged into the Pacific Ocean, should be adopted in Vic­tcria.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-It all comes back on the beaches.

Mr. }.IIACFARLAN.-The honorable member is comparing the ocean to Port Phillip Bay. The fact is that the sewage does not find its way back to the beaches oj' Sydney, and if a proper place on our ocean beaches were chosen, there would be no complaint on that score. After the great mass of sewage has 'been irrigated, the fluid percolates through the soil and reaches the sea at Werribee. I have wit­nessed that process and am not prepared to say that there is anything wrong with it. There is little cause for objection by the time t.he fluid has percolated through the earth. Nevertheless, its origin is nauseous and it is my duty, on behalf of the people who live in districts facing Hobson's Bay, to protect the purity of the 'waters of the bay. The beaches are used not only by my ronstituents, but by many thousands of those represented by all other members of this House. We arc> ('ollsidering the disposal of a Yfist voluIDf' of fluid having- a nasty' origin, and it~ pJ'('~cnce in tllf' ha.'7 waterR, to say thp

1198 Health I_\SSEMB.LY·I (Amendment) Bill.

least of it, takes the pleasure away from swimming. While that may be regarded as a minor point at the present time, it must be remembered that as the popula­tion of the metropolis grows the quantity ?f fluid discharged into the bay will mCl'ease greatly.

Referring again to the time when the Argyle Government was inquiring into the matter, I remember that a serious pro­posal was advanced to that Government to the effect that all the sewage from the eastern suburbs should be concentrated at Mordialloc-only a mile or two from my constituency. I presume it was intended to establish a treatment plant or another sewage farm-possibly both; but the result would have been the same. The nnal destination of the effluent would be Port Phillip Bay. The honorable mem­ber for N orthcote, who has a nice home near }Iordiallo,c, knows that thousands of persons swim in the sea there. Pollu­tion formerly occurred when oil tankers cleaned out their tank.s in the bay, after which the receding tide would deposit a film of oil on the beaches. It was only after a considerable row had been made that the tankers were forced to go outside the Heads to clean their tanks.

There seems to be a tendency by bodies like the Melbourne and Metro­politan Board of Works, and also municipal COUl1cils, to toss any re­fuse or fluid they cannot other'wise di~pose of into the people's swim­n:mg pool. That is one reason why it is tIme the general question of sewage dis­posal in the metropolitan area was in­vestigated with a view to getting rid of the unhealthy, unpleasant, out-of-date method now employed. That exhausts what I wish to say. I oppo,se the Bill, and support the ban, because I believe that it is impossible to say that beef from the MetI'opolitan Farm does not contain dead or live cysts, and because, if the public realized that, it would not want the ban lifted.

Mr. CUMMING (Hampden).-I do not want to touch on the medical side of this question, but rather on the practical side. T have be~n concerned all my life with the fattenmg and rearing of cattle and 'only from that stand-point am I inte:ested in the question dealt with in the Bill. I have no axe to grind, and no wish to

favour any beef-breeding institutions in the State. I visited the Metropolitan Farm to make a thorough investigation, and to see fO,r myself 'what I thought of the business. I saw "water" coming into a paddock, and I saw it tested. I saw beautiful pastures and cattle of all ages, sizes, and descriptions. I do not think it would be possible for anyone to see cattle better finished than the cattle I saw. In­cluded in the party were the late honor­able member for Hawthorn, Mr. John Gray, and the present hono,rable member for St. Kilda. Mter looking at the finish­ing paddocks shown to me, I thought I should like to see the earlier paddocks, but no one seemed particularly interested to show them to me. Eventually, how­ever, I was taken to a drain that was carrying a large quantity of filth and discharging it into, a paddock. In the next paddock, the filth had more or less disappeared. The cattle had to wade across such drains, and consequently the stock is not, in my opinion, fit for human consumption. I am not particu­larly concerned whether the cysts in the cattle are dead or alive, and I am not concerned whether they are in 100 per cent. or in only 10 per cent. of the cattle, but I am concerned that if the ban is lifted the people will have to take their chance in restaurants and elsewhere of eating that beef.

Mr. OAIN.-Or an old cow. Mr. CUMMING.-I would rather

have. the old cow every time. Great as the l'lsk is supposed to be, I would much rather have a rabbit, even if the beef from Werribee had been 'subjected to the routine examination.

Mr. OAIN.-Are you aware that at Camperdown there is no meat inspection?

Mr. CUMMING.-If the honorable member for N orthcote is correct in that

,statement, I am wholeheartedly behind him. He has made a definite statement for which, if it is correct, we are obliged, and, if he will take the matter up, he ~ll find the whole House behind him in seeing the job through.

Mr. HOGAN.-We have an army of veterinary surgeons and stock inspectors who have to go to every sale yard.

Mr. CUMMING.-I know that. Mr. CAIN.-N 0 stock inspector has the

same qualifications as a meat inspector.

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1199

Mr. CUMMING.-If the honorable member fo]; N orthcote can produce evidence to show that his statement is correct, we shall all fall in behind him and help him. I feel convinced that at Camperdown the slaughtering of meat is under as good supervision as is exer­cised in any other place the honorable member could mention.

Mr. CAIN.-Oh! Mr. CUMMING.-Has the honorable

member ever seen meat being inspected at Camperdown?

Mr. CAIN.-No. Mr. CUMMING.-I am speaking

from first-hand knowledge, and he is not. Mr. CAIN.-Is there a meat inspector

at Camperdown? Mr. CUMMING.-There is a h('alth

inspector. Mr. CAIN.-vVho is also a dog inspeetor

and a nuisance inspector! Mr. CUMMING.-He is not. The

honorable member should state his facts correctly. After inspecting the paddocks at the Werribee farm, we went to the "homestead," or house, and I asked if milking cows were grazed on the farm. I was told, " Yes." When I was given a cup of tea I thought, " This is the first time that I would rather not have milk in my tea."

Mr. HYLAND.-Surely dairy cows are not being grazed on the farm!

Mr. CUMMING.-The cows are milked on the farm, I understand. The only other sewage farm I know of where cattle have been grazed was in South Australia. When beef measles was dis­covered on the South Australian farm, drastic measures were taken. The animals, numbering 362, were slaughtered, and it was found that 250 heads, 275 hearts, and 71 various muscles were in­fested. The figures indicate that some of the animals were infested in more than one part of the carcass. The authorities were so muc~ impressed with the result of the investigation that they closed the farm and decided to deal with the sewage in some other way, but, eventually, they were persuaded to re-open the farm. A report supplied to me states-

Since the removal of these cattle the farm has been used for grazing by horses and l'Iheep and for growing crops, including green feed for dairy rattle. until Oetoher. HI::l2, wh('n :1

small number of experimental cattle were ob­tained to determine whether they would be­come infested by grazing on the farm. These were from a line which had from time to time been sold in the abattoirs market and slaughtered at the abattoirs, and were known to be clean. Twenty-two of these yearlings were placed on the farm on the 28th of October. 1932, and were grazed in various irrigatNl paddocks.

The cattle were taken from herds in hard, dry country, and were known to be sounn in every way. They were slaughtered at. the abattoirs, with the following result :--

Date of Slaughter No. No. Week Ending. Slaughtered. Affected.

17th March, 1933 4 1 7th April, 1933 6 2 5th May, 1933 4 2 2nd June, 1933 8 4

22 9

I should say that those figures prOyioE' conclusive proof that beef measles re­main in the ground for a long period. The report further states-

This experimeutal re-stocking has been tilt' only occasion on which the irrigated porti0l1

of the sewage farm has been used for cattl(' since the discovery of beef measlefl on the farn' in 1924. .

There is no need for me to say any more about whether beef measles remain in th(' ground, whether the eggs can be got rid of by removing the stock, or whether they l"emain for all time in the sewage. I am definitely opposed to lifting the ban, and I should hate any of my people to he asked to eat beef from the Metropolitan Farm.

The sitting was suspended at 6.14 p.m_ until 7.37 p.m.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) .-This is a very small Bill and, apart from its title, it consists of only one clause. In that one clause therp. are' merely ten words. Although the Bill is sm:l nand limited to on e clause, if it is passed it will h<1"c far-reaching con­sequencE's. and it would be a retrograde> step by Parliament to pass it. The Go­VCl'mnent is opposed to the lifting of the han on the Sf! 10 of heef for human con­~llmption from the :Metl'opolitan Farm at. WCl'ribee. T believC' the ('.onsuminp; publiC' also OppOS(l the lifting of the hRl1.

1200 BeaUn I j';SSEMBLY·1 (Amendment) Bill.

This question has been the subject of many debates in the House. The Bill which was passed in 1935 was submitted by the present Government. I thought­and I know that other members were of the same opinion-that this matter had been finalized, because there was an attempt during the Committee stage to limit the operation of the Bill to two years; that amendment-moved, I think, by the honorable member for St. Kilda­was defeated. Since the Bill became law there have been persistent efforts on the part of certain representatives of the Melbourne· and Metropolitan Board of Works, and other individuals, to have the ban lifted. As a result of those repre­sentations, and the agitation which has taken place, the Bill now before the House was passed by the Legislative Council. So it is necessary for this House to .:wade again through the same sordid story in order that the case may be submitted against the removal of the ban. I wish to make it clear that the present Govern­ment did not impose the ban in the first place. The ban was imposed by the pre­vious Administration-the Argyle Go­vernment. It was not done by legislation, but by meaus of an agreement which had the same effect.

Mr. HOLLWAy.-It was a temporary measure.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-It was a tem­porary measure and it "vas imposed pend­ing certain investigations. The ban was jmposed after complaints concerning the disease had been made, and the agreement was as binding upon the Melbourne and· Metropolitan Board of Works as the present legislation is. What was contemplated by the last Government was given legislative effect by the present administration. The honorable member for N orthcote, when submitting the. Bill this afternoon, tried to draw a red herring across the trail. He dealt with what he termed the lack of ~mpervision of the meat offered for sale in this State, and he referred to tuber­culosis, and other diseases. The Minister of Agriculture, who will speak later, no douht will submit an effective reply to the Rl'gnmonts advanced by the honorable member for N orthcote.

Mr. CAlN.-It will be the first time he has ever done so.

Ml'. A. A. DUNSTAN.~I would not say that. There may be some merit in the argument submitted by the honorable member for Northcote, and, if neces­sary, action can be taken to strengthen supervision in the direction he has indicated. However, that has nothing to do with the Bill now before the House, which provides simply for the lifting of the ban, the removal of the embargo, and the granting of permission to sell for human consumption cattle fattened on sewer-irrigated land. There may be some differences of opinion on the technical side of this subject. We often find one doctor holding one view while another holds a different opinion.

Mr. CAIN.-But the medical authori­ties agree on this question.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-They do not.

Mr. CAIN.-I should like to hear the vlews of those who differ from the majority,

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-Dealing with the matter from a commonsense point of view, there can be no difference of opinion so far as the vital and essential points are concerned. For instance, there can be no difference of opinion On the following points :-( a) that cattle fattened on land irrigated with raw sewage are liable to contract tapeworm -that is gener-ally acknowledged by all authorities; (b) that there was an out­break of this disease at the Metropolitan Farm in 1933; '(c) that the disease is transmissible to human beings who con­sume infected meat that may be lightly or not properly cooked; and (d) that, although the disease may not be regarded as deadly or dangerous, at the same time -as the honorable member for Brighton rightly said-it is a disagreeable, objec­tionable, and loathsome disease. It is recognized that the disease may lead to seri.ous consequences in certain persons. The medical evidence shows that although the symptoms are slight with some,' the disease can be severe on ,nervous people. The public has a right to be protected by legislation against the possibility of infection from the beef they purchase in this city. .

Mr. COTTER.-Why do you not protect the people in the Eaglehawk and Bendigo areas in that way~

Health [22 OCTOBER} 1940.] (Amendm,ent) Bill. 1201

,Mr. A. ,A .. lJlJ~STAN.-Those people are protected against purchasing meat of this type. I do not desire to deal at length with the medical aspect. It is easy to quote medical authorities for or against the question.

Sir STANI,EY ARGYLE.-Pl'oduce one medical authority who is against lifting the ban.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The Leader ()£ the Opposition later will air his medical knowledge; but I can obtain the ()pinion of another medical man who ()bjects to lifting this embargo.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Why do you not let the House have it?

Mr. A. A. DUNST~\'N.-The Leader ()f the Government in the other House <!ould express an opinion more forcibly, and probably with more conviction, than <!an the Leader of the Opposition. There­fore, I do not intend to speak at length ()n the medical side of the question. It is a fact, however, that there is a serious <langeI' to human health when cattle fattened on the Metropolitan Farm are permitted to be slaughtered for human consumption. Dr. Robertson, wJ!o was <!hairman of the Commission of Public Health when the ban was imposed, stated-

Tapeworm eggs will continue to he ('arried to Werribee in the ;:ewage. notwithstanding the treatment of infectpd persons. It is not po'l~ible to eliminah> t appworm eggs from tIlt' 8ewnge.

Dr. Featonhy, th~ }H'('sent chairman of the CommiH8ion, has stated-

If a mall cOllsume,; lwef illfc('ted with beef llleURles, and which 1'; insllffic:ently cooked, he 1'3 liable to contract a tapeworm infec­tion . . . Tf cattle are fed on land irrigated with Hewagl', some of them will contract beef measles.

There could not be a more definite state­ment than that. I shall now quote ('xtl'acts from the report of the late Dr. Gilruth, whose servircs were made avail­:'Ible to the l\.rgyle Government in 1!l34 by the Council for Scientific and Indus­trial Research to investigate this matter nnd submit a report to that Government. Dr. Gilruth stated-

Nevertheless, the public haA some right to object to the consumption of such cysts, alive ,or dead, cooked or raw, but they should realize, 'and particularly in this instance, that fhey must pay directly or indirectly for an assur­ance, which CRn only be' ab!=\olute RO far as

\Yerribee cattle at present are concel'lleu, by IJrohibiting their use for human consumption a:;. carcaS8 meat. . . . Even if live eyst:; were present in the body, they. can be ea8ilj killed by thorough cooking. But it appear:; eviuent that thorough cooking of meat is not always practised, and cannot be insisted upon. . . . The freezing of the carca8ses alone results in a definite deterioration which, so far as we know, cannot be overcome by any system of thawing. The frozen meat market of Britain supplies sufficient evidence. . . . in the inspection of animals slaughtered for human consumption from a farm where an infestation with beef measles is common, such us the Werribee sewage farm, no system which does not insist on the mutilation of carcasses to such an extent to render them un­marketable as "joints or large cuts" by the butcher can warrant a guarantee of an absolute freedom from cysts, dead or alive. . . . No system of meat inspection can guarantee more than that all reasonable precautions ha ve been taken by the inspectors to ensure that the meat is healthy and fit for human consumption. . . . In view of the public perturbation, which has been created regarding beef from the sewage farm, and the not unnatural objection to the ron­sumption of parasites, dead or alive, cooke<1 or raw, the special branding of this beef, even if passed by the· inspectol'R, should be considered.

Dr. Gilruth suggested that the beef should be branded as Werribee sewage beef. The Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, in its comments on Dr. Gilrnth's report, dated the 14th of June, 1934, stated, infer alia-

'!'hnt the Board is entirely oppospd to the hranding in the manner suggested.

I do not blame the Board for that 0ppoRition; which, I think, reflected sound judgment. If beef from the WerribeE' farm were brallded as such, the consuming publie of this State would refuse to pur­chase it. Dr. Gilruth referred to beef infected with parasites. In view of the imposition of the ban in 1935 I did not think that this Parliament would again be called upon to discuss the advisable­ness of the sale of beef infected with parasites for human consumption. If the Bill is passed this Government will, by regulatioil, if it can-and if it cannot it will take other means-insist on the beef from the Board's farm being branded as coming from the Werribee sewage farm.

Mr. HOGAN.-That would not do much good to Werribee.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-It might not do much good to Werribee, and it would not be of advantage to the Board. How­eVf~r, I am satisfied that the public would

1202 Health r ASSEMBLY·l (Amendmtnt) Bill.

not purchase the beef. I should like to test the demand for beef from the sewage farm by having it supplied in the parlia­mentary Refreshment Rooms. I think I haye furnished sufficient evidence from thrpe highly-qualified men to di.3pose of the medical side or the question.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Dr. Gilruth was not a medical man.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The Leader of the Opposition, when Premier, appointed Dr. Gilruth to make an investi­gation. Now he criticizes the status of the late Dr. Gilruth.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-N o. I want you to be accurate. He was not a m(ldiral man.

}fr. A. A. DUNSTAN.---:-I agree with the Leader of the Opposition that he was not [[ medical man; but Dr. Gilruth emphasized the medical side of the question. I should like to ask honor­able members this question: Why is there a need for the introduction of the Bill? I have not heard the argument advanccd that there is not sufficient good and whol~­some beef in Victoria.

Mr. CAIN.-The answer to your ques­tion is to be found on the Ministerial back hench.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-There is a sufficient quantity of wholesome clean heef in Victoria, without taking a risk by pcrmitting beef from the :M:etropolitan Farm to go on the market. The public have a right to be protected when pur-chasing beef. .

Mr. COTTER.-Why do you not protect your constituents at Eaglehawk?

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I have pro­tected them. Some risk can be taken wit.h certain legislation, but I contend that Parliament canllot take a risk when human health is concerned. I should say that, from every stand-point, beef fror"n the Metropolitan Farm stands condemned. Therefore, Parli:mwnt has no right to rpmove the h~n. The argument has been ~dv:mced in f~vol1r of the lifting of the hfln that it has had the effect of increasing th(> pI-ice of cattle in Victoria, and par­tirnlnrly in the metropolitan a"rea. There 11' no substance in that argument. For the four years immediately prior to the imposition of the ban-1929-30 to 1932-33 -t.hf' totalnumbr.r of cattle sold at New­mnrket from th(> Board's farm avel'aged 2.4 rf'r rent. of :111 th£' cattle slaught.er!'cl

jn Victoria for human consumption. The cattle sold by the Board at Newmarket in those four years were less than 5 per cent. of the total number of cattle sold at New­market. Of the total number of 188,000' fat cattle sold annually at Newmarket in those four years the Board sold about 9,000 head each year.

The effect on the market of the lifting of the ban would be very slight, but the raising of the ban would have a vital effect on the consumption of beef. The statement has been made that the imposi­tion of the ban forced up the price of ca ttle. Tha t is incorrect. According tc I figures furnished to me by the Depart­ment of Agriculture, the average pric,< t.hat prime bullocks were making in Mel­bourne during the four years immediatel.y prjor to the imposition of the ban was £14 19s. 9d. each, and for the four yearR immediately fo1lowing the imposition of the ban, £11 18s. each. Seasonal condi­tions, particularly droughl, have a vital effect on the cattle market. In drought periods cattle are scarce, and prices are therefore high. It is futile to argue that the cattle from the Board's farm, repre­senting 2.4 per cent. of the cattle slaught­ered for human consumption in the four years quoted, had any effect on bf'ef prices, either retail or wholesale.

The lifting of the ban will have a: disastrous effect on the cattle industry. The consuming public will not want beef, and consumption will drop to a marked degree. Honorable members will remem-· bel' the effect of the scare created some years ago concerning cattle from the· Metropolitan Farm going into human consumption. The proprietor of the­hotel at which I stayed in Melbourne then told me that consumption of beef at his C'stablishment had dropped by 90 per cent. The lifting of the ban will have a vita T effect, not only on local trade, but also 011 export trade. .\. week ago I wrote to 1.h(> Commonwealth Government asking what action it would taker in the evrnt of the ban bein~ lifted, r('~;arding the export of beef l·aised on the metropolitan sewage farm. I llave received a letter from the CommonwC'alth Minister for Commerce, Mr. Oameron, on the subject. I shall qnote his opinion, and that of the Com­rnonwC':1lth GOYf'l'llmerit, which controls tllr export of mrnt.

Health [22 OCTOBER) 1940.\ (Amendment) Bill. 1203

.Mr. DILLo~.-ls that the man who suggested the use of sulphuric baths in a ('ertain connection ~

.Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-That comment (!onccrning the Commonwealth Minister's J'eference to myself makes his opinion all· the more valuable, and shows that he -expresses his views without any affection for me. The communication, which is <lated the 10th of October, stated-My Deal' Premier,

I haye your letter of to-day'lil date, in which you inquire the attitude of the Commonwealth to the export of beef from the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works farm at vVerribee, Victoria.

Responsible officers of my Department inform me that it would be most inadvisable, in the interests of the beef industry of Australia as n whole, for the export of Werribee beef to be permitted. In view of the tenor of tIle report which I have before me, I have to state that under no circumstallces am I prepared to lift the ban on the export of this beef.

Your Government and the Parliament of Victoria will, of course, act as they think best 'in the interests of Victoria when dealing with the URe of this beef for human consumption wit.hin your own State. On this aspect thf' Commonwealth expresses 110 view. The Com­monwf'alth will maintain the ban in the interests of the good reputation of Australian heef overseas.

Yours faithfully,

<;ould we have anything more definite thall that letter ~ Mr. Cameron said the ban must be maintained in the interests of our reputation as exporters of good beef.

Mr. CouN.-Mr. Cameron is satisfied that there is no danger of destroying the overseas meat market.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The }Iillister, speaking On behalf of the Commonwealth Government, said this beef was not fit for export to any country. Those who are Bupporting the Bill say, in effect, that although the beef should not be exported, and should not be permitted to go out of the State, it is good enough for local consumption. Some time ago a person suggested that a gift of this beef should be made to the people of Great Britain. I am glad to know the attitude of the Commonwealth Government, because if efforts had been made to export the beef they would have been prevented. If the ban were lifted the meat exporting coun­t.ries competing with the Commonwealth would use the fact as an argument against Australian beef. The passing of this measure would have far-reaching reper-

cussions. To remove the ban would be a bad advertisement for Victoria. I have heard it said that the Board should be allowed to sell this beef in the interests of its finances.

1\11'. CAIN.-I did not mention the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works.

l\Ir. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I did not say that the honorable member mentiuned the Board. He is only one of a number of people who favour the removal of the ban. I suppose some of the keenest advocates are members of the Board itself. They have said that the ban should be removed, because its imposition is having a serious effect on the Board's finances. In the circumstances, it is interesting to note the Board's annual revenue, the amounts being as follows :-1929.,30, £1,706,000; 1930-31, £1,767,000; 1931-32, £1,733,000; 1932-33, £1,703,000; 1933-34, £1,677,000; 1934-35, £1,684,000; 1935-36, £1,927,000; 1936-37, £2,005,000; 1937-38, £2,133,000; 1938-39, £2,214,000. In 1938-39 'the Board had a surplus of £70,865 on its enterprises, and in 1939-40 its surplus was £71,736.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - The Board's finances are better than the State's.·

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The Board~s finances are better than the State's were whe'll the Leader of the Opposition was Treasurer. The Board recently reduced the sewerage rate by Id. ill the £1, and that shows that it does not need extra taxation. The Board has bulg­ing revenues and handsome snrpluses, but I am not dealing with that point at all, although it is an argument advanced by some of its members. The paramount matter to be considered is the effect that the removal of the ban will have on human health. The effects on the local consumption of beef and on the export trade have also to be' remembered. The Government is definitely opposed to the lifting of the ban.

Mr. DILLON.-How definitely opposed to the Bill is the Government? Will it make the vote vital ~

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-If the Govern­ment did so some of the members of the Opposition would forget all about beef measles and think only of occupying the Treasury bench. If this Bill is agreed to the Government will submit legislation insisting on the branding of the beef as

1204 Health, I ASSEJ\lJ3 L Y. I (Amendment) Bill.

beef fattened on the sewage farm a1 Werribee. In addition we shall, either by legislation or by regulation, insist on a higher standard of purity of the effluent. The Board may well remember these facts. The very thought of passing legislation of this kind should be repulsive to every man and woman in this State. On reading a medical report to-night I learned that some of these tapeworms in human beings are 30 feet in length .. Does the Leader of the Opposition dispute that?

Sir STANLEY ARGYJ.E.-That is correct. Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-The honor­

able member for N orthcote should read the report submitted' by Dr. Gilruth. These matters were dealt \vith during the dehate 011 the Bill in the Legislative Oouncil.

Mr. OAU,,-What about Dr. Penfold's report?

Mr .. \ .• \. DUNSTAN.-The honor­able member conveniently forgets all about the other medical men. The Leauer of the Opposition, who is evidently sup­porting' the Bill, should endeavour to convince ::;ome of his supporters as to the wisdom of passing it before he endeavours to convince the House on the matter. There are press reports that this question is to be made an issue at the Polwarth

. by-election, but I have noted that the United Austi'alia party candidate is not advocating the lifting of the ban. Vic­toria leads in the quality of its meat exports, and it certainly would not do to export Werribee beef at the' present time. I hope the House will not agree to l'emovc the embargo. The matter has been discussed on numerous occasions. and, whatever decision is registered, I hope it will be final and conclusive.

Mr. OAIN.-YOU said you would not accept it as final.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I did not. The honorable member for N orthcote said he would not object to the branding of Wcrribec beef as sueh.

.M]'. CA TN.-YOU said you would insist Oll :l h(:ttC']· ,'<t:llLdHl'd for the Board's f'ffiucnt.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-Yes, and the public ,,"ould insist on it. The public would not allow the sewnge in a raw state to he lITigated on tllC' land used for pasturage purposes. That higher stan­dard\vould he the natural corollary to thr p:l~~aA"C' of legislation of this kind. I

hope Parliament will not agree to a retrograde step. The ban has caused no­hardship, but, on the contrary, it has ensured the sale of wholesome and pure· beef. If the ban is removed it will have far-reaching effects, not only on the health of the community, but on the State as a whole.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorrak).­I propose to deal with the Bill only from the medical point of view. I shall not speak as the Leader of my party, but as a doctor who knows something of the sub­jects discussed to-day. I cannot sit in ~y place and patiently listen to ridiculous statements made by some members who could not be expected to know what they were talking about. When we deal with the economic side of the question we deal with the effect of the ban on local prices, on the beef market overseas, and on th(> industry as a whole, but I shall not enter into those matters.

Mr. J. G. B. :WIcDoNALD.-They un" important.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-This is a health Bill. The main point raised against it is the preservation of public health~ The other side of the question is arguable,. and I am not denying it. I have heard certain statements made about public health, and if I have any belief in the profession in which I was trained;­I have a duty to point out where the House seems to be going astray. Some honorable members seem to assume that all medical men are research experts. Of course, they are not. An ordinary general practitioner knows how to> handle accidents and treat disease. He is trained to know that; but the research worker js a scientist. In that connection, there is one thing that I par­ticularly want to impress on the House. The word " science" means "knowledge ,;­and" truth," and no scientist can put his signature to anything that is untrue. At least, if he cloes so he ceases to be a scientist. When I listened to-day to some uf the criticism of distinguished men who have investigated this problem, and heard opposing opinions quoted from men who have never been heard of as authorities,. I began to ask why. The Premier became excited because I corrected him when he referred to three medical men. I told him t.hat Dr. Gilruth was not a medical man.

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1205

ltlr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I referred to Dr. Robertson, Dr. Featonby, and Dr. Gilruth, but I did not mean that Dr. Gilruth was 11 In edical man.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The Pre­mier said so, and that is why I corrected him. Dr. Gilruth was a personal friend of mine, and for his ability I had the hjghest respect. He was an able scientist ~n~ veterinary surgeon. A report by him IS worth reading; what he wrote about beef measles was quite sound, and in the main, was favourable rather than un­favourable to the us€' of beef from the ~etropolitan Farm for human consump­tIOn.

N ow let me give a bit of history. My name has been associated with the im­position of the ban. What is the truth? An accidental discovery was made at the abattoirs of the presence of beef measles at the Werribee farm, and the disease was found to be fairly prevalent. The facts were broug'ht under the notice of my Government, and we decided that there was possibly a danger to public health. We agreed that the facts should be investigated, and, pending the results ()f the investigation, we asked the Mel­bourne and Metropolitan Board of W ork!1 to give an undertaking that it would not sell a~y more cattle. That undertaking was given, but, before we could receive the results of the investigation, which was made by various authorities, my Govern­ment went out of office. That was in 1935 and in the same year a new Government; under the present Premier, introduced legislation to make the ban permanent not only on beef from the Metropolitan Farm, but also on beef from sewage farms throughout the State. Those are the facts. "}Iy Government put the ban on as a ~a.tter of preca~tion against the possi­bIlIty of somethmg serious, and when the investigation showed that the 'disease was not serious, the present Government <,ontinued the ban.

Oonsider who were the gentlemen who investigated the problem. I have already refel'1'ed to Dr. Gilruth. The other men were Professor Woodruff who was pro­flssor of bacteriology at'the Melbourne University and a research man of -eminence; Dr. Robertson, who was Chief Health Officer of the Donartment of Puhlic Health; a~Id Dr. Kellaway, of the Walter and Ehza Hall Institute of

Research. I want to remind honorable members that when I speak of the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Research, or of the Baker Medical Research Instltute, I am talking about scientific institutions of world fame, and not merely of some respected and very delightful private prac­titioner. I am talking about bodies whose findings are recognized throughout the h:·ngth and breadth of the civilized world. The mOll at the head of those in­stitutions are men we must listen to. Dr. Penfold was the head of the Bakel' :Medical Research Institute at the Alfrtd Hospital, and Dr. Kellaway is the head of the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Research at the Royal Melbourne lios­pital. Those men are not ordinal'Y prac" titioners; they are men who understand the meaning of research. They are scientists, and if they find a fact that is opposed to their theory, the theory has te go, and the fact stands. Let honorable members make no mistake about that.

Wbat did those men find regarding beef measles? They found a very interesting thing. They found the probable cause of the condition, which is a parasitic disease running through the cycle of two hosts, the ox and the human being. We have a similar cycle with hydatids, which affect other animals and mankind.

Mr. HOGAN.-Another cycle occur~ with fluke, in sheep.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-And there are others. The main point is that in this particular outbreak it was discovered that the probable cause of most of the cases was the influx into this State of foreigners from the semi-oriental State of Syria. In that country the disease i,s very prevalent. I' am not going to weary the House by repeating arguments that have been used many times in other places.

Mr. OAMERoN.-Why is the diseast' prevalent in Syria?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Because of the insanitary conditions in that coun­try, and because the people eat meat so badly cooked that it is almost raw. Syria is not the only country where the disease is prevalent. There are other countries in southern Europe where the people eat meat that Australians would not look at. Those people brought the disease here. and caused the infection of the cattle at Werribee and on other sewage fa l'ms. It was fonnd that cattle in variou~ pal'tR of

1206 Health rASSEMBLY·l (Amendment.) B7:U.

the State, which had never seen Werribee, had developed beef measles. vVe were deal­ing with something that could be made to

sound very unpleasant from the aesthetic point of view. We have heard some of that point of view in this House to-night, and in another place things were said that might make anyone sick. Reference was made to a tapeworm 30 feet long. That is uncommon, but it has been known to exist. We have had appeals to our aesthetic sense regarding the con­dition of affairs at Werribee. I am telling the House that all the medi­cal experience of any value in the community has been that there is no logic in this objection to Werribee beef. First of all, the condition can be dealt with; secondly, the disease exists in only very few people; and, thirdly, if proper methods are taken it can be eliminated. A letter appeared from Dr. Penfold in the Argus of the 21st of October, 1940. It r(>ao-

WERRIBEE BEEF. Sir,

May I, as the investigator employed by the Metropolitan Board of Works, be allowed a word on Werribee beef? Extremely slight infeRtations of beef measles were found in a few of the cattle. Nothing was known of immunity to the disease until we found that it was easy to immunize cattle against it by passing them through a mild attack by simply infesting them with a small number of eggs. After waiting approximately a year, the cattle were found to be immune; large doses of eggs were unable to produce further infestation. Moreover, it was known that cooking infested mcat rendered it non-infective. If the meat is to be cooked slightly, living infestations do not matter.

On our presenting the facts, especially those relative to immunity, Parliament decreed that no meat cultinlted on sewage-watered ground could be marketed, so the Metropolitan Board naturally stopped the research.

So the Board stopped research. There was a means of wiping out the disease, but research has been stopped, and all the Government says is, "Leave the matter where it is. Nothing must be done."

Mr. CAn~-.-That, I presume, is in the interests of public health! "

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Ap-parently so, according to the arguments used. I am talking only from the point of view of public health. What is the extent of the disease, as revealed by the number of cases treated in two of our main hospitals during the last eight years? I find that the only cases treated

at the Alfred hospital were one child m 1932-33, three children and t.hree adults in 1933-34, and three adults in 1934-35_ In 1935-36, "1936-37, and 1937-38 tape­worm cases were removed from the ordin­ary hospital and treated in the Hamilton Hussell community ward, where they wei'e under observation by Dr. Penfold. The Government offered a bonus of £5 each for all cases reported. No cases went into the ordinary hospitals, and, therefore, no statistics are available for those three years.

Mr. HYLAND.-Would not many cases be treated privately?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I was in practice for 25 years as a doctor before I became a specialist in X-ray work, and during that time I did not treat one case. The only cases I saw were in the Mel­bourne hospital, and they were very few. The cases treated in the Alfred Hospital after 1936-37 were: Two children in 1937-38, two adults in 1938-39, and one adult and two children in 1939-40. Now 1 turn to the Royal Melbourne Hospital. There have been no in-patients during the last five years, and only three out-patients. I have not the figures of the number of out-patients in previous years, because the statistics are not kept for longer than five years. The investigations showed that infestation of human beings was trivial. I should like to give some idea of the magnitude of the investigation made by Dr. Penfold, whose report to the Mel bourne and Metropolitan Board of \Vorks stated-

Our personal information is based on the study of 83 cases . . . . who were infested on the a vcrage for thirteen years . . . When 11 Public Health administrator is determinillg a question of public health policy, he balallees the evil effectR of the disease on one side against the cost on the other side of the public health effort which is to be made to prevent these evil effects.

The first evil effect to be feared from any disease is the deaths it occasions.

We have been informed by the Premier that no deaths have been recorded in the State from this disease. Dr. Penfold then stated-

The second consideration is the amount of morbidity or invalidity due to" the disease. Only two of onr 83 patients could be made to admit that they were not perfectly weU_ So much was this the case that we quite commonly had to beg them to submit to treat­ment. Except in the case of one patient, who only missed a day and a half during the two years of her infestation, no loss of time

Health r 22 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Amendment) Bill .. 1207

from work occurred on account of the disease. We have not been able to find any of the patients who, because of their infestation, hav~ refrained from their ordinary amusements, any more than from their work. The invalidity, therefore, is not worthy of mention.

Dr. Penfold then pointed out that persons infested with Taenia saginata can be eured easily and cheaply. Ris report con­tinued-

A personal communication (27/4/34) from the Treasury Department, Public Health Ser­lI;icf', Washington, U.S.A. stated-

Taenia saginata infection of man is not considered a public health problem in the United States.

Sewage farms are cornmon in the United States of America.

Mr. DODGsHuN.-Are cattle run on those f arms ~

Sh STANLEY ARGYLE.-I am not certain. Cattle are fattened on sewag3 farms in other places.

Mr. RYLAND.-Is not Berlin the only place where cattle are fattened On sewage fn.rms ~

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I shall refer to those farms later. It has been stated that there was a decline in tIH~ consumption of beef throughout Victoria following the discussions on this subject during 1935, and can one wonder at that decline ~ The psychological effect was obvious. Dr. Penfold dealt with that ~H'pect as follows:-

The psychological disturbance will disappear as soon as the sensational reports cease and the true position is appreciated by the public.

In his reports on the known cases, he 8airi--

Despite the more elaborate and novel methods adopted to locate cases of tapeworm infesta­tion, only 45 were discovered who had acquired their infestation in Victoria.

Ont of the 83 cases, only 45 acquired the disease ill Victoria.

Haviug regard to the time necessary for a lJIcasle ingested by man to develop into a com­plete tapeworm, we conclude that of these 45 l'aSCR-

Forty-one acquired their infestatiun at ~ome time during the twenty years prior to the apparent outbreak of beef measles in the Werribee cattIe.

I t was shown that 41 cases had the disease prior to the outbreak of beef measles in the cattle at the Metropolitan Farm.

Mr. OAIN.-More than 100,000 head of cattle had been sold from that farm.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The re­port then stated-

One acquired it during the period from the time of the apparent outbreak until the time the Werribee beef was withdrawn from the market.

Three acquired it from one to four months after May, 1934, when the Werribee beef was withdrawn from the market.

After. the ban had been placed on the cattle, three persons contracted the disease, but only one acquired it during the pre­vious period. Dr. Penfold qualified his ir.st statement, and said-

Another case has recently COllie to our notice who acquired tapeworm eleVl'1l months after May, 1934.

It is no use honorable members arguing tha t this disease is a real menace to public health. It has been shown to have infected some people.

Mr. DILLON.-Is it possible for the medical authorities to determine the exact date on which a person has acquired the disease ~

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-ReferencB has been made to a tapeworm being 30 feet long. The number of segments in that worm would show its age.

Mr. ROGAN.-How old is a tapeworm 30 feet long ~

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Possibly, it might be 30 years old; but I cannot say for certain. I listened with astonishment to the remarks of the honorable member for Brighton, who said he had read the medical evidence and tried to understand it. Without desiring to be offensive, I must say that the honorable member for Brighton failed to understand the medical evidence; he did not appreciate the dif­ference between a research worker and an ordinary doctor. The Premier doefi not realize that difference, because he has quoted a distinguished member of the Govermnen t in the other Rouse as an authority on this subject. Re is no more of an authority than I am.

Mr. OAIN.-Ris outlook on the subject is not determined by his medical know­ledge_

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The hon­orable member for Brighton commented on the use of the 1tielbourne and Metro­politan Board of Works sewage farm methods for the disposal of sewage. The Board sent its Engineer of Sewerage abroad to investigate what was being done

1208 Health r ASSEMBJ.J Y·l (Amendment) Bill.

in other parts of the world. The honor­able member for Brighton was correct ill his statement that when I was thc Leader of a Government we discussed the ques­t.ion whether it would be desirable to bring an expert to Victoria to see if our method ,,.,as the best. It was found 011

investigation that different methods of '3ewage disposal exist .according to the conditions which apply. The question of running the sewage into water was men­tioned. I would point out that the sewag~ of Ohicago runs into Lake Michigan, and probably honorable mem­bers are aware that the sewage of Oolae is run into Lake Oolac; it is treated, and is not raw sewage. In every case where sufficient dilution can be effected, water is availed of to dispose of sewage.

Mr. HOGAN.-The authorities decided that that was the cause of the outbreak of infantile paralysis in Ohicago.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - That theory was advanced; it has not been proved that the outbreak of infantile paralysis was due to the disposal of sew­age in water. Is there any evidence that the water supply of Melbourne has had sewage discharged into it?

Mr. BARRy.-There is no evidence of that.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Of course, there is not. I shall now comment on the methods used in other countries to dispose of sewage. The method of land disposaJ is almost universal, and it is carried out in different ways, according to the vary­ing conditions .. I was on a sewage farm in England some five years ago, and ] did not find anything unpleasant about that place. It was well conducted, and some of the live things that came off it \"0I'e eaten by me. They happened to be snipe, but that is another story. Mr. K F. Borrie, the Engineer of Sewerage of the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, reported as follows on his visit of investigation to Great Britain, thEl nontinent of Europe, and America, in 19:37. On the aspect of the land treat· ment of sewage, Mr. Borrie said-

Atatements have been made, from time to time, that, in the continuerl use of land treat· ment for the purification of its sewage, Mel­hourne has lag~ed behind other cities in the matter of sewage treatment. 1. therefore, took pains not only to visit sewa'ge farms wherever rpasonably possible, but to ascertain the status of purification by lanel treatment in the

countries yhdted. and to Reek tlH' opinions of some of the most prominent sanitary engineers and chemist" on this subject.

The use of land in the treatment of scwagt> is much wider than if! generally realized, awl [ had the opportunity of seeing at Milan in Haly, at Paris in France, at Berlin, Leipzig. ~ll1d Lennep in Germany, and at Oxford. Leicester, Nottingham, and Coventry in England, typical example8 of the manner in which land treatment is used in those COUll

tries. In Holland and America, the limita­tions of time a.nd distance prevented me froID i.nspecting any sewage farms, but I was able to discuss the question with engineers familiar with the local conditions.

1 shall not weary honorable members by reading the facts deduced by Mr. Borrie, but I can say of my own knowledge that nature's method of land disposal is a good one, and the talk we have had as to what is to be found is unpleasant. However, it has to be dealt with., and nature's method is sun, air, and soil. That has provAd satisfactory.

Mr. DILLoN.-Th8 Board says it should be T)lus cattle.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - And sheep. I do not want to be drawn into an argument on the question whether cattle and sheep should be allowed to graze on the Metropolitan Farm; neither do I desire to make remarks similar to those that the Premier made during his speech-about the political aspect of the ·question. That does not concern me. What does concern me is the truth. I want the truth, and if anyone can con­vince me that the facts I have placed be­for the House are wrong, I shall with· draw them. I ask the Premier to produce one real authority to say that the statements I have referred to are wrong. No attempt has been made to produce buch an authority. The findings of Dr. Penfold and the other three distin­guished officers of the different research institutes in Melbourne have not been disputed by competent authorities.

We have been told that a certain polio tician in another place is an authority on this subject. I do not accept him as an authority, and he would be right in not accepting my word, because I am not an authority. However I understand what I read: and I say that the authori­ties I have quoted are worthy of credence. They state den.nitely that there is nothing in this matter from the point of view of public· health. That is the only aspect that concerns me.

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1209

Mr. COYLE.-That is, provided you cook the cysts.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Partly provided that they are cooked. The disease can be eliminated from a herd, if certain action is taken, but that method has been stopped. .

Mr. DILLoN.-Did the Board not think it was worth while?

Sir STANLEY A.RGYLE. - The Board was making an investigation, but when Parliament stepped in, the Board did not go any further with the matter. Can it be blamed for having refrained from proceeding further? Reference has been made to the cooking of the meat. The various reports are available to honorable members, and they show that the extent of cooking necessary to render the meat safe is trivial. The degree of infestation in cattle is so small, and its effect is so infinitesimal, that the whole thing is absurd. It is an insult to one's intelli­gence to be asked to deal with this subjec~ from the point of view of public health. It is arguable from the political aspect, but I am not discussing that. When the Premier says this is a subject vitally affecting the public health of the com­munity, I reply-" Rubbish! "

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Are you prepared to admit that some people in the State will be affected if the Board is allowed to sell its cattle for human con­sumption~

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-I am not. That can happen to an odd person, but it cannot be described as a menace to public health.

Mr. J. G. B. McDo~ALD.-You are prepared to allow that risk to be taken?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The risk can be reduced.

Mr. BARRy.-People are likely to acquire the disease to-day?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - Yes, from cattle not grazing on the }.{etro­politan Farm. If an infected person leaves faeces in the vicinity of cattle in the country, it is possible that they may develop the disease.

Mr. OLD.-There is a concentration of cattle on the Metropolitan Farm.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Steps can be taken on the Metropolitan Farm to combat the risk of infection. There are cases quite apart from the cattle from

th(' Metropolitan Farm. The :Minister of \Vater Supply said that tho cattle are concentrated in that area, but the result of that concentration has been only H few cases in twenty years. It is absurd to say that that is a menace to public health.

Mr. HOGAN (Minister of Agriculture). -The Leader of the Opposition has en­deavoured to show the House that tape­worm infection is not serious. The honor­able member for N orthcote stated that many other stock diseases were prevalent and that little or nothing was being done to prevent their infecting human beings. He said that in many places no meat inspection was carried out. In addition to the meat inspectors in the areas mentioned by the honorable mem· bel' for N orthcote, there are, as well as health inspectors, veterinary surgeons, stock inspectors, and dairy supervisors attached to the Department of Agricul­ture. What does the honorable member think they are doing?

Mr. OAIN.-I do not think any of them are qualified to examine meat.

Mr. ·HOGAN.-They are most highly qualified, and among them are the m~n best able to examine diseased animals­the veterinary surgeons. Eleven veterinary surgeons are at present employed by the Department, and seven more are in train­ing at the Sydney University, on Govern­ment scholarships.

~fr. BARRY.-Werribee is a long' way from Sydney.

:Mr. HOGAN.-If the honorable mem­ber for Carlton knew as much as he thinks he knows, he would realize tIlat veterinary science is not. taught in the University of Melbourne, and that studC'nts of veterinary science must go to the Sydne.y University. Of the seven students there at present, four aff>

doing their fifth year studies and will graduate next year, return to Victoria, and take up service with the Department of Agriculture. In the Department there are also seven senior stock inspectors, 22 stock inspectors, and temporary stock inspectors., and the duties of those officers and of the veterinary surgeons are to attend cattle sales and inspect the animaho for sale. If any of the beasts have visible signs of disease' they are condemned before they are sold, and are destroyed.

1210 Health r ASSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

Sir S'l'ANLEY l~RGY Ll~.-Can those officers jnspect and diagnose beef meas1et4 in a live beast?

Mr. HOGAN.-I do not think they can, but I am replying to the st:;ttement of the honorable member for N orthcote that nothing is being done to eliminate other diseases in cattle, such as cancer and tuberculosis. If an animal has external signs of cancer, it is condemned while alive, and destroyed.

Mr. DODGSHuN.-Have not the inspec­tors the right to brand a beast, which, although it may .be sold, must be killed under supervision ~

Mr. HOGAN.-Yes. In addition to the officers I have already mentioned, 10 senior dairy supervisors and 77 dairy supervisors are employed by the Depart­ment of Agriculture to inspect dairies and dairy cattle, and they condemn all cows that show signs of disease. Those cattle are condemned while they are alive. That method of locating disease is more effec­tive than by examination of the beast after it has been slaughtered. In addi­tion to the officers of the Department of Agriculture, the Health Department em­ploys 18 health inspectors who are highl~ qualified men and are stationed in various parts of the State, as well as the doctors of the Health Department-who are public health officers-to whom the honorable member for N orthcote referred. Some municipalities have a health in­spector and a health officer, and in country districts a zoning system is in operation where two or three municipali­ties jointly have a qualified health inspector.

Mr. CArN.-The health inspectors are llot qualified.

Mr. ROGAN.-The health inspector£; are much more highly qualified than th(· meat inspectors.

Mr. CAIN.-The veterinary surgeons and health inspectors may be qualified, but none of the stock inspectors or dairy supervisors is obliged to obtain a meat inspector's certificate.

Mr. nOGAN.-All these inspectors are qualified and have to pass a severe examination before they are appointed to perform the responsible duty of protect­ing the health of the people and of stock. The I.Je&.der of the Opposition addressed himself to the question whether tapeworm

infection was a menace to public health. The tapeworm infects human beings and oxen only. It can only be transmitted to oxen from human beings infected with tapeworms, and from oxen to humlW beings. The cycle of the life of the tape~ worm is from human beings to oxen by medium of sewage deposited on pastures eaten by cattle. When the cattle eat that" grass, they contract the tapeworm, if tapeworm eggs are in the sewage deposited on the grass. If human beings eat the flesh of an ox infected with tapeworm cysts or beef measles, those human beings in turn become infected with tapeworm, and so the cycle is completed. Research doctors and medical authorities through­out the world are agreed that that is the cycle of life of the tapeworm.

A similar cycle of life exists with the fluke in sheep. The eggs drop on the grass, and unless those eggs are hatched out and are able to find a host-a snail­they perish. If, however, they find a snail, the fluke develops j the eggs are dropped from the snail on to the grass, and the sheep eats the grass j and so the cycle is completed. To break that cycle, the Department of Agriculture and intelligent g'l'aziers destroy the snails. The way in which we destroy snails is--

Mr. CAIN.-To put lime on them! Mr. HOGAN.-The honorable member

for Northcote is wrong again. He has made two guesses to-night. His first guess was that the milk from the Werribee sewage farm was being sold in Melbourne for human consumption, which is entirely wrong. His second guess, that snails are destroyed by putting lime on them, is equally incorrect. The snails are de­stroyed by putting bluestone in the water where the snails live--but, of course, the honorable member for N orthcote has never heard of that. If the cycle of the fluke is broken by destroying the host­'which is the snnil-fluke ran he dimin­a ted from flocks of sheep. A similar principle, of breaking the cycle of life of the tapeworm, must be applied in the case of eliminating the tapeworm. Many people are diffident about pur('.has­ing and eating meat ('.ontaining tapeworm cysts 01' eggs.

Mr. CAIN.-They are also diffident about eating meat affected with tuber­culosis.

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Amendment) Bill. 1211

Mr. HOGAN.-There is a risk, and the Leader of the Opposition admitted it, t.hat they may contract tapeworm, and on that account some people will cease eating meat altogether whether it be from the Metropolitan Farm or anywhere else. That happened when the beef measles scare developed some years ago. If Melbourne were beseiged by Hitler's forces and clean food was unobtain­able, people might then eat beef that contained tapeworms, but speaking personally, I prefer to eat clean beef without any risk of contracting tape­worm; and that is the opinion of many others. If people cease eating beef, it will have a bad economic effect not only on the beef industry but on the dairying industry, because many cows reared on dairy farms are fattened for the beef market. We should not be able to export beef of that kind overseas, because that would be forbidden by the Commonwealth Department of Commerce. We should not only have to meet the competition from . Queengland and New South Wales beef, but also the prejudice of our own people against beef if they suspected that it was affected with tapeworm cysts. People will not eat beef that might contain a medium of tapeworm infestation, and the beef raised on sewage farms is the only place where such infestation is found.

The Leader of the Opposition spoke a bout research officers. I desire to direct the attention of the House to a remark­able discovery that has been made by onE' of the most eminent research men in the world and which is of tremendous importance. Recently Victoria suffer'ed an epidemic of infantile paralysis. Human sewage is universally recognized

. as a dangerous source of infection; not only can tapeworm be contracted because of it, but typhoid epidemics have been caused by it in every country in the world. The discovery has now been made that human sewage is also the source of the infantile paralysis germ. I shall read to the House my authority for making that statement. It is contained in an article appearing in the Melbourne Herald of the 19th of September, and is as follows:-

INFANTILE VIRUS ISOLATED BY SWEDE.

Stockholm, Wednesday.-Dr. Karl Kling,' chief of the Swedish Bacteriologica.l Research, reports ha.ving successfully isola.ted the virus of

infantile paralysis, in the excretions of patients, in sewer water, and in contaminated wells, where it harl lived for a long time.

He has reached the conclusion that the infection spreads chiefly indirectly, like typhoid, dysentery!, and cI101('r8., and rardy directly as a result of personal contact,

Live virus was fouud in butter made wit.h contaminated water.

KLING'S THEORY.

The assistant director of the Walter and Eliza Institute, Dr. F. M. Burnet, said to-day that Professor Kling had been working for years on the theory he originated, that the germ was passed on through the intestines, and was likely later to contaminate food and water. There was no doubt that the virus did pass into sewers during epidemics. This was proved in America last year, when ReWel'S con­taining the virus were cut off from the general systems during epidemics in Detroit and Charlston, and doctors succeeded in isolating the germ.

Mr. EVERARD.-Good God! There i~ no hope for us.

Mr. HOGAN.-There is. We hope that the virus of the disease will be dis­covered, and that. it will be eliminated from the host in which it lives .

Mr. MULLENs.-IR milk produced on the Metropolitan Farm sold in the metro· polis?

Mr. HOGAN.-N o. The Metropoli-tan Farm is not licensed to keep dairy cattle, because the place is insanitary. Not only is the farm not allowed to send milk to Melbourne, as was stated by the honorable member for N orthcote--

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-On a point of order, I wish to state that. I did not say what the Minister has just attributed to me, and I ask him to withdraw hi~ remark.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -The honorable member for Northcote complains about a statement. which the Minist.er wrongly attributed to him, and seeks a withdrawal.

Mr. HOGAN (Minister of Agriculture). -You, Mr. Speaker, were in the chair when the honorable member for Hampden was speaking. The honorable member for N orthcote then said that milk from the farm conducted by the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works was !3ent to, and sold in Melbourne.

Mr. CAIN.-I did not say anything of the kind.

Mr. HOGAN.-I heard the honorable. member say it.

1212 Health r ASSEMBLY·l (Amendment) BiU.

Mr. CAIN.-YOll must have dreamt it, and I ask for an unconditional with­drawal of the statement.

Mr. HOGAN.-You, Mr. Speaker, heard the statement referred to.

The SPEAKER.-I' did not hear the words in question.

Mr. HOGAN.-J can assure you that I heard them.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Milk from the Metropolitan Farm has never been sold in Melbourne.

Mr. IIOGAN.-Of course not! The SPEAKER. - The honorable

member for N orthcote' has complained that the Minister attributed to him wordR that he did not use, and seeks a with­drawal of them. I urge the Minister to (~omply with the request.

Mr. nOGAN.-We all heard the re­mark of the honorable member,· but, out of deference to you, Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reference to it. . I wish to indicate what the Department is doing to prevent the spread of these diseases. In the first place, I shall deal with those two serious stock diseases, tuberculosis and pleuro-pneumonia. The Department of Agriculture began tuberculin testing in December, 1937, and since then 29,225 tests have been made. Last month 1,716 cattle were tested for tuberculosis, and only eleven reacted to the test. They were slaughtered, and the owners were compensated. No trace of tuberculosis was found in three of the eleven cows that reacted to the test.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That is not unusual.

Mr. HOGAN.-It is not. It is not until after an animal has been slaughtered and a post-mortem has been made that the presence of tuberculosis is definitely proved. Of the cows that were tested for tuberculosis last month less than half of 1 per cent. actually had tuberculosis. In addition, 19,272 cows were reported by other veterinary surgeons as having been tested by them, from the 30th of June, 1939, to the 30th of June, 1940, for tuberculosis.

Mr. CAIN.-Was last month's test the third, the fourth, or the fifth ~

Mr. HOGAN.-It was the first tost on (:el'tain farms.

Mr. CAIN.-When the district at Whit~ tlesea was dealt with, was that a first test ~ I think I shall ask for the returns to be presented. Your figures are not as good .as you make them out to be.

Mr. HOGAN.-The Department has been conducting tests for three years, and as the cows infected with tuberculosis are eliminated the percentage of reactions will naturally decline. Among the farms dealt with last month were a number that had not previously been subjected to a tuberculin test.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Has there been any investigation in recent years for the presence of tuberculosis infection in milk sold in Melbourne ~

Mr. HOGAN.-That work is proceed­ing continuously. I come now to pleuro­pneumonia, which at one time was ram­pant in Victoria and caused serious losses. Prior to the passing of the Cattle Com­pensation Act in 1924, all the herds on dairy farms where outbreaks of pleuro­pneumonia had occurred were destroyed. by officers of the Department of Agricul­ture, but no compensation was paid to the owners. As no compensation waS payable in respect of animals slaughtered because of infectious diseases, there was a tendency among cattle owners to hidEl the fact that there was disease among their herds, with the result that diseases spread rapidly.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Pleuro-pneu­monia is not communicable to human beings.

Mr .. HOGAN.-I am outlining what the Department of Agriculture has accom­plished in the direction of coping with diseases other than tapeworm. It is our duty to eliminate fluke in sheep and. pleuro-pneumonia and tuberculosis in cattle. In addition, we must endeavour to eliminate tapeworm in cattle. The results are a wonderful testimonial to the Department. In the first year of the operation of the Cattle Compensation Act the number of cattle killed because they were found to be infected with pleuro-pneumonia was 758, and compen­sation amounting to £4,011 was paid. In 1925-26, the figures were 1,302 and £6,769 respectively; in 1926-27, 1,978 and £10,860; in 1927-28, 630 and £2,960; ill 1928-29, 343 and £1,442; in 1929-30, 35 and £301; in 1930-31, 181 and £1,140;

Health [22 OOTOBER} 1940.] (Amendment) Bill. 1213

in 1931-32, 322 and £1,582; in 1932-33, 62 and £322; in 1933-34, 15 and £47; in 1934-35, 3 and £11. It was then thought that the trouble had been cleaned up, but certain cattle infected with pleuro-pneu­monia surreptitiously entered Victoria from New South Wales, with the result that there was another outbreak in 1936-37 when 363 cattle were destroyed, compen­sation amounting to £926 being paid. The measures taken were so effective that in 1937-38 only four head of cattle werfl found to be infected and were destroyed. In 1938-39, the number was eight; and in 1939-40, it was 27. Up to date, in the present financial year, only two have been found and killed. The total number of cows slaughtered to eliminate pleuro­pneumonia since 1924-25 is 6,04~, and the total amount of compensation paid to owners is £30,733.

The Department also imposes quaran­tine restrictions, not only where there is an outbreak of pleuro-pneumonia, but also where a contact is found. If an anima] infected with pleuro-pneumonia comes into Victoria, the farm where it is dis­covered is quarantined and the adjoining farms also.

Mr. CAIN.-The Department does everything but inspect the meat slaughtered in country districts.

Mr. HOGAN.-It is clear that the Department is' adopting stringent methods for the elimination of tuberculosis, cancer, and pleuro-pneumonia in cattle and of fluke in sheep. Equally stringent measures must be employed to eliminate tapeworm.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-What are you doing about it?

Mr. HOGAN.-If the Bill now before the House is passed, the ban on cattle graz­ing on land where sewage is deposited will be lifted. In that case, beef from the Wer­ribee farm will be sold for human con­sumption and the cycle of life of the tape­worm that we have been endeavouring to break will be resumed. On the other hand, by preventing the sale of such cattle, that cycle is broken, and in that way we protect the health of the con­sumers. If this ·Bill becomes law, those interests will be neglected, and the econo­mic security of the State, with which the cattle industry is so closely bound, will be undermined.

Session 1940.-[ 52]

Mr. REID (Oakleigh).-I was im­pressed with the remarks of the Leade\' of the Opposition, whose special know­ledge enables him to make a valuable contribution to a debate on a Bill such as that now before the House. After ha ving examined the evidence he adduced I feel certain that the people should not be alarmed if the ban on the sale of Metropolitan Farm beef for human con­sumption is lifted. Certain honorable members have declared that the Bill now before the House is purely a health measure, but I should like to be able to persuade myself that that is the case. Judging by the tone of the debate, I consider that there is. be­hind t he movement more than a p' pears on the surface. The health of the people is of great importance. Great thought has been given to this legis­lation, which has occupied the minds of mauy people for a long time. The Bill was the subject of a resolution passed at a Labour party conference recently. The l'C'solution asked for the ban to be lifted. That shows that the public is giving the matter consideration.

The municipalities I represent-Oak­leigh, Caulfield, and Malvern-contain a large number of people. The councils of those municipalities also have written to me asking me to support the lifting of the ban. Have not the councillors of those municipalities some consideration for the health of the people they represent ~ For myself, I have to realize that if the Bill is passed, meat from the Metropoli­tan Farm will be placed on the market, and that it may be used in my home. Therdore, I have to face the question, " Is it right that t.his ban should be lifted in the interests of the people I rC'prpsent, and of those who live ill my home?" The only logical conclusion that I can come to is that I ought to seek the advice of the men who are competent to advise me on the subject, and they are the men who were employed by the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works to investi­gate the facts. Many extraneous matters have been brought into the discussion. Cheap meat for the people has been one of "Town versus Country." Ap­the debate, the eontest seems to me to ue one of "Town versus Country." Ap­parently, nearly every country member

1214 Health rASSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.'

will vo.te against the Bill, and nearly eyery metro.po.litan member will vo.te fo.r it.

~fr. MAcKRELL.-The people who raise the cattle kno.w mo.st abo.ut the subject.

Mr. REID.-Tho.se who. kno.w mo.st about the subject are those who inspect the carcasses, and the experts who have been emplo.yed by :the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works to make inv.estigations. If the honorable member had an illness, to whom would he go for the best advice?

Mr. HOLLAND.-A Chinese herbalist. Mr. REID.-That interjection indi­

rate.s the mentality expressed in the Bill. Some members who are supporting t.he ban would go to a Chinese herbalist if they were ill rather than to a Oollins­street specialist. I might explain to the honorable member for Flemington that when I was seriously ill I went. to a Chinese herbalist, and, after having attcnd€'d him for about three months, I was waiting one night for an in terview when I heard the sis­ter say, "The doctor will not be able to see any more patients to-night. Hr has a very bad cold. He has taken ha If a dozen Aspros and a glass of whiskey, and has gone to bed." I came to the conclusion that if the herbs he was supplying to me would not cure him, I had better have no more to do with him.

I have given the Bill very earnest con­sideration, and I have been to the Metro­politan Farm, where I heard the manager address a meeting of representatives of various municipalities. I was amazed at the cleanliness of the farm. I have heard honorable members speak of cattle wading in filth up to their knees, and I heard the honorable member for Brighton say that he could smell the Werribee farm at. Geelong. I say that that stat8ment is positively untrue. My friends in the Country party who are concerned about the sale of cattle from the Metropolitan Farm have not much reason to boast about the sanitary arrangements in their own districts. Some country sea· side resorts have septic tank systems, the effluent from which runs down the main streets into the sea. Country members on this occasion, however, are the mem­bel'S who are talking about the public health. The Metropolitan Farm is con-

structed on the best lines possible, and I feel sure that tho.usands o.f peo.ple to-day are eating the sheep raised there. There js no objection to the sale of sheep from tbe farm.

1-11'. HOGAN.-Yes, there is.

Mr. ~EID.-I suppose the objection will come later when the market is affected by the sale of the sheep. The Minister of Agricul tUl'e, in his speech, showed how the tapeworm egg is eaten by the cattle on the farm, and, in turn, eaten by the human being. That cycle could be prevented by not allowing persons who are infested with tapeworm to use the sewerage system. I know that I shall call forth another storm of inter­jections when I raise another important point. I remind honorable members of the keen interest taken in thn matter by the housewives' associations. All mem­bers of Parliament have been asked by those bodies to assist in lifting the ban. Who is more entitled than the housewife to express an opinion. on the lifting of the ban? The Housewives Association of Victoria is a .hody with thousands of members. Members supporting the Go­vernment express fear that if the ban is lifted the public will not buy beef. If that fear is justified, the Government could bring down legislation compelling persons who sell beef from the Metro­politan }'arm to brand it, so that the public may know exactly what they are buying. Even if that is done, I shall stil1 support the Bill. My attitude was the same 'when we were discussing the marketing of margarine. So long as the public know ,vhat they are buying, they sho.uld be allowed to buy ,vhat they want.

Mr. HOGAN.-Even if they buy tape­worm?

Mr. REID.-According to the reports of the experts, the cattle from Werribee are as goo,d as most other cattle killed for human consumption. There is not much supervision, I understand, of slaughter­ing in country districts. Some of the animals killed there may have tapeworm. In some districts, night-soil is spread over the grass and cows eat it. Those cows are as likely to contract tapeworm a:; are the cattle on the Metropolitan Farm.

Mr. I{YLAND.-If that is done, it is definit(lly against the law.

Health [22 OCTOBER) 1940.] (Amendment) Bill. 1210

. Mr. REID.-After having given serious ('onsideration to the Bill, I am of opinion that it should be passed. I believe that the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works has stated the case fairly, without hiding anything. It has been said that members are not influenced by debates in this House. Perhaps that is true of some members, but I wish to pay a tribute to the Leader of the Opposition for the i uformation he conveyed to the House. That information was based on his knowledge and experience. I have no fpu)' und no hesitation in voting for the Bill, and I believe that I am taking the right action in the interests of the people r represent and of those who have asked 111(' to support the Bill.

Mr. HYLAND (Minister of Transport). --'Yhen Truth newspaper in 1934 brought this subject very successfully before the puIllie', I do not think it realized that the nrgurnent would go on year after year. [ want to pay a tribute to that paper for tlLP statements it made at that time. It ~(lt out the whole case fairly. No one ('all say that Trulh has not always had thr interests of the working man and of the poorer sections of the community at henrt. Year after year it has consistently upheld the rights of the poorer members of the community, by endeavouring to see that they obtain goods of the highest possible quality at reasonable prices. rrhat paper is still supporting those who object to the lifting of the ban. The Leader of the Labour party mentioned {'ountry slaughter houses; he said that they were not inspected, and that they were dirty and infested with flies. Every one who lives in the country knows that (·ountry slaughter houses are inspected regularly, and that those who conduct them are compelled to keep the meat in fly-proof chambers. The honorable mem­ber's statements are a reflection on a body of men who are doing their work well-the inspectors and the butchers. The public health has been mentioned time and again to-night, and I am not going to refer to it at any length; but I wish to quote what Mr. R. G. :Menzies snid in 1934, when he was Deputy Premier:-

No apprehension need be felt that the position established will be broken down. The first and most important consideration is the public health. The second is the effect on the cattle market, both here and overseas.

That statement was made by Mr. R. G . Menzies, as the considered opinion of the Government of the day. It was pis view that the health of the community wa~ paramount. The Premier has read ~ letter from the Commonwealth Govern­ment to the effect that it will not sanction the export of meat from the Metropolitan Farm, Werribee, or from any other sewage farm. The honorable member for N orth­cote stated that in case of sickness he would go to experts for advice. I agree with that contention. If we wanted some information about coal mines, we would ask the honorable member for W onthaggi to speak. If we desired information rela­tive to the sale of cattle, the ex-member for Polwarth was the man to whom we wo.uld go. He 'Was selling stock and cattle, and was in a position to know. In 1938 he said-

When Parliament placed a ban on the sale of cattle from the Metropolitan Farm, it did so because of the conditions then prevailing.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Coll1:n,qwood).­On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Transport in order in quoting extracts from a speech made by an ex-member of the House in support of hiR arguments?

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). - The Minister is in order in reading quotations of what was said by a member of this House.

Mr. HYLAND (Minister of Transport). -Mr. Allan MeR. McDonald continued-

Have those conditions been altered since T Have different methods of' treatment been adopted? Is there anything to cause us to believe that in the future there will be no further outbreak of beef measles in cattle? If not, I briefly remind honorable members of what happened during the last scare. Unfortunately, the publicity given to the subject was respon­sible, in a large measure, for the decreased consumption of beef at that time. It is a fact that the consumption of beef fell from 25 to 30 per cent. and that prices fell also. If the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works lost from £30,000 to £40,000 because of that publicity, it is a safe estimate that Vic­torian graziers lost £1,000,000 because of the decreased consumption of beef.

That was the considered opinion of the ex-member for Polwarth. Although the Government did not agree with him politically, it must admit that he knew his job. It is prepared to take the honorable member's word when he said that consumption of beef fell from 25 to

1216 Health r ASSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

30 per cent. The honorable mem­bpI' for Brighton, m a clear and concise speech, dealt with every aspect of the case from the Government's point of view, and he is to be congratulated on what he said. He mentioned that 6 acre-feet of sewage is spread annually over 10,000 acres of land in the Werribee district.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-How much of that is water?

Mr. HYLAND.-There is a certain amount of water. God help us if it were all solids! I shall now refer to the smell that is discernible by anyone travelling along Geelong-road. I traversed that road recently when the wind was in the wrong direction for me, and the smell was shocking. Recently, the honorable member !or Barwon has been anxiously endeavour­lDg to ascertain to what extent the Metro­politan Farm was being extended in the direction of Geelong. The city of Geelong is growing rapidly, but are residents of that city expected to submit to the con­tinual stench that arises from the sew­age farm?

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-The passage of the Bill will not affect the amount of smell arising from the farm.

Mr. HYLAND.-I shall now refer to a subject which has not been extensively dealt with up to the present. The Mel­bourne and Metropolitan Board of Worb should inquire into the prospects of effectively treating sewage at Werribee. I propose to refer to the report of a debate in this House On the 10th of September. 1931, when the Budget was being con­sidered. You, Mr. Speaker, were Attorney­General in the Hogan Government, and on page 4920 of Hansard, Vol. 187, I re­ferred to a statement made by you on the 11th of August, 1931, according to thE' report on page 2093 of the same volume of Ha.nsard-

The Government will have to be guided first of all by the whole question of the conversion of the large sums of money that are due by t~ese . authorities, and, secondly-a matter of vItal Importance-by the desire and willingne,:;p of those authorities to paRR the concessions on to the people who should get the advantage of them.

My remarks then continued-The Leader of the Opposition referred to

the matter, and read a letter from the Melbourm~ and Metrop~litan Board of Works, one para­graph of whIch stated :-" It is estimated that

a reduction of 22~ per cent., or so much of th(' figure as is applicable in the interest payabh' in respect to the Melbourne issues above· mentioned, would relieve the Board to th9 extent of £1 93,000 per annum, with consequent benefit to the ratepayers of the metropolis."

The Leader of the Opposition commented-That contemplates passing on the benefit

of the relief received' to the people who con­tribute to the Board's revenue.

I interjected-So long as the Board will do that, that 19

the main thing.

The Leader of the Opposition added-If the Board obtained relief through an Act

which would lighten its responsibilities, and if it failed to pass on the relief to its rate­payers, it would be an iniquitous course.

The Board did not pass on the relief to ratepayers.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-What has all that to do with the Bill?

Mr. HYLAND.-The Board was re­lieved to the extent of £193,000, but we now hear a complaint that the Board is being penalized because it cannot sell cattle from the Metropolitan Farm, and is losing money.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Why are you stone-walling the Bill? .

Mr. HYLAND.-I am setting out the caSe as I see it.

Mr. BARRY.-What about saying some­thing about the Bill?

Mr. HYLAND.-There is another matter I desire to mention in connection with the Melbourne and Metropolitan Boarel of Worke. During 1937-38 the Government granted £61,500 to the Board for unemployment relief purposes. I shall now refer more particularly to the finan­cial position of the Board. I have searched its recent reports-the report for the present year is not available-and I find that the item "Depreciation" made its first appearance, so far as I can see, in the General Net Revenue Statement for 1938. That statement showed that £10,324 had been set aside for depreciation, while in 1939 a sum of £61,319 was set aside for a similar purpose. In connection with the Board's contributions to a fire insurance fund, in 1933 it set aside £500 for that purpose, in 1935, £704; 1936, £696 ; 1937, £10,000; 1938, £20,000, and 1939, £25,000. On top of that, as the Premier stated, the Board reduced its rate by 1d. in the £1, and disclosed a surplus of £70,000 in the last two years. With the revenue available to it, the Board is in

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1217

a pmntlOll to institute inquiries reI at in .. to the disposal of sewage.

1 shall now refer to the cost of provid­ing proper treatment works at Werribee. It has been stated, time and again, that the cost would be enormous. No one is in a position to say what it would cost, because proper inquiries have not been made. Mr. R. G. Menzies, when he was Attorney-General, in 1934, said that the Board estimated that the setting up of the necessary plant to bring about a treatment of the sewage to eliminate all possibility of infection would cost £1,000,000. Not long after that" date the Leader of the Opposition estimated the cost at £4,000,000.

Sir STANJ~EY ARGYLE.-What are you talking about ~

Mr. HYLAND.-In yolume 204 of Hansard, at page 786, the Leader of the Opposition said by interjection that the cost of a proper treatment plant at Wer­ribee would be more like £4,000,000 than £1,000,000. Apparently, no one knows what thp. cost would be. If the Board would get down to the job and ascertain th£' cost, it would be doing some good. It should endeavour to ser that the effluent is disposed of outside the Heads in some way.

Sir STANLEY.ARGYJ~E.-Do you suggest that could be done at a cost of £l,OOO,OOO?

111:1'. HYLAND.-N o. When the war is over a tremendous post-war problem win be the provision of employment. I suggest that the installation of a propel' sewage treatment plant at Werribee ('ould be proceeded with. I further suggest that the treated effluent could be disposed of outside the Heads of Port Phillip Bay. In Sydney, and in many other places, the sewage effluent is effectively disposed of. In country towns residents pay a sewer­age and water rate; in OIle town in my electorate the rate is up to 4s. 2d. in the £1. The Board of ¥lorks rate is 1s. 9d. in the £1.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-YOU are wen aware that country towns have been finan­cially assisted by the Government through the unemployment relief funds.

Mr. HYLAND.-The Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works also ob­tained :financial assistance from that source. In country towns treatment works must be provided, because the local authorities are not permitted to spread

ra w sewage oYcr the countryside. T hr Board of VV orks is not compelled to install effective treatment works.

:Mr. HaLLWAy-Why does not the Government compel it to take action in that direction?

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Have you for­gotten that the Board of Works provides the nnest water supply system in the world?

Mr. HYLAND. - I give the Board credit for its water supply system. There has never been any argument about that. The statement has been made outside Parliament that the Board does not pay rates on its properties. I would point out that in 1927 Parliament passed a Bill compelling the Board to pay to a number of shires an amount equivalent to rates as a contribution for roads constructed to certain properties. On its expiration in 1937 that legislation was rene\V(\d by Parliament. In view of t.he fact that country towns are compelled to install sewage-treatment works, I can see no reason why the Melbourne and Metro­politan Board of Works should not makA an honest attempt to install a proper treat­ment plant at Werribee.

Mr. MURPHY (Port Melbourne).­The industrial population of :Melbourne has looked forward for some time to the introduction of this Bill. The statement that the public of Melbourne does not favour the measure is contrary to the facts. The opinion of the public was ex­pressed at a recent conference in Mel­bourne when 20,0 persons representing the great Labour movement carried a J'csolution urging the lifting of the ban imposed on the sale for human consump­t.ion of cattle from the Metropolitan Farm. About 1933, the present Leader of the Opposition, when Premier, entered into an agreement with the Melbourne and :Metropolitan Board of Works that until such time as an inquiry was held no cattle from the Metropolitan Farm should be sold for human consumptiou. The Board adhered to that agreement. The then Premier instructed the late Dr. Gilruth to investigate the matter, and hilt report was not unfavourable to the lifting of the ban. Dr. Penfold also reported tha t the effect on public health of beef measles in cattle from the Werribee farm was insignificant. Then a committee ~on­sisting of Professor Woodruff, Dr. John

1218 Health r l\'SSE~1:BLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

Dale, and Dr. Kellaway was appointed to make an investigation. Their report stated that there was little danger to the public Iwalth from the sale for human consump­tion of rattle from the Board's farm.

A move was then made by perSOll::! intr1'ested in the prohibition of the sale of the cattle. A conference held at KYlleton in 1933 convened by the Cham­ber of' Agriculture carried a resolution urging the Government to consider im­mediately the advisableness of preventing thp. Board competing with the cattle raisers of the State. Later, the question ",ns d(~bated in this House, and I remem­b('I' a speech made by the honorable mem­bpI' for Waranga. Speaking as an Hlldionp.cl', he !said that the effect of placing the 130ard's cattle on the market Hlp1'eSented to the cattle raisers a loss of £1 on every head of cattle sold. I ap­preciate that the cattle raisers are trying to protect their own interests, but I con­si<1r1' it my duty to proter.t the interests of the public of 1felbourne. The Premier furnished information to-night showing that the number of cattle placed on the market from the Board's farm over a ppl'iod of four years immediately prior to . the imposition of the ban represented only 2 per cent. of the number of cattle slaughtered for human consumption. Those figures show that the Board's cattle ('omprised only a very small propo.rtion of t.he market. I shall outline briefly what occurred before the ban was im­posrd. At different periods, because of a large number of cattle being held back from the market by the graziers, the price of eat.tle sold at Newmarket rose. At such periods the Board placed a number of its cattle on the market to even the rnling price.

)fcrnbcrs representing country districts who oppose the Bill are justified, I sup­pose, in their action. I am not in favour of diseased cattle being allowed to go into human consumption in the metro­polii:i 01' elsewhere. However, I have made inquiries from the four representa­tives of my municipal council on the l\felbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, and the latest information I received was that 80 pel' cent. of the Board's cattle slaughtered and sent to the boiling-down works for conversion into fowl feed showed 110 signs of disease. Efficient l1leat inspectors supervise the

Mr. Murphy

slaughter of animals at the metropolitan abattoirs, and under no consideration would they permit cattle infected with live or dead cysts of beef measles to go into human consumption. I do not question the sincerity of honorable mem­bers who oppose the Bill; they contend .that the ban was imposed in the interests of the health of the people. I would point out that five years have passed since the ban was placed on the Board's cattle, ~ut during that period many members of the public have been aware that carcasses of cattle have been found to be in­fected with cancer, but the meat has been allowed to go into human consumption after the affected portions were removed.

I think the policy of a Government is questionable when it allows the flesh of animals affected with cancer or other diseases to go into human consumption, and at the same time bans the sale for human consumption of healthy cattle from the Board~s farm. The Minister of Agriculture stated in reply to the Leader of the Labour party, that there was proper supervision of the slaughter of cattle in country towns. However, the Leader of the Labour party made it clear that there are 58 towns in the State, with populations ranging from 1,000 to 8,000, in which there is no super­vision. The Minister said that that statement was incorrect, because the Department of Agriculture has eleven veterinary surgeons on its staff. I should like to know whether eleven veterinary surgeons can examine all the cattle slaughtered in the country towns of the State.

Mr. LIND.-There are inspectors of th(· Department . employed throughout the State.

Mr. MURPHY.-A number of the in­spectors are not qualified as meat inspec­tors. Beef from the Metropolitan Farm should be allowed to be sold for human consumption, provided the qualified meat inspectors at the abattoirs certify that there are 110 cysts-alive or dead-in the carcasses. I am not opposed to the branding of beef from the Metropolitan Farm.

Mr. DODGSHlTN.-How would diners at cafes in Melbourne know whether or no the beef served to them came from the farm?

Health . [22 OCTOBER, 1940.J (Amendment) Bill. 1219

Mr. MURPHY.-The total consump­tion of meat in cafes would be a mere bagatelle compared with the quantity con­sumed by the worker~ and their families. I am supporting the Bill in the interests of those people. They have de­clared in unmistakable terms that they are in favour of the lifting of the ban. The graziers must depend 011 those people for the consumption of a large proportion of their beef, mutton and lamb. Cattle from the Metropolitan Farm are now sent to the boiling down works for con­version into fowl feed, but I have never heard it suggested that fowls or chickens fed on that meat could transmit tape­worm to human beings. Summing up, my view is that beef raised on the Metropoli­tan Farm should be permitted to be placed on the market, provided qualified meat inspectors at the abattoirs certify that the carcasses do not contain cysts of beef measles, dead or alive.

Mr. ZWAR (Heidelberg).- I shall speak on this measure as a grazier. I send more cattle to the Melbourne and Tasmanian markets than any other mem­ber of this House. I say deliberately that the ban against the sale of the Metropolitan Farm beef was not. imposf'd in the interests of public health. Cer­tain dealers were behind it. They ap­proached the farmers' conference held at Kyneton in 1933 and induced that body to advocate the imposition of this ban on the cattle belonging to the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works. If the Premier had been really serious in hi8 statement that he was ]ookillg after the public health he would have sub­mitted a Bill to prohibit milk from tuber­cular cows coming into the city of Mel­bourne. It must be well known that tuberculosis involves tIle community in losses running into large amounts of money, and it rauses great distress to many children. Yet the Government has done nothing.

Mr. PAToN.-This Government has done more than any other.

Mr. ZW AR.-We see certain country members only when the interests of farmers or graziers are to be considered, but when Par'liament is dealing with queStions affecting the unemployed or city consnmers those members are con

spieuous by their absence. Some of them tll'em to have come out of hollow logs; they have not been here for some time. r repeat that this ban has not been im­posed in the interests of public health. There should be better supervisiun throughout the State of cattle killed for human consumption. If a person goes 3 miles outside the City of Preston he will find stock men who are send­ing good cattle to the Melbourne market; but diseased cattle are killed locally with­out inspection. When a meat il1:.lpector operating at the abattoir~ finds a beast suffering from tuberculosis the piece affected is removed, but the remaind.er of the carcass can be sold for consumption by human beings. That is not right. Portions of pig carcasses which are tuber­cular are cut out, but the remainder of those carcasses will be disposed of for hnman eonsumptioll. No farmer is allowed to export pigs suffering from tuberculosis. The Chief Secretary, speak­ing at Warrnambool some time ago, said this ban must be retained in the interests of the graziers. We know that beef measles are easily detected. This disease is the least harmful of 52 cattle diseases; it is found around the tongue and the hea rt. If beef measles are found in an animal's tongue or heart its whole carcass should be destroyed. It has been stated that the consumption of beef during the scare several years ago was reduced by at least 60 per cent., but that is not a true state­ment. I watched the hide market, and during that time more hides were sub­mitted than before.

Mr. HYLAND.-Accordillg to you, the member for Polwarth must have told a lie when he said there had been a re­duction in the consumption of beef.

}'£r. ZWAR.-The Minister should quote the truth and refrain from exag­geration.

Mr. HYLAND (Minister of Transport). -On a point of order, I draw attention to the fact that I simply quoted a state­ment made by the honorable member for Polwarth. It was not my statement, itlld I wish the honorable member for Heidel­berg to withdraw his objectionable cour ment.

1220 Health r ASSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -The Minister of Transport has com­plained of a comment made by the honor­able member for Heidelberg, and in the circumstances I ask the honorable member to withdraw.

Mr. ZWAR ([leidelberg).-I withdraw the statement complained of. Althoug·h milk from cows suffering from tuberculosis and mastitis comes into Melbourne, the Premier proposes to do nothing in the matter. Vit e know that the honorable gpntlcman has interests in the Riveri nH.

~fr. A .. A. DUNsTAN.-That is neWR to Jll{'. I did not know that I hid interests there.

)1:1'. ZWAR.-In this State tubel'culosis is morc prevalent than any other cattle disease, yet there is not that meat super­vision throughout Victoria that there should bp. Every municipal district should have an inspector qua1i:fied to detect a disease \vhen cattle a1'(, heing killed for human consumption. If the Oovernment was consistent it would insist on meat supervision throughout Victoria. The Leader of the Opposition quoted from reports made by authorities appointed in 1934 to inquire into the eOlldition of stock coming from the Metro­politan Farm. Professors and others spoke highly of the Werribee beef and said they were prepared to eat it. A shipment of this beef was sent to Eng­land, and at Smithfield the King's butcher said that if that meat had been sent home under chilled conditions it would have caused a sensation. He also described it as the best beef ever sent to London. A lthough experts speak highly of the meat Victorians are prevented from eating it. It has bcpn said that the removal of the han would prejudice the beef export trade. If there is any fault in that trade that lies ill the advertisements published about Werriber meat and beef measles. The J\rgen6ne is full of beef measles, but the United States of America, England, and various European nations take no notire of this disease. It is regarded as a 11 armless disease, if it is a disease. There have been very few cases during the last few years. Victoria kills annually more than 500,000 head of stock, and the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works fattens about 7,500 a year. The Board is prepared to send to market an

average of Hot more than 150 cattle a week. That number would not affect the market. If the Board was allowed to market bullocks the market prices would not be affected because of the scarcity of animals caused by the dry year. We have been told that filthy conditions prevail at the Metropolitan Farm. I have travelled to Geelong many a time but I have not remarked such conditions, nor have I noticed unpleasant odours arising from it, but perhaps the wind has not been blowing from the right direction. A person could visit various dairies ·where he would find cows' udders touching the mud. The conditions are filthy. There are many dairies run under such conditions.

Mr. H YLA~D.-Where ~ Mr. ZW.AR.-I could take the Minister

of Transport to some of them. If it were not for the dirty conditions prevailing at the dairies Victoria would produce RO or 90 per cellt. of first-grade butter lU­stead of only 48 per cent. If we wish to have pure butter we must see that the dairics are properly conducted. Queens­land has strict regulations, and it produces 84 pCI' cent. of first-grade butter, whereas Victoria, which has better climatic con­ditions, produces only 48 per cent. of first­grade butter.

Mr. A. A. DU~STAN.-Do you think the dairies are dirty generally ~

lvIr. ZVl AR.-The conditions prevailing at some of the dairies are dirty, and the Premier knows it.

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Would you prevent filthy conditions everywhere ~

~fr. ZWAR.-I would try. Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Then you

should begin at Werribee. Mr. ZWAR.-Judging by reports from

other parts of the world, conditions on the :Mctropolitan Farm compare more than f~woura blv with the conditions 011

any other gew~ge farm. The farID is located in open country, the atmosphere is dr.v, and there is an abundance of SUIl­

light. Anal:vses have shown that out of 1.000 parts of effluent 997 parts are water, 2 are salt, and 1 is organic matter. That is a very small percentage of organic matter. That, however, is not the point. Members of the Country party are looking at this question only from the stand-poin t of the graziers' interests. They are not con-

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1221

cerned about the public health. If they were, they would alter certain cond.itions existing in the country. They are Ignor­ing those conditions, because their pockets arc not affected by them.

Mr. COYLE (lVaran,qa).-I rise to oppose the Bill, and I do so because I feel that the public should not be allowed unsuspectingly to buy beef without know­ing how it has been fed and treated. I am surprised at my friends in the Ministerial corner party, who have hitherto stood for the underdog that can­not protect himself. I am surprised that they should support the lifting of the ban. I ~m not 30 much concerned with tape­worm as with the fact that the lifting of the ban will foist on the public, without their being aware of it, beef raised under filthy conditions. I think it will be con­ceded that I have considera blp ImO'lvledge of ::ltork, a1l(1 of irrigation farming, and I think it should, therefore, be conceded j·hat I know what the effect would be of feedil~g cattle on land irrigated with sew­age. ..After the water has seeped into the land, the sediment is left. No one can t('ll me that that will not provide an opportunity for the cattle to contract disease and transmit it to the people. To allow th(' sale of such cattle for human consumption is quite wronp;. For some time past I have been feeding and milking between 70 and 80 cows, and I know that if cows are fed on certain herbage, such as capeweed and lucerne, their milk is affected.

I have yet to leaI'll that what cattle eat is not transmitted in their flesh. Dr. Penfold is a medical expert, but if I wanted to know about disease in stock I Rhould not consult a medical man, but a veterinary surgeon, who would be ex­pected to know much more than a medieal man about animal diseases. I have also had great experience of feeding sheep. In 1914 I fed some sheep on onions ~ tho <frought, in fact, forced me to do so. After the drought, when some of the sheep had recovered, I killed one of them, and found that there was a strong flavour of onions throughout the flesh. That provided me with evidence that what animals eat is transmitted to their flesh. I have given some study to the question of beef measlps. r wag urged. hy slaughtel'men and othr1'8 at N rwmarkE't to take some action to

prevent cattle from the .Metropolitan Farm from being slaughtered for human consnmption. They assured me that beef measles could be found in any paTt of the flesh of the animals, although medical men did not endorse that view.

M v district is not a cattle-raising dis­trirt; so I am not taking up the matter in the interests of the cattle raisers, but because the evidence submitted to me was, in my opinion, genuine. The evidence came from people who understood what thev were talk.ing about, and I took my ow;~ means of testing it. [asked Sir 'Villi am Ang-liss about cattle sent to Englawl from the :Metropolitan Far~. I believe' the1'e are no greater experts m the world on stock slaughtering, marketml~, and shipping than Sir Wnliam Angliss and the :firm ,vith whirh he is associatrd. He told me that the beef sent to London was p:rcatly admired. I asked, " Have you had any complaints?", and he replied, " No." The beef measles were discovered, in fact, by an inspector at the abattoirs at N cwmal'ket. He was an officer ,,,ho was doing his duty in a correct mamlCr, fl11d he rrported his discovery to tlw proper authorities. That brought a bont the first upheaval.

Propaganda on this subject has bren rife. The },{elboul'ne and :Metropolitan Board of Works has partieipatrd in it, and has tried to convey the idea that therr is nothing wrong with cattle from the :Metropolitan Farm. :Members of thf' Board lllay be good councillors and goon business men, but they are not experts on cattle. The Board has askC'd, "Who win suffer by the marketing of the cattle r' and the former cbairman of the Boal'd ::laid, "We will brook no interference f1'0111 ~n:vbody." The discussion has continllNl, and I l1aye persisted in my view that thfl bfm should not be lifted. Some years ago I waited on the then Ohirf Secretary, the honorable member for Brighton. He said to me, "We have an agreement with that Board that, pending an investigation, no cattle will be marketed." I asked him what penalty had been provided for a breach of the agreenll~nt, and he said that I should put that question to the A ttorney-Genera.1. I interviewed Mr. Menzies, who was .\ttorney-Genel'al, and he said, "Wr. have an assurance from the Board that it will not send its cattle to market." I asked

1222 Health r ASRRMB LY·-I (Amendment) Bill.

\\"lwt was the penalty for breach of the ngl'C'el1lent, and he replied, " They -will not break the agreement. We have q 11 lmder­~takinfj, under the seal of the Board, that it will not market cattle, peurlillg all in­vestig~.tion." It win be remem bP]'od by lJlany honorable members thnt, 011 the n~otion for the adjournment of the llouse one night during that session I "blew the gaff" as to what was happening, and the result was that the present Act was passed.

The Board had undertaken not to sell cattle for human consumption; but during the night it was sending cattle to the abattoirs. Two men were journeying to Werribee one night, and they saw cattle on the ~Ielbourne-Geelong road. They were cattle experts, and on their return journey they asked the drover who owned the beasts. The drover just grinned and said, "You know an about the cattle. They are Board cattle." The drover then t.old these men the full' story-that cattle were being sent to the abattoirs at the rate of 50 a night, and that 200 had been slaughtered. That information was con­veyed to me. I considered it carefully before I made the statement on the floor (.f the Honse which led to the introduction of the Bill. The Government had no con­fidence in the Board, and it wished to make certain that the Board could not bl'eak it.s undertaking.

If the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works will bi'eak a definite undertaking with the Government, I sub­mit that the propaganda it is disseminat­ing is not to be believed. I am not pre­pared to accept any statement the Board may make as to why the ban should be lifted. I wish to protect the public from purchasing meat of cattle reared on the Metropolitan Farm. Men who shoot over that area have informed me that they cl:tnnot take their boots into their homes fur three months after being on the place. The residents of Geelong do not open their windows or doors on certain night;, because of the stench that comes f1'0m that property. Are we going to allo\v people unsuspectingly to purchase beef reared under those conditions? If cattle from the Metropolitan Farm were offered at auction, and the auctioneer informed intending buyers that the cattle had come from the Metropolitan Farm, I am gamB to bet that he would not receive one bid.

Mr. Coyle

It is not the duty of Parliament TO tell the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works how it· should dispose of sewage; that is its own concern. The Board is required under its Act to supply water to :Melbolll'ne, and I understand Melbourne has one of the finest water supplies in the world. I have not heard of anything better than the metropolitan sewerage system. Those are two functions which the Board has to carry out, and it does its work with credit to itself; but it should not ask honorable members to permit it to foist on' to the public someJ

thing that is not fail'. I do not mind who wishes to eat the meat from the 1ietropolitan Farm. Anyone can eat it so long as it is known that it is from the Metropolitan Farm. People can purchase what they like where they like; but they should not be allowed to take the risk of buying meat that is possibly infectious. For the reasons I have stated, I oppose the ljfting of the ban, which, jn the interests of the community, I trust win not be removed.

Mr. JEWELL (B1"U Hswick ) .-1 su p­port the motion for the second reading of the Bill. In my opinion, Parliament erred in imposing the ban in 1935. At the time I protested, and said that it was wrong, and to-day I welcome the lifting' of the ban. Meat at reasonable prices is wanted urgently in the metropolitan area, and it is a shame to see the excellent meat from the Metropolitan Farm being with­held from consumption. A peculiar feature js that the meat is sold to the poultry farmers in the Werribee area. Those people supply thousands of dozens of eggs a year, and their fowls are fed upon this so-called "measles beef." The people of the metropolitan area eat the eggs and also the fowls.

The way in which SOllle members have spoken a bout beef measles to-night makes one think that one would have to use a stick on the Metropolitan Farm to beat off the measles. I think the ban should be lifted. The best available expert advice has been obtained, and, as the Leader of the Opposition said, the men who have reported on the question are qualified to speak. After years of inquiry they have determined that" there is little harm in the beef from the Metropolitan Farm. There is more disease outside the Metropolitan Farm than there ever was

Health [22 OCTOBER) 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1223

on it. Septic tanks have been installed in country districts. In thousands of cases the effluent is run from the tanks over the grass areas on which the cattle graze, and into creeks from which the cattle drink, but nothing is said about that. Experts have informed me that disease gets away from septic tanks in the same way as it gets away at the Metropolitan Farm.

The meat area does not cover the whole State, and thousands of cattle are killed for consumption in the country districts that would never be passed by inspectors if they were sent to the metro­polItan market. Such beasts are not sent to the metropolis. If a farmer sees that an animal is not likely to pass the in­spectors, he sends it to the local butcher. It is there killed and sold for local con­sumption. Frequently, a beast is killed -one might say-to save its life; if it wero left for another day it would die, anvhow! 1 am convinced that if certain m~~bers who have spoken to-day had a Humber of cattle which they thought would not be passed by the metropolitan mea t inspectors, they would not send them to the metropolitan market.

I have spoken to many butchers em­ployed at the abattoirs, and they tell me that the percentage of animals affected by tapeworm at present killed at the abattoirs is as high as it was when Metro­politan Farm beef was being sold. It is ridiculous to talk about disease at the Metropolitan Farm. With other meID­bel'S, I have visited the farm, and, in my opiniou, it is clean from one end to the othor. Some said they could smell things, while others said 'that they could see something hanging on to the high-water mark aloug the channels. I have recently been to the Snowy river, and I saw high­water marks there. If we were to inspect any channel carrying water frOlIJi the storages to the reservoirs we should be able to see high-water marks. I have even seen a high-water mark on a man who had just washed his face! Such talk is ridiculous when compared with the advice of those most competent to giyo it. Our meat inspectors are fully-trained men; 90 per cent. of them were butchers before they became inspectors. They can kill a beast and cut it up, and they at'e qualified to examine and inspect every hcast handled. If a beast is clean, and disclos'es no sign of disease, surely it should be passed for human consumption.

At the present time good meat is de­sired in the metropolitan area, or, for that matter, anywhere in the State. Drought conditions and an increased export trade have made it highly desirable that all available good meat should be marketed. If the ban on ,Vel'l'ibee beef were removed, the meat shortage would be relieved. Our soldiers would be better off if they were fed on }letropolitan Farm beef, instead of on tho meat at present being served to them. :MaIlY soldiers are camped in country districts outside the meat supervision a rca. They are expeeted to go abroad and fight for us, but first they have to fight disease from cattle scrved to them in country centres. Why should we not have universal meat inspection throughout the State? If a beast is in perfect condition, it would then be passed for hUlllan ronsurn ption.

I proposc to refer to ('(,l'taill figul'l~s handed to me by an honorable memher from the Council relating to the JJI'/,

capita eonsumption of meat in Australia. They show t.hat the average annual C011-

sumption of beef and veal during the six-year period, 1916 to 1D21, was lOU.()8 lb., and mutton and lamb, 69.47 lb. Tn the next three-year period, to 1924 the consumption was 143.70 lb. beef' amI ,\real, and 71.79 lb. mutton and lamb. In 1929, beef and veal consumption rose to 152 lb. In 1930, 1931, 1932, consumption decreased during the depression period, mainly because the people were not able to buy meat. In 1938 the per en pita consumption of beef and veal had risen to 150.6 lb., and mutton and lamb, to 76.:n lb.

I shall now quote figures to, show the in­crea,sed number of cattle required to sup­ply the beef and veal demand in Aus­tralia. In 1918, the population of Aus­tralia was 5,080,912, and the annual con· sumption of beef and veal by each person was 109.68 lb. In 1938, the population had increased to 6,929,691, and the annUR 1 consumption per person was 150.60 lh. The number of cattle required in 1 !H8 to supply the beef flll<.l veal demana of Australia was 995,133, and, in 1938, 1,863,592. The average weight of thE' eattle was 560 lb., and during those hventy years t.he demand inrroased to the extent of 86R,469 lH'Hsts. Those figures demonstrate the need for cattle from the

1224 Health I ~\'SSE~fBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

:Metropolitan Farm being sold in the mar­ket. I do 1lot wish to advocate consump­tion of anything that is harmful to the people, but I maintain that beef fr(lnJ

the Metropolitan Farm is as good as that raised at any other place in the Comlllon­wealth or the world. On the last occasion when a Bill such as this was being con­sidered by this House, I remember seeing an advertisement in a large butcher'& shop in Moonee Ponds which stated-

No Wcrribee beef :,;old here, but the vet'Y next best.

That advertisement spoke for itself. In the interests of the people, and of the Board, I hope that the Bill will pass. The Board has a large area of land that could be cultivated and used for grazing cattle. The prevention of the sale of beef from this farm is one of the most cruel Dnd wicked things I have heard ot'. The Leader of the Opposition has spoken many times about the health of the peoplfl in different parts of Victoria, and if thfl House would accept his advice and authorize the expenditure of money in an honest effort to help the people, instead of trying to deprive them of som~ of the best beef available, it would be much better for all concerned.

Mr. DILLON (Essendon).-lf the in­troduction of this Bill has done nothing else, it has considerably revived the attendance of members. For that reason alone, the Honse is indebted to the hon­orable member for N orthcote. Various reasons have been given why the ban on the sale of beef from the Metropolitan F arm should be lifted. The reasons have heen nearly as numerous as the number of cattle handled by the Board in pre­vious years. One reason for the introdllC­tion of the han was the outcome of some mysterious conference held at Kynetol1, when three or fonr cattle dealers had :mfficient influence to induce graziers to perRuade the Government to introduce this ban. The honorable member for Waranga has suggested an entirely different reason, which I find very difficult to accept, namely, that the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, which is a responsible body of representative m~n, was quietly sneaking its cattle into the abattoirs. We have also been told that the Bill has been introduced because of a decision of some 200 delegates at a recent Ijabour conference. I am afraid we ·shall

discover shortly that the decisions of that conference will not be as liberally inter­preted by its representatives in this House as they might be. Reference has been made to members being brought here to-day from all k~nds of places, and that some have been 111 cool storage for the last six months. I suggest that some of the representatives on that conference will be in cool storage when the vote on this motion is taken.

Mr. BARRY.-What do you imply ~ Mr. DILLON.-The implication is

plain, and a serious indication of what will happen has been given by the attitude of the Premier. The House has been given a great deal of heat but not much light from the Government front bench, suggesting that the Government is seriously concerned at being challenged by the august body of men in the Ministerial cornel'. However, the Premier has decided that he canllot accept this Bill as a vital challenge to the Government.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.- Hear! Hear! He is a strong man!

:Mr. DILLON.-IIe is so strong that he knows the gun is not loaded against him. That is my strong conviction.

Mr. BARRY.-Do you suggest that this Bill is brought forward as a joke ~

:M:r. DILLON.-It ceI~tainly has not. been a joke, and the measure has beAu treated quite seriously. Indications have reached certain rpembers during the last few hours, however, that it is not quito so serious as some members of the Minis~ terial corner party Teany believe. The Premier has made quite sure it is not so serious, because we have not heard such heated and pertinent interjections from him during the last hour of the debate,ss during the earlier stages.

It has been suggested that the Metro­politan Farm is a nice clean place--a most desirable farm on which to raise beef for human consumption. Every member of the House knows that one .of the most unpleasant, but necessary duties of the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works is to get rid of the sewage of this large city in some way, but does any honorable member really believe that the sewag~ that reaches Werribee within 8 hourR of leaving the city is treated and disposed of by being flooded on to the grass, solid particles included ? We are also asked to believe that there is no

Health [22 OOTOBER, 1940.] (Amelbdment) Bill. 1225

smell from it. Nobody believes that. Under the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of 'V orks Act the Board bas to run this farm propei·ty as a sewage farm, and cattle-grazing and fattening has been con­sidered to be one of its most suitable uses. It is apparent to anyone that 'when (3 acre­feet of sewage is spread over an area of grass land, a luxurious growth of herbage must result. Possibly, really choice beasts can be fattened on the farm. However, I take the same view as Dr. No bertson, former chairman of the Health Com­mission, who said, "Don't ask me to eat anything that grows on the farm or walks otr 1 t." The Board may consider that the assistance of cattle is necessary to supplement the sunlight and wind in disposing of the objectionable form of manure placed on the grass land of the farm. .A number of towns with popu­lations ranging from 1,000 to 8,000 were quoted in support of the statement that there is no official examination of the meat which goes into human consumption in many country districts. The state­ment, if eon'cet, furnishes a good reason why .Parliament should insist on an im­provement of that state of affairs. If those are the conditions obtaining in those towns, they are wrong, but no at­tempt should be made to apply the same eonditions to the metropolis. A great deal of expert evidence has been quoted during the debate to support both sides of the question. Expert evidence can be s('cured to prove anything, and possibly a learned Judge held that view when he remarked that there are three kinds of liars-liars, damned liars, and expert witnesses.

Sir STANr~~Y ARGYLE.-Do you suggest that the gentlemen whose opinions I quoted are liars?

Mr. DILLON.-N 0, I quoted the re­mark of a Judge. I am inclined to regard the evidence of all the experts quoted to-night as representing their genuine opinions, but we cannot be ex­pected to accept all of them, otherwise we should have to cast two votes-one for and the other against the second reading of the Bill. The statement was made that the late Dr. Gilruth was not a medi­cal man. If it was necessary to appoint a medical man to investigate the question at the time when Dr. Gilruth was called in, a medical man should have been

selected. However, my party, which was the Government then, must accept the responsibility for obtaining the services of Dr. Gilruth, and I accept him as a real expert on the question. When the ban was first imposed, the :Melbourne and )letropoli tan Board of Works suggested that it might have to abandon the Metro­politan Farm as a place for raising stock. The Board had been selling about 12,000 head of cattle a year from the farm be­fore the ban was imposed, but since then it has sold a larger number of sheep than formerly, the number of sheep sold in 1939 being 56,000. I suppose the auctioneers who sold the sheep did not tell prospective buyers that the stock came from the Board's sewage farm. I 5hould say that the Board is not keen that it should be widely known that so many sheep are placed on the market from the farm. I am not prepared to eat either beef or lllutton raised on the Metropoli­tan Farm.

Referring to the boiling down of cattle from the Board's farm, the honorable member for Brunswick expressed some fear about the condition of fowls fed on the meat. I would point out that a large quantity of the meat is not bellIed down; the medt is feel to fowls in its raw :::Jtate, chopped and minced. If the honorable member can prove that the meat has a detrimental effect on the health of the poultry, I shall be prep:11'ed to support the imposition of a ban on the disposal of Metropolitan Farm beef in that way. If it were publicly known that one of our largest e~g producers useR a large quan­tity of Metropolitan Farm beef to feed his fowls, I should not be surprised fit a big drop in the price he obtains for his eg'gs.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-Have you ever seen an egg with measles?

Mr. DILLON.-I have seen some funny things, but I have not seen a measly egg. The honorable member for Colling­wood does not look as if he was reared on tough beef from the northern part of Victoria. I am sure that if he was offered a choice piece of beef from the Upper Murray, and a piece of beef from this supposedly sweet clean farm at Wer1'ibee, he would not take long to make up his mind which to select. If cattle can be raised under clean and sufe conditions at

1226 Health r 11SSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

the Metropolitan Farm, there is no neces­sity to worry about the health side of the problem. Many quotations have been made to-night by opponents of the Bill. The Truth newspaper was quoted by the Minister of Transport. Even that news­paper was good enough to quote against the Bill! Then the Premier quoted a letter written by Mr. Cameron, the Minis­ter for Commerce, but I do not think that gentleman would be pleased to have

. the Premier on his side. However, I suppose that when Truth and Mr. Cameron are in agreement with the Government on this question, both must be right!

Despite all the expert evidence quoted, the main question is whether the Metro­politan Farm is a desirable place upon which to rear the choicest beef raised in Victoria, or whether the 'Board should establish a more modern method of treat­ing the sewage of the metropolis. I be­lieve that in view of the objectionable conditions obtaining at the farm from the grazing point of vie"w, thc ban should not be lifted. Further, I believe that there is something more serious behind the opposition to the lifting of the ban. Even if the circumstances were not as they are I should be loath to give the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works power to compete with privatE! enterprise. That has always been my objection to allowing the Board to sell meat, and it will always remain my objec­tion.

This is not the first time, nor the second, that I have made such a statement as that. I do not like Government enter­prises competing with private enterprise. [ think the point whether this is a ma ttel' of health has been thoroughly debated. [ hate the trend that recent legislation has taken. The submission of this measure will let the country members see where they are being led. The innocent country members did not know that the Labour party stood for private enterprise. We have at least a clear indication that there is nothing in common between the Labour party and the party led by the Premier. The Country party members have been as busy as they could be in taking every­thing possible from the city consumers and in handing it over to their rural friellds. Now, when a proposal i~ made to give something' to the city consumers,

"M,.. Di11()11.

the country supporters of the Government say, "No, we have not enough for our­selves." The Board's method of disposing of sewage makes. the :Metropolitan Farm an undesirable place on which to graze cattle which are to be sold for human con­sumption.

Mr. LAMB (Lowan).-When I left the Assembly some time ago to go into camp honorable members were assured that no contentious proposals were to be sub­mitted. On returning this evening I find the House is considering a measure that has caused the parties to be remarkably disarrayed. I see the honorable member for N orthcote and the Leader of the Oppo­sition standing side by side with their bayonets pointing in the same direction. The most peculiar condition I have noticed is that all the members repre­::;enting city constituencies, except the honorable member for Essendon, wish the ban to be lifted. Those members should be most particular about the health of the metropolitan community because half the population of the State lives in the capital. On the other hand, representa­tives of country electorates are very solicitous about the health of the people in the metropolis. That is rather amusing. I shall oppose the Bill for one reason which I shall explain later. I shall also endeavour to prove that I am not taking that action with any ulterior motive. 11 lot of "hooey" has been talked about the health of the community, export markets, and other things. There is a substantial reason why the ban, which was wrongly imposed-I supported it then -should stay. A parody on "The Quartermaster's Store" runs like this-

There was meat, meat, Meat you couldn't eat At the farm, at the farm. There were cysts, cysts, Big as both your fists At the Werribee Sewerage Farm. I've lost my specs, I cannot see Why I should eat tapeworm for tea.

r believe, with the honorable member for Brunswick, that meat inspectors should be efficient and able to detect beef measles in meat intended for human consumption. If they, as experts, say that stock from the Metropolitan Farm is fit for human consumption, I see no reason why it should not be used in that way. I under­stand that the Premier was at one time engaged jn business as a butcher.

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1227

Mr. 11. .. A ... DUNsTA:x.-That IS a new one on me!

~Ir. LA1'IB.-The honorable member for N orthcote has just suggested that the Premier was a political butcher. Cer­tainly, he set out last March to do some killing, but, in the words of Tndh, " This Lamb was too tough!" In furtherance of my view that a lot of "hooey" has entered into the discussion on this Bill I may mention that I have lived in Geelong for seven or eight years and that not once have I noticed a smell of sewage from the other side of Corio ;Bay. If there was any smell it was traceable to the potash nseo on the farm.

The ban having been placed on the disposal of beef from the Metropolitan Farm for human consumption, and propa­ganda having been circulated throughout the country that such beef is bad, if the llan is lifted consumption of all kinds of beef will diminish considerably. It may be contended that the ban should not have been imposed in the first place, but as it has been put into operation, the lifting of it would be prejudicial to certain country interests. In other words, I do not believe in all this rubbish about the health of the community being endangered by the sale of beef from the Metropolitan Farm. Other means have been available to pro­tect the health of the community in that respect. N or does all the talk about the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works interest me one iota. I am honest pnough to give my real reason for oppos­ing this Bill. If the ban was lifted, the l'eimlt would be prejudicial to the interests of the persons in the country whom I represent.

Mr. HOLLWAY (BalZarat).-The debate on the Bill has been most interesting and educational, and I am certain that-what­ever eIRe they may be prepared to contend with--members of this House will not face a meat supper. We have heard a good deal about tapeworms 30 feet in l~ngth, and the cycles of the cysts, together with other interesting phases of the subject from the health stand-point, all of which were not particularly edify­mg. What has pleased me is the fact that at this late hour one member of the United Country party has been prepared honestly to giv~ his real reason for oppos­ing the Bill.

.Mr. LAMB.-It is the reason why we are all opposed to it.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-That is suo If honorable members seated behind the Government search their consciences-pre­suming they have consciences--

Mr. BARRY.-YOU know they have not! Mr. HOLLWAY.-I am not acquainted

with them as intimately as is the honor­able member. By the mournful expression on his face, it would appear that he do.es not think much of them. But the members of the United Country party are his friends, not the Opposition's. The reason why I oppose the Bill is the same as that advanced by the honorable member for LOWall. The fact is that the ban on the ~ale for human consumption of beef from the Metropolitan Farm has been imposed, and there has been created in the minds of the community the feeling that the farm is subject to all kinds of extraordinary diseases capable of being communicated to human beings and back again to the cattle-a never-ending and vicious circle.

:NIl'. CAIN.-Are you using the authority of the :Minister of Agriculture for that statement?

Mr. HOLLWAY,-A. tapeworm 30 feet in length is something that ought to be preserved and possibly put into Hansard.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-A bookmarker! Mr. HOLLWAY.-With the honor­

able member for Lowall, I believe the talk about such tapeworms is all "hooey." The only reason for our opposition to the lifting of the ban is the psychological effect that it would have on the publie.

Mr. A. E. CooK.-It would be forgotten in fiye minutes. ~h. HOLLWAY.-I am not so certain

on that point. If the ban were lifted I should be less of a beef eater than I have been, not because I should think everv time that I was being supplied with be~f from the Metropolitan Farm. In fact, I might enjoy eating it without knowing that it came from that place, but 1 do not prop ORe to take the risk.

1'Ir. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-You might g.et political measles if you did.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-I remember a time when the honorable member proposed to lead a crusade against the present Govern­ment. What he does not know about political measles is not worth knowing.

1228 Healt'h r ASSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

The Labour party has been able to compel the Government to bring forward this measure.

Mr. OLD.-But it cannot eompel the Government to vote for it.

Mr. HOLLWAY.-The fact that the Labour party can exercise that measure of compulsion, even in the face of ordin­a.ry Government business, indicates tbe p-normous influence it has on the Govern­ment. Further, the fact-as mentioned by the :Ministel' of Water Supply-that the Labour party cannot compel the Go­vernment to vote for the Bill, shows what a sham fight it has been. The Labour party knew from the beginning that it had not the remotest chance of having the Bill passed. That is the reason why it has been submitted to us.

Mr. ORE.l\fJ<jAl-\.-"Tas that the reason why you did not 'want the· measure debated?

.Mr. HOLLW.AY.-In the circum­stances, why should the time of the House be' wasted? We realize that the Bill will not be passed into law. If the United Country party had been honest it would have voted against the introduction of the measure, enabling the Government to proceed with its ordinary business.

Mr. EVERARD.-It brought the Lamb down a distance of several miles.

Mr. HOLL W A Y.-The Premier must be glad that that action was taken! There is no chance of my voting for the measure.

ltlr. c.uN.-I had as much hope of your voting for it as I had of the Go­vernment doing so. Even your Leader cannot induce you to change your mind.

Mr. HOLLW1~Y.-No. The honorable member is not keeping me in a Ministerial office! At the risk of damaging their political consciences the members of the Labonr party are keeping the United Australia party in Opposition. I consider that the interests of the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works at t.he Metropolitan Farm would be better served if, instead of raising cattle there, a e~op suitable for the production of power alcohol was grown. In that way the Boa~'d would be performing a national ~el'VICe.

Mr. TUNNECLIFFJ<;.-How the cars would smell!

Mr. HOLLW AY.-Australia is starved for petrol, and one of our most vital necessities III the future will be an

adequate supply of liquid fuel. At the Metropolitan Farm there is a large area of land eminently suited for growing plants that could be converted jnto power alcohol, which, added to the petrol supply, would be of great assistance to the nation. Instead of putting the land to that use, the Board has raised cattle on it, and has sold the cattle in competition with cattle raised by private enterprise. The Board could perform a national ~el'vice in the way I have suggested, and, if it did tliat, its profits would probably not be diminished, but even a loss of profit could be justified in the national service.

Mr. HOLLINS (lInwthorn) . ... _[ rise to support the Bill, and I do so after having given the subject much consideration. I can support the Bill with a greater degree of conviction after having heard the de­ba te in the House this afternoon, ancI more especially after having heard the splendid speech of the honorable member for N orthcote. The division that exists in this House on this measure clearly indicates the fallacy of party politics. The great majority of those who represent producing interests want the ban to remain, and the great majority of those who represfmt consum­ing interests want the ban to bp- lifted. It seelllS to me that that division of opinion clearly indicates the motives of those who Hre opposing the Bill. The Prp-mier said he opposed the Bill for health reasons. If he believed that, it was a logical attitude. If I could find any indication that Werribee beef was detrimental to health, 1 should be the first to raise my voice in protest against such beef being sold in the metropolitan area. But I cannot find any such evidence. No evidence of an expert natnl.'e is available to support that view, but there is much evidence to suggest that the Bin wil] he opposed for other reasons.

I think it was the honora hIe member for N orthcote who quoted from a speech made ill this Honse some ;years ago by the h01I01':1blc member for Benambra, who pointed out that what ,,-as complained of was unfair competition by semi-Govern·· 1l1ent institutions. I am opposed to unfair competitioll, but I contend that wr should a pproach that problem from the fillallciaI and e'collomic e11d. During the last elec­tion, there was a strong demfllHl fortlli-'

Health [22 OCTOBER) 1940·-1 (Ammbdment) Bill. 1229

lifting of the ban, particularly by metro­politan electors. That was because there are in the metropolitan area a large number of working men who cannot

. afford to buy beef at its present pricu. Whether they were justified or not, they certainly felt that if the ban were lifted beef would be made available at reduced prices. Because of those expressions of opinion, I felt it was my duty to in­vestigate the whole question. I made it my business to consult the authorities quoted, and without exception I found that they opposed the ban as wrong, and as not being in the interests of the com­munity as a whole.

Mr. PAToN.-Did you visit the farm? Mr. HOLLINS.-I did.. Before 1

·came into this House, and while I have been here, grossly exaggerated statement~ have been made by certain members regarding the detrimental effect on health of eating beef from the MetropolitalL Farm. If those statements were true, I should be the first to uphold the ban. I felt it my duty to visit the farm, and to examine conditions at first hand, in order to ascertain whether there was any truth in what certain honorable members were asserting. I found that the conditions were good. I say that emphatically.

Mr. CAl\fERON.-Would you eat beef from the farm?

Mr. HOLLINS.-I would. I found the conditions on the farm entirely satis­factory, although at one or two points they were not very pleasant, particularly at the pumping station. I was free to go to any part of the farm, and, because r believed that the "oting would be close Oil this Bill, I felt nUl t I had a responsi­hility to investigate the subject with an open mind, with a view to describing to the House what I had seen. Therefore, I went to evC'rj' part of the farm where information cOllld he obtained. I saw the land before being irrigated and immedi­ately after irrigation, and I saw the pas­t.ures immediately before the cattle were turned on to them. I went as far as to run my hand through the hu:uriant growth of grass, and I found that it left my hand perfectly clean. When the water was flowing on, the grass was eaten down, and was very short. The greater part of the effluent is pure vv-atC'r, only onc thousandth part bcjng organic matter.

There was a certain amount of sedimentation, . but only along tlw channels, and that was not unreasonable. The passage of raw sewage must result ill the deposit of a certain amount of sediment, which dries and leaves silt in the channels. During the irrigation pro­cess, in most cases the short grass W:.l ~ standing above the effluent. After four or five days the cattle are turned on to the grass, which grows at a remarkable rate. It must be obvious to honorable members that fat cattle-many of them weigh at least one ton-could not be put on to soggy pastures; they would d('stroy tllt' pastures. Claims made by certain hon­O1·able members cannot stand closn examination in view of that fact. The pal:itllres were comparatively clean, aud the smell at the time of irrigation was not ~s bad a~ I expected it would be.

Mr. Ln;n.-You know that all the filth from :Melbourue is deposited on that land.

}fr. nOLLINS.-I shall deal with that aspect later. The effect of the HUll

and air on the pastures removed every trace of smell during the intervening fiv(> days. The grass wa~ luxuriant. [ plucked a few handfuls of it, and all [ could smell was fresh, ri.ch grass. I make that statement becau~l' that is exactlv what I found. .

}fr. LIND.-Are yon Bure you were not on the area adjoininp: the Mr.tropolitan Farm?

Mr. JIOLLINS.-T was not. I in­spected ever~ pasture I wished to examim·. The authorities were prepared to take me to any part of thf' farm. Honorable mem bel'S must realiz(' by now that I will not support sectional interests, and the electors of Hawthorn know that. Although I represent a metropolitan constituency, I believe I can cOllsci(·ntiously reprflsent electors from all part!' of Victoria.

~fr. PATON.-YOU do not appear to mind sacrificing some electors.

~fr. HOLLINS.-I am not pr('pared to sacrifice the intf'l'f'st.s of any elector. I visited every part of the Metropolitan Farm and spent lllany hours there ob­taining evidence on th(' ('xistillg condi­tions, because I desired to be able to speak with authority on this· subject. The honorable mC'mbr.r for N orthcote pointpd ont that no pC'r (~ent. of the towns of the State are being supplied with beef which is not examillrcl adPfJllatcly. HC' a 180

1230 Health r ilSSEMBL Y. I (Amendment) Bill.

mentioned the conditions at slaughter houses in country districts. I was reared in the country and have had much to do with rural industries. I know that many slaughter houses in the country are ob­noxious. It is difficult to avoid that, particularly in small places. The super­vision exercised on the Metropolitan :Farm and at the abattoirs in the metro­politan area is most effective. I have discussed this subject with some of the leading authorities in Melbourne, and I am satisfied that the examination given is all that is necessary; it is more effective than in any other country.

Mr. MARTIN.-That statement is not correct.

Mr. HOLLINS.-I admit that I am 110t an expert 011 the subject, but I accept the opinion of authorities whose reputa­tions are world-wide. If I require atten­tion from a doctor, I go to a leading medical man-I do not seek the advice of a "quack." The men. who have ex­pressed these opinions to me have no axe to grind. No expert evidence has been brought forward to support the continua­tion of' the ban. It is true that this method of dealing with sewage is not pleasing to the aesthetic sense, but there are many things in life that are not pleas­ing to the aesthetic sense.

Mr. DODGSHuN.-Why perpetuate the nnpleasing thing in this instance ~

MI'. HOLLINS.-These things are part of the laws of nature. They are not fit suhjects for discussion at the dining 'table, bnt. they are fads which must· bl' admitted.

Mr. DODGSHuN.-This is not a law of ]) a ture, bn t of man.

Mr. HOLLINS.-It is a law of nature that whatever comes out of t.he soil must. go back into it.

Mr. MACKRELL.-Or into the sea. That is why the sea contains salt-to purify refuse.

Mr. HOLLINS.-People in other coun­tries do not throwaway thA chemir.als which, in the fi:nal analysis, come out of the soil.

}.tIl'. DODGsHuN.-That is no reason why w(' should put them back into the Roil in an obnoxious forni.

Mr HOLLIN8.-That is not dOlle at the ~fetropolitan Farm.

Mr. DODGSHuN.-A matter of opinion!

Mr. HOLLINS.-Honorable members who were in France and Flanders during the last war will recall how careful the farmer/:) were to see that every thing that wa~ taken out of the soil was put back into it. Only in Australia could we speak about dumping it into the sea. When putrefaction takes place, the process is not pleasant, but it has the effect of breaking up raw sewage, by bacteria, into its chemical constituents. When those chemical constituents are worked upon by the sun and air they go back into the soil in their proper form.

It has been suggested by certain honor· able members that there is another serious objection to the sewage going on to the Metropolitan Farm year after year. This has been estimated at six acre-feet per annum. When we speak of this occurring OYI'l' the whole area, it seems a tremendous volume, but the raw sewage consists of 997 parts of pure water and one part of organic matter. The fact is that only .071 of Ol1e inch of organic matter is placed on the soil each year. As it is a large area, the effect of sun and air quickly changes the organic matter back to its chemical constituents. Then it grows luxuriant grass. It has been estimated that through this sewage being deposited on the area during the years, the land should have been raised by at least 7 feet, but we realize the fal­lacy of that theory when we remember that only .071 of an inch is added during a year. The chemicals go to produce grass, the grass is eaten by the cattle, and the chemicals leave the area in the beef cattle. The ground cannot be raised in any way. It is claimed that beef from the Metropolitan Farm is not fit for human consumption. Authorities in every part of the world admit that it is possible to detect the existence of cysts because they affect cattle only under the tongue, in the muscles of the heart, or in the diaphragm. Those parts can easily be examined by experts, and the presence of cysts readily detected. There is perhaps one chance in a thousand of a cyst escaping the examiners. It is further admitted that almost without exception in Australia meat is properly cooked before it is consumed. In such conditions it is impossible for humans to contract this disease.

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Amendment) Bill. 1231

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-How is it that certain people have contracted the disease in Victoria ~

Mr. HOLLINS.-They have mostly come from other parts of the world, while in some cases the beef consumed here has not been properly cooked.

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Did you hear the Leader of the Opposition admit that a certain number of people had con­tracted the disease in Victoria?

Mr. HOLLINS.-I think the facts are that 83 people out of a population of more than 1,000,000 were found to be suffering from the disease.

:Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Do you think it fair that we should ask anyone to run the risk of infection?

Mr. HOLLINS.-The public are asked to take much greater risks every day of the week. The Board is willing to de­stroy every beast found to be diseased. If a person did contract the disease he could be cured at a small cost-I think, of 6s. Many diseases are contracted be­('ause cattle killed in country areas have not been properly examined. Such cattle are also sold in country centres. It can­not be denied that the Werribec beef is the he1't quality beef in the world. On that ~ubjcct, I propose to read an extract from a statement made by the former Agent­General for Victoria, Sir Walter Leitch. On the 5th of December, 1929, he wrote to the theR Minister of Agriculture as follows:- .

This week, in company with the Trade Com­missioner, Mr. White, I visited the stall of Messrs. Hayes, Paine, and Knowlden, at the Smithfield Market, to inspect the beef for· warded under the auspices of the Australian Scientific and Industrial Research Council, and which had been reared at the Werribee experi. mental farm. I enclose a report from the Trade Commissioner on the subject, in which he has embodied the remarks of Mr. Hamilton, of Messrs. Hayes, Paine, and Knowldell, and attached are also press reports on the beef and the prize show lambs from the Royal Agricul. tural Show, Melbourne. I met a number of meat experts at the market inspecting the beef, and their verdict was that the beef had created a sensation in Smithfield. Dr. Nobbs, a well· known veterinary expert, from Rhodesia, said he envied Victoria being able to produce such magnificent material. No doubt the represen­tative of the Scientific and Industrial Research Council will report to that body, and the neces­flary steps will he taken to fORter trade in this class of beef.

Mr. OAIN.-That letter does not refer to the Metropolitan Farm.

Mr. HOLLINS.-The fact remalnS that it was Werribee beef that was ex­amined by experts at the Smithfield Market. Tests were carried out by chefs at Lyons's cafe, London, and they referred to it as the finest beef they had ever handled. There seems to be no grounds for retaining the ban on Werribee beef. There is no real danger to the public, and, I repeat, the cost of curing allY disease so contracted is so small that it iR hardly worth considering.

After listening to honorable members from both sides of the House, I have formed the opinion that this is not. a health problem; it is a problem of semi­governmental interests interfering with private enterprise. I do not want tn see private interests destroyed or affected by semi-governmental enterprise, but I believe 've 8hould face the question fron1 an economic and monetary angle. 1 f that were done, we should deal mo]'E' effectively with the problem. For the reasons I have outlined, I believe thn ban should be lifted.

Mr. HOLLAND (Flernington).-I pro­pose to approach the subject from an angle that has not yet been mentioned. The Werribee beef that is not sold On thp metropolitan market invariably finds its way either to Cockbill's or to Angliss's meat works. When Oockbill's pUl'chaso the beef and remove it to their factory for boiling down, people in the district I represent are sUbjected to an abominable odour. During the boiling-down process, either of Werribee beef or of dead horses, residents in the surrounding districts :find it necessary to remain indoors.

}Ir. CA.IN.-A similar position ohtfdns when offal is dealt with.

~fr. HOLLAND.-That is so. If any honorable member doubts my assertion, 1 invite him to visit the district while boil­ing-down is in process.

Mr. BORTHWICK (nippsZand N orfh). -There appear to be two school:.. of thOll.C:ht among- rnedical men aR to whether human beings can ncquire a loathsome disf'[ls(' from ('ow:l1ming­beef from 111(' 1fc>tropolitan Farm. I do not think any nllC> will disagree when I sa~T that instinct is ahyays a sure gouidf'. After visiting the Metropolitan Farm laM week, I instin~­tiH'ly revolt from eating- be('f or mutton

1232 Health rASSE~IBLY·1 (Ame'lbdment) Bill.

fattened and grazed under the disgusting conditions that exist there, and I say that, notwithstanding anything the honorable member for Hawthorn has said. Last session a :Bill was passed by this llouse to prevent the sale of horseflesh for human consumption, but if I were invited to dine with the honorable member for N orthcote, I should much prefer to find a joint of horse, when the covers were lifted, rathel' than a roast of Werribee beef.

Some members may not have visited the Metropolitan Farm, but last week, when I went there with a party, we eagerly approached a concrete drain in which we saw an inky-coloured fast-flowing stream. A glance was sufficient, and we were driven back by the foul stench. We were then taken to a less offensive drain, from ·which the manager obtained a bottle of water, informing us that the substance consisted of 997 parts of of water, two of salt, and one of solid matter. 'Ve then inspected the earthen channels along which the effluent is directed and there saw a slimy substance 5 or 6 inches thick through which the ('attle and sheep constantly wallL The property cannot be irrigated in the winter, so the effluent is directed on to a deprcssion. I do not know how the liquid is disposed of from there, but a large scoop is used to scrape t he remaining solid substance into a heap. On the occasion of our visit the heap was dry and burning. Th~ entire place was most revolting.

Proceeding towards the sea we saw a clear stream of pure water running in the creek. This water percolates through the paddocks. It is possible that the publ i~ imagines that the farm is being irrigated with that pure water, which has been filtered through the earth. On one part of the farm an area of New Zealand flax was growing, from which binder twine and rope can be made. The manager told us that thero is no market for the flax and that it realizes only 15s. a ton at the paper pulp mill. It may be . possible to grow flax on the farm and manufacture binder twine and rope, which at present are imported. The honorable member for Ballarat made the excellent suggestion that crops could be grown on the farm from which fuel

M'I'. Borthwick

oil might be obtained. Surely there are uses to which this lO,OOO-acre property could be devoted other than that of fatt.en­ing sheep and cattle.

I consider that a ban should be imposed on the mutton raised on the farm. Th~ sheep are slaughtered· there, and it is impossible to avoid contaminating the carcass, because the slaughterman must touch the sheep. I personally decline to touch beef or mutton from the Metropoli­tan Farm. Some years ago, when this matter first was discussed, commercial travellers used to buy their beef in country towns and bring it to their homes in the metropolis. If the ban is removed, people in Melbourne will not buy meat as they do now. A gibe has been levelled at the Qountry party, implying that it is op­posed to lifting the ban because it wants to help the country cattle man. Fatten­ing cattle is a rich man's hobby, and people so engaged are not usually found in the ranks of the Country party, but are probably supporters of the Opposition. Therefore, there is no point in that criticism. The Oountry party is not interested in the cattle industry beyond the fact that if that meat from the Metropolitan Farm is marketed, it will have the effect of considerably reducing the consumption of beef in Victoria.

The sitting was su-spended at 12.1 a.m. (Wednesday) until 12.47 a.m.

Mr. MULLENS (Footscray).-I did not intend to speak on the Bill, but the speech of my friend, the honorable member for Flemington, impels me to refute the soft impeachment that my constituency is the home of the boiling-down works where Werribee Farm beef is converted into food for fowls. We, in Footscray, are intensely patriotic and city-proud, and in that quality we are comparable with the ancient Romans. Therefore, speaking with pride, I assure the House that the correct geographical situation of the boil­ing-down works is South Kensington, which is not in my electorate. There, the carcasses of decayed and dead horses and cows and all sorts of other animals are rendered down for the purpose of fertiliz­ing the soil. We have none of those activities in Footscray. There has been a welter of argument to-night on the Bill,

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1233

but, listening patiently, I have been re­minded of the lines of old Omar Khayyam-

Myself when young did eagerly frequent Doctor and Saint, and beard great

argument About it and about; but evermore

Came out by the sllme door wherein I went.

I have intense respect for those honor­able members who quoted scientific opin­ion in support of their views. However, I cannot subscribe to the point of view expressed by the honorable member for Waranga, whose only authority was him­self. He imparted into the wealth of argument a mythical slaughterman, who uttered a dogma which appears to the honorable member to finalize the ·whole matter. What intrigued me most-and I slightly resented it-was the attempt by the honorable member for Hawthorn to impugn this democratic institution. This debate, he inferred, showed the futility of party politics and sectional interests. The assumption is, of course, that every mem­ber who has contributed to the debate is animated by section a 1 interests, while aloft anJ. glorious on a pedestal stand the shining band of Independent members, in whom alone rests the salvation of our mod­{'I'n life! Is the honorable member fol' Hawthorn not aware that in the clash and <ljyisioll of opinion in a House of Parlia­lIlpnt such as this, and in the part;v rooms, lies ultimately the hope of df'mocracY in contradistinction to the <1ietatorsl~ip~ of Europe? I am thankful that we ('an respect that. difference of opinion amongst honorab18 memb81's. r wonld remind the honorable member for Hawthorn, when he speaks the language of scientific philosophy, and expresses learned dicta to the effect that everything that comes from the soil goes back to the soil, hc is not voicing' a new concept. Thc remark of an honorable member that the law of gravitation always operates prompts me to express the conviction that by the law of gravitation we shall all find our level in this House.

r was a little displeased with the honor­able member for Lowan in his desire to dissociate himself from selfish motives, by making a frank revelation of his soul to members of the Opposition that he was actuated in his vote solely by t.he interests of his constituent·s. We mnst respect each

other's opinions and motives, but I should like to direct attention to the fact that at this hour of five to one in the morning we, the stalwarts of the industrial move­ment, are still in our places in the House determined to do our duty. We have the supreme solace of knowing that although the question at issue has been thoroughly analysed and debated from every con­ceivable angle, ultimately the interests of the people and democracy will prevail.

Mr. ELLIS (P1·ahran).-Oll several occasions I have spoken on the subject mattar of this Bill, which I now regard as a hardy annual; but I am surprised that there are still some h0110rable members who are not satisfied with the medical reports which have been furnished. I think the question of beef measles in cattle sold for human consnmption from the Metropolitan Farm was first raised in September, 1933, and it was declared a health rather than a veterinary matter.

The Argyle Government was then in power, and it rightly asked the Mel­bourne and Metropolitan Board of Works to stay its hand in selling its cattle, pend­ing investigation. It was not until 1935, after the Argyle Government had gone out of office, that the present Ministry saw fit to impose the ban on the sale of tIl(' Board's ('nttl€'. A Hrnlth Bill was considered in Committee on the 11th of September, 1935 .. \\'hell the Government proposed a new ('lause which imposed the ban. If any blame is to be apportioned on account of the embargo it should be placed on the present Goycrnment. Quotations have been made from several reports. I have one 01' two that I should like to read, especially as the Argyle Go­vernment asked members of the British :Medical Association to recommend three experts to investigate. Professor Wood­ruff, Dr. Kellaway, and Dr. Dale were recommended and were asked to report on this subject. The Board itself appointed Dr. Penfold to make an inquiry, which occupied 21 months and cost £2,000. A meeting of the ·Commission of Publi(' Health "'.vas held on the 27th of February, 1934, when Professor Woodruff was reporteo in the Age to have said-

There was no reason for any alarm so far as public health was concerned.' No people ever died of tapeworm, and the incidence of the dise~se was extraordinarily light. If the grazlers showed more concern over such things

1234 Health fASSEMBLY·1 (Amendment) Bill.

as the incidence of tuberculosis in cattle they would do a greater service to the cause of public iJealth.

According to a report ill the Age of the 14th of April, 1934, Dr. Robertson, then chairman of the Oommission of Publie Health, said-

The rules laid down for the examination of eart'asses adequately protected consumers. If by any chance cysts escaped. observation ~Y the inspectors, they would be kIlled by cooktng up to a temperatllre of 115 deg~ees F~hrenheit, which actuallYI meant comparatively shght heat­ing of the meat. In such a ease the only dan­ger would be ill eating raw meat or drinking raw beef juice.

Dr. Hobcrtson was also reported to have Haid that this (lisease was of a very minor llahne as compared ",,,ith 51 other diseases whi('h affected eattlE'. Professor Wood­ruff and Drs. Kellaway and Dale stated in their report-

We conclude by affirming that the public apprellCnsion and fear is not warranted and that with the proper observance of these re­commendations that the beef be permitted to be sold for human consumption under certain con­ditions the public health will be adequately saf0guardcd.

After an investigation, which occupied 21 months aud was probably the most intensive inquiry ever made into the subject, Dr. Penfold stated...:....-

I consider the effect on public health of beef lI1easles in the cattle at the 'Verribee Farm is insignificant.

Dr. Robertson l'eported-Tho rules laid down for the examinatioll of

carcasscs adequately protected consumers.

The late Mr. J. S. Penrose, Superinten­dent of the Melbourne Oity Council's Abattoirs, after a visit abroad, sty:tted that he had 1l0t seen from the Metro­politan Farm at Werribee one carcass of beef which, according to the standards in other lands where this disease was known, should have been condemned. His com­lllen ts were reported in the Argus of the 30th of March, 1935. Professor W ood­ruff and Drs. Kellaway and Dale re­ported that Metropolitan Farm beef should be permitted to be sold subject to competent yetorinary inspection at an approved abattoir. In addition, Dr. Penfold repol'ted-

Since the apparent outbreak of beef measles, an extremdy thorough met.hod of meat in­Hpcction has been 0111ployed. Such. a method wc conservativelv estimate as fiftyl tImes more scarehing than 'tllat llsed in England or. the United StatcH of AllIerica, where we conSIder the public IH?altli is rcasonably and a(leqnately safeguarded.

Mr. ",lUis

These comments have been sufficient to convince me that the public will be pro­tected in every way in case the ban against the sale of Metropolitan ·Farm stock is lifted. I feel that we shall do the people injustice if we do not agree to the Rill, and accordingly I shall support its second reading.

Mr. CAMERON CKara Kara and Borunq).-I do not represent either beef barons' or cattle kings; in fact, not a single constituent of mine has mentioned to me the lift.ing of the ban on the sale of cattle from the }'fetropolitan Farm. [ claim, therefore, to be in a kind of independent category. I have listened with interest to the debate, and I shall support the Government in its opposition to the Dill for three reaso"ns. The first reason is aesthetic, the second is one of health, and the third is because I do not believe the lifting of the ban will brin~ about the economic betterment of tll1~ people. We do not like the thought of (lating beef, or mutton, or pork off a sewerage farm, particularly a farm the authorities of which run raw sewage over its broad acres. No doubt that practiee produces a wonderful growth of herbag(" "With scveral other members I inspected the :Metropolitan Farm, which was rathpL' odorifcrous at. the time. Although the Board conductfi the farm in a really good way there is, nevertheless, an obnoxious fla~'~UJ' about it. It is rather revolting and nauseous for a person to think about consuming meat of any description off such a farm. I would not· eat beef or mutton if I knew it ",vas produced there. A number of persons with stron~er­stomachs than I have can relish su~h meat, but I could not do so. 1 do. not think it is good that meat from such a farm should be sold for human consump­tion.

I listened with interest to the Leader of the Opposition quoting various re­nowl1Nl authorities. I admit that hiR: argnments were cogent, and that the lia­bilitv of disease from such a farm WRS

sho",~;n to be slight provided the meat waF=: properly inspected. Nevertheless, there is the danger of infertion, and, therefore, I ask, "Why should we subject the people of the Statr to anv such risk?" The honorable member for :Port Melbourne stated that· at least 80 per rent. of the stock slaught­('red from the Metropolitan Farm wen'

Health [22 OCTOBER .. 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. ]235

(,kun. If 20 1)('1' cent. of the stork ",er(' u1H~leall, that i8 suHieient reason from a health point of view why the Board Bhon Id not sell such stock. In respect of health matters I am governed by my taste and palate. After heavy autulllll rains S01lll' years ago, I recall that ill the north­ern parts of Victoria, charloek, or wild turnip, gr-cw prolifically. It was good grazing fodder, but the sheep feeding on that rank herbage had a strong odour. When the meat was cooked it had a dis­tinct flavour which many, including myself, found to be unpalatable. Some one who was wiser than I was informed me that the remedv was to feed the sheep on dry herbage for four or five days before slaughter. In view of that experience with sheep, I have no doubt that the beef grown 011 the )fctropolitan Farm must hav(' a peculiar flavour. Like the honol'­~lble member for Gippsland North I am governed by personal instincts, notwith­standin~ all medical advice. If the Lea­{leI' of the Opposition advised me to take (~od liver oil because it contained certain "itamins essential to my physical well-· being, I should be unable to do so. ltfy stomach revolts against cod liver oil.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Do you think that a scientist like D~'. Kellaway 01' Dr. Penfold compares with a man who ad­ministers castor oil '?

:111'. CAMEHON.-(;astor oil was re­f Pl'l'ed to only by an interjection and by way of a joke after I had alluded to cod Ever oil. I think the present Government lost an opportunity when it did not pro­('ced with the proposed investigation into the treatmrnt of sewage on the Metropoli­tan Farm and other similar undertakings. .:\s the honorable member for Brighton mentioned, when beef measles were first discovered in 1933 it was proposed by the Argyle Government to send an expert abroad in order to inquire int0 a better method of sewag~ treatment. Therein lieH the solution of the difficulty with sewage farms, whereyer they may be in this State. Members who have already contri­buted to this debate have asserted that on other farms the sewage has to bp. treated in a scientific manner. Why ('ould it not be treated in such a manne'r and rendered innocuous before it is utilized on the ~fet.l'opolitan Farm?

:Mr. OAIN.-Then you would subscribe to the policy of permitting the :Metl'o­politan Farm to tarry 011 ratt18 raising ~

~Ir. C ... \.)tIEHON.-I am not opposed to the raising of stock on that area be­cause it is a semi-governmcntal institu­tion; in that respect I am not in accord with the yiew of the hOnOl'H ble member for Esscndon. If consumers consider that beef from the Metropolitan Farm is superior to other kinds, I would not debar them from purchasing it, provided that it was branded; but the honorable member for Brighton has pointed out clearly that .it would not be possible to brand the beef to the point at. whirh it reached the consumer's table.

,Yhile, in another place, a good deal \Va:; said regarding the losses sustained by the :Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works owing to its being compelfed to boil do·wn beef grown on the Metropolitan Farm, no reference was made to profit.c:;. I have in my possession certain figures covering a period of four years. I have not rhosen any particular year to suit my argument, but it appears that in 1934-35 -the year in which the beef measles scare first started-the loss on cattle was £24,120; the profit on sheep was £5,03~, and the profit on the agistment of horses was £3,298, the net loss on stock for that year being £15,'784. In the following year, when the m::magpment of the Metro­politan Farm had to revise its ideas of stock raising and fattening, the loss on rattle was £'7,3'75; the profit on sheep was £18,151, and the profit on the agistment of horses £3,668. The net profit for th~ year was £14,444, which almost wiped out the net loss of the previous year.

III order to determine a fair average I referl'cd to the figures for 193'7-38, when there ·was a loss of £7,319 on cattle, and of £658 on horses, the latter probably being due to the purchase of horses for farm use. On sheep there was a profit of £15,548, and on the agistment of horses a profit of £15,230. The net profit on stock for the year was £23,801. In 1938-39, the loss on cattle was £4,833, and on horses £'76'7. The profit on sheep, however, was £22,483, and agistment showed a profit of £10,073. The net profit on stock for that year was £26,956. The net profit for the four years cited, namely from 1934-35 to 1938-39 was £49,39'7.

1236 Health r .\SSEMBLY·l (Amendment) Bill.

These figures clearly indicate that the Metropolitan Farm is not running its stock at a loss, and, therefore, I cannot ~ce that any great hardship would result to the Board if the ban on the sale of hed for human consumption was con­tinued.

I como now to an item that deals more particula.rly with consumers, for whom I have a.s much sympathy as have the members of the :Ministerial corner party. The consum p6 on of beef and veal has increased since the ban on 'Verribee beef was imposed, and that indicates to my mind that the consumers in the mass are not being charged exorbitant prices for bp('f and veal. Figures relating to con­sumption have to be taken from the Com­monwealth Year-Book;; they are not pub­lished in the Vicf01·ian Year-Book. In 19:33~34, the consumption of beef and veal in Australia was 110 lb. per capita. There was no ban on Werribee beef at that time. That figure, by the way, is almost double the consumption of beef and veal in Great Britain, alld, in fact, it is almost doublf' the corresponding figure for the U niterl States of Ameriea or Oanada. The only ~01mtry in the world that consumes A

little more meat per head than Australia is ~ ew Zealand. The New Z('alalHlers do not consume quite so much beef and vea 1, but they consume more mutton and lamb. [n 19a4-35, Australians consumed 120 lb. of beef and veal per head, as against 63 lb. per head in Great Britain. The last year for which t.he Commonwealth Y p-ar-Book provides fignres was 19H7-38, when the Australiau consumption of heef and yeal 7Jer capita had increased to 150 lh .. as against 69 lb. in Great Britain.

Those figures do ]}ot indicate that the masses of the people ~re being denied beef hecause heef is too deal'. If the prlee of any article of food increases beyond a (~~I'tain level, the consumers im'ariably ('hange to sometbiug else that they can better afford, with the result that fluctua­tions in prices on1y alter the incidence of ('ollsumption as b0t,,-een one consumable Nmmodity and another. ] eOlldllde from the figures I l1ave quotcd th[lt 110 economic hardship will he inflicted by not lifting the h:w. The lifting of t.he ban would not make lIllle-1t diffC'rel1rc to the prodllcers.

1H 1". Cameron

Mr. BARHy.-TelI that to the honorable member for Benambra anrl he will shoot you.

Mr. CAMERON.-I do not agree with the honorable member for Benambra on that point. If prices increase "Qeyond a certain level, supplies come from other States, and that tends to reduce prices. There is thus an equalizing system regu­lated by the price factor, and J do not think that placing Werribee beef on thl:' market would have any directly Sel'l011& effect on the producers. It might hav~ the indirect effect of causing the public tl. eat less hE'p,f, and that is not ,,-hat we desire. We wish to see the consumption of Assentj al foodstuffs kept as high ati possible, so that every consumer will receive his full money's worth. J n the last few years cond itions have been quitA satisfactory from both the consumption and the production points of view; there­fore, my vote will be cast in favour of leaving things as they are.

Mr. COTTER (Richl1wnd).- -There are two observations I wish to make. The­first is that the Bill has been dangled f01· a long time before being brought forward. I should say that the Premier has haei somA anxious times and some anxious thoughts about it, and that he allowed it. to be brought on to-day because the party whips have counted heads and have dis­covered that the Government is safe~ There are two or three aspects of the Rill that appeal to me. The honol'able mem­ber for Kara Kara and Borung COll­demned the Bill on the ground that fluctuating prices caused fluctuations in consumption, but the Premier put quite a different aspect by condemning the Rill as a health measure. Representatives of metropolitan constituencies are grateful t.o the Premier for the iutereRt he showed in their districts, which, he pointed out, would be injured by the passing of the Bill. It is not often that he takes all intcrcst in Ollr electorates. The honor­able member for Kara Kara and BOl'ung~ however, has shown that the Premier was wrong, fM with him it is merely a ques­tion of ('('onomics. If he is not "·I'ong, thC'1I the Premier is wrong. Opponents of the BiH have condemned it only from the stand-point of economics; all they haye shown is that as much beef is C'.Oll­

snJ1wcl to-da~r as has been consumed any

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Amendment) Bill. 1237

()ther day, and that the producers will re­ceive as much for it. The Premier quoted figures relating to four years before the ban was imposed and four years after. I said to him, "Before you sit down ex­plain what the differen~e means. Were they drought years ~" He said, " I will," but he sat down and did not explain.

. \ll the speakers in opposition to the Bill appear to be anxious concerning the health of the people in the metropolitan .area. If they were honest, they would say that they do not want this beef to come ()n to the market in conlpetition with that produced in other areas. I should like to know the real reason under lying the objection to lifting this ban. If it is because the members of the Country party are concerned with the health of the people in the metropolitan area, they should say so. But the Leader of the Opposition, in unmistakable language, has pointed out that there is no substance in the argument that the health of the residents in the metropolitan area will be affected if this beef comes on to the mar­ket. He quoted recognized authorities in support of that contention. If the oppon­(mts of the measure are anxious to obtain increased returns for the graziers in the northern parts of the State, the House s~ould be told .. I contend that the opposi­tIOn to the BIll from the "cockies" is because they wish to keep the beef from the Metropolitan Farm off the market. I draw their attention to the fact that within a radius of 20 miles of the General Post Office, Melbourne, there is a popu­lation of more than 1,000,000 people, and none of them has asked for the continu­ance of the ban. I . do not often speak, but I thought on thIS occasion I should say something against the opposition of those who have been kept in office by the Labo~r pa.rty. If the House is against the PremIer, It would not be a bad idea for the Country party to keep the Labour party in office.

i\~r. A. A. DUNSTAN.-That would give me a great deal of pleasure.

l\1r. OOTTER.-Each member who has spoken in opposition to the Bill is a member of the Country party, or repre­~ellts a rural constituency. While listen­mg to the speech of the Premier I w~ndered, if t~i.s ban was such a dood thmg for the CItIzens in the metropolitan

area, why a similar regulation did not exist iu the electorate he represents. During last year I spent a holiday in the country. I visited a friend of mine who owned the local store, which was a com­bination of butcher's shop, ironmongery 8tore, and so on. He said that he was going to kill a bulloek. He shot the bullock with a rifle; tIl(> ('urrass was cut up and brought to the shop, and the meat was sold that afternoon, The' meat wa;:; not inspectro, and a similar state of affairs exists in lllany country areas. That heing so, why 8honld thC' l'('prcscntative-: of country clectoratt's he' HO anxious as to the health of' tht' ritizPllH of' the me'tro­politan area?

The honorable mcmbp)' fOl' EssendoH let the cat out of the hng when he said that the debate boils down to a question of sorialism versus private enter­prise. If that is the case, to be consistent the Government should close the Newport workshops and the many factories estab­Lished by the Government for munition purposes, and turn the lot over to priyatl~ enterprise, Do Country party members

. support such a policy ~ The discussion ou this Bill was forced on the GovernmenT. The Bill emanated from the Council anu when it was transmitted to this nOl~se it was placed at the bottom of the Notice Paper. When the Government found that it could no longer avoid a debate on this subject, it thought fit to give the Bill "a fly," and to trust to God to help it.

The ~remier found fault with every o~e, partlcularly the Leader of the Opposi­tIOn. As a result, the Leader of the Opposition made one of the best speeches I have ever heard him make in this House. He made it clear that he had considered the subjec,t much more elosely than had the PremIer. That was evident other­wise the Premier would not ha;e made half the stupid statements he made thi~ evening. We all realize that the Leader o.f the Opposition gave us the benefit of clear thinking on a subject with which he is familiar. He is a leader in the medir~l profession, ~nd he approached the BIll from the VIewpoint of health. He asked the Premie'r if he wag diseussin fr

the Bill from a health 01' from an economi~ aspect. The Premier remained silent-he did not know anything about it! The Leader of the Oppositioll quoted authori­ties, and pointed out whrl'e the Premier

1238 Health rASSEMHLY.' . (Amendment) Bill.

was wrong; he said that if the Premier desired to debate the subject from an economic point of view he, the Leader of the Opposition, did not desire that to be done, but he was prepared to debate the sub.iect from the aspect of public health. The Premier had every opportunity to reply, but hc did not.

In my opinion, the ollly objection Oountry party members have to the Bill is not from the health viewpoint. They admit that the sale of beef has not diminished. Probably if that had happened they would have been prepared to consider the Bill from an economic aspect, and not because thcy desired to protect the health of the people in the metropolis. Country party members cannot have it both ways.

Mr. W. DUNsToNE.-Surely we can approach the problem from more than one angle?

Mr. COTTEH.-Country party mem­hers have discussed this matter from an eeollomic point of view only. They want to prevent the sale of beef from the ~fetropolitan }'arm. The honorable mem­ber for Kara Kara and Borung pointed out that the sale of beef from the Metro­politan Farm did not decline during the four years to which he referred. I con­(·luded, therefore, that if the sales had fallen, the honorable member would be prepared to consider lifting the ban. It ~ ppears to m~ that so long as the " cocky" III the north IS protected in the beef mar­ket the Country party will perhaps con­sieler the lifting of the ban. At present the beef cattle on this farm are being sold at :~Os. a head to Angliss and Company, whereas they would bring £30 a head in the market. But there are members in the House other than th~ " cockies " from t he north who should decide what should he done with those cattle. I have been instructed by my council in Richmond to support this measure in an effort to have the ban removed from the best beef ('attle in Australia, and, therefore, I hop!" t he Bill will be passed.

Mr. MUTTON (Coburg).-The impor­tant measure before the House has been debated from all angles, including power alcohol and tainted milk. I support the Bill with the full knowledge that thp. majorit,Y of Victorian citizens demand beef from the J\fetropolitan Farm. Lon~

before I entered this House, I realized that the consideration of the health of the people was nothing more than a bogey­Something like £2,000 was spent in rp­search work over a period of 21 month9 to enable the most eminent authorities to

investigate beef measles, and when thOSi~ authorities said that the beef from the :M:etropolitan Farm was fit for human consumption, I immediately came to the conclusion that the Act imposing the ban on this meat was simply pretence. I have been astounded to-night to notice the atti­tude of many rank and file members of the Country party on this question. They do not seem to realize their responsibilities to citizens of the metropolis. My con­stituents at Coburg desire that the ball should be lifted.

The importation of beef into VictOrIa has been mentioned during the debate, but I would remind honorable membel'~ t.hat a considerable quantity has beeh ex­ported from this State. Statistics show that !),158,102 lb. of meat have been ex­ported from Victoria at a value of £156,125. That indicates the fact that becf is an important conmlodity here. But I should like country members particu­larly to listen to what I have to say on anot.her angle of this question. I refer to the swine industry. More pork than beef has been exported from Victoria. I know something about public health and I know that in Melbourne refuse from hospitals, publie institutions, cafrs, and camps is carted away to feed pigs. Honorable members will agree tha t refuse is not natural pip: feed. The average butcher advertise's in his window that he has dairy-fed pork for sale, but that is not correct because the pork he is exhibiting has been fed on refuse, or ,vhat is known as "slop feed." There is a marked difference between the carcass of a slop­fed pig, and that of a dairy-fed pig.

Country members must agree with me that grain feeding is the only na~ural method of feeding pigs, but it cannot be said that slops are not suitable food. How­ever, there are some unscrupulous people in the country districts who feed pigs on raw offal. Comparing certain methods of feeding pigs with the feeding of cattle, 1 have come to the conclusion that the lift­ing of the ban on the sale of cattle from

Health [22 OCTOBER, 1940.J (Amelbdment) Bill. 1239

the Metropolitan Farm would be in the best interests of the State. Country members should be careful before they make a comparison between the beef and swine industries, because they know that raw offal is fed to pigs in the country districts.

Mr. DODGsHuN.-The remedy would be to compel the cooking of raw offal before it is fed to pigs.

Mr. MUTTON.-The story told by the honorable member for Richmond about the shooting of a bullock was correct. Conditions arc very el'l~de in many coun­try -abattoirs. Country members know that some farmers, when they are short of a pound or two, kill their poddies, vealers, and young steers, put the carcasses in a motor car and bring them to Melbourne for sale. I am convinced, after reading the reports of medical men, that there is a particular reason for the retention of the ban on the sale of cattle from the Metropolitan Farm, and it has nothing to do with public health. During the last five years, the Government has had no authority to support it in its refusal to remove the ban. I hope that the House will pass the Bill.

Mr. BARRY (Carlton).-I wish to ex­press my opinion on the measure before the vote is taken. It will be admitted that nobody is in doubt as to where the Labour party stands on this question, but I am sure that many people who have .been anxious to ascertain how members in­tended to vote on the motion for the second reading are still at a loss to know the intentions of some members on the Opposition side.

Mr. OAMERoN.-The mystery deepens.

Mr. BARRY.-A number of mystery men have beeu present during the debate, and one of these is the honorable mem­bcr for Gippsland West. I think that thore has been 1110re " duck shoving" on this Bill than on any other measure that has been introduced since I became a member of the House. Those members on the Opposition side who have been endeavouring by all sorts of pretences to forestall the Labour party on this question still belong to a divided force. The Leader of the Opposition made a worthy contribution to the debate, and I congratulate him on his speech. Actually, I am sympathetic towards him

because he has not much of a party to lead on this issue. Th~ Deputy Leader of the Opposition adopted a different atti­tude from that taken up by his leader. Those honorable members who have ad­dressed the House have expressed differ­ent opinions. The honorable member for Eyelyn could not be encouraged to speak on the subject even after the honorable memher fo1' Coburg, the great authority on thE:' breeding and marketing of pigs, had delivered. an illuminating speech on swine. If it were possible to discouragEl the honorable member for Barwon from supporting me I should be amazed! It would b8 interesting to hear from the honorable member for St. IGlda on tho subject of worms.

:Mr. lhcHAELIS.-If I spolu' on worm8 you might be annoyed.

Mr. BAURY.-I have listened to sup­porters of the Government, and they have spoken about worms and beef measles. I wish to say to the honorable member for Benalla and to other comrades ill the House, that I sympathize with the hon­Ol'able member for Lowan, who has travelled 60 miles at the command of the Oountry party's whip. The honorable member for Lowan told us that he was not convinced about the effects of cysts on the health of the people. It is not often that I am rude enough to interject, but I did so this evening when the honorable member for Bellambra interjected in the courl:le of the speech of my Leader. I was then reminded by my Leader that that hon­orable member had truly explained the attitude adopted by the Country party.

I do not think the honorable member for Benambra and his colleagues are much concerned about the health of the people. We have no quarrel with those members who claim that they are attempting to assist a section of the stock industry they represent. I think the Premier's contention that he was acting in the interests of the people was an­swered by the Leader of the Opposition. The honorable gentleman is about as in­terested in the health of the metropolitan people as I am interested in the welfare of the cattle growers. This question is one of "The people versus the beef barons." The Government and the hon­orable member for Essenoon hfiY<' chosen to back the beef barons, ,vho also have the

1240 Health r ASSEMBLY·1 (Amendment) Bill.

support of certain absent members. I do not suggest that any honorable member who could be here is not here. The fact remains that the Leader of the Opposition is present ,\~ith divided forces, and they are sufficiently split to save the beef barons from the people. The whole dis­play has been well stage-managed.

Mr. DILLON.-You have made quite ('ertain who are your friends.

Mr. BARRY.-The Labour party is the only party in this State that knows where it stands on this question. If it was willing- to put the Government out of office-

Mr. DILLON.-I will give you a hand t.o do that at any time.

Mr. BARRY.-With that end in view, the honorable member would even vote with the Labour party on this Bill. He a nd his party colleagues are concerned not so much about the health of the people as about the possibility of deposing the Premier. As the honorable member for Collingwood said of Opposition mem­bers, " To depose the Premier they would swallow tapeworms." The view of the members of the Labour party has o.een ably submitted by their Leader. We be­liC've that the Melbourne and Metropoli­tan Board of Works should be permitted to supply the people of this State with a certain type of food, and we are prepared to n ccept medical and other opinions from authorities who understand the subject. Wr: consider it our duty to endeavour t.o take such action as will enable the people to buy beef grown on the l\fetropolitan Farm should they so desire. At the same time, we. are of opinion that the lifting of the ban may result in lower prices for hC'cf.

I rose for the purpose of indicating the reasons for my support of this Bill and to :mswer certain statements of a hurtful rharacter that were made about members in this, the Ministerial corner. N everthe­less, the Government would be wen ad­"ised to dispense with pretence in sub­mitting any of its legislation. There will be evidence of further pretence when the introduction of the Bill relating to the trading cnpacity of the State Electricity Commission approaches. In that case, too, reasons wi]} be advanced why the measure

should not be brought forward. Certain persons engaged ill the electrical. tra?es are declaring that the proposed legIslatIOn will not be proceeded with. Pretence can­not last for long; no. Government can rely on it and remain in power. The argument that the ban was imposed on the sale of beef for human consumption from the Metropolitan Farm to protect the health of the community is a pretence. Admittedly, the Government has spon­sored a great deal of useful legislation and, generally speaking, the Labour party has little to complain about. I am per­mitted to advise the Government.

Mr. DODGSHuN.-Who has instructed you to do that?

Mr. BARRY.-I am in 'a different position from that of the honorable mem­ber, who must seek permission to speak on any subject. On this occasion I am permitted to offer a little advice to the Government. It should realize that the cloak of pretence is not a satisfactory covering. It would be much more honor­able if the Government said in effect, "The health of the community has been advanced as the reason for the ban on beef grown on the Metropolitan Farm; but that is only a pretence." In this case, the Government is acting in the interests of a certain section of its supporters, namely, the beef barons. The ratepayers of the metropolis must meet the loss incurred by the Metropolitan Farm in consequence of the Government's action.

The House divided on the motion (the Hon. VV. Slater in the chair)-

Ayes 25 Noes 30

Majority against the motion f)

AYES.

Sir Stanley Argyle Mr. Barry Mrs. Brownbill Mr. Cain " Cook, A. E.

(Bendigo) " Cotter " Cremean " Denigun

Ellis Field

" Hayes Hodsoll Holland

Mr. Hollins " Jewell " Lemmon ,. Malthy " Mullen~ " Murphy ,. Mutton " Oldham " Tunnecliffe " Zwar.

Tellers: Mr. Mil'haE'lis " Reid.

Personal Explanation. l23 OCTOBER, 1940.] Adjowrnment. 1241

NOES.

Mr. Allnutt " Bailey

Bennett " Borthwick " Cameron " Cook, F. A.

(Rena.lla) " Coyle " Cumming " Diffey " Dillon .. Dodgshun " Dunstan, A. A.

(Korong & E'hawk) " Dunstone, W.

(Rodney) " Everard " Hogan

Holden

Mr. Hollway Kirton

" Lamb Lind

" Madarlan " Mackrell

Martin " McDonald, Alex.

(Stawell & Arm'at) " Moncur

Old " Paton

White.

Tellers: Mr. Hyland " McDonald, J. G. B.

(Goulburn Valley).

PAIR.

Mr. Haworth I Mrs. Weber.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION. HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL.

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-By leave, I wish at this stage to make a personal ex­planation, in connection with the debate on the Bill with which the House has just been dealing, and in reply to the Minister of Agriculture, who made an accusation that he ultimately withdrew. When the honorable member for Hampden was speaking, I made a statement that thous­ands of gallons of milk had come from the Werribee Research Farm. The Minister said that I said the milk came from the Werribee sewage farm. There was no justification for his saying that, and I want to advise the Minister and those members who believed what he said that r was referring to the Werribee Research Farm. There is a difference between the Werribee Research Farm and the Werri­bee sewage farm.

Regarding the Bill, the vote has been taken, and we who supported it have no alternative but to accept the decision of the House. We cannot go beyond that, although I do not think that the decision was right. I want to thank honorable members for what has probably been the best debate that has taken place this session. If the debate did nothing else, it brought from the dark holes "of Cal­cutta" members who have not been seen in this Parliament for some time. They put in an appearance, for some reason best known to themselves, and, on this occasion, they have shoVirn in the affairs of State an interest which, in the past, has been unfortunately lacking.

PUBLIO TRUSTEE BILL. This Bill was returned from the

Council with a message relating to an ~mendment.

It was ordered that the message be taken into consideration ncxt day.

ADJOURNMENT. Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Prcmier and

Treasurer).-I move-That the House, at its rising, adjourn until

to-morrow at half-past 3 o'clock.

That means that the House will actually meet at 4 o'clock this afternoon.

Mr. CAIN.-Will you have as many members of the Country party present this afternoon as you have had here this morning? .

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN.-I do not know. That will be for members themselves to determine.

The motion was agreed to.

The If ouse adj01.l'rned at 2.34 a·.m. e Wednesday).

LEG ISLATI\TE ASSE~1BL Y.

l~TednesdaYJ October 2/"J, 1940.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater) took the chair at 4.8 p.m., and read the prayer.

MOTOR CAR (THIRD-PARTY INSURANCE) AOT.

PRE::\fIUM RATES. :For Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda), :Mr.

Hollway asked the Chief Secretary-How the rates for compulsory third-party

motor car insurance, ~H; published ill the pres!'! of the 21st of October instant, ('ompare with thof'e originally framed by the Premiums Com­mittee and returned to the ('o1l1Jllittcc for further consideration '!

Mr. BAILEY (Chief Secretary).­The rates pnblished are those originally recommended by the Pl'emimllR Oom­mittee.

124:2 M ental Hospitals. r ASSEMBLY.l Police Offe'IWes Bill.

MENTAL HOSPITALS. NON-PAYM}~NT OF PENSIONS TO INMATES.

For Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood), Mr. Cain asked the Chief Secretary-

If it' is a fact that, while inmates of hos­pitals and other charitable institutions who are entitled to pensions continue to receive their pensions (part of which is retained by the institution to defray the cost of maintenance), no such allowance is made to inmates of mental hospitals, many of whom are definitely invalids, and prior to their removal to an institution were in receipt of pensions?

Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary).­The answer to the honorable member's question is "Yes." The Government of the Oommonwealth, despite representa­tions by all the States, has refused to pay either an old age or an invalid pension to any person whilst an inmate of a mental institution, notwithstanding that such a pension may have been paid prior to receRtion into such institution.

ALLEGED EVASION OF TAXATION.

. Mr. LAMB (Lowan ) asked the Pre­mIer-

1. Whether he has received any written in· formation 01' correspondence complaining of alleged evasion of taxation by the official organ of the Country party?

2. If so, will he lay on the table of the Library all correspondence relating thereto to this matter?

:~. If he has laid any informatioll with the Taxation Department relative thereto, and with what result?

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) .-There are no official papers relating to this matter. I did, however, receive what was really an anonymous letter-the signature being indecipherable and no address given-on the subject, but on making verbal inquiries from the newspaper concerned I was informed that there was no substance in the complaint.

SUPERANNUATION BILL.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Superannuation Acts.

The motion was agreed to.

The Bill was brought in and read a first time.

WATER SUPPLY LOANS APPLICATjION BILL.

Mr. OLD (Minister of Water Supply) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to sanction the issue and application of certain sums of money available under loan Acts or in the State Loans Repay­ment Fund for irrigation works, water supply works, drainage and flood protec­tion works in country districts, and for works under the River Murray Waters Acts, and for other purposes.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a

first time.

PROPERTY LAW (BOYD SETTLEMENTS) BILL.

Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to apply the provisions of section 163 of the Property Law Act 1928 to certain settlements made by Henry Oollis Boyd and Emily Mary Boyd.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a

first time .

EDUOATION (P ATRIOTIO OEREMONIES) BILL.

Mr. MARTIN (Honorary Minister) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to make provision with respect to the observance of certain ceremonies in State schools.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a

first time.

LOOAL GOVERNMENT (BUILDINQ REGULATIONS) BILL.

Mr. MARTIN (Honora~y Minister) moved for leave to bring in a Bill to make provision for building regulations, and for other purposes.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a

first time.

POLIOE OFFENOES BILL. Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary) moved

for leave to hring in a Bill to re-enact sections 26 and 81 of the Police Offences Act 1928.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a

first time.

Stamps (Increased Duty [23 OCTOBER, 194.0.] Continuance) Bill. 1243

STAMPS (INCREASED DUTY CONTINUANOE) BILL.

Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and Treasurer).-I move-

That this Bill be now read a. second time.

This measure merely provides for the re-enactment of the rates of stamp duty at present imposed on' some classes of instruments chargeable with stamp duty in Victoria. The rates of stamp duty chargeable on many instruments in this State, with the principal exception of the duty on cheques, were doubled in 1915, and have from time to time been re-enacted-in some instances for periods of four years or longer. Since 1936, the double rates have been renewed annually, and will cease to operate on the 31st of December next.

The stamp duty on cheques was raised from 1d. to 1 !d. as from the 15th of January, 1930, and from 1 !d. to 2d. as from the 15th of. December, 1932. The stamp duty on receipts for amouuts of £25 and over was increased from 2d. to 3d. from the 1st of January, 1932, while the annual licence fee payable by insur­ance companies transacting fire, marine, and fidelity guarantee business was reduced from 3 per cent. to 2 per cent. as from the 1st of January, 1937. Fol­lowing the imposition of a stamp duty on transfers of shares, the rate of stamp duty on conveyances and transfers of real estate was reduced from 20s. per £100 to 16s. per £100 as from the 1st of .January, 1938.

The revenue derived for the last two years from each class of instrument affected by thp Bill-that is, instruments chargeable with increased duty-together with the amount estimated to be collected during the present financial year 1940-41 is set out in the following table;-

Class of Instrument. 1938-39. 1939-40. 1940-41 Estimate.

£ £ £ Cheques .. .. 273,370 270,140 270,000 Reoeipts .. 190,806 191,372 191,500 Conveyanoes and

Transfers of Real Estate .. .. 224,813 229,363 229,000

Leases .. .. 12,78R 18,250 18,000 Settlements and gifts 48,975 51,771 55,000 Insuranoe licences .. 45,038 48,948 48,500

795,788 1809 844 1812000

The following table sets out similar details regarding instruments not affected by the Bill, namely, instruments charge­able with the original rate of duty:-

I I 1

1940-41 Class of Instrument. 1938-39. 1039-40. Estimate.

£ £ £ Promissory notes ., 20,674 18,821 17,000 Bills of exchange

(other than cheques) 8,961 6,019 5,000 Transfers of shares .. 48,783 49,499 48,500 Powers of Attorney .. 1,315 1,316 1,600 Bookma.kers'licences 11,647 10,900 11,000 Betting tickets .. 106,397 99,830 101,000 Betting statements .. 41,318 41,838 42,000

239,095 1228,2231226,100

The estimated revenue for this finan­cial year from classes of instruments affected by the Bill is £812,000, and that from instruments not affected, £226,100. The total estimated revenue from both sources is, therefore, £1,038,100. The Bill does not seek to impose any new taxation by way of stamp duty, but merely provides for the institution of the present rates of duty for another year.

On the motion of Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak), the debate was ad­journed until Tuesday, October 29.

PAWNBROKERS BILL. Mr. BAILEY (Attorney-General).-

I move-That this Bill be now read a second time.

The Bill is one to amend the Pawn­brokers Act 1928. Subsequent to tho passing last yea r of the }.{oney Lenders Act and the fixation by regulation of an interest rate of 48 per cent. which, if exceeded, was to be deemed to be exces­sive by the Courts unlesF" the money lender proved otherwise, complaints have been received by the Government that the interest rate that pawnbrokers are allowed to charge under the Pawn­brokers Act is excessive. The rate allowed is 2d. per month 011 every 2s. 6d. which, in terms of a rate per centum per annum is 80 per cent. As all ad­vances made by pawnbrokers are fully secured by the value of the chattel pawned, it is proposed to reduce that rate to bring it more into keeping with the regulation rate under the Mone~'

1244 Pa'Umbrokers I. ~"-SSEMBLY·l Bill.

Lenders Act. The amended rate pro­vided in the Bill is ld. per month 011

every 2s., which works out at approxi­mately 50 per cent. per annum. This reduction is regarded as imperative because the large majority of pawn­brokers' customers are drawn from the poorer sections of the community.

The Bill is also designed to make more effective the provisions of the principal Act dealing with the disposal of ·unre­deemed pledges. Under the existing law pawnbrokers are required to sell by auction all forfeited articles on which any sum above 5s. has been lent. Any money received from the sale in excess of the amount advanced by the pawnbroker plus the interest and expenses of the sale must, on demand, be paid to the person who pawned the article. Investigation has shown that, with two or three excep­tions, pawnbrokers have failed to observe the requirements of the Act in respect of auction sales. That, no doubt, is due to the fact that the l\..ct did not provide for the appointment of any person to en­sure that its provisions were observed. It was, in fact, no one's particular job. To remedy that, the Bill empowers the Treasurer to authorize any person to in­spect all books, documents, and articles in the pawnbroker's possession for the purpose of ascertaining if the provisions of the Act are being complied with.

Prior to any auction sale, the pawn­broker will be required to forward to the Treasurer a catalogue of all articles sub­mitted for sale by auction, and to keep a t his place of business a copy of such catalog'ue, with details of prices obtained by the auctioneer for each article sold. The provisions will ensure that adequate supervision can be exercised in respect of the djsposal of forfeited pledges. The Bill provides a further amendment in respect of fees. The fee for a pawnbroker's licence at present is £10, either to an individual or a company, and having re­g'ard to the fees payable for mouey ·lendcrs' licences, which are £25 for an individual licence and £f)0 for a company li(,pnce, it was considered that the pawn­broker's licence fee should be brought more into keeping with the money lender's f(les. Consequently the Bill proviorR for the fee to be increaseo to £20.

Having dealt with the principal f(·atl1l'(,~ of the Bill, I shall now explain

lIfl'. Rrrilpu

the clauses. Olause 1 i;:; the title clause, and it provides for the bringing into operatioll of the Act. Olause 2 substi­tutes a new section for section 5 of the princi pal Act, which provides the manner in which licences are to be obtained. The new matter in this clause is: (a) provi­sion for procedure whereby the police may object to the issue of a licence; (b) increase of licence fee to £20; and (c) simplification of procedure in applying for renewals of licences by holders. Clause 3 . substitutes a new section for section 17 of the Act. The new section limits th(· interest rateR to the amounts I have pre­viously indicated. It also provides R

penalty in tIle event of any charge by the pawnbroker in excess of the rates stipu­lated. A consequential amendment to section 18 is necessitated by the Bill refer­ring to the amounts charged by the pawn­brokers for advances at "rates of inter­est" instead of "rates of profit," as in the principal Act.

Olause 4 substitutes new sections for sections 25 to 27 of the principal Act. The new section 25 provides for the period for which pledges may be kept for re­demption. The new section 26 provideR for the sale by public auction ill Victoria of every unredeemed article on. which an amount of over 5s. has been lent. The sale must take place within twelve monthR of the time when the pledge became for­feit. An upset price on each article equal to the amount owing to the pawnbroker by way of principal and interest, plus charges of sale, must be announced by the auctioneer before the article is put 1111

for sale. A copy of the auctioneer's sale sheet showing upset prices and price~ oh­tained for all articles sold is to be kf'pt at the pawnbroker's place of business fol' twelve months. New section 27 is a new penalty section for contravention of sec­tions 25 and 26. Clause f) is concerned with the policing of the Act. It giveR thr Treasurer power, for the purpose of ascer­taining whether the provisions of the Act are being' complied with, to authorize in writing any person to enter and Rearch pawnbrokers' premises, inspect books, documents, or anv article 011 the premises and take possession of any artic1p.. That is a brief outline of this small Bill. It is tiIDe the legislation affecting pawn­hrokers was renewed ano, having 1'''0' ... ,.,1

to the legislation passed by the Houlle

Police Offe'lbCes L23 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Dog Racing) Bill. 1245

controlling money lenders, the Govern­ment thought it advisable to bring down the Bill.

On the motion of }Ir. HOLLWAY (Ballarat), the debate was adjourned until Wednesday, October 30.

PUBLIO TRUSTEE BILL. The message from the Council relat­

ing to the amendment in this Bill was taken into consideration.

Mr. BAILEY (Attorney-General).­The Oouncil has inserted the following new sub-clause, to follow sub-clause (3) of clause 6:-

" ( ) No election shall be filed pursuant to either of the said sub-sections in any case in which a caveat against any applieation for pro­bate or administration has been lodged with the registrar of probates and administrations and has not expired or been withdrawn."

I have discussed the amendment with the Public Trustee and the Parliamentary Draftsman. It is probably not strictly nece8sary, because the Public Trustee is of opinion that even without the amend­ment he could not be " entitled to a grant of probate or administration" under sub­clause (2) of clause 6 of the Bill in a case in which a caveat had been lodged. However, the amendment will not do any harm, since it represents the course that the Public Trustee would undoubtedly take in any case where objection was raised. I move-

That the amendment be agreed to.

On the motion of Mr. OLDHA~rf (Boroondara), the debate was adjourned until later this day.

POLioE OFFENOES (DOG RAOING) BILL.

The House went into Oommittee of the Whole.

Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary).-­(By leave.)-I move-

That subject to and in accordance with the provisions of the Police Offences (Dog Racing) Bill the following fees and amounts shaH be payable under the said Bill:-

(a) Upon every application for a licence: a fee of One pound;

(b) Upon every application for the renewal of a licence; a fee of One pound;

(c) Upon the renewal of a licence: an amount equal to 1 per centum of the gross revenue from all sources re­ceived or derived by the holder of the

Se.'lSion 1940.-[63]

licence in connection with the holding of dog races by such holder during the period of twelve months ending on the thirtieth day of June then last past.

The motion was agreed to, and the resolution was reported to the House and adopted.

The House went into Oommittee for the further consideration of the Bill.

Ola uses 2 to 6 were agreed to,. Olause 7-(Provision for transfer to

another ground).

Mr. MUTTON (Cob'urg).-If a ground on which dog races are held is within the boundaries of a shire, and the aretl is then annexed by an adjoining city, what would be the rights of the pro­,prietors of the ground? The Napier Park ground is in N ol'th Essendon, which is in the Shire of Broadmeadows, but if the area were annexed by the ad­joining Oity of Essendon, would the rights of the proprietors of the club holding dog racing meetiugs on t.hat ground be affected ~

Mr. HOLLWAY.-Bettillg would not be allowed on that ground if it came within the boundaries of the Oity of Essendon.

Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary).­This Bill does not override the powers of municipalities to grant licences for grounds on which betting may be con­ducted. If a dog racing course was in a shire, and the area was annexed by an adjoining city, the circumstances would vary.

Mr. MUTToN.-If the ground .was in a shire, and the area was later transferred to a city, betting would not be permitted on the ground after it had been included within the city boundaries ~

Mr. OArN.-No, and in addition the proprietors of the ground must obtain permission from the city council to run amusements on that ground.

Mr. MUTToN.-Will the Government support the proprietors of dog coursing grounds in their effort to acquire new sites within a shire boundary ~

Mr. BAILEY.-N 0, the Bill does not" make provision for an eventuality of th,at kind.

Mr. MUTToN.-Am I to take it that if a speed coursing ground was annexed to an adjoining city, and the shire council

1246 Police Offences r .l~.sSEMBLY·l (Dog Racing) Bill.

did not desire to retain a speed coursing ground within its borders, that would be the end of the club?

Mr. BAILEY.-That is the position under the law as it exists.

The clause was agreed to. Clause 8, providing, -inter alia-

(2) No application for the transfer of a licence to another ground shall ue granted unless all the holders of licences in respect of the former ground make application for such transfer:

Provided that where one of se\'eral holders of licences in rcspect of any ground applies for the transfer of his licence tounother ground that application may be granted not­withstanding that all the holden:; of licences ha\'e not made application for such transfer if-

(a) at the commencement of this Act that holder waR the promoter of dog races on a ground on which othcr pro­moters also held dog raCCR;

(b) at the date of the application for traml­fer that holder and other persons are the holders of licem'es in respect of such ground; and

(c) prior to becoming the prolllot.er of dog races on such ground that holder was at any time during the period of twelve months immediately preceding the twenty-fifth day of .June One thousand nille hundred and forty the sole promoter of dog races on some other ground-

and where any sueh application for truue:fer is granted then notwithstanding anything in the next succeeding section the number of days to be specified in the licence in respect of any subsequent year shall not exceed fifty-two days and in respect of the year current at the date of transfer the number of days specified in the licence shall be deemed to be fifty-two da~Ts.

Mr. OLDHAM (Boroondara). - I ·move-

That, in sub-clause (2), the proviso be omitted.

'J.'ltis is the first of two amendments I propose to move to bring the Bill into line with the intentions of the Govern­ment, as expressed on the 25th of June last by the Premier and the Ohief Secretary, when it was announced that Oabinet proposed, when Parliament re­assembled, to impose certain restrictions on dog racing. Honorable members were reminded, during the second reading de­bate that, according to a newspaper l'eport, the Chief Secretary had stated, ill effect, that new dog racing clubs were springing up in all parts of the State, ~nd thnt there wpre already too many

clubs_ He also said that Cabinet would consider a proposal for an authority to be established to control dog racing in the same way as the Victoria Racing Club controls horse racing. The proposed legislation to deal with these clubs would be made retrospective to the 25th of June. According to another newspa per, the Premier announced that the suggested retrospective legislation was to be intro­duced in the coming session, and he hoped that those intending to establish new courses would take heed of the warning and not waste their time and energy on their projects.

The Premier also said that Oabinet considered there were far too many cours­ing tracks springing up. That was the atmosphere in which the first announce­ment of this legislation was made. To enact legislation to comply with those desires, I suggest that the amendment I have proposed merits the support of the Committee. Under clause 7, no applica­tion for the transfer of a licence to another ground will be granted unless all the holders of licences in respect of the ground where they formerly operated sub­mit a joint application. If three clubs were opera ting on one ground, and could not obtain a renewal of their lease on reasonable terms, they could not move to another ground unless they all signed the application to move. If only one club operates on a certain ground and that club cannot obtain a renewal of its lease of the ground upon fair terms, the Ohief Secretary may allow that club to I?ove to another ground if he is satisfied with the circumstances of the ca!e, subject to the overriding authority of the municipality in which the new grol!nd is situated. Under such an arrangement, one coursing track would no longer ~ ul5ed, but a new coursing track would come into existence, so that there would be no actual increase in the number of track:..

The proviso "which my amendment seeks to eliminate, sets forth that, in certain circumstances, particular clubs now opera­ing on grounds used also by other clubs, may move to another ground without the consent of the clubs ,,·hich remain on the old ground. In that way opportunity is givell to increase the number of grounds, and t hat is one of the things the Govern­lllcnt seeks to avoid. The clubs concerned could move to a new location if npcessary,

Police Offences [23 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Dog Racing) Bill. 1247

but my amendment would prevent an increase in the number of grounds, and not merely retain the Humber as at the 25th of June last. In his second-reading speech, dealing with clause 7, the Chief Secretary said-

Sub-claut;e (2) provides that generally no application for a transfer of a licence to another ground shall be granted unless all the holders of licences in respect of the ground apply. \Vithout this safeguard it would pos­sibly mean all increase in the number of grounds, as one club might wish to transfer a.nd one to remain, and so there would then be two grounds instead of one.

That is the principle the Bill seeks to establish, but that principle is broken down by the proviso to the clause now under discussion, which the Chief Sec­retary described as follows-

A special proviso has, however, been im,erted to meet the case of the Gracedale Park club. which raced at Springvale for some years, and the lease of which property expired on the 31st of ]\farch, 1940. The owner and the club differed regarding the conditions of renewal, and the club has, in the interim, be~n racing at White Cit~-. The proviso authorizet; the Chief Secretary to approve of the transfer of the licence of one of the clubs holding licences in respect of olle ground, notwithstanding that the other clubs racing there have not applied . . .

and special circumstances are enumerated. I do not take exception to the Bill be­cause it ,,,,ill secure the position of certain proprietary monopolies, by whom dog racing can probably be carried on, subject to rigid governmental control, better than under some sort of loose amateur control. If the Government had proceeded with its intention as first announced, that an authority would he created to control dog racing, many of the arguments I now propose to advance would be unnecessary, because the questions of renm\-al of licences, transfer to other grounds, and days of meeting could be decided by some impartial authority, such as a committee of three presided over by a police magis­trate. But that has not been provided for. It would not be out of place to appoint a Royal Commission or a Select Oommit­tee of this House to inquire into what will be the effect (\)f this legislation, and ascer­tain what would be a reasonable course to follow in administering it. Unless an examination is made of the possible effect of this measure-the way in which it will a ff(lrt the proprietary interests involved -it will be difficult to ascertain what is a fair course to follow.

At present there is only one track in the metropolitan area upon which more than one club is operating. With regard to the Gracedale Park club, which the Ohief Secretary mentioned, I understand there was a dispute between that club and the owner of the ground on which it conducted its meetings, and, so far as I can ascertain, the merits in that dis­pute were on the side of the club. It appears that the owner of the ground asked for an exorbitant rental as a condi­tion of the renewal of the club's lease. The rlub refused to pay it, and the lease was not 1'8ne,,-e<.1. Another club, callrd the Sandown Park club, is operating in the Springvale-Dandenong district. That ('lub is licensed for daytime racing only, and it holds two meetings a week. La tpl' I shall submit an amendment to provi<l(' tLat all courses shall be restricted to hold­ing one meeting a week. Operating in tllP Dandenong district were the Gracedalp Park club and the Sando'wn Park club. The Gracedale Park club transferrC'(l to White Oity.

Mr. BAILEY.-The club did Hot trans­fer to White City at that stage. It had acquired another ground.

Mr. }!uTToN.-The ground of the San­down Park club was outside the r('si­dential arp.a, but the ground of the Grace­dale Park club was in the residential area.

Mr. OLDHAM.-Does the honor a hlp member for Coburg consider meetings should be held outside a residential area?

Mr. MUTToN.-I have had expC'riem'(' in preventing clubs from operatillg in :1

residential area. Mr. OLDHA1vI.-The Sporting Glo7)()

on the 14th of February reported that thr Graredale Park club had acquired a propert:v at Dandenong, alongside that on which it had raced previously. The re­port stated-

'Vith the acquisition of a block of around at Springvale at a cost .of £4,000, plan~ have been put in hand for the building of a new track by the Gracedale Park management. Th€'sc provide for the spendin!.!; of j llst on £6,000, as Mr. Fred Watkins is dptE'l'lI1inf'f1 that thp new track shall he tll(' lwst ill AUN

tl'alia_ There will he a circular trark of 5!)0 ~'ards and a straight track of 300 y-fll'ds.

An innovation will he tile ('()I;strllctioll of a spf'C"ial .training t~ack beR.ide. the rncing trade It IS a good ldf'a as It: wIll sa\'(' the main track.

1248 Police Offences rASSEMBL Y."I (Dog Racing) Bill.

100 FT. GRANDSTAND. The plans also provide for the buildiJlg of

a 100 ft. grandstand, and the installation of septic tanks.

The architect, Mr. H. R. Johnstone, who incidentally is chairman of directors of Napier Park, has been given an open order to install the best possible lighting system.

Work will begin almost immediately and the new track will be opened in a c.ouple of months.

The" club made application on the 26th of February to the Dandenong Shire Council for the registration of the new ground, but it was refused. At the same meeting, the council restricted the Sandown Park club to daytime racing. From the 14th of February, and after the application to the shire council had been rej ected, work proceeded on the new ground, 250 yards of track being fenced in to permit a meeting being held. That meeting was described in the S'l.lrl N ews-P'icfon:al of the 4th of March, as follows:-

SPEED COURSING BY -LAW DEFIED BY CLUB.

Although Dandenong Shire Council has passed a by-law against further speed coursing III its territory, Gra:cedale Park club held a special meeting on Saturday afternoon on the site it obtained recently for construction of a new speed coursing track.

The Gracedale dub acquired several acres in Sandown Road, Springvale, to build a track so that it could transfer from its old Springvale ground. It has planned to spend about £]0,000 on the new course.

The manager of Gracedale Park (Mr. H. Heggart) said that night the club would go on with its plans for a new track, and would continue to operate. The club claims it will not be affected by the by-law, as it is merely transferring from one ground to another.

The meeting was held in defiance of the ban by the Dandenong Shire Council. It was poorly attended, and I understand that only one bookmaker operated. I suggest that this matter should be investi­gated-I do not pass judgment on it­as it would appear that this bogus meet­ing was held in order to comply with the provjso to clause 7 as to the number of meetings held within the preceding twelve months.

Mr. BAII"EY.-When was this bogus meeting held?

Mr. OLDHAM.-On the 2nd of March. Registration of the ground was refused by the Dandenong Shire Council on the 26th of February. The club has con­tinued to effect jmprovements to the new ground. I understand that an amount has been allocated for the erection of a grand-

stand, and that an iron fence, 10 feet high, has been constructed for a distance of approximately 15 chains. It is obvious that some move is intended by the club.

Mr. :McKENZIE.-N aturally, the club would want to hold meetings on a ground of its OW11 after losing the lease of the other ground.

Mr. OLDHAM.-But the Bill is de­signed to limit the number of coursing grounds. Clubs desire to expand their activities, and I agree that they may want to operate in new areas. Any club could have a "puppy" club operating in another district, and could transfer to that groun(1.

lvfl'. lYIuLLENs.-At Dandenong, there is the old ground, and there is also the new ground you have mentioned. How will there be an increase in the number of grounds in that area?

Mr. OLDHAM. - At the moment, coursing cannot take place legally at the old ground.

Mr. MULLJDNs.-That is because the club is holding meetings at Footscray.

Mr. OLDHAM.-N o. The Dandenong Shire Council has prohibited racing at that ground. An explanation should be given why the club is spending money on the new ground.

Mr. BATI"EY.-The club would be foolish to spend money on the ground if it did not think the council intended to change its attitude.

Mr. McKENzIE.-Obviously, the club is gambling on the council lifting the embargo.

1\fr. OLDHAM.-We should remember that the object of the Bill is to prevent an increase in the number of coursing g-rounds. We should not allow certain clubs to enjoy privileges that will not be permitted in the future. If two or three clubs hold meetings on one ground they will be permitted to share the num­ber of meetings allotted to that ground. J n the Dandenong district, the Sandown Park club is restricted to racing in the daytime. If the shire council reverses itR de~ision, snrely that club should be per­mitted to conduct meetings at night.

Mr. MULLENs.-What authority re­stricted the Sandown Park club to day­time racing?

Police Offences 1~:3 OCTOBER, 1D40.1 (Dog Raci'i'bg) Bill. 1249

~{r. OLDHA~L - The Dandenollg Shire Oouncil. I take it for granted that not only is the licensing of grounds within the control of the local council, but also the stipulating of the period for 'which the licensed grounds are to operate. I feel strongly that in dealing' with a Bill affect­ing highly contentious and antagonistic proprietary interests we should be ex­tremely careful. I believe the' House genuinely wishes to make this an effective measure. I believe, too, that the Ohief Secretary desires to have the Bill passed so that in these times of national danger the war effort shall not be hurt by gather- . ings at dog races. The Premier has said that there are too many dog racing courses now. I feel that the desire of this Committee is to limit the number. I do not think anybody would be hurt hy the adoption of my amendment. In the final analysis, if there is proper control of this activity, the clubs that conduct their race meetings best, and spend money 011

wiRely improving the accommodation for their patrons, will get results. The Bill will be greatly improved if my amend­mC'ut is, accepted. What I have said ahout the metropolitan areas applies equally to the country areas, where there is no ground upon which more than one club operates. If I am v"rong 011 that point, my proposed restriction would operate on such a country ground.

Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary) .­The whole purpose of the Bill is to 1'e­strict the number of dog racing grounds throughout Victoria, and when it becomes law it will have that effect.

}fr. McKENzIE.-In framing the Bill you have restricted not only the numbe;' of grounds, but also the Humber of meetings.

J\fr. BAILEY.-Sub-c1ause (1) of cIa use 3 restricts the grounds on which dog races may be held. It states-~ave as is otherwise expressly provided in

tJl1~ Act, after the commencemeut of this Act n~ d?g races shal~ be held on an~' ground unless wlthm the penod of tweh'e months im­mediately preceding the twenty-fifth day of June One thousand llille hundred and forty dog raceR were held on that ground. .

As the honorable member for Boroondara said, the Gracedale Park Olub raced 80mewhere near Springvale for a number of years. The ~lub leased ground under

an arrangement with the landlord, who received a substantial amount as rent and was retained as caretaker at a fairly good remuneration. N egotiatiolls were entered into for the renewal of the lease, but as the honorable member for Boroondara mentioned, the lan,dlord stipu­lated conditions which the club thought were not reasonable, and so it looked for another ground. The club acquired another area on which it spent a consider­able sum of money. The fact then dawned upon the club's officials that they could not conduct racing without the per­mission of the local municipality. The council concerned, however, refused to licence the ground for the purpose of dog racing. The club had been racing within the period of twelve months preceding the 25th of June, 1940-it had raced from the 1st of July, 1939, to the 1st of March, 1940. As it could not come to an amicable agreement with the landlord or obtain a permit from the Dandenong Shire Oouncil, it arranged with the White Oity club to race on its ground. Three clubs race there.

The Government, in framing the Bill, has provided that if any licensed club nnds that it is impracticable to race on its ground, it may, on furnishing' satis­factory reasons to the Ohief Secretary, transfer to another ground. Once the licence is issu~d for the new ground, the old ground WIU be closed down so that there will be no increase in the number of grounds used for this sport. The hon­OI'able member for Boroondara asserts that a licence should not be granted to the Gracedale Park club to race on another ground, notwithstanding that it had been racing on its old ground for nine months within the period of twelve months preceding the 25th day of J ~lle, 1940. We think that objection is not reasonable. If the landlord had pro­posed terms that the club considered to be reasonable it would have been racing now on the old ground.

Mr. OLDHAM.-What are the three clubs racing at White Oity~

Mr. BAILEY.-White Oity, Grace­dale Park, and Glenroy. If the 'White Oity club transfers to another ground its present ground will be closed. The Glenroy club cannot obtain a transfer, whereas the Gracedale Park club can do

1250 Police Offences r ASSEMBLY.] (Dog Racing) Bill.

so, because it complies with this provision in that it had been racing for the greater part of the twelve months prior to the 25th of June last. The club pioneered dog racing in its locality. The adoption of the Bill will not increase the number of grounds devo,ted to dog racing. If tlw Gracedale Park club had come to an ar'rangement with its landlord-and it could perhaps, even now-it would be entitled to conduct 70 meetings in a year, but the Goyernment has stipulated in the Bill that if the club acquired new land it would be restricted to 52 meetings for the year. In that way, the club would be considerably penalized. If the club ('0111d secure another ground for which tIl() municipality would grant a permit for dog racing it would be able to secure a licence, but it would not be able to eOllduct 70 meetings in a year, whereas it would have been able to do so had it continued to race on the old gromid.

Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda).-I can appreciate both points of view in this ('ontroversy. I realize that the Minister ,,;i~lws to be sympathetic towards one pnl'tielllal' club.

jIl'. BAlLEy.-I desire to be equitable.

:'\lr. MICHAELIS.-While the Minis­ter is actuated by a desire to be fair, the fact remains that he has adopted a sympathetic attitude towards one club.

:Mr. B.\ILEY.-For the reasons I have stated.

1fr. .MIOHAELIS.-On the other hand, the honorable member for Boroon­dara ('onsiders that owing to the manner in which the proviso is drawn it might open the door to applications from more than one club for transfers of licences. I suggest that the 'way out of the difficulty is to delete the proviso and, in a sched1J.le, to specify the club in question as being ~ntitled to an exemption from the other provisions of the clause. In that way the possibility of numerous other clubs s('eking a similar exemption later would 1)0 avoided. On the general principle I agree with the honorable member for Roroondara, but when we are attempting to l('gislate with the view (If reducing the number of dog races it is desirable to make adequate provision to prevent the formation of new clubs.

Mr. MAUF ARLAN .-It is not easy to determine the position of the Gracedale Park club. If it is in disagreement with the landlord of the course, and also with the shire council, it is apparently in difficulties.

:Mr. MICHAELIS.-In his desire to sympathize with one par,ticular club, the Minister has opened the door to the ad­mission of others. The honorable mem­ber for Boroondara has expressed the view that the proviso in question would grant a wide discretion to the Minister, and it is not beyond the bounds of possi­bility that several other clubs will be able to comply with the conditions and make applications for exemptions. If my sug­gestion were agreed to it would, I think, meet the objection voiced by the hon­orable member for Boroondara.

Mr. MULLENS (Footscray).-In my electorate there are two dog racing courses, and I claim to have some know­ledge of the sport, particularly as I had a slight personal association with it in years gone by. Although it has been suggested by the honorable member for Boroondara and the honorable member for St. Kilda that a special set of circum­stances is attachable to one dog racing club, I submit that the position of that club is no different from that of the San­down or the Maribyrnong club. Similar difficulties may be faced by more than one club at the expiration of a lease. If the M aribyrnong club, for instance, owing to a disagreement concerning the lease of its ground, was permitted to transfer to another site, that would not mean an addition to the number of grounds. The same argument applies to the club at Sandown Park. Managed and controlled in a highly satisfactory manner, the course at White City has always been the " Flemington" of dog racing.

It must be understood that the control of dog racing at White City and Grace­dale Park is entirely distinct from that which is exercised at Dandenong and Sandown. In the one case the executive of the National Speed Coursing Associa­tion is in charge, while in the other case an unregistered body functions. In the metropolitan area a dog that races at White City can be entered elsewhere only at Gracedale Park, while dogs that run at Napier Park can be entered elsewhf1rQ

Police Offences [23 OCTOBER, 1940.J (Dog RO£ing) Bill. 1251

at Sandown and Maribyrnong. As the courses at Sandown and Maribyrnong are held under lease, any proviso a pplica ble to the transfer or projected transfer from one course to another applies equally in all cases.

Mr. HOLLAND (Flemington).-Unlike the honorable member for Footscray, I have not much knowledge of speed cours­ing, although I have had a deep interest ill amatcur whippet racing since its in­('eption in this State. For some time past, th~ proprietors of White Oity have grunted permits to the Whippet Ooursing Club to run handicaps on nights on which the vVhite Oity holds speed coursing llleptings. If the amendment is agreed to, and a reduction in the number of meetings at White Oity is effected that will deprive the Whippet Oou~'sing' Olub of opportunities to run evening handicaps.

~lr. OLDlIAM.-Does that club permit hetting" at its ordinary meetings?

:Mr. HOLLAND.-No. Mr. OLDIIAM.-This Bill applies only

to llw('tings where there is betting.

. .Mr. HOLLAND.-The Whippet Oours­ing Olub condul.!ts a Saturday afternoon handica p in a paddock, and no betting is allowed. For the evening events at White Oity, however, betting is permitted. Suppose that the number of meetings at White Oity is reduced first from 180 to 70 and, later, to 50; then the privilege en­joyed by the Whippet Ooursing Olub will disappear. Obviously, the White Oity management will contend that it is im­possible to make the necessary provision. The Whippet Ooursing Olub should not be deprived of the privilege it has enjoyed for some time past. It is a purely amateur organization, and all its profit is devoted to charitable purposes. With the view of purchasing for £1,000 a ground for its own use, the club saved a certain amount, £500 of which it released free of interest, to the Commonwealth GOY(,l'nment for war purposes.

Mr. HAYEs.-Yet the Government of this State would chop off the club's head!

Mr. HOLLAND.-I do not think the Government can be blamed.

:rn:r. MUTTON (Coburg). - Having realIzed that the sport of dog racing has come to stay, the Government now desires

to exercise control over it, and with that object .in vie·w the Bill provides that no further new grounds shall be used for speed coursing. In a certain munici­pality, I have been engaged in a good deal of strife over speed coursing, and I am concerned about the sincerity of the Government's expressed desire to control this sport. Some minutes ago I asked the Chief Secretary a question in relation to a coursing club whose ground is situated in that portion of a shire which may be annexed to a city. The reply that I received was to the effect that the an­nexation would sound the death knell of that coursing club.

Mr. BAILEY.-If the club's ground was transferred to a city, betting would not be permitted at its meetings.

Mr. M"LTTON.-The main point is th8 need to safeguard a club in the event of the territory in which its course is situated being annexed by a city. I realize that it is the desire of the Government to control dog racing, but the Government should take steps to protect a coursing club in the event of the territory in which its course is located being annexed by a city. Horse racing clubs are permitted to conduct meetings in cities, and the Jog racing clubs should be granted the same privilege. Thousands of pounds have been expended by dog racing clubs on the im­provement of their courses for the con­venience of the public. The opportunity should not be given to a few busybodies in a certain district to bring about the extinction of a coursing club merely be­cause of the annexation of territory by a city. Some time ago the Shire of Braybrook circularized the municipalities in an attempt to obtain support for the proposal that betting should be prohibited at dog racing meetings held in shires. I am sure that the Oountry party Govern­ment would not remain long in office if it sought to introduce that prohibition.'

Thousands of persons who attend Jog racing meetings do llOt go to horse racing meetings. Dog racing is a good sport, which is rapidly develop­ing an industry in this State. Thousands of persons earn their livelihood in that industry. The breeding of grey­hounds has reached a high stan­dard, and thoroughbred greyhounds are being brought into Australia for the

1252 Police Offences r ASSEMBLY·1 (Dog Racing) Bill.

purpose of improving the breed. I hope the Chief Secretary will grant to· dog­racing clu\)s the same privilege as is now enjoyed by horse-racing clubs, which are permitted to conduct meetings in cities.

Mr. OLDHAM (Boroondara). - The honorable member for Flemington ap­peared to fear that the restriction proposed in my amendment would prevent the whippet club to which he referred from continuing to run whippet events at White City. I understand there is no betting on whippet races at White City.

Mr. McKENzIE.-There is betting on whippet races at White City.

Mr. OLDHAM.-I had in mind legal betting, and I should like to be informed whether there is betting at White Ci ty when whippet races are held.

Mr. HOLLAND.-A friend of mine who is in the gallery, and ·\\'ho is a follower of whippet racing, has just informed me that there is betting on whippet races at White City.

Mr. OLDHAM.-Apparently, I was misinformed.

The amendment was negatived, and the cIa use was agreed to.

Clause 9, providing, inter alia-(1) After the thirty-first day of December

next after the commencement of this Act no holder of a licence shall hold dog races under sllch licence-

(a) on a greater number of dayrs in any week than is specified in such licence;

(b) on a greater number of days in any year c.ommencing on the first day of January than is specified in such licence; or

(c) during any hours on any day other than those specified in such licence.

(2) The number of days to be specified in any licence shall be determined by the Chief Secretary subject to the following rules:-

{a) The aggregate number of days in any week so specified in the licence or licences in respect of anyone ground shall not exceed two days;

(b) The aggregate number of days in any year commencing on the first day of January so specified in the licence or licences in respect of anyone ground shall not exceed-

(i) seventy days where dog races were held on such ground on any number of days greater than seventy during the period of twelve months immediately preceding the twenty-fifth day of .June One tholHmnd nine hundred and forty;

(ii) fifty-two days where dog races were held on such ground on any number of days greater than fifty-one and not greater than seventy during the said period of twelve months; or

Mr. OLDHAM (Boroondara).-I move­That, in paragraph (b) of sub-clause (2), sub­

paragraphs (i) and (ii) be omitted with the view of inserting the following sub-para­graph:-

" (i) fifty-two days where dog races were held on such ground on any number of days greater than fifty-one during the period of twelve months im­mediately preceding the twenty-fifth day of June One thousand nine hundred and forty."

The object of the amendment is to ensure that there is no unfair disCl'imina­tion with respect to the proprietary in­terests. The Government has professed a desire to restrict dog racing both as to the number of courses and the number of meetings. The second-reading debate showed that the Government proposes to reduce the number of meetings by 25 per cent. If we really think there is far too much dog racing, the restriction should be greater. The effect of what I propose would be that on any sports ground there could not be more than 52 meetings a year. The Bill provides that on grounds where clubs are operating at present there can be 70 meetings a year, and on new grounds, 52 meetings a year. What an opportunity is provided by that pro­vision for blackmail of the lowest type! A club that would have the right under this legislation to apply to, the Chief Secretary might be allowed to move to a new ground, but on that new ground it would be able to hold 'only 52 meetings a year, whereas on the old ground it could hold 70 meetings a year.

The proposal in the Bill will give a distinct and unfair advantage to certain clubs on their present grounds, and con­sequently it will place a most powerful weapon in the hands of the landlords of grounds where proprietary clubs are now operating. It is obvious that the land­lords will he able to exact higher rents for grounds where 70 meetings can be held than for grounds where only 52 meetings can be held. I do not see why, when we are dealing with a monopoly such as this, we should advantage one section of the community and disad­vantage another section, or why we should transfer certain clubs from an

Police Offences [23 OCTOBER, 1940.1 (Dog Racing) Bill. 1253

advantaged class to a disadvantaged class for no other reason than that they can­not obtain fair terms from those who control the courses on which they arc operating. The legislation 'will create great vested interests for the clubs nov,' operating, and will 'increase for those clubs the benefits that are being ladled out. It is unfair that the Bill will not reduce dog racing to a much greater ex­tent than is . proposed, but I take the further grave exception that it will give to one set of clubs advantages that are denied to other clubs when they move to new grounds.

The Chief Secretary himself pointed out that if the Gracedale Park club moved from its present ground it would be disadvantaged to the extent that it would be able to hold only 52 meetings a year. That proposal is founded on incorrect logic. The Gracedale Park club now shares the White City gro,und with two other clubs, and the three clubs together will not be able to hold more than 70 meetings a year. If one of the clubs moves to another ground, the re-' maining two clubs will be able to share the 70 meetings, and the club on the new ground will have 52 meetings to itself. Therefore, the argument of the Chief Secretary in that regard falls to the ground. I ask my honorable friends in the Labour party, who are generally keen against monopolies and vested interests, to scrutinize the amendment very care­fully before they vote against it. It will restrict the number of clubs to those existing at present, and will restrict the number of grounds almost to the number existing at present. What is fair on one ground is fair on another, and I cannot see any reason for the proposal to allow 70 meetings on some grounds and 52 meetings on others. If the first intention of the Government had been carried out, and an independent authority had been created to control the number of meet­ings, I should have been prepared to leave the task entirely to that authority. As matters stand, however, it is the business of Parliament to hold the scales fairly,

Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary).­I do not agree that it is desirable to delete the sub-paragraphs proposed to be omitted. The honorable member for Boroondara seems to think that the Bill

will not greatly curtail dog racing. Let me explain how much it will curtail the sport in the metropolitan urea. ..A t the present time, at White Oity, 156 meetings a year are held, but under the Bill the number will be reduced to 70; at Napier Park, 7~ meetings ,viII be reduced to 70; and at Maribyrnong, 79 will be reduced to 70. The Graced'ale Park club held 104 meet­ings a year on its old course, and, if it obtains a transfer to another ground, it will be able to hold only 52 meetings a year. Those figures indicate a Bubstan­tial reduction. At Sandown Park, 104 meetings a year are held, and the number in future will be 70. My figures show that a total of 521 meetings a year will be reduced to 332, which I regard as a substantial reductio;n. Before ldeciding on the number of meetings to be held, the Government gave careful considera­tion to the matter. It decided that the pioneer clubs, which are now free to hold races every day and every night of the week, should be allowed to hold 70 meet­ings. It regards its proposals as reason­able, and, therefore, I cannot accept tho amendment.

Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda),-I was astounded, when listening to the remarks of the honorable member for Boroondara, to learn the different implications of the clause. From virhat he has said, I gather that the rent ramp, to which members of the Ministerial corner party express ob­jection at regular intervals, is nothing as compared with the rent ramps that will be perpetrated in the dog racing Rport if the clause is passed without alteration. The landlords will be able to say to thp tenants, "We are going to double your rent. If you do not like it, get out, and, if you get out, the number of your meet­ings will be reduced from 70 to 52." The tenants are in' an invidious position. Clubs which own their own coursing grounds are on velvet, but most clubs arc tenants.

Mr. BAILEy.-The honorable member is under a misapprehension. Three clubs are racing on the one ground, but the number of meetings held by each club will be reduced. Olause 7 makes provi­sion for the transfer of a club from one ground to another. The number of meet­ings authorized by this measure wou~J not be curtailed because a ground was ciosed

1254 Police Offences (Dog Racing)· Bill. r ASSEMBLY.l ~.I'~

restrict the number of dog coursing meet­ings. It is generally admitted that dog racing is only another means of gambling. There is not even the attraction of seeing a thoroughbred racehorse in action, or the women's dresses, which are the main items of attraction at the principal meetings. Many people who attend horse racing meetings do not gamble. But how few would attend a dog race meeting if gambling were prohibited!

and the club transferred to another ground. Sub-clause (1) of clause 7 pro­vides, inter alia--

Where during the currency .of anYl licence the holder of the licence satisfies the Chief Secretary that it is or will be impossible 6r that the conditions or proposed conditions of occupancy have rendered or will render it im­practicable for him to continue to hold dog l'aces on the ground to which the licence then relates, the Chief Secretary may transfer the licence to another specified ground , . .

If a landlord endeavoured to blackmail a club, the Chief Secretary would be in a position to permit the club to transfer to another ground without reducing the number of meetings to be held by that ('lub.

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-That does alter the circumstances, but few\er dog race meetings should be held. It was suggested by members of the Labour party that cer­tain clubs might hold extra meetings if they transferred from their present grounds. While they remain at their present grounds, they are to be allowed to hold a certain number of meetings, but if they move to another ground, the three clubs concerned will be permitted to hold extra meetings. The honorable member for Footscray said that he knew of a num­ber of clubs in a position similar to the Gracedale Park club.

Mr. MULLENs.-The Maribyrnong club races on a ground it has leased, and the Gracedale Park club is temporarily at White Oity. There is no difference be­tween the position of the Sandown Park, the Maribyrnong, and the Gracedale Park clubs, each of which races on a course it has leased. Even if the clubs transferred there would be no increase in the number of courses and no increase in the number of days on which races would be held.

Mr. OLDHAM.-One dog race meeting a week at each course would be ample.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-Even that num­ber would greatly exceed the number of horse race meetings held by metropolitan dubs. At Flemington fourteen meetings are held each year, but a larger number are held at the Oaulfield and Moonee Valley courses in normal times. How­ever, they do not average one meeting a week at each racecourse. If it iR advis­nble to restrict the number of horse race lll('('tings, ~mrely it is €'qually advisable to

Mr. BAILEY.-Have you ever been to a dog race meeting?

Mr. MIOHAELIS. - I attended a meeting at the White Oity course, in England. It is the biggest and best­conducted dog racing course in that country, and the conditions are different from those on our local courses. A meet­ing at White Oity in England is a social function, and on the grandstand, dinner is served behind a glassed-in pavilion. Even so, the vast majority of the crowo a ttend to bet.

Mr. BAILEY.-Dog racing is looked on as the poor man's sport. He is not inter­ested in social functions.

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-At Flemington, on Melbourne Oup Day, thousands of poor men pay their shillings to go on to the Flat. Those who cannot afford even that small amount congregate on Scotchman's Hill, outside the racecourse.

Mr. BAILEY. - The attendances at Flemington would be materially reduced if betting was prohibited. Returns filed by bookmakers and receipts from the totalizator indicate how very few people go to race meetings and do not bet.

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-One dog race meeting a week on each metropolitan course would be ample.

Mr. MULLENS (Footscray).-I am afraid the debate on this Bill has suffered because of its title. I do not think we should compare gambling on dog racinf!. with gambling on horse racing. Ap­parently, it is all right for a pack of hounds to career across the paddocks after a ~ox, with the field in full chase. And there is little objection taken to plump ton coursing, although it is possible to back a dog, at the call of the card at the Benalla or Geelong Plump ton, to win £3,000. Betting on speedcoU!rsing is not comparable with that wagering. At Flemington racecourse on Saturday last

Police Offences L23 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Dog Racing) Bill. 1255

I noted a bet of £1,200 to £800 Gold Salute, in the last race; a succession of bets of £5,000 to £1,000, High Caste; £1,200 to £200, High Oaste; £1,000 to £200, High Caste; and £800 to £400, Gold SaInte. It may be exhilarating when one sees a sprightly young man, a son of a business "baron," going along the rails calling" £1,000 to £500, Gold Salute," and ()ne may gaze with awe at another young man calling "£5,000 to £1,000, High Caste." That sort of betting is not in ~he saPle category as the wagering of the man in the street, with his modest investment " two bob each way, Sally, up the straight." The authentic bets I have mentioned are infinitesimal when com­pared with the huge volume of betting at Flemington on any race day. We cannot reduce the argument on this or any other amendment to the plane of betting. If we could, I am afraid that the example set on some of our principal racecourses would have a very harmful effect on anv legislation that might be introduced. L

The Oommittee divided on the question that the words proposed by :M:r. Oldham to be omitted stand part' of the clause (Mr. Ooyle in the chair)-

Ayes 33 No~ 6

~rajority against the amendment 27

AYES.

lVIl·. Allnutt " Hailey " Bond' " Borthwick

Mrs. Brownbill Mr. Cain

" Cameroll ,. Cook. A. E.

( Bendigo) .. Cook. F. A.

(Benalla) .. Cremean " Denigan _, Diffey . , Dodgshun " Dunstan. A. A.

(Korong & E'hawk) " Dunstone, 'V.

(Rodney) HaveR

,. Hogan

l\[r. Holden ., Holland ., Jewell " Lemmon " l\facfarlall " Mackrell " Martin ., McDollald. Alex.

(Stawell & Ararat ) " l\:[cKenzlP " Mullens " l\Inttoll ., Old ,. Paton ,. Reid.

Tellers:

~fr. Hyland " McDonald, J. G. B.

(Goulburn Valley)

NOES.

Sir Stallley Argyle Mr. Hollins

" Oldham " Zwar.

Tellers:

Mr. Ellis " Michaelis.

PAIRS.

:'Ill". Barry 1\11'. Kent Hughe!\ Benllett " H ollwH'y

" Field Colonel Harold Cohen Frost Mr. White Kirton Maltby

" Lind :: Dillon Moncur Lieut.-Col. Knox

" Murphy Mr. Cumming TUllnecliffe " Haworth

The ela use was agreed to, as were the l'(,llluining clauses.

The Bill was reported to the House without amendment, and passed through its remaining stages.

PUBLIC TRUSTEE BII-lL. The df'bate (adjourned from earlier

this day) on the motion of Mr. Bailey (Attorney-General) that the a]~lendment of the Legislative Council he agreed to was resumed.

Mr. OLDHAM (Boroondara).-I have perused the amendment. It is merely a machinery provision, and the Opposition has no objection to its being incorporated in the Bill.

The motion was agreed to:

LAND TAX BILL. The debate (adjourned from Octouer

16) on the motion of Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premier and Treasurer) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (To01·ak).­The Treasurer has explained that the Bill is merely the re-enactment of the existing IJand Tax Act and therefore calls for little comment. However, certain facts relating to land tax should be brought to the attention of honorable members. The last available report of the Commissioner of Taxes fliscloses that 158,000 tax­payers paid in State land tax a a total revenue of £490,000 on land with an unimproved value of £239,000,000. The rate of State land tax in Vietoria is low compared with the Federal land tax . The report also discloses that 40 per cent. of the total assessments are made on parcels of land with an unimproved value of less than £500. That indicates that the owners of comparatiyely small areas contribute a large proportion of the total revenue from the tax. In only 4.29 per cent. of the assessments is the unimproved value of the land more than £5,000. That land is owned by people who alRo pay

1256 Land

Federal land tax. The report of the Commissioner of Taxes for the current financial year has not yet been published, but his report for last year shows that 49 per cent. of the assessments are on broad acres. Many people believe land tax is a rural tax; but it is not. It is only partly a rural tax, because 49 per cent. of the assessments are on broad acres, 44 per cent. on metropolitan pro­perties, and 7 per cent. on land in country towns.

The Bill is a hardy annual, and the Treasurer has informed us that no alteration has been made in the proposed rates. We have every reason to be thank­ful that they have not been increased, as we shall be taxed heavily in other direc­tions

Mr. CAIN (Northcote).-I do not wish to enter into a full discussion of the subject of the laud tax, but I have always appreciated that the tax is based on the unimproved value of land. Therefore, it follows that a large proportion of the reven ue collected by means of the tax comes from properties in the cities. At present, an exemption from the payment of land tax is granted in the cases of small holdings in country districts and areas in the metropolis with a value of less than £250. Possibly that exemption i3 too low. The major portion of the revenue collected by means of the Federal and State land taxes is derived from properties in the city.

. Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That is true.

Mr. OAIN.-Following the depression, remissions were made in the :tate of Federal land tax, and it was generally accepted that that would assist agricul­turists in difficulties; but more than 50 per cent. of the remission applied to owners of city properties, the value of which has been enhanced by the concen­tration of business activities in the metro­politan area.

:Mr. OLDHAM.-Does not the same argument apply to country areas, the value of which has been enhanced by the con­struction of railways, the provision of irrigation facilities, and so on?

Mr. OAIN.-Yes; but if the honorable member for Boroolldara will consult the records of the values of property in coun­try areas, he will find that land values

Tax Bill. '.

have fallen. That applies even in the Western District, the most productive province of the State. It is possible to purchase land to-day for less than the prices ruling ten years ago.

Mr. ALEXANDER McDONALD .. - There has been a considerable reduction in land values.

Mr. OAIN.-Yes. The value of land depends upon its earning capacity. There has been a reduction in the income received from land, and that has been followed by a fall in its price. At the end of the last war, when butter-fat was realizing 28. 6d. a lb., the Victorian Government acquired areas for soldier settlement, spending £35,000,000 on the purchase of land and in making advances to settlers. Too much was paid for the land. We know what happened to the farming community when the price of butter-fat dropped to 1s. a lb.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-One cause of the increased price of the land was the high price paid for primary produce. La tel' a slump came.

Mr. OAIN.-That is so. Similar con­ditions prevailed in relation to the purchase of wheat lands in the Wimmer a, where £25 or £30 an acre was paid. The collapse in the price of wheat was followed by the collapse in the price of land. There has been a decline in the price of land even in the northern areas of Victoria, where the Government has spent large sums on irrigation works, as well as· in the Western District where sheep and cattle are raised, and even where there has been intense culture and holdings have been devoted to potato growing or dairying. Of course, as there has been a decline in the price of land there has been a corre­sponding decline in the amount received from the land tax. The reverse has occurred in Melbourne, and that is prob­ably a great tragedy. The price of city land has been rising. Approxim~tely every twenty years new buildings are erected in certain parts of Melbourne. For instance, about 24 years ago, two theatres were erected in Bourke-street, but not so long ago both were demolished, and new ones have since taken their places. Oity land is becoming more valuable than ever.

Land [23 OCTOBER, 1940.] Tax Bill. 1257

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-T,here is, of course, a scarcity of land in the city, and the demand is greater than the supply.

Mr. OAIN.-Land values have in­creased because there is a tendency for the population to move towards the city. The transport system has become more efficient, and suburban people travel to the city to make many of the purchases they used to make in the suburbs.

Mr. OLDHAM.-The tremendous growth of the secondary industries is another factor increasing the price of city land.

Mr. OArN.-It is not true to say that only Bourke-street and Oollins-street land has been enhanced in price. A similar enhancement has occurred in Collingwood, Fitzroy, and other parts where factory development has taken place. No doubt, home purchasers find that the land near the city is more valu­nble than it was some ti~e ago. It is safe to say that city property, whether in the shape of cottages, ordinary work­men's homes, fiats, or any other type of building,. has increased in ,~alue, whereas agrirultural land has declined in value. That is a regrettable feature of the his­tory of the State, and it is occurring everywhere. Agriculture is in the dol­drums, Therefore, the proportion of land tax revenue obtained from the rural dis­tricts will be diminished, while the -proportion derived from the owners of city' properties will beeome greater.

I do not know that I am a great ueliC'ver in the lalld tax, which can be a tax on capital. The Labour party was l'f'sponsible for the Commonwealth land tux, which was imposed with a view to cutting up the big estates. That tax has its virtues. \\T C' must not overlook the fact that primary producers, who are iiving in areas liable to droughts, are called upon to pay land tax despite the failure of their crops, whereas under the income tax system the farmer, the business man, and the owner of city property pay ill proportion to the income they earn. For tha t reason I think the income tax has much to commend it as against the land tax. When the Federal Labour party imposed the Oommonwealth land tax years ago, it endeavoured to effect the subdivision of a great number of large estates throughout the Common­wealth.

Mr. OLDH.\:M.-In the light of what has transpired since the imposition of that tax, many land owners are glad that t hey got rid of their properties.

}Ir. C~\'IN.-They took another view at the time the land tax was mooted, and they were opposed to it. I believe that we shall be wise to revise our taxation and its incidence, and probably we shall realize greater justice in taxation by the imposition of a direct income tax. If a person does not earn any income he will not be a contributor to that taxation.

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

passed through its remaining stages. The sitting was suspended at 6.28 p.m.

until 7.35 p.m.

Wl\.TEH BILL. The House went into Oommittee for

the further consideration of this Bill. Olause 2 was agreed to. Olause 3-(Oarrum watenvorks dis­

trict created a drainage district under the jurisdiction of the Oommission).

Mr. FIELD (Dandenong). - This clause provides for the abolition of the Oarrum Waterworks Trust and for the district which it controls to be converted into a drainage district under the'super­vision of the State Rivers and Water Supply Oommission. During the second­reading debate, I directed attention to the fact that the proposed conversion would confer on the Governor in Oouncil, on the recommendation of the Oommission, a certain power to extend the area of the proposed drainage district. The power to extend the area of a drainage district is contained in section 79 of the Water Act. That section provides-

With respect to any waterworks districts under the jurisdiction and control of the Com­mission or any drainage districts under such jurisdjction and control, the Governor in Coun­cil on the recommendation of the CommisslOn may by order published in the Gazette-

Then a number of things are enumerated that the Governor in Oouncil can do, and among them is-

( e) extend any such district by the addition thereto of any land not forming part of any district.

On the face of it there is no limitation to tha t power, and in the course of a conference between representatives of the

1258 Water r ASSEMBL Y. I Bill.

State Rivers and Water Supply Commis­sion and various municipalities, including the Shire of Dandenong, the City of Carrul1l, the Shire of Cranbourne, and I think the Cities of Mordialloc and Ohelsea, a suggestion was made that the external catchment areas, which extend to the higher reaches beyond Dandenong, as far as Ferntree Gully, should be called npon to contribute to the cost of draining the territory into which they discharge their surface water. It was stated that the principle had been given effect to in England, although it had taken about 200 years to secure legislative sanction to it in that country.

My concern is that during the con­fercllce the chairman of the Commission indicated that he believed there was no power to extend the drainage district to the external catchment areas, but it appears to me now, from the cursory examination I have made of section 79 of the Water Act, that his ~tatcment may not have been' accurate, and that, in fact, the Governor in Coun­('il may have unlimited power, on the recommendation of the Commission, to .extend the district. If that is so, the districts I have mentioned, from which the surface water goes into the drainage area, could be brought in as financial contrib.utors to the scheme. That is a matter of considerable !,Concern to the ratepayers of those districts. The Min­ister of Water Supply has indicated that, before any such step is taken, he will consult the people concerned.

Mr. CAIN.-Those powers exist apart from this amending Bill. .

Ml'. FIELD.-Yes, so far as drainage districts are concerned, but I am refer­ring particularly to the Canum Water­works Trust. It may be possible for the Governor in Council to extend the area so as to include the upper regions. I, of course, accept the :Minister's assurance. The extensions contemplated in a report submitted by an ofli('C'r of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission were in the direction of Cranbourne on the onp- hand and embracing a certain area on the frontage of Chelsea on the other hand. I assume that when the Minister gave his assurance he was re­fel'rin~ to those extensions, and I want to feel quite sure that nothing will be oone to extend tllP al'(,ll without the local ppople being notiTIr.(l.

:11:1'. Or ... n.-The honorable member may accept my assurance implicitly. If it is proposed to extend the existing area, the local people will be consulted.

Mr. FIELD.-I regret' that I have not had an opportunity to consider the matter in more detail. I did not anticipate that the Bill, which is 10,W

on the Notice Paper, would be brought forward so soon., Had I realized that possibility, I could have studied more earefully the effect of the section of the Water .. A .. ct to which I have referred. and should thus have been able to give a more precise indication of the powers eonfel'1'ed. In view of the assurance given hy the :Minister, I do not consider that 1 am warranted in asking to have the clause \vithdrawn.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­I feel somewhat guilty in this matter. because I suggested to the :Minister of "\Vater Supply that the Bill should be taken to-night. If I had known that th(' honorable member for Dandrnong was in a difficulty, I should not haye made the suggestion. I now sugg('st to thE' Minister that the Committee stage of the Bill should be completed, and an adjourn­ment made before the third-reading stagE' lS reached, so as to enable the honorablp member for Dandenong to consider the flubmission of amendments.

Mr. FIELD (Dandenong). - I am thankful to the Leader of the Opposition for his suggestion, which I ask the Min­ister, if possible, to adopt. I had arranged to confer with a representative of at least one of the councils concerned, and in­tended to examine the legal aspect with him. I shouVd still 1ike to, (have an opportunity to do so and to moye amend­ments, should I consider them desirable or necessary.

Mr. OLD (Minister of Water Supply). -I, of course, have no objection to the eourse suggested. If time permits-and I have no doubt that it will-a reasona 1) Ie (,'pportunity will be given to honor­able members to examine the Bill. There is nothing controversial in the measure, which embodies the recommendations of the Royal Commission, except that we ha '''e not adopted the specific recom­mendation to 'bring all the high lands jnto tlle rating area. The Government hns, howeyel', ndopted the principle of

Water [23 OCTOBER, 1940.] Bill. 1259

taking away from an exi.sting dra~n~ge area a piece of land that IS nO.t derlvmg any benefit, 01' adding to the drainage area land that is deriving benefit. The land removed is thus exempted from mak­ing contributions, and the land brought in has to contribute.

Mr. FIELD.-The question of contribu­tions by external catchment areas is distinct from the question of contribu­tions from districts receiving direct benefit.

Mr. OLD.-Honorable members will recollect that the affairs of the Carrum Waterworks Trust have been subject to very careful investigation, and have been unsatisfactory for a long time. The trust has been the subject of special recommendations by the Royal Oom­mission.

:M:r. OAIN.-Why not mend it?

1\£r. OLD.-That might create a storm 6f opposition in some quarters, and, being a man of peace, I do not want to do it. What 1 am seeking to do is to improve the llnRatisfactory conditions in the Canum district. I have assured the hon­orable member for Dandenong that if it is proposed to ask external areas to con­tribute to the cost, the people conc.erned will be consulted. I am agreeable that the Oommittee stage of the Bill should be proceeded with, and that an oppor­tunity should be afforded to the honor­able member for Dandenong before the third reading is moved to consider the submission of amendments. After he has had time to examine the existing legisla­tion and the Bill, I feel sure that he will not find any amendment necessary.

The clause was agreed to. Olause 4 was adopted with a verbal

amemlment. Olauses 5 to 7 were agreed to. Olause R was adopted with a verbal

amendment, and the remaininp; dauseR wC're agreed' to.

Mr. OLD CMinister of Water Supply). -1 propose the following new clause, to follow clause 11-

AA. (1) Notwithstandin~ anything in the Water Acts, where any Water Supply Loans Application Act (whether passed before or after the commencement of this Act) sanc.t.ions the pxpenditure of any sum of money for till' pur­dlasc 01' acquisition by the Commission of mov­ahle plaut and machinery to be engagerl on the

construction and maintenance of works by tlH' Commission, the Commission may! expend aIl~' such sum or any portion thereof in the pur­chase or acquisition of movable plant ani! mae-hinery to be engaged on the construction and maintenance of works by the Commission without charging .the cost thereof to any dis· trict or division.

(2) When any such plant or machinery j~ engaged on the construction or maintenance of any works by the Commission there shall bp' charged on the moneys authorized fOl" the carry­ing out of such works such sums as the Minis­ter determines are proper in the circumstanc£'!" to be charged for-

(a.) the depreciation of such plant 01

machinery; (b) providing for the payment of interest

and contributions to the National Debt Sinking Fund in respect of the amount of loan moneys expended on the pur­chase or acquisition of such plant OT'

machinery; and (c) the costs of operating maintaining !uld

repairing such plant or machinery!. (3) Any such charge may be determined Cll

t he basis of-(a) a percentage of the cost of the pllreha~·H'

acquisition or replacement of the plallt or machinery; or

(b) the period or distance or amonnt of work for which the plant or machinery J'~ so engaged.

(4) Every sum so charged for the deprecia­tion of any such plallt or machincry shall-­

(a) be paid direct to the credit of the Watf'r Supply Plant and Machinery Deprecia.­tion Fund kept in t.he· Treasury; and

(b) (with interest credited thereon) bf' shown in the books of accounts cf the Commission to the credit of thf' respective items of plant and machinery in the Water Supply Pilmt and Machinery Depreciation A ('('oun t.

(5) The said fund shall be invested and cJ'edited with interest earned in each ytear.

(6) Any moneys in the said fund ",hi('h nrC' in th£' said account credited to am' item of plant or machinery shall be available and used only upon the written sanction of the l\linist£'r and for the purpose of paying for the repla.('e­ment of such plant or machinery.

(7) Any moneys in the said fund which aI'£' in the sairl account credited to any item of plant or machinery shall, in the ewnt of such plant or machinery being partly or wholly. supersedei! or being no longer ,·eqtlired. to the extf'nt to \\'lIit'h such moneys 81'f' not further reC)uil'Nl be withdrawn frOl11 the said fund a 11(1 placcrl to the credit of the Stnt.e Loans Hepaymf'nt Fund.

(8) ] f any item· of such plant or ll1aehiner~' is not furthf'I' J'cCluired it ma.y be disposNl of and the proceeds thereof shall be paid to the credit of thf' State Loans Rppayment Fund.

Section 1:1 of thC' Water Supply I~oang Application Act 193fl provided for the purchase of movahlC' plant and lllflchinery. such as mechanir[t 1 exravators, rOl1Cfetp mixers, and othel' large-Rize plant for thf' construction n Jl(l maintenance of works b.V' the State HiYers and Water Supply COJ)1-miRsion, witllOUt rluH.ginp; the ('ORt tllC'rfot

1260 6tale Electricity Commission !. \ SSE)IBI .. Y.I (Trading) Bill.

to al1Y distl'iC't 01' division. It also made provision for the operation, maintenance, all(, depreciation of the plant to be charged to the respective works or divi­sion upon which it was being operated, at hire rates sufficient to provide interest on the capital cost, and operating and maintenanee charges, together with ade­quate depreciation for renewal.

It is undesirable to have administrative provisions contained in a Water Supply Loans A pplica tion Act as, unless inserted in the principal Act, such provisions would require to be re-enacted every time additional sums were made available for the purchase of machinery. The oppor­tunity is therefore taken of inserting this new clause in the Bill. The provisions are identical with those contained in the Water Supply Loans Application Act 1939. Th('l'e is no new principle involved in thp. proposed new clause.

The new clause was agreed to.

The Bill was reported to the House with amendments, and the amendments were adopted.

Mr. TUNN'ECLIFFE (Oollingwood).­(By lea1)e.)-In my search for informa­tion, I a~k you, Mr. Speaker, to clarify the position in relation to the new clause inserted in the Bill just now by the Oom­mi ttee of the House 11. t the instance of the },Iinister of Water Supply. I am agitated as to why it should have been d('signated "New clanse AA."

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -1 understand that the general practice is to designate new clauses proposed by the Government with dual letters. If a private member proposes a llew' ('lause, it is marked with a single letter.

STATE ELECTRIOITY OOMMISSION (TRADING) BILL.

Mr. OLD (Minister in Oharge of Elec­trical Undertakings).-I move-

'Ibat this Bill be now read a second time.

The electric energy supply of Victoria may be divided into four sections: indus­trial, lighting, rural, and domestic. The industrial section has been reasonably well developed. The State Electricity Oommission's activities are extending daily, and will continue to expand, but

the industrial section does not provide that new and definite field for the supply of electric energy by the State Electricity Commission and other electrical under­takings throughout the State, which is found in the rural and domestic spheres. The industrial load of supply is highly developed, but expansion in this section is limited chiefly to the est a blishment of new industries. The rural load is of such national and economic importance that it must be fostered in every possible way, and, with the dO,m~stic field, offers a most fertile sphere of development. Owing to its relatively backward state of

. electrification, the domestic field presents unparalleled opportunities for the cul­tivation of that diverse, long-hour use of electricity which is essential to the economic, working of a grea,t undertaking.

The chief difficulty in Victoria with electricity supply undertakings is occa­sioned by the peak load and low load periods. Electricity supply equipment has to be of such a nature that it can carry the peak load, plus a margin of safety, but in the low load period of the day there is a great excess of unused machinery. It is in that direction that opportunities present themselves for fur­ther development in the Use of electric energy.

Although the State Electricity Oom­mission had power to trade under the original Act, in 1927 it launched out on an extensive campaign of selling electrical appliances. Honorable members are familiar with the large building in Flinders-street, with its magnificent show­rooms, where electrical appliances could be demonstrated to purchasers and pros­pective ,purchasers and sales could be effected. In. 1933, a Bill, introduced by the honorable member for Brighton, who was then the Ohief Secretary and Minister in Oharge of Electl'ical U nder­takings in the Argyle ltovemment, abolished the trading activities of the State Electricity OO,mmission. The result was almost disastrous. Prior to the introduction of the Bill, approximately 500 electric stoves were sold in the metropolitan area each year, but after that legislation came into force the num­ber sold decreased to 200, and since then. has averaged only 240 a year.

State Electricity Commission [23 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Trad~'ng) Bill. 1261

Prior to 1933, the State Electricity Commission-which is the major elec­tricity supply authority of the State­had as its objectives, firstly, the supply of electric energy, secondly, the supply of that energy at the cheapest possible rate and thirdly, the popularizing of the use 'of electric energy by distributing ap­pliances and servicing them for the benefit of the users. When those activities were curtailed, private enterprise failed to maintain the sales of appliances. In Sydney, the city council is the chief e~ec­tricity supply authority, and has tradmg facilities' similar to those possessed by the Victorian State Electricity Commissi~n before 1933. Last year, 3,000 electrIc stoves were sold in Sydney. That number is in marked contrast with the 250 sold in Melbourne. I have made investiga­tions into the practices of electricity authorities abroad, and am advised that, irrespective of whether a supply authority is a Government or municipal undertak­ing, or a private company, in 90 per cent. of cases trading is allowed in the supply and servicing of appliances.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-How many of that 90 per cent. of cases are Government authorities ~

Mr. OLD.-I am not in a position to state how many are Government authori­ties, but that does not matter.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Is it not a fact that the great majority of them represent private enterprise ~

Mr. OLD.-We have not obtained definite information on that point. Merchandising is the policy 0,£ the English Electricity Commission, and in 1928 English legislation gave additional powers to certain municipalities to engage in trade. That legislation was designed to bring about a uniform practice throughout England. In Canada, trad­ing by electricity supply authorities in appliances is practically universal, and the attainment of the high standard of electric development in that country is as much due to this fact as to the natural resources available there. In the United States of America more than 90 per cent. of the electric power companies engage in a merchandising policy based on the sale of electrical appliances. The trading operations of these companies extend to 4,200 towns and cities. The general opinion in America of the value of trade

Session 1940.-[54]

to electricity undertakings may be gauged from a declaration adopted by a delega­tion from national organizations repre­senting varied interests of electric power· companies, manufacturers of appliances, and traders in those appliances. The declaration states:-

Since the efforts of the power companies form the only continuous means of promoting the sale of appliances, we believe the best interests of manufacturer, dealer, and consumer require the continuance of the mercbandising activities of the power companies.

In brief, the policy of merchandising by the supply authority is the recognized world practice. This policy obtains not only with respect to electricity supply authorities, but also, as to gas supply authorities. In Victoria, we have the local exampl~ of the Metropolitan Gas Company actively selling gas-consuming apparatus to its consumers on liberal terms. The success of that undertaking is largely due to the low sales of electric stoves in the metropolitan area. In essence, the sole criticism of the policy of merchandising arises because the Com­mj13sion is a governmental body. If it cannot undertake these integral functions of an electricity supply authority, then the State should never have entered the business of electricity supply; but having entered it on a State-wide basis, as a de­liberate and well-considered policy with all the responsibilities and ramifications inherent in the business, the State has a clear duty to consumers to develop the business so that, by regulating and in­creasing the consumption, the cost of electricity will be reduced.

In the areas served by the Commissi on, the annual consumption in relation to each domestic consumer has increased from approximately 400 to 600 units in eight years. The domestic con­sumption in other cities of the world in which electricity has reached a high point of development exceeds 1,200 units, and, in some instances, 3,000 units per consumer. It has been possible, with the modest increase in sales in Victo:ria during the past eight years, to reduce the average price per unit for domestic pur­poses by more than 1d. This reduction has meant a saving of £600,000 to con­sumers within the last twelve months alone, and further rate reductions depend almolit entirely upon the extent to which it is possible to stimulate development.

1262 State Electricity Commission r ASSEMBLY.] (Trading) Bill.

To. say that the entry ef the supply autherities into' the trading field is fereign to' the purpese ef previding ample sup-

• plies of cheap electricity, ignores the facters upen which cheap electricity de­pends. The Cemmissien's task is enly half dene in previding a system equal to' all the fluctuating demands that may be made up en it. It must be given the erdinary business facilities fer selling its service and creating ecenemical cenditiens of lQading Qn its system; Qtherwise, the great Qbject Qf prQgressively cheapening the CQst Qf electricity by means Qf that system win be largely nullified.

In this matter, the interests Qf city and. cQuntry consumers are identical, because all are supplied Qn the basis Qf prQduc­tiQn cest, plus distributiQn charges. A.s reductiQns in CQst almost entirely depend uPQn the develQpment Qf faveurable CQn­ditiQns Qf lQading, CQnsumers everywhere will be benefited by any well-regulated grQwth Qf demand, but particularly in the mQre densely populated areas. To. develep the IQad by the sale ef suitable electrical appliances is Qne Qf the prin­cipal means Qf assuring further reduc­tiQns to' CQnsumers, and the absence Qf such pewers places the electricity supply authQrity under a cQnsiderable handicap in relatien to' its cempetitQrs in the field of light, heat, and PQwer supply. AnQther cQnsideratiQn is that QPpertunities fQr employment WQuld be previded. As n result Qf the prQpesed legislatiQn, there would be a greatly increased prQductiQn Qf electrical appliances. It is prQPQsed that the State Electricity Cemmissien shQuld nQt manufacture but merely sell the appliances.

lir. Er.LTs.-Is it net prepQsed by the CemmissiQn to' manufacture the npnlianr.es?

Mr. OLD.-It is net. LQcal manufac­turers WQuld be called u PQn to' meet the increased demand fer these articles, 'addi­tiQnal wQrk WQuld be available fQr wir­ing CQntractQrs and tradesmen, and an impetus to' the electrical trade in g-eneral ceuld be expected. It is expected that in the wider market develQped by the supply authQrity, the number ef' units Qf apparatus SQld will be increased, which WQuld have the effect Qf ultimately de­creasing the CQst Qf electrical apparatus.

The clcse assQciatiQn between the ccn­sumer and the electricity supply authQrity

places the latter in the PQsitiQn Qf Qffer­ing a reliable, efficient, and prempt service that is nQt Qtherwise available, particu­larly in the mQre remQte centres, and the assurance that this service is available is a mest impertant facter to' the peten­tial purchaser Qf electrical a ppara tUB. It may interest honorable members if I cite an instance of what actually happens in part Qf the electO.rate I represent. At present, a municipal electricity supply authQrity is not permitted to trade in electrical appliances, nQr to' wire premises. It can take the electric energy a distance ef 60 feet frO.m its main line, and there it has to', install a meter. Any further wQrk involved in taking the current frQm the meter to' the hQme Qf an intending CO.nsumer has to' be dO.ne by private elec­tricians. In Swan Hill there is an elec­tricity supply undertaking which caters for Lake BQga to' the south, Ultima to the west, Nyah to' the nQrth-west, and O.ther small centres.

Mr. CArN.-DQes it supply electric energy acrO.ss the Murray River?

Mr. OLD.-N Qt' generally, but I understand current is SQld to' Qne 0.1' two' business peQple acrQSS the river.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE. - Has that authO.rity any alliancp. with' the State Electricity CO.mmissiO.n?

Mr. OLD.-NQ. Under the present Act, the undertaking is nQt permitted to' carry O.nt wiring installatiO.ns in private hO.uses. The result is that peO.ple in Ultima who. desire electric light in their hO.me~ ?ave to' pay fares fO.r a private electl'lClan to' travel from Swan Hill, al­thO.ugh an electrician in the emplO.y O.f the municipal undertaking has previQusly erected a wire a distance Qf 60 feet frQriI the electric main. There is no. resident clectrician in Ultima, and intending CQn­sumers are faced with that heavy in-stallatiQn charge. .

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Has the State Electricity CQmmissiQn PQwer to' wire premises to' which it will supply electric current?

Mr. OLD.-It has nQt the PQwer to' carry Qut internal wiring.

Sir STANI.EY ARGYLE.-But it is per­mitted to' do. installatiQn wQrk?

Mr. OLD.-It CQnnects the main line to' the meter. Under the Bill it is prQ­PQsed to' give the State Electricity CQm­missien PQwer to' carry Qut all types Qf

State Electricity Oommission [23 OOTOBER, 1940.] (Trading) Bill. 1263

installation work. Until 1927, the State Electricity Commission directed its efforts to the establishment and com­pletion of its construction programme, and then it commenced to sell apparatus. It conducted active merchandising opera­tions until early in 1934, when by legislation, it was prohibited from carry­ing on the business of trading in electrical appliances and fittings, and carrying out wiring and servicing within the boun­daries of any city in Victoria. Munici­palities acting as electricity supply under­takers have no powers to trade in apparatus, to carry out Wlrlllg, and so on, or to service illstallations, but an amendment of the Local Government Act in 1938 gave mum­cipal councils the right to trade in gas appliances and fittings. The Act was amended at the instance of the honorable member for Dandenong. It ,vas the con­sidered opinion of the House that muni­cipal gas supply authorities should be given that power. I can see no difference between granting that power to authori­ties supplying gas appliances and grant­ing it to electricity undertakings. The principle is the same.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-The principle involved is pure socialism.

Mr. OLD.-I did not know that there could be pure socialism. In New South 'Vales, under the Local Government Act, councils have the right to trade in elec­trical and gas appliances and fittings. So far as I know, there is no outcry about competition with private enterprtse in that State. The Bill proposes to restore to the Commission power to tradp. in electrical apparatus, and to install wiring, electrical fittings, and so on, and it grants similar power to other electricity supply undertakers. Provision is also made for eleetricity supply authorities to finance over an extended period the purchases of r-lectrical apparatus, and the cost of the installa tion of electric wiring and the erection of service lines. The Bill em­bodies the recommendations which the Parliamentary Public Works Committee made in its report to the Government last year on the powers of the State Elec­tricity Commission, and other electricity supply undertakings.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-A number of members of the committee expressed their views before they had heard any evidence.

Mr. OLD.-That would not prevent them from considering the matter in the light of the evidence they heard.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-They had com­mitted themselves.

Mr. OLD.-N o. Before enumerating the committee's findings, I should like to state that when the Bill to restrict the trading activities of the Commission was before the House on the 22nd of August, 1933, Mr. Moncur, the member for Wal­halla, moved the following amendment-

That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into and report upon the merchandis­ing activities of the State Electricity Com­mission, and their cffect on consumers in general, and country consumers in particular.

As I thought it desirable to have an. inquiry, I supported the amendment, which, however, was defeated by 28 votes to 21. Later, I accepted statements made by the present member for Brighton, in a plausible speech, and I voted for the Bill. Since then my desire, as expressed. by the support of Mr. Moncur's amend­ment, has been gratified, and the Public Works Committee, consisting of members of both Houses, has made inquiries into this 1'ubject.

Sir STAKLEY ARGYLE.-It is not a Public Works Committee of this House. It is a committee of a portion of this House.

:M:r. OLD.-That committee includes members of this House. It inquired into this matter and made certain recommen­dations, and to a great extent the Bill is the outcome of them. The l'c('0ll1mcnda­tions are as follows:-

(a) It is in the public interest to repeal the prohibition imposed on the State Electricity Commission of Victoria by section 3 of the State Electricity Commiss'ion (Trading) Act 1933 (No. 4l!)7), which, amongst other things, prevents it from carrying 011 within the boundaries of any city thc busincss of trading in electrical apparatus as defined in the Act.

(b) The State Electricity Commission of Victoria should be cmpowered to supply, erect, and finance, on such terms ~l1d conditions as it thinks fit, service lines, the cost of which is required to be borne by inrlividuH 1 consumers.

(c) The State Electricity Commh'lsion of Victoria should be empowered to undertake, on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit, the installation and financing of electrjcal fittings (not being electrical apparatus) and the repairing and reconditioning of such wiring and fittings.

(d) That the councils of the municipal dis­tricts or other public bodies, being lmdertakers withiv the meaning of the Electric Light and

1264 State Electricity Commission r ASSEMBLY.l (Trading) Bill.

Power Act 1928, should have similar powers to the State Electricity Commission, as out­lined in recommendations (a), (b), and (0).

(e) In order that Parliament can con­clusively determine the question of selling apparatus, &c., by Victorian public electric au pply authorities, there should be introduced 8 special Electrical Trading Act based gt!uerally upon the electricity I:mpply legisla­tion of Great Britain, and upon recent amend­ments of the Victorian Local Government Act under which municipai councils are empowered to trade in gas appliances and fittings. To this end, the State Electricity Commission of Victoria and the councils of municipal dis­tricts, or other public authorities, being un!ler-1 ak('r!) within the meaning of the Electric Light and Power Act 1928, should be empowered-

to sell, let for hire, fix, connect, repair, maintain, and remove electric fittings, apparatus and appliances for lighting, heating and motive power, and for all other purposes for which electricity can or may be used, and provide all materials and work necessary and proper in that behalf, and with respect thereto take such remuneration or rents or charges, and make such terms and conditions as are agreed upon, and repossess any such appliances which have been let for hire in respect of which any payment is in arrear.

Legislation upon similar lines also should be introduced to empower all these authori­ties-

(a) to supply, erect, and finance, on such terms and conditions as they think fit, service lines, the cost of which is required to be borne by individual consumers; and

(b) to undertake, on such terms and con­rlitions as they think fit, the installation and finance of electrical wiring and electrical fittings (not being electrical apparatus), and the repairing and reconditioning of such wiring and fittings.

When investigating these matters, the Public Works Committee found that most electricity authorities in other parts of the world, whether govel'nmental, semi­~overnmental, or private, exercised to the full the powers of merchandising equip­ment, and that gas supply authorities similarly traded in gas-consuming devices.

It is the considered opinion of the Government that the implementing of the recommendations of the committee will be to the advantage of consumm's of elec­tricity throughout the State, and, further, that the extended use of electricity by facilitating the purchase of appliances by eonsumers is an integral part of the function of electricity supply undertakers.

The ('onsumption of electricity pel' consumer in Victoria lags behind the trend overseas, and the Government con­

Mr. Old

siders that the granting of trading powers to the supply authority, and the proposed facilities for spreading the initial cost over a period, will greatly encourage the further development and use of electricity throughout the State.

Additional appliances used and con­sumers connected to the system must increase electricity sales per mile of high tension line and per kilowatt of generat­ing plant. This is an important factor contributing to the downward trend in charges to the consumer, and to make best use of the State's natural advantages by bringing about a closer relationship between the consumer and the supply authority is a contribution to the national economy which is of vital importance. The Bill will confer uniform powers on all electricity supply undertakings throughout the State, so that consumers will enjoy the same conditions not only in the areas served by the Commission but also in those areas served by supply authorities receiving supply in bulk from the Commission, along with undertakings operating independently.

The Bill will repeal the State Elec­tricity Commission (Trading) Act 1933 (No. 4197), which pro~ibits the Commis­sion from selling electrical a ppara tus or carrying on any electrical wiring installa­tion within the boundaries of any city. I have previously given honorable mem­bers an illustration of the retarding effect of these restrictions on the development of the electricity supply. I mentioned the fact that the number of cooking ranges connected annually by the Commission's metropolitan branch dropped from ap­proximately 500 to 200 immediately after the 1933 Act operated. In spite of generally improved business conditions during the last five years, the average annual number of stoves connected in the metropolitan area was only 240. Last year the Sydney City Council, which has trading pm,vers, sold 3,000 electric ranges.

The Bill further empowers the Oom­mission and undertakers to trade in elec­trical apparatus, and for that purpose to purchase, hire, sell, install, maintain, repair, and recondition such apparatus on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.

State Electricity Oommission [23 OCTOBER, 1940.] (Trading) Bill. 1265

The measure contains further powers which will be advantageous to users of electric current. Those powers are set out in clause 5, which empowers the Com­mission and undertakers to-

( a) supply, erect, maintain, repair, and recondition service lines for the supply of electricity to any premises;

(b) install, mamtain, repair, and recondi­tion electrical wiring or electrical fittings in any premises.

If the measure is agreed to, there will not be a recurrence of the Swan Hill incident I mentioned just now. On that occasion, two persons were compelled to travel 22 miles to do a job that one of them could have done. That happened because of the conditions brought about by the State Electricity Commission (Trading) Act. Another great advantage will be derived through the adoption of the proposal to give the Commission and other undertakers power they do not possess now, of making various exten­sions from their mains without restriction on distance. As I have previously in­dicated, the electricity supply authority can be responsible for only the first 60 feet of a service line from its mains. Under the Bill there will be no limit· that . ' 1S to say, the supply authority will be em-powered to make satisfactory arrange­ments with individuals or groups of in­dividua.ls who may desire to have elec­trical energy supplied to their farms, workshops, or residences, although their circumstances may be such as to preclude them from providing in a lump sum the necessary finance for a rather costly work. It is interesting to note that during a period of twelve months 904 new consumers in coun try area~ installed, a t their own expense 70 miles of private lines on their properties at a total cost of £11,400. It is prop~sed under .the Bill to empower the supply authorIty to install service lines and to give the consumers extended terms of re­payment. This will prove of great ad­vantage to a large number of deserving persons.

Mr. ELI.ls.-And wipe off the debts they cannot pay!

Mr. aLD.-That is just the kind of remark one can expect from the honor­able member! I do not think anyone can charge the State Electricity Commission

with having been lax in collecting its revenues. On the contrary, I suggest that the Commission presents a shining example to private enterprise in that re­gard. The Public Works Committee has reported that the Commission made it clear that, were power granted to install electrical wiring and fittings, it desired to be left free to make arrangements with wiring contractors as it might think fit. Although under the Bill the powers to which I have referred will be given to the Commission, it is not the intention of that body to monopolize the wiring opera­tions, but to take advantage, wherever economically possible to do so, of the ser­vices of those already engaged in the trade. The important feature will be that the Commission will be enabled to grant extended terms to the purchasers of appliances or to persons whose require­ments of electrical energy involve the in­stallation of transmission lines, in which case work will be provided for local traders. In places where the Commission has showrooms or salerooms-and, in fact, anywhere-it will be able to make adYances, under the provi­sions of this measure, to persons desirous of obtaining electrical appliances, and those persons will be entitled to make their purchases wherever they think fit.

I have given a full explanation of this Bill because it is of a particularly im­portant character. It proposes to reverse the decision which this House made in 1933. I have no compunction in that regard because I believe that the peopl(' of this State are entitled to the best and cheapest service, irrespective of whether that sf'l'vice is provided by private enter­prise or a Government u'ndertaking.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Too'raleY.­I suggest that the debate be adjourned for a fortnight, and I move- .

That the debate be now adjourned.

:Mr. Ol~D.-This is not a new measure. Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-But it is

highly important. Mr. TUNNECLIFFE (Collingwood).­

:My view is that the debate should be adjourned for only 24 hours. Members of this (the Ministerial corner) party are straining like greyhounds at the leash to discuss this measure, which presents to us an opportuni.ty to get back something which the Argyle-Macfarlan Government

1266 Income Tax r ASSEMBLY.l (Rates) Bill.

took away. As that Government was re­sponsible for the passage of the State Electrici ty Commission (Trading) . Act of 1933, I hope that the members of the party to which I belong will not be denied their opportunity of worrying the spon­sors of the most effete legislation on our statute-book. They wish to exercise their histrionic ability and their rhetori­cal power.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-Would you like the House to proceed with the Bill at once?

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-):es.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE.-That IS your idea of a fair thing!

Mr. TUNNECLIFFE.-The Leader of the Opposition was the Leader of the Government which rushed the measure of 1933 into law. The honorable member f01; N orthcote and I were rendered breathless in our endeavours to keep pace with the rapid progress made, not only with that measure, but also the gas Bill. In the circumstances, an adjournment for only 24 hours on the present Bill would be long enough.

The motion for the adjournment of the debate was agreed to, and the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, November 5.

INCOl\{E TAX (R.ATES) BILL. The debate (adjourned from the pre­

vious day) on the motion of Mr. A. A. Dunstan (Premier and Treasurer) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Sir STANLEY ARGYLE (Toorak).­This Bill is the annual income tax Bill, and as the Treasurer has informed the House, the tax is being re-imposed at the same rate as was imposed last year. There is, therefore, very little to be said about the Bill at this stage, except to express thank: fulness that taxation is not any higher. We do not know what is in store for us in the matter of taxation, and I am pleased to know that at present it is possible to carryon the services of the State without' increasing this form of taxation. As I did when speaking on the Land Tax Bill, I propose to place a few salient facts about taxation before the House. I think it is well from time to time that we should see exactly w~o is

providing the reve~ue derived from taxa­tion. I find, on investigating the latest available report of the Commissioner of Taxes, that exclusive of companies, 119,000 individuals pay income tax on personal exertion. Of those, 110,600 have incomes not exceeding £500 a year. While 10,800 persons pay on property incomes only, 10,300, who are termed composite taxpayers, pay on both classes of income. Taking the next division, em­bracing those with personal exertion incomes between £500 and £1,000 a year, I find that there are 8,500 of them. While 8,900 pay tax on incomes not ex­ceeding £500 a year from property, 1,800 pay on incomes over £500 a year from property. In the year to which the statistics refer, incomes from personal exertion vielded a total tax revenue of £3,000,000 in (round figures, while in­comes from property yielded £366,000. Approximately 87 per cent. of the assess­ments were on incomes not exceeding £500.

There is a lesson to be learned from those figures, and it is that the principal source of taxation revenue is the taxpayer with a moderate income. That fact needs always to be borne in mind. The total amount of revenue that can be obtained from those in receipt of large incomes is relatively small.. Any increase or de­crease in the rate must fall largely on persons with small incomes. I do not wish to elaborate the figures, but I sug­gest that from time to time the reports of the Commissioner of Taxes should be examined, because they supply all the necessary details as to the where, the when, and the why of the sources of in­come of the State.

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

passed through its remaining stages.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION BILL.

The debate (adjourned from October 1) 011 the. motion of Mr. Bailey (Chief Secretary) for the second read­ing of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. MICHAELIS (St. Kilda).-I do not desire to say anything about the pro­visions of the Bill. I t is a machinery

Workers' [23 OCTOBER, 1940.] Oompensation Bill. 1267

measure suggested by the Workers' Oom­pensation Board with the object of facilitating the administration of the Act. There are, however, two other matters connected with workers' com­pensation legislation to which I should like to refer. The first I mentioned when moving the adjournment of the debate, and I again bring it forward. I ask the Minister to place before Oabinet, when the time comes for considering further amendments of this legislation, a pro­posal that workers' compensation legisla­tion should be consolidated and brought up to date. If the Government would arrange for consolidation of this legisla­tion, I feel certain that all honorable members would be grateful. Oonsolida­tion of other legislation could also be undertaken with advantage. Possibly the only way in which it can be done is piece­meal. A series of amending Bills would be necessary, and whether the present is a practical time for undertaking work of such magnitude I cannot say. I am in­formed that a certain legal gentleman has already found it necessary to prepare an index of the Workers' Compensation Acts, and the various amending Acts, so that solicitors may be able to ascertain the present state of that law. It is an im­portant subject which is worthy of the consideration of the legal members of the House as well as members of the Labour party, who are particularly interested in this legislation.

The next subject I shall refer to relates to the proposed transfer of the offices of the Workers' Oompensation Board to new premises. On the 16th of October I asked the Ohief Secretary certain questions relating to the transfer of the Board to new premises in the building which is in course of reconstruction to house the State Accident Insurance Office and certain other Government Depart­ments. On the 9th of October the honor­able member for Goulburn Valley directed attention to the leasing of a city property by the Melbourne and Metropolitan Tramways Board, and the subsequent re­leasing of that property to a Oommon­wealth Department at approximately three and a haH times the amount paid by the tenant to the tramways Board.

The proposed transfer of the Workers' Oompensation Board is a disgrace and a scandal. I hope that I shall be able

to convince honorable members that I have not adopted unduly harsh terms. I asked the Chief Secretary if the Workers' Compensation Board is to be moved to the new building which is very slowly being altered to accommodate the State Accident Insurance Office. I was informed that such a transfer was contemplated. The :Minister also replied that the Board is at present paying £750 per annum, plus 10 per cent. on special fittings, amounting to £40 15s. per annum, or a total rental of £790 15s. I am informed on what I believe to be good authority that it is proposed to charge the Board £1,500 per annum for its new premises. That rental will not be paid by the Government but by insurance companies undertaking in­surance under the provisions of the Workers' Oompensation Acts.

Mr .• J. G. B. McDoNALD.-To whom is the rental to be paid ~

Mr. MICHAELIS. - To the State Accident Insurance Office, to make it appear that its new premises are a finan­cial success. The Workers' Oompensation Board is at present completely satisfied with its quarters. These are in a build­,ing where it is nO,t connected with any other Government Department.

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Who is the owner of the building into which it is proposed to transfer the Board and its officers?

Mr. MIOHAELIS.-I do not know who owns the premises at present rented by the Board, but its new landlord will be the State Accident Insurance Office. The present accommodation for thE' Board includes ample offices and a court room. I am not taking up the cudgels on behalf of the landlord. I do not know who owns the building, but I do com­plain about the Board being compulsorily transferred, against its will, and by the direction of the Chief Secretary, into a building at present being remodelled for the State Accident Insurance Office, and at almost double the rental. Whatever rent is paid by the Workers' Compensa­tion Board, the money is found by thE' insurance companies, and, indirectly, by those who pay for cover against workers' compensation risk.

1268 Workers' r ASSEMBLY.] Oompensation Bi U.

Mr. HYLAND.-I do not think anyone will be able to say that the rent to be charged in the new building will be exorbitant, because it must be based on the floor area occupied by the Board.

Mr. MICHAELIS. - The Workers' Compensation Board is being used as a chopping block to bolster up returns and to make the new expensive building for the State Accident Insurance Office a payable proposition. That building has been entirely gutted and the floor levels altered, and probably the cost will exceed the amount for which a new building could be constructed. However, the building must be made to pay, and that is being seen to by compulsorily transfer­ring the Board to new premises.

Mr. BAILEY.-Where did you get that information?

Mr. MICHAELIS.-I got it on very good authority.

Mr. BAILEY.-Nothing has been done in connection with the rent to be charged in the new State Accident Insurance Office building. The Board is occupying its present offices temporarily, until the new building is available to it.

Mr. MICHAELI8.-The Board is adequately housed Rlt present, and no Board member desires a change. How­ever, the Chief Secretary is adamant, and he insists that the Board shall transfer. If the Ohief Secretary desires to say that he is not adamant, and that what I am saying is incorrect, he will have an oppor­tunity to do so.

The SPEAKER (the Hon. W. Slater). -I do not think the Chief Secretary will have an opportunity to refer to the matter, because the subject is outside the purposes of the Bill.

Mr. BARRY.-There is something to be said in favour of Government Depart­ments being housed in the one building.

Mr. BAILEY.-The new building is State-owned property.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-It is most undesir­able that the Board should be housed in the same building as the State Accident Insurance Office. Officials from the two offices will constantly meet, in the lifts, on the stairways, and in other parts of the building. It has been admitted

that the State Accident Insurance Office is one of the insurance concerns regularly engaged in proceedings before the Workers' Compensation Board. It is highly un­desirable that the two bodies should be cheek by j ow 1 in the same building. The Board is a judicial authority, and it should be set apart from the influences of one of the parties appearing before it. The proposed new arrangement is exactly on all-fours with stationing police officials within the law court buildings where they may come in contact with judicial officers. I do, not refer to Crown law officials.

Mr. BAILEY.-In other words, you suggest that the Workers' Compensation Board will be influenced in some way because it is a tenant in a State-owned building?-

Mr. MIOHAELI8.-0fficers from the two Departments would constantly meet, and I think they should be separated. From that point of view, I think it is wrong that the change should be insisted on. I repeat that I do not know the Board's landlord.

Mr. BAILEY.-I should think he would be the only person vitally concerned.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-The people most vitally concerned are the members of the 'Board.

Mr. BAILEY.-It is remarkable that they have made no representations to me on the subject.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-What I am say­ing I have on good authority-that the Board is averse to the change, that repre­sentations have been made to the Minis­ter about it, but that the Minister is adamant.

Mr. BARRY.-The Minister has said that no representations have been made to him on the subject.

Mr. MICHAELIS. - Possibly the Board has not made official representa­tions to the Minister.

Mr. J. G. B. McDoNALD.-Did a mem­ber of the Board make a statement to you on the subject?

Mr. MICHAELIS.-I shall not dis­close the source of my information, but I got it on good authority-authority which I have no reason to doubt.

Workers' [23 OCTOBER, 1940.] Compensation Bill. 1269

Mr. BAILEY. - Representations may ha ve come from the owner of the building.

Mr. MIOIIAELIS.-I shall not say where they came from. I repeat that t.his matter was submitted to the Minister by the Board, but that the Minister was adamant and said the Board had to go into the building willy-nilly.

Mr. BARRY.-The Minister denies thr. truth of that statement.

Mr. MIOHAELIS. - The Minister says it is not all true.

Mr. BAILEY.-When the building in question was purchased, one condition was that it should house the Workers' Compensation Board. The Board was to occupy its present quarters temporarily. Its tenancy is for that reason on a yearly basis. The Board has made no repre­sentations to me that it does not want to go into the other building.

Mr. MICHAELIS.-I am told that representations have been made, but I do not know whether officially or unofficially. The Board objects to paying a rent of £1,500 a year instead of £790, including the extra charges that are im­posed at present. The most important feature is that a client is to be placed cheek by jowl with the Board in the same building. I have no criticism to make of the Bill; it is a machinery measure suggested by the Board, and I understand it is approved by all interested parties.

Mr. CREMEAN (Clifton IIill).-I had not previously heard anything about the matter raised by the honorable member for St. Kilda, and consequently, I am not prepared to express an opinion on it. I do not consider, however, that the activities or the fair judgment of the Workers' Compensation Board would be materially affected because it happened to be housed in the same building as the State Accident Insurance Office. It would be almost as correct to say that the Board might be influenced in its decisions because it happened to be housed in a building adjacent to premises occupied by othcr insurance companies dealing with workers' compensation.

I agree with the honorable member for St. Kilda that the various Workers' Com­pensation . Acts should be consolidated. Since the last com;olidation of this legis-

Ses.'~ion 1940.-[55]

lation, in 1928, at least five amending Bills have been passed by this House. Two of those Bills effected major amendments in the legislation. The 1935 amending Bill crea ted almost a new Act. It added two schedules, and revolutionized the general procedure in workers' com­pensation administration, besidp" con­siderably extending the scale of benefits set fqrth in the original schedulcR. Many Acts of Parliament are studied almost solely by legal practitioners, but workers' compensation legislation is consulted not only by the legal profession but also by employers and employees.

Like the honorable member for St. Kilda, I agree with the Bill. In 1936, a Workers' Compensation Board was created, and both Houses of Parliament agreed that that Board should have com­plete power to deal ;with all matters affecting workers' compensation. It was expected that the Board would replace the a ppeal Court provided under the original Act, and exercise all the powers that were previously given to a County Court Judge. In, practice, that has not been the case, on account of technical shortcomings in the legislation. The Board now asks this House to vest in it the full powers ~riginally intended.

The Bill contains four amendments, but none of them is of a major character. First of all, the powers of the Board are widened in connection wi th certified schemes of workers' compensation insur~ ance. At present, the Board is em­powered to certify to schemes of a private nature created by employers, as being schemes sufficiently comprehensive to justify the Board's approval and replace ordinary schemes created by the Act and administered by insurance companies. The present legislation does not provide for disputes under certified private schemes being dealt with by the Workers' Oompensation Board, but the amendment proposes that the Board shall have com­plete power to deal with such disputes.

The second a.mendment provides for an appeal to a medical referee or to thp Board, according to the circmnstance~ of the case, against the decision of a certifying medical authority on questions of disablement by industrial diseases. The present Act provides for

1270 Workers' rASSEMBLY·l Oompensatwn Bill.

such an appeal in the case of or~inary injuries sustained by a wO,rker In the course of his employment. The third amendment provides for the proper con­trol of all agreements made under the Workers' Compensation Acts. At present, agreements may be made outside the con­trol of the Board, but the amendment provides that unless an agreement is filed, it will not be considered to be a .legal agreement under the Workers' Compensa­tion Act. The last amendment sets out that the Board shall be able to administer in full lump sum payments to be made to minors. In introducing the Bill, the Minister said that the Board had actually been administering lump sum payments to minors, although it had no express legal authority to do so,. The Bill will legalize the actions of the Board. I think a.ll members agree that exception cannot be taken to any of the extended powers the Bill confers on the Board. As the purpose of the Bill is to make the Board the authority it should be, and what it was understood it would be when it was created, the House should pass this measure as soon as possible.

Mr. BAILEY (Ohief Secretary).­The honorable member for St. Kilda mentioned that the Workers' Oom­pensation Board is occupying a build­ing in the city, and that it is the inten­tion of the Government to transfer it to a new building in Oollins-street. On the 16th of October, the honorable member asked certain questions concerning this aubject, and, notwithstanding the answers which I then "Supplied, he infers that the Government has fixed the rental of the new premises considerably in excess of the amount paid at present. I assured the honorable member that the amount of the rent had not been assessed at that d'ate; and the matter has not been finalized.

Mr. MIClIAELls.-Has any indication been given of the rent it is proposed to charge the Board for the new premises ~

Mr. BAILEY.-N o. The following are the questions asked by the hono'rable member for St. Kilda:-

1. If the Workers' Compensation Board is to be moved to the new building of the State Aecident Insurance Office?

2. What rent is to be paid? 3. 'Wbat rent is being paid at present! 4<. Whence the revenue of the Board is

d.er'ived T

5. Whether the Board is in favour of the move?

6. What is the reason for the proposed change? To those questions I supplied these answers:-

1. Such transfer is contemplated. 2. This has not yet been assessed. 3. £750 per annum, plus 10 per cent. on

special fittings amounting to £40 15s. per annum.

4. The expenses of the Board are met ~y contributions from the insurance compames undertaking insurance under the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Acts. .

5. The question of the office accommodatIOn provided for the Board is one for ~he deter­mination of the Government. A maJor reason influencing the purchase o! the building in Collins-street was to provIde proper accom­modation for the State Accident Insurance Office and the Workers' Compensation Board, and the housing of the Board at its present address was a temporary arrangement pe~ding the completion of the new State ACCIdent Insurance Office.

6. For the public convenience and in the interests of economical administration.

When the Government contemplated pur­chasing the building in Oollins-street from the Trustees, Executors, and Ag~ncy Company Limited, the representatIOns which influenced the Government were that the State Accident Insurance Office, the Workers' Oompensation Board, and the Public Trustee could be housed in a central position. No better situation could be found for the Workers' Oom­pensa tion Board and the other Depart­ments. Two other parties were concerned in the matter, one being the landlord of the building in whicl~ the Board is at present quartered.

Mr. MIClIAELIS.-Who is the landlord ~ Mr. BAILEY.-I do not know. The

other party consists of the insurance companies, which contribute the Board's rent. If the rental to be charged is fixed at a higher amount than the present rate, certain people will have to make up the difference. It was well known that the tenancy of the Workers' Compensation Board was tem­porary, running from year to year, and that the new building would be the permanent location of the Board. The new building in Oollins-street will com­mand higher rentals than the old premises, but it is considered desirable to accom­modate in that building the tliree activi­ties I have named.

Workers' [23 OCTOBER, 1940.] Oompensation Bill. 1271

:Mr. REID (OakZeigh).-The Bill will be of great benefit to workers, and I sup­port the motion for its second reading. A situation concerning the medical fraternity has been brought to my notice. When an injured worker calls on a doctor for professional attention, the medical officer has to send- his account to the Workers' Compensation Board, or to one of the various insurance com­panies. In many instances, the doctor is compelled to take legal action against his patient before he is paid his fee from the compensation fund. I was approached by a doctor in my electorate who made a complaint of that nature te me. I have conferred with the Leader of the Labour party, and he considers that action should be taken to obviate that kind of thing. I bring the matter under the notice of the Chief Secretary now to see if anything can be done. I under­stand that the insurance concern associ­ated with the Chamber of Manufactures is the main culprit in delaying payment of fees to medical men. A doctor is entitled to' his fees without the ~ecessity for legal action to secure them.

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

committed. Cla~se 1 was agreed to. Clause 2-(Powers, &c., of Board with

respect to certified schemes of compensa­tion).

Mr. BAILEY (Chief Secretary).­With reference to the subject mentioned by the honorable member for Oakleigh, it will be recalled that in the Workers' Compensation Act 1938 provision was made for the payment of ambulance charges, medical, nursing, and hospital fees, and pharmaceutical treatment ex­penses up to £25, in addition to the amount of compensation otherwise pay­able. Section 2 provides, inter aZia-

(I) For section four of the Workers' Com­pensation Act 1935 as amended by any Act there shall be substituted the following section:-

4. (I) Where an employer is liable to pay compensation in respect of any personal injury by accident to a worker arising out of and in the- course of the employment of that worker there shall in addition to any compensation otherwise payable under the Workers' Com­pensation Acts be paid by or on behalf of the

employer a sum of not more than Twenty-five pounds towards the payment of claims in re!3pect of the following matters:-

( a) Any expenses, not exceeding Two pounds, for transport of the worker to hospital (whether by ambulance or otherwise) arising out of the accident;

( b) Any fees, not exceeding Ten pounds, payable to any medical practitioner in respect of any medical or surgical treatment or examination arising OU\

of the accident; ( c) Any fees, not exceeding Three pounds,

payable to any registered nurse "in respect of any nursing services arising out of the accident; and

( d) Any expenses, not exceeding Ten pounds, incurred by any hospital in affording maintenance attendance and treatment arising out of the accident to the worker.

That section plainly' indicates that a sum up to £10 is to be paid to the doctor who has attended an injured worker. I cannot understand why a doctor should have had recourse to suing an injured worker for the re­covery of his fee. If the honorable member pows of any case in which trouble has occurred over the payment of the medical practitioner who attended an injured worker, I shall be pleased to place his representations before the Workers' Compensation Board in the' hope that there will be no, repetition of such an incident.

The clause was agreed to, as were the remaining clauses.

The Bill was reported to the House ~ithout l!-~endment, and passed through Its remaInIng stages.

ADJOURNMENT. Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and"

Treasurer).-I move-That the House, at its rising, adjourn until

Tuesday next at 3 o'clock.

The motion was agreed to. Mr. A. A. DUNSTAN (Premier and

Treasurer) .-1 move-That the House do now adjourn.

We are about to rise this evening a little earlier than usual, but yesterday we had a vexy long sitting, and it was about half-past two o'clock this morning before we had concluded our business. We have made good progress to-day, having passed five Bills.

The motion was agreed to. The House adjourned at 9.25 p.m.

until Tuesday, October 29.