/
19250814_reps_9_111.xml
1644 lines (1644 loc) · 162 KB
/
19250814_reps_9_111.xml
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<hansard xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<session.header>
<date>1925-08-14</date>
<parliament.no>9</parliament.no>
<session.no>3</session.no>
<period.no>0</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>1446</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<para>House of Representatives. </para>
<business.start>
<day.start>1925-08-14</day.start>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker</inline>(Rt. Hon. W. A. Watt) took the chair at 11 a.m., and read prayers. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA</title>
<page.no>1446</page.no>
<type>miscellaneous</type>
</debateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1446</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXG</name.id>
<electorate>BALACLAVA, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WATT, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt</name>
</talker>
<para>-Just before the adjournment of the House in connexion with the welcome to the American Fleet, I received the following cablegram : - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>Members Empire Parliamentary Association in Parliament of United Kingdom desire to present to Commonwealth Parliament Speaker's chair for new Federal Parliament House, Canberra. Chair would be replica of that in our House of Commons. Telegraph whether this presentation would be acceptable. </para>
<list type="upperalpha-dotted">
<item label="J.">
<para>H. Whitley, </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>Speaker, House of Commons. </para>
<para>Joint President, United Kingdom Branch, </para>
<para>Empire Parliamentary Association. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">Because of the all-night sittings immediately preceding the adjournment, which honorable members have probably not yet forgotten, and for other reasons, I was unable to announce the receipt of the cablegram immediately it was received; but during the adjournment I sent the following reply to the Speaker of the House of Commons: - </para>
<quote>
<para>Have much pleasure in accepting, on behalf of the House of Representatives, Speaker's chair, so gracefully and generously offered for House, Canberra,by United Kingdom Branch of Empire Parliamentary Association. Resolution of House will be proposed when House re-assembles in about three weeks. </para>
<list type="upperalpha-dotted">
<item label="W.">
<para>A. Watt, Speaker. 21st July, 1925. </para>
</item>
</list>
</quote>
<para class="block">I understand that the Right Honorable the Prime Minister will submit ft motion of acceptance of this welcome gift, and I content myself, therefore, with saying, as the presiding officer of the House, how keenly I am sure honorable members appreciate this characteristic act of cordiality and friendship by the members of the parent branch of the Empire Parliamentary Association. I hope, as I trust we all hope, that this gift will adorn our House for many a generation, and that it will always be regarded as a visible link between the imperial mother of parliaments and the daughter institution in Australia. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1446</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4B</name.id>
<electorate>Flinders</electorate>
<party>NAT</party>
<role>Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRUCE, Stanley</name>
<name role="display">Mr BRUCE</name>
</talker>
<para>. - Every honorable member will cordially endorse your action, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> in replying, on behalf of the House, to the cablegram sent by the President of the United Kingdom Branch of the Empire Parliamentary Association, which conveyed this most generous and welcome offer to the Parliament of Australia. We are all desirous of having, at Canberra, a replica of the Speaker's chair in the House of Commons, because all our parliamentary institutions are based upon those of the motherof parliaments, and because we are all anxious to maintain those constitutional principles which have for so long guidedthe land from which we have come. Thisis but another example of the beneficial work which is being done by the Empire Parliamentary Association in promoting the interchange of visits between members of the various parliaments of the Empire, an instance of which was the recent visit paid to South Africa. I understand that it is the intention of the Australian Branch of the Empire Parliamentary Association to invite every otherbranch of the association to send representatives to Australia next year. We may, therefore, hope that if this visit is brought about it will provide an appropriate occasion for the presentation of this chair to the Parliament of Australia. The motion, which I now submit, will, I am sure, commend itself to every honorable member. I move - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>That the offer of the United Kingdom Branch of the Empire Parliamentary Association, to present to the Commonwealth Parliament, a Speaker's chair for use in the Parliament House, at Canberra, be most cordially accepted, and that <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker</inline> be requested to convey to the Speaker of the House of Commons. Joint President of the United Kingdom Branch, the sincere thanks of the House for such a valued gift, and its warm appreciation of this expression of good will towards oar Commonwealth from the members of the Home Parliament. </para>
</quote>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1446</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JXA</name.id>
<electorate>HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHARLTON, Matthew</name>
<name role="display">Mr CHARLTON</name>
</talker>
<para>.- I have great pleasure in seconding the motion. We all greatly appreciate the generous offer that has been made by the United Kingdom Branch of the Empire Parliamentary Association. It is further evidence of the benefit to be derived by association with this organization. I understand that many honorable members of this House are members of it. I have been associated with it since its inception, and recently, when I visited London, although many members of the United Kingdom Branch were absent in South Africa at the time, the secretary immediately got in touch with me, and made my stay in the Motherland as pleasant as possible. We ought to do everything we can to foster such a valuable institution, and I think that all honorable members should become associated with it. I join with the Prime Minister in hoping that, as a result of the invitation extended to other branches of the association to visit Australia, we shall, in the near future, have another opportunity to thank the United Kingdom Branch more fully than we can at the present moment. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>Question resolved in the affirmative. </para>
</speech>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TARIFF BOARDREPORT</title>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KMQ</name.id>
<electorate>PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MANN, Edward</name>
<name role="display">Mr MANN</name>
</talker>
<para>- As so far only copies of the reports of the Tariff Board on agricultural implements have been distributed and only to a limited number of honorable members, will the Minister for Trade and Customs say when correct copies will be generally available? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K1J</name.id>
<electorate>MARTIN, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>NAT</party>
<role>Minister for Trade and Customs</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PRATTEN, Herbert</name>
<name role="display">Mr PRATTEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I hope to place the report of the Tariff Board on the table at the next day of sitting. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>PARLIAMENT HOUSE STEPS</title>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEV</name.id>
<electorate>MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FENTON, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr FENTON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to address a question to you, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker.</inline> It concerns the privileges of honorable members and others associated with this House, and has reference to the control of the steps in front of this House when any demonstration is taking place. On some occasions, during processions, the naval or military authorities take over the control of these steps, and honorable members of this House, as well as officers of the House, have been subjected to gross insults from them. I protest against either the naval or the military people being given control of Parliament House steps, and I should like you, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> to say why the steps are from time to time handed over to them, and why the President of the Senate and you, sir, who are the custodians of the privileges of honorable members in this regard, should allow it? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXG</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon W A Watt</name>
</talker>
<para>- Honorable members are, no doubt, aware that the Joint House Committee controls this building as a whole. When requests are made for the use ofthe steps in front of Parliament House on important public occasions they are referred to the committee, if it is possible to get a meeting, and, if not, to the President of the Senate, who is its chairman. The President usually confers with the Speaker, who is the vice-chairman of the committee. In connexion with the march of the American sailors through the streets of Melbourne, the Government asked the President of the Senate, through its Reception Committee, for the use of the steps, and the request was granted in the ordinary way. I doubt if such a request from the Government has ever been refused. However, in view of what has recently happened, and more particularly because of the statement that honorable members have been subjected to insults, I shall take an early opportunity of conferring with the President of the Senate, and probably with the Joint House Committee, to prevent a recurrence of complaints in the future. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>BORING FOR OIL</title>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KF9</name.id>
<electorate>KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GREEN, Albert</name>
<name role="display">Mr A GREEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Will the Prime Minister confer with the Western Australian Government in regard to the exceedingly limited area in that state in which it is proposed by the Commonwealth to grant a £1 for £1 subsidy for the boring for oil? Some of the geological authorities of Western Australia hold the opinion that there are parts of the Kimberley districts, other than those recommended by <inline font-weight="bold">Dr. Wade,</inline> in which it is possible to find oil, and I think their opinion should have some weight with the Federal Government before its proposals are finalized. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1447</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4B</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>NAT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRUCE, Stanley</name>
<name role="display">Mr BRUCE</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Government's policy in this regard is perfectly clear and definite. It is proposed to subsidize oil boring, to the extent of £1 for £1, in any area in Australia where, according to authoritative opinion, as opposed to interested opinion, there is the possibility of oil being found. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KF9</name.id>
<electorate>KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GREEN, Albert</name>
<name role="display">Mr A GREEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is the Government adhering closely to the opinion of <inline font-weight="bold">Dr. Wade?</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4B</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRUCE, Stanley</name>
<name role="display">Mr BRUCE</name>
</talker>
<para>- At the moment his opinion is the only authoritative statement we have. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>DUTY ON AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Tariff Board's Report</para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4M</name.id>
<electorate>INDI, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Robert</name>
<name role="display">Mr COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Having regard to the importance of the Tariff Board's report upon the duty on agricultural implements, will the Minister for Trade and Customs supply a copy of the report to each honorable member? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K1J</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>NAT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PRATTEN, Herbert</name>
<name role="display">Mr PRATTEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>WEMBLEY EXHIBITION</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JZK</name.id>
<electorate>REID, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COLEMAN, Percy</name>
<name role="display">Mr COLEMAN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Can the Prime Minister say whether the Commonwealth is committed to a large expenditure in connexion with the continuance of the Wembley Exhibition, and whether large losses have been sustained? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4B</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>NAT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BRUCE, Stanley</name>
<name role="display">Mr BRUCE</name>
</talker>
<para>- Subsequent to the determination that the Wembley Exhibition should be continued this year, negotiations took place between the Australian and British Governments, as a result of which the British Government gave a subsidy of £50,000 towards the expenses of the Australian portion of the exhibition. Upon that basis the Commonwealth resolved to participate in the exhibition this year. It isestimated that over and above that contribution of £50,000, Australia will probably have to find approximately £30,000. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>OLD-AGE AND INVALID PENSION</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate>EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Upon the notice-paper this notice of motion appears against my name : - </para>
</talk.start>
<para>That, in view of the large available surplus, the increase of old-age and invalid pensions be given favorable consideration at once. </para>
<para class="block">I ask you, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> what steps I am to take regarding that motion in view of the fact thatthe Government has decided to propose to Parliament the increase which I suggested? </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I do not think the honorable member really desires any guidance from the Chair in this matter. I suggest that this is a matter for conference between himself and the Government </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>GOVERNMENT AEROPLANE HANGARS</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Accommodation of Privately-owned Aeroplanes. </para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFA</name.id>
<electorate>RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>CP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GREEN, Roland</name>
<name role="display">Mr R GREEN</name>
</talker>
<para>asked the Minister for Defence, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Does the Government allow privatelyowned aeroplanes to use departmental hangars ? If so, under what conditions? </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Is any charge made? If so, how much, and on what basis is it computed? </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>Does the price for use of hangars vary? If so, why? </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>Is the Government in favour of encouraging civil aviation? If so, will the Minister abolish fees for the use of departmental hangars until such time as the industry is sufficiently advanced to justify private expenditure on hangars? </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KI7</name.id>
<electorate>CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>NAT</party>
<role>Minister for Defence</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HOWSE, Neville</name>
<name role="display">Sir NEVILLE HOWSE</name>
</talker>
<para>- The answers to the honorable member's questions are as. follow: - </para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Yes, conditional on floor-space being available. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Yes. The charges are - </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>AA. Aeroplanes ofless than500 square feet -1s. 3d. daily, 7s. 6d. weekly. </para>
<list type="upperalpha-dotted">
<item label="A.">
<para>Aeroplanes from 500 to 900 square feet - 2s. 6d. daily, 15s. weekly. </para>
</item>
<item label="B.">
<para>Aeroplanes from 900 to 1,350 square feet - 3s. daily, 20s. weekly. </para>
</item>
<item label="C.">
<para>Aeroplanes from 1,350 to 1,800 square feet - 3s.6d. daily, 22s. 6d. weekly. </para>
</item>
<item label="D.">
<para>Aeroplanes over 1.800 square feet- 4s. daily, 25s. weekly. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para class="block">These charges are based on the number of square feet of floor-space occupied, computed by multiplying the span by the overall length of the aeroplane. </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="3.">
<para>No. </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>Yes. The charges for hangar accommodation have recently been reduced by 50 per cent., and are now considerably below the corresponding charges in England and elsewhere. It is not proposed to make any further reduction at present. </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>WINTER SESSIONS</title>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JRH</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BOWDEN, Eric</name>
<name role="display">Mr BOWDEN</name>
</talker>
<para>asked the Treasurer, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>Whether he will make arrangements for the alteration of the financial year from the 30th June to the 30th September, so as to do a,way as far as possible with the necessity for Parliament meeting during the winter season? </para>
</quote>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1448</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>C7E</name.id>
<electorate>COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>CP</party>
<role>Treasurer</role>
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, Earle</name>
<name role="display">Dr EARLE PAGE</name>
</talker>
<para>- The matter will receive consideration. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1449</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>EXCISE DUTIES</title>
<page.no>1449</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Collection in South Australia. </para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1449</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KZ6</name.id>
<electorate>GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LACEY, Andrew</name>
<name role="display">Mr LACEY</name>
</talker>
<para>asked the Minister for </para>
</talk.start>
<para>Trade and Customs, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
<quote>
<para>What was the amount collected as excise duties in South Australia for the years 1921-2, 1922-3, 1923-4, and 1924-5? </para>
</quote>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1449</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K1J</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>NAT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PRATTEN, Herbert</name>
<name role="display">Mr PRATTEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- The figures are as follow : - </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="block">
<graphic href="111331192508141_3_0.jpg" />
</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>MR. MAXWELL AND THE WHITEWORK TRADE</title>
<page.no>1449</page.no>
<type>miscellaneous</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Personal Explanation</title>
<page.no>1449</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1449</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNP</name.id>
<electorate>Fawkner</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAXWELL, George</name>
<name role="display">Mr MAXWELL</name>
</talker>
<para>.- I desire to make a personal explanation. During the debate on the Immigration Bill, the honorable member for Ballarat <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. McGrath)</inline> stated, according to the report in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> at page 1120 - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>The honorable member for Fawkner was chairman of a wages board, which, on his casting vote, decided that 14s. per week was sufficient to maintain a woman and her little children. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">He said, also, that that fact would be useful information to put before the electors of Fawkner during the forthcoming election campaign, and he concluded by saying that in so acting I was doing the work of my class, for which I was well paid. Subsequently, the honorable member for Hindmarsh <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Makin)</inline> said that when I, as chairman of a wages board, had a chance to give whiteworkers 16s. a week for making nightdresses I had voted for a wage of 14s. per week. That, he said, was a fair and just representation of my attitude at that time towards trade unionism. I shall place before the House a short statement of the facts connected with that wages board. In 1897 the wages board system was introduced in "Victoria, and I had the honour of being invited by its members to preside over the board appointed to deal with the whitework trade. One of the duties of the board was to fix a minimum wage to be paid to workers over eighteen years of age. At that time the trade was very disorganized and irregular, women entering it at various ages for various reasons. After a protracted discussion as to what would be a fair minimum wage for girls of eighteen years of age and upwards, the board came to a deadlock, the employers expressing their willingness to vote for 13s. a week, and the representatives of the employees contending for 16s. a week. As chairman of the board, I said that I was not in a position to give a casting vote without making further investigations, and, with a view to informing myself of the existing conditions in the trade, I carefully investigated the books of various reputable firms in Melbourne, and consulted with the then Chief Inspector of Factories <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Harrison Ord).</inline> I found that the then ruling minimum wage for girls of eighteen years of age was 7s. 6d. a week. A girl might possibly have entered the trade a week before attaining the age of eighteen years, and, having no experience, she had to start at the beginning, and learn the trade. That accounted for the low minimum wage then obtaining. I told the board that I could not be a party to raising the minimum wage - not the living wage - from 7s. 6d. to 16s. per week at one bound, but that if the employers' representatives would agree to a minimum of 14s. per week I would give my casting vote in favour of that wage. That was done, and 14s. per week was, by my casting vote, fixed as the minimum wage to be paid to any girl over eighteen years of age, however inexperienced. Subsequently, the board came to another deadlock in regard to the piecework rates, and was dissolved. A new board was appointed, and applied itself to the same task as its predecessor had faced. After discussion and investigation, that board, comprising four representatives of the employers and four representatives of the employees, unanimously fixed16s. per week as the minimum wage to be paid to women over twenty years of age, and no protest was heard from any quarter. Whereas by my casting vote the wage had been fixed at 14s. a week for girls over eighteen years of age, the new board unanimously specified a minimum wage of 16s. a week for any woman over twenty years of age. I find on inquiry of the Federal Statistician that 14s. per week at that time was equivalent to 28s.1d. to-day. That means that if the board of which I was chairman were to-day assessing the minimum wage to be paid to an inexperienced girl of eighteen years of age, employed in the whitework trade, it would fix a wage of 28s. Id. a week. To-day, the wages in Victoria in this trade are fixed by law. Girls under the age of 21 years have to serve four years before they can claim the minimum wage. They have to learn their trade. The wage for the first year is 10s. per week, for the second year 15s., for the third year 22s., and for the fourth year ,30s. per week. Those are the wages ruling to-day. My action 28 years ago, when we were pioneering in this matter, was called in question, and I leave it to every unprejudiced mind in the House to say whether my determination on the facts before me was, as the honorable member for Ballarat said, a. decision that 14s. a week was sufficient for the maintenance of a woman and her little children. The honorable members for Ballarat and Hindmarsh, in their attempt to vilify me, have been guilty of the grossest and most wanton misrepresentation. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PAPER</title>
<page.no>1450</page.no>
<type>miscellaneous</type>
</debateinfo>
<para>The following paper was presented : - </para>
<quote>
<para>Canberra - Report, of Operations of Federal Capital Commission for Quarter ended 30th Juno, 1925. </para>
</quote>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>1450</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>LEAGUE OF NATIONS ASSEMBLY</title>
<page.no>1450</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Report or Australia's Delegates</para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1450</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate>Darling Downs</electorate>
<party>NAT</party>
<role>Attorney-General</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Sir LITTLETON GROOM</name>
</talker>
<para>. - I lay upon the table of the House the report of the Australian delegation to the Fifth Assembly of the League of Nations, and I propose to conclude my remarks by moving that the paper be printed. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>I desire, in the first place, to express my appreciation, not only of the privilege enjoyed bv me in representing my country at the Fifth Assembly of, the League of Nations, but also of the hearty cooperation of the delegates and substitute delegates who were appointed to represent Australia at that Assembly. I assure honorable members that the task placed upon us was no light one, and that the delegates' and substitute delegates found the whole of their time closely occupied with the consideration of the many problems that came before them during, the sittings of the Assembly. </para>
<para>I shall commence my remarks by dealing with the matter whose importance, to some extent, overshadowed other work : I refer to the Protocol for the pacific settlement of international disputes. Had it not been for the Protocol, the other work which was accomplished by the Fifth Assembly during its sittings would have been sufficient to attract considerable public attention. </para>
<para>The most pressing question at the Assembly was undoubtedly that of the limitation of armaments. The subject is not new, but from the very inception it has been regarded as one of the most important of the League's problems. The Treaty of Versailles contains the following article dealing with the position of Germany: - </para>
<para>In order to render possible the initiation of a general limitation of the armaments of all nations, Germany undertakes strictly to observe the military, naval, and air clauses which follow. </para>
<para class="block">Article 8 of the Covenant of the League of Nations declares that - </para>
<para>The members of the League recognize that the maintenance of peace requires the reduction of national armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety, and the enforcement by common action of international obligations. </para>
<para class="block">The article requires the Council, taking account of the geographical circumstances of each state, to formulate plans for such reduction for the consideration and action of their several governments. As soon as the League of Nations was organized, steps were taken to give effect to this obligation to' reduce armaments. Before the meeting of the First Assembly of the League in November, 1920, the Council constituted the permanent commission under the obligation contained in article 9 of the Covenant. The Financial Conference, which was summoned by the Council just prior to the meeting of the First Assembly, met at Brussels, and recommended that the Council should confer at once with the various governments - </para>
<para>With a view to securing a general reduction of the crushing burdens, which on their existing scale armaments still impose on the impoverished peoples of the world, sapping their resources and imperilling their recovery from the ravages of war. </para>
<para class="block">The First Assembly instructed a temporary mixed commission, consisting not only of the technical, naval, military, and air experts, but also of representatives of employers and employees, financial experts, aud men of political experience, to prepare reports and proposals for the reduction of armaments, as provided in article 8 of the Covenant. In 1921 the matter came before the Second Assembly, which instructed the temporary mixed commission to submit proposals for a reduction of armaments, which, in order to secure precision, they suggested should be submitted in the form of a draft convention for adoption by the nations. The temporary mixed commission made its report, which came before the Third Assembly. It defined certain principles which it thought might serve as a basis for a draft convention for the reduction of armaments. At the Third Assembly was passed the famous resolution known as the Fourteenth Resolution, which laid down the following principles: - </para>
<list type="decimal">
<item label="(1)">
<para>No scheme for the reduction of armaments can ever be really successful unless it is general: </para>
</item>
<item label="(2)">
<para>In the present state of the world, the majority of Governments would be unable to accept the responsibility for a serious reduction of armaments unless they received in exchange a satisfactory guarantee for the safety of their countries. </para>
</item>
<item label="(3)">
<para>That a guarantee can be found in a general defensive agreement binding all countries to provide immediate and effective assistance in accordance with a pre-arranged plan in the event of any of them being attacked. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para class="block">The Assembly concluded by instructing the temporary mixed commission to prepare on those lines a draft convention. This draft convention was presentedto the Fourth Assembly in the form of what is known as the Treaty of Mutual Assistance. This was sent on by the Fourth Assembly to the governments of the members of the League for their consideration. Quite a number of governments responded, but many did not. Some nations were prepared to <inline font-style="italic">accept</inline> the Treaty, while others were not It was, therefore, finally rejected. That was the position when the Fifth Assembly met. By that time the <inline font-style="italic">proposal</inline> for the reduction of armaments had been thoroughly investigated and examined by technical experts, and by the temporary mixed commission. It had been discussed before four assemblies, which all realized the urgent nature of the problem and the pressing need Tor its solution. When the Fifth Assembly met, the replies of those governments which had responded were placed before it. At that stage the problem seemed almost incapable of solution. The proposal to bring about a reduction in armament was brought up at the Fifth </para>
<para class="block">Assembly by the British and French governments. The settlement of disputes by arbitration was suggested. The then Prime Minister of Great Britain, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Ramsay</inline> MacDonald, said: - "The one method by which we can approximate to an accurate attribution of responsibility for aggression is arbitration." He also proposed that the compulsory provisions of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice might be examined, and suggested that some such step would be necessary as" a preliminary to a conference on disarmament. He also said to the Assembly - </para>
<quote>
<para>The British Government thinks that the matter should now be explored, beginning with the Covenant, andapplying the Covenant to our present circumstances, and in the spirit of the League of Nations developing a policy that will give security and reduce armaments. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">The French Prime Minister approved of the suggestion that arbitration should be the test of aggression. He favoured the acceptance of arbitration. He said - </para>
<quote>
<para>Arbitration is essential, but it isnot sufficient; it is a means, but not an end. It does not entirely fulfil the intentions of Article 8 of the Covenant, which . . . are security and disarmament. We in France regard these three terms - arbitration, security, and disarmament - as inseparable. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">Throughout the debate it was emphasized that without some form of security nations could not be expected to agree to reduce their armed forces. The principles of the Covenant were generally supported, and there was an. eager ness to explore any avenue that would lead to the desired haven. Accordingly it was resolved that - </para>
</speech>
<para>The Assembly,</para>
<para>Noting the declarations of the Governments represented, observes with satisfaction that they contain the basis of an understanding tending to establish a secure peace. </para>
<para>Decides as follows: </para>
<para>With a view to reconciling in the new proposals the divergencies between certain points of view which have been expressed and, when agreement has been reached, to enable an international conference upon armaments to be summoned by the League of Nations at the earliest possible moment: </para>
<list type="decimal">
<item label="(1)">
<para>The Third Committee is requested to consider the material dealing with security and the reduction of armaments, particularly the observations of the Governments on the Draft Treaty of Mutual Assistance prepared in pursuance of Resolution XIV. of the Third Assembly, and other plans prepared and presented to the Secretary-General since the publication of the Draft Treaty, and to examine the obligations contained in the Covenant of the League in relation to the guarantees of security which a resort to arbitration and a reduction of armaments may require : </para>
</item>
<item label="(2)">
<para>The First Committee is requested - </para>
<list type="loweralpha">
<item label="(a)">
<para>to consider, in view of possible amendments, the articles in the Covenant relating to the settlement of disputes; </para>
</item>
<item label="(b)">
<para>to examine within what limits the terms of Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute establishing the Permanent Court of International Justice might be rendered more precise, and thereby facilitate the more general acceptance of the clause; and thus strengthen the solidarity and the security of the nations of the world by settling by pacific means all disputes which may arise between States. </para>
</item>
</list>
</item>
</list>
<para class="block">No other indication was given to tho committees as to the lines upon which they should work. I was asked to accept the position of chairman of the First Committee, and as I felt that the request was an honor to Australia, I undertook the heavy responsibility of that office. I ask honorable members to consider the problems with which the committees were faced, and would remind them that, although the Protocol has not been accepted, those problems are still facing the world and demanding a solution. For that reason I feel that any person who can make suggestions of a constructive character will render a service to the whole world. The heavy burden of armaments was recognized by the representatives present, and a real desire to do something in the direction of a reduction of armaments was evident throughout. The committees were not composed of visionaries or idealists, but of men of experience, including prime ministers, foreign ministers, ambassadors, and leading jurists, mauy of whom had had actual experience of the horrors of the great war, and were anxious, if possible, to avert another such catastrophe. From my knowledge of them I do not hesitate to say that there was a real desire on the part of the delegates to arrive at some scheme which would secure the peace of the world. To give honorable members an indication of the situation as it presented itself to some of the delegates, I cannot do better than quote the remarks of <inline font-weight="bold">Dr. Benes,</inline> who was one of the keenest men at the conference, and largely responsible for the Protocol. When speaking at the council meeting, in March last, he said - </para>
<quote>
<para>I shall take the liberty of putting opposite these important facts certain other facts which are of no less importance, and whose significance seems to me prophetic for the future. The war destroyed four great empires in Central and Eastern Europe, demolished ancient frontiers, established some ten new states, upset dynasties, unchained social revolutions, destroyed communications and financial systems, put down whole ruling classes and so forth, and produced a most incredible intermingling and incredible cross-currents in the interests of states, nations, and classes. The war set nations against each other in this part of the world, and created problems of hitherto unknown complexity. From Finland in the north, through the Baltic Republics, Poland. Germany, Czecho-Slovakia, and Austria, down the valley of the Danube to Constantinople and Southern Greece, you have regions where thousands of conflicts may break out, beginning today by tho murder of a frontier guard or the desecration of a flag, and easily ending tomorrow in a terrible war. To-day all these countriesare tired of this state of affairs. They long to be at last delivered from this intolerable position. They know that they have many problems that are almost insoluble psychologically through direct negotiations, and have wished to find methods other than violence and direct action to solve these problems. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">A great deal was accomplished in a very short time. The First and Third Committees worked both night and day. I remember that on one occasion I remained in the chair for six hours without a break. It was realized that the Protocol produced under such conditions must contain imperfections. <inline font-weight="bold">Dr. Benes</inline> in this connexion said - </para>
<quote>
<para>We were in no way unconscious of the fact that there were some rather important imperfections and shortcomings in the work that hail been performed so rapidly in a few short weeks of feverish labours. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">That describes exactly the feverish rush to which the delegates were subjected. Problems arose one after the other with amazing rapidity, and the marvel is that at such conferences a Protocol could have been evolved which should receive such a measure of support as has been accorded to this one. </para>
<para>I should like to give a brief outline of the Protocol to show the manner in which it attempted to deal with the various problems which arose. The primary object was to get a conference to agree to the reduction of armaments. But certain nations contended that before they could agree to any reduction of armaments they must have some guarantee of security. It was pointed <inline font-style="italic">out</inline> for instance that a nation might have as its neighbour a manufacturing people, capable at short notice of utilizing their factories for the manufacture of munitions of war. A nation with such a neighbour would realize that it could not agree to disarm unless some guarantee of security were given. But that alone was not sufficient. Something in the nature of the pacific settlement of disputes was also necessary. The problems of disarmament, security, and the pacific settlement of disputes were so closely interwoven that they could not be considered separately. The general aim of the Covenant is to establish the solidarity of the members of the international community. This the Protocol recognizes. The preamble to the Protocol sets this forth, and asserts that a war of aggression constitutes a violation of this solidarity, and is an international crime. It expresses the desire to facilitate the complete application of the system provided in the Covenant for the pacific settlement of disputes between States, and for ensuring the repression of international crimes. The purpose desired to be realized, as contemplated by Article 8 of the Covenant, is the reduction of national armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety, and the enforcement by common action of international obligations. There is no obligation under the covenant in "no" case to resort to war.. Under Article 12, the members of the League agree " in no case to resort to war until three months after the award by the arbitrators - or the judicial decision - or the report by the Council." Again, under Article 15, if a dispute comes before the Council, and the Council fails to reach a report which is unanimously agreed to by the members thereof other than the representatives of one or more of the parties to the dispute, the members of the League reserve to themselves the right to take such action as they shall consider necessary for the maintenance of right and justice. </para>
<para>The Protocol seeks to reduce the area of possible conflicts - to close gaps in the Covenant. Under Article 2 of the Protocol, the signatory states agree in no case to resort to war, either with one another or against a state which, if the occasion arises, accepts all the obligations of the Protocol. There are, however, two exceptions: first, when a state is acting in resistance to acts of aggression,- and, secondly, when it is acting in agreement with the Council or the Assembly of the League of Nations in accordance with the provisions of the Covenant and of the Protocol. An addition to the Covenant is also contained in Article 3 of the Protocol, under which the signatory states agree to accept the compulsory provisions of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice in the cases covered by paragraph 2 of Article 36 of thaiStatute. This acceptance is without prejudice to the right of any state, when acceding, to make reservations compatible with the clause. The legal disputes covered by this Article are - (a) the interpretation of a treaty ; (6) any question of international law; <inline font-style="italic">(c)</inline> the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation; («7.) the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation. These disputes were regarded in the nature of legal disputes, and it was felt that the proper body to settle them would be the Permanent Court of International Justice. In connexion with this court, <inline font-style="italic">I</inline> should like to remove a little misapprehension that exists. The question has been asked, " Who will comprise this court?" I remind honorable members that the court has been in existence lor some time. It was created on the 16th September, 1921, and was opened on the 16th February, 1922. The court operates in two ways - it may deal with cases between parties, and it may give advisory opinions. Up to the close of the Fifth Assembly, three judgments had been given in cases between parties, and no less than ten advisory opinions had been expressed by the court at, the request of the Council. Of these thirteen cases Great Britain was concerned in three, one of which was a case between parties, and two of which were advisory opinions. The court has, of course, been functioning since the returns were prepared. The court consists of eleven judges and four deputies, who are selected, not as representing individual nations, but for their special qualifications. The aim is to secure representation of the main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world. Lord Finlay, a British subject, is a mem-' ber of the court, and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. John</inline> Bassett Moore, one of the greatest international lawyers of the United States, is also a member, although the United States is not a member of the League. The Article is an agreement to take advantage of the compulsory jurisdiction of the court. The nations, having agreed not to resort to war, had to adopt some other means of settling disputes. As a result of the discussions at Geneva, some of the articles in the Covenant of the League are now better understood than they were. Australia, with other signatories to the Peace Treaty, has accepted under the Covenant certain definite and distinct obligations. It is agreed in Article 12 of the Covenant that should there arise, between any of the parties, a dispute likely to lead to a rupture, it should be submitted either to arbitration, to judicial decision, or to inquiry by the Council. The parties agree that whenever a dispute arises which is recognized as suitable for submission to arbitration or judicial settlement, and cannot be satisfactorily settled by diplomacy, they will submit the matter to arbitration or judicial settlement. Those are the definite obligations contained in the Covenant, but certain gaps were left in it. The aim of those who drafted the Protocol was to follow as far as possible the spirit and lines of the Covenant, and to fill in the gaps left in the Covenant. The Protocol provides several alternatives. Under the Protocol the signatories agree in no case to resort to war. They agree to follow the procedure set out in Article 4 of the Protocol. This procedure is designed to make more' complete the provisions of paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 7 of Article 15 of the Covenant. In the event of the dispute not being settled by the Council under the Covenant, the duty is then cast upon the Council of trying to induce the parties to accept a judicial settlement, or to submit the dispute to arbitration. If they cannot agree to do that, and if one of the parties desires arbitration, that party may apply to the Council, .and a committee of arbitrators will then be appointed, as far as possible by agreement between the parties. If neither of the parties wants arbitration, the Council must again take the matter up and endeavour to obtain a settlement. If in the end the Council fails to reach unanimity, it must submit the matter to arbitration. Honorable members will, therefore, see that in the end there must be arbitration. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1454</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>DQC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUGHES, William Morris</name>
<name role="display">Mr W M Hughes</name>
</talker>
<para>- What rules are laid down for the selection of arbitrators ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1454</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>NAT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Sir LITTLETON GROOM</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is dealt with under Article 4 of the Protocol. If the parties cannot agree as to arbitration, the Protocol sets out the conditions of the appointment of arbitrators. In the final resort the Council determines the composition, powers and procedure. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1454</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KMQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MANN, Edward</name>
<name role="display">Mr Mann</name>
</talker>
<para>- If one nation refuses to submit the dispute to arbitration, how can it be forced to do so? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1454</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Sir LITTLETON GROOM</name>
</talker>
<para>- That party would be guilty of a breach of the Covenant. I shall deal with that phase of the subject later. The honorable member raises the question whether it is possible to provide a system to settle disputes without force as a final resort. Article 4 of the Protocol makes provision for the appointment <;f arbitrators. The Protocol provides that in the settlement of disputes there is first conciliation by the Council. That method will probably be the most generally used. The Council has power, from time to time, to obtain advisory opinions from the Permanent Court of International Justice. Then there is arbitration by agreement, and, finally, compulsory arbitration. On the important question of domestic jurisdiction, paragraph 8 of Article 15 of the Covenant provides - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>If the dispute between the parties is claimed by one of them, and is found by the Council to arise out of a matter which by international law is solely within the domestic jurisdiction of that party, the Council shall so report, and shall make no recommendation as to its settlement. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">First the Council has to find unanimously that the matter is solely one of domestic jurisdiction. If the Council disagrees, and there is no unanimous finding, the parties may try to settle the dispute by conciliation, friendly negotiation, and goodwill. In the end, however, the final arbiter might be war. The aim of the framers of the Protocol was to cover all possible forms of dispute, and to provide for peaceful settlements in all cases. It is very important that honorable members should know what Article 5 of the Protocol means. Let as assume that a dispute has reached the final stage of compulsory arbitration. In the course of the arbitration proceedings a nation may contend that immigration is a matter of domestic jurisdiction. The party raising that question has the right to take it to the Permanent Court of Internationa] Justice, and it must be submitted to the court through the Council. The court has to decide whether - and these are the words of the Covenant - the dispute arises out of a matter which by international law is solely within the domestic jurisdiction. The decision of the permanent court is final, and it is not necessary that it should be a unanimous decision. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1455</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNP</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAXWELL, George</name>
<name role="display">Mr Maxwell</name>
</talker>
<para>- What is the effect upon the party against whom the decision is given ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1455</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Sir LITTLETON GROOM</name>
</talker>
<para>- He is bound by it. If he disregards it he becomes an aggressor under conditions which I shall explain presently. Nations which accept this article in the Protocol agree that if the court gives a decision they will honour the obligation they have accepted. The question has been raised of the right of nations concerned in a dispute to be represented on the court. The Statute of the Permanent Court provides that if it includes on the bench a judge of the nationality of only one of the parties, the other party may select from among the deputy judges a judge of its nationality. If there is not among the deputy judges a judge of that nationality, the party may choose a judge, preferably from among persons who have been nominated as candidates. If the court includes on the bench no judge of the nationality of the contesting parties, each of these may select or choose a judge. Thus, every litigant before the court may have upon the bench a member of its own nationality. The question arises as to a decision by the court on matters affecting domestic jurisdiction. For instance, is immigration a matter which, by international law, is solely within the domestic jurisdiction ? I looked into the matter very carefully beforehand, and the view I held very strongly was that it was inconceivable, on the authorities, that any court could possibly hold, or any lawyer could possibly advise, on the existence of international law as it is to-day, that immigration was not a matter which, by international law, is solely within the domestic jurisdiction. My honorable colleague is aware that this question gave him and myself a very great deal of anxiety. We obtained the opinion of one of the most eminent authorities we could get, and that opinion, which was in agreement with our own, has been confirmed by other outside opinions. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1455</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0A</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GABB, Joel</name>
<name role="display">Mr Gabb</name>
</talker>
<para>- Could that not have been stated definitely in the Protocol? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1455</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Sir LITTLETON GROOM</name>
</talker>
<para>- Domestic jurisdiction covers an exceedingly wide range of questions, and the attempt to include one or two in the Protocol might lead through the non-inclusion of others, to an interpretation which might prove to be embarrassing. It seemed quite clear that immigration is a matter of domestic jurisdiction. On this question I should like to refer honorable members to an opinion given by Professor Charteris, Professor of International Law in the University of Sydney, who is an authority of very high repute in Australia. Dealing with this aspect of the matter, he says - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>As to the two points upon which the Protocol has been adversely criticized in the Australian press, it is conceived that the autonomy of Australia in respect of her immigration policy is not endangered by either. Hostile critics have not infrequently betrayed ignorance of the present rights and liabilities of Australia under the covenant and have compared the Geneva proposals with the present state of unchallenged autonomy (which is due to the virtual acquiescence of Japan in the White Australia policy), and not (as they should have done) with the position in which Australia would find herself under the covenant if Japan were to raise an " acute dispute " over this policy. There seems, indeed, to be no reason to dissent from the legal opinions which the Australian delegation was reported by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Bruce</inline> in Parliament to have received in Europe to the effect that the White Australia policyis exposed to no new risk under the Protocol as compared with the covenant. </para>
</quote>
<para>Later on he adds - </para>
<quote>
<para>Having regard, then, to the limited function of the court and to the practical certainty of a favorable opinion, it is conceived that Australia would gain an advantage in the right which the Protocol would give her of demanding, first, arbitration of the dispute, and thereafter an opinion of the court, on her plea under Article 15 (8) of the covenant, which would be automatically binding on the arbitrators. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">Honorable members will see that this matter was watched very carefully by my colleague and myself, and our opinion on the subject has been confirmed. Article 10 of the Protocol deals with the conditions under which a state refusing to accept a decision that a matter is one of domestic jurisdiction becomes an aggressor. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1455</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNP</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAXWELL, George</name>
<name role="display">Mr Maxwell</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is Australia prepared to accept an adverse decision upon a matter like that? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1456</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Sir LITTLETON GROOM</name>
</talker>
<para>- I feel perfectly certain that there is no danger of such a decision, and that the White Australia policy is not threatened or endangered by the Protocol. This question of what constitutes domestic jurisdiction actually came before the Permanent Court in connexion with a dispute between Great Britain and France concerning Tunisian affairs. France said that the matter in dispute was a matter of domestic jurisdiction, and Great Britain contended that it was not. The dispute went before the court. I want honorable members to bear in mind that tho court does not consider the policy followed in a matter of domestic jurisdiction. It has no authority to decide whether the policy followed is right or wrong : that is for the nation who carries it out to determine. The court decides simply as to the matter of power - is it or is it not within the power of the state, that is, is it, or is it not, within its domestic jurisdiction according to international law ? The matter to which I have referred having been taken before the court, it expressed the opinion that - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>The question whether a certain matter is or is not solely within the jurisdiction of a state is an essentially relative question; it depends upon the development of international relation. Thus, in the present state of international law, questions of nationality are, in the opinion of (lie court, in principle, within this reserved domain. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">The court decided that, so far as nationality is concerned, the conferring of nationality rights is a matter within the jurisdiction of the country concerned. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1456</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FENTON, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Fenton</name>
</talker>
<para>- Does <inline font-weight="bold">Dr. Pollock,</inline> the great jurist, agree with that? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1456</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Sir LITTLETON GROOM</name>
</talker>
<para>- I have not his opinion on that particular point, but I have it on another aspect of the Protocol, which I shall quote presently. I want, at this stage, to make some reference to a difficulty which arose during discussion before the First Committee. Japan moved an amendment which gave rise to considerable apprehension at the time. It was stated in terms which seemed to suggest the possibility of constituting the Council a court of appeal from a decision of the Court. On that occasion I had to leave the chair, and address the Committee on the amendment. I made the position very clear so far as </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para class="block">Australia is concerned - that if the court gave its decision we should be entitled to hold to that decision very strongly. However, the matter was finally reconsidered, and practically the terms suggested by the British delegates were accepted. I direct the attention of honorable members to the last part of article 5 of the Protocol. which says that if the question is held by the Court or by the Council to be a matter solely within the domestic jurisdiction of the state, this decision shall not -prevent the consideration of the situation by the Council or by the Assembly under article 11 of the Covenant. I point out that this does nothing more than simply preserve all existing rights that are to-day contained in the Covenant. It does not carry the matter any further. Under article 11 of the Covenant it is the right of any particular nation to bring before the Assembly or the Council any circumstance whatever affecting international relations which threatens to disturb international peace, or the good understanding between nations upon which peace depends. The view put by the British delegate before the committee as to the meaning of this last paragraph of article 5 was accepted unanimously, as shown in the report of the rapporteurs. If under paragraph 8 of Article 15 of the Covenant a unanimous decision is given by the Council that decision stands and is binding. If, in the exercise of the right which a nation possesses under Article 11 of the Covenant to bring the matter again before either the Council or the Assembly, the same question is raised, neither the Assembly nor the Council can interfere with the decision previously given. So that the position under the Protocol would be that if a country has been given a verdict in its favour on a question, of domestic jurisdiction, and the nation adversely affected by the verdict exercises its right under this particular article to bring the matter again before the Council or the Assembly in order to have it reconsidered, all that could happen would be that there might be friendly suggestions, friendly intercourse, a suggestion for instance to the nation in whose favour the verdict had been given that its policy was not being carried out in a humanitarian way, and that it might consider whether it could not come to some agreement. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1456</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JZK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COLEMAN, Percy</name>
<name role="display">Mr Coleman</name>
</talker>
<para>- Moral suasion. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>1457</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />