/
19061011_senate_2_35.xml
8229 lines (8229 loc) · 459 KB
/
19061011_senate_2_35.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>1906-10-11</date>
<parliament.no>2</parliament.no>
<session.no>3</session.no>
<period.no>0</period.no>
<chamber>SENATE</chamber>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<para class="block">Senate. </para>
<business.start>
<day.start>1906-10-11</day.start>
<para>The President took the chair at11 o'clock a.m., and read prayers. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>HIGH COURT BENCH</title>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>SenatorMILLEN. - I desire to ask the Minister of Defence, without notice, whether he is in a position to state if the announcement in this morning's press relative to the appointment of the Attorney -General and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Higgins</inline> to the High Court Bench is correct or not, or whether an appointment has been offered to each of those gentlemen ? </para>
<para>SenatorPLAYFORD. - I know nothing about the matter. </para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate>TASMANIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator CLEMONS</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ask the Minister of Defence, without notice, whether he is prepared to offer, not to me, but to the Senate, an explanation relative to the publication of certain correspondence? On Tuesday, with his consent and unanimously, a motion was carried to the effect that the correspondence relative to appointments to the High Court Bench -should be laid upon the table of the Senate. No such return has been tabled here ; but this morning we find that the correspondence is given, apparently in full, in the daily newspapers, and also that yesterday it was laid upon the table in another place without any motion having been moved. I ask the Minister to explain why he is treating the Senate in what I venture to say is a contemptuous way. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Minister for Defence</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable senator is altogether misinformed. A resolution was passed that certain papers be laid upon the table of the Senate; and the return was handed to the Clerk early yesterday morning- </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate>TASMANIA</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator CLEMONS</name>
</talker>
<para>- By whom? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- By me. In response to the order of the Senate, the correspondence was handed to the Clerk in the proper way. It was not my duty to lay the return upon the table and submit a motion. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator Clemons</name>
</talker>
<para>-i do not wish to throw any reflection upon any officer of the Senate, who, I think, ought not to be reflected upon by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Playford.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I did not reflect upon any one, but only stated the facts. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator CLEMONS</name>
</talker>
<para>- Arising out of the answer to my question, I desire to ask <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Playford</inline> whether he in any way conformed with the practice of the Senate? Did he intimate that he was laying any papers upon the table? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- It was not my place to make an intimation. The Senate ordered a certain paper to be laid upon the table; it was not my place to lay it upon the table, but to give it to the Clerk, who had then to lay it upon the table. The proper course was followed. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator Clemons</name>
</talker>
<para>- I venture to say that is not the proper course. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</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">PRESIDENT, The</name>
<name role="display">The PRESIDENT</name>
</talker>
<para>- I understand from the Clerk that the paper was handed to him by the leader of the Senate some time yesterday, and that he had no opportunity of laying it upon the table during the course of the day. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KLZ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GOULD, Albert</name>
<name role="display">Senator Lt Col Gould</name>
</talker>
<para>- Was it not the duty of the Minister, sir, to lay the paper upon the table? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- No. If I lay a paper upon the table it is either by command or pursuant to statute. Where the production of a paper has been ordered by the Senate, the practice is for the Minister to hand the paper to the Clerk, and it is then laid upon the table. I followed the usual course. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator Clemons</name>
</talker>
<para>- There was no intimation given to the Senate. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I complied with the standing order on the subject. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>REPORT ON MILITARY FORCES</title>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KLZ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GOULD, Albert</name>
<name role="display">Senator Lt Col GOULD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ask the Minister of Defence, without notice, whether he will lay upon the table the report which the late Inspector-General of Military Forces handed tohimjust prior to his departure - that is, the report in which the honorable senator said yesterday Major-General Finn had condemned everything - and move that it be printed ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I have no objection to lav the report upon the table, although it is marked confidential. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PAPERS</title>
<page.no>6434</page.no>
<type>papers</type>
</debateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Senator KEATING</inline>laid upon the table the following paper: - </para>
<quote>
<para>Public Service Act - Amendment of regulation 148 - Statutory Rules, 1906, No. 83. </para>
</quote>
<para>The Clerk laid upon the table the following papers: - </para>
<quote>
<para>Return to order of the Senate of 28th August, 1906 - Tobaccoes, Cigars, and Cigarettes, Employes engaged in the manufacture of. </para>
<para>Return to order of the Senate of 9th October, 1906 - High Court, Correspondence between Prime Minister and Chief Justice of South Australia <inline font-style="italic">re</inline> appointments. </para>
</quote>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>IMPERIAL CONFERENCE</title>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JVC</name.id>
<electorate>TASMANIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DOBSON, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Senator DOBSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ascertain from the Minister of Defence, without notice, whether he will ask the' Prime Minister, when he attends the Conference in London, to ascertain on what terms the Commonwealth can obtain from the Admiralty an obsolete war-ship to act as a training ship for boys in Australia? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I shall ask the question. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>UNIMPROVED VALUES OF LAND</title>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KUL</name.id>
<electorate>NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MILLEN, Edward</name>
<name role="display">Senator MILLEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ask the Minister of Defence, without notice, a question relative to a return which was ordered on the motion of <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Pearce</inline> some time ago. I believe I am correct in saying that the Minister now. has some information: on the matter, and I desire to know whether he will disclose it to the Senate ? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I have some information on the point. A return was moved for by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Pearce,</inline> and at the request of <inline font-weight="bold">Senator' Millen</inline> it was agreed that we should obtain further information if we possibly could. It could only be obtained from the States with whom the Prime Minister communicated. The Premier of Victoria replied that there was no return available from which the information asked for could be compiled ; that the valuation of land under the Land Tax Act was based upon its sheep-carrying capacity, and that neither the capital value nor the unimproved value was taken into consideration. The Premier of South Australia, replied that the cost of compiling the particulars would be from <inline font-style="italic">£500</inline> to £600, but that if particulars respecting the areas of separate holdings should not be wanted, the cost could be reduced to about ^200, and he inquired whether the Commonwealth would incur the expenditure. The Premier of Tasmania said he regretted that the information desired could not at present be obtained. The Premier of New South Wales replied that the staff of the Commissioners of Taxation would be unable to commence the preparation of the return until after the 17th </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="block">October. The Premier of Western Australia asked to be advised of the meaning, of the term "private-owned lands." He desired to know whether it was intended to refer to land held in fee simple only, or to include land held under the "conditional purchase " provisions of the State. He pointed out that should the information be required, special expenditure would have to be incurred, and inquired whether the Commonwealth would reimburse the State for the outlay. The Premier of Queensland merely acknowledged the Prime Minister's circular of the 26th July. The Commonwealth Statistician was also asked whether he could furnish any additional information on this matter, but he was unable to do so. It will be seen, from the replies, that in some cases the Commonwealth may get the additional information if it is prepared to incur such expenditure, but that in other cases it is not available. </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KUL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MILLEN, Edward</name>
<name role="display">Senator MILLEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Judging from the answers which the Minister of Defence has read, the difficulty appears to be in regard to the unimproved value of the land. I desire to ask whether he will consult the officers whose duty it would be to prepare the return, and see if he can get any portion of the information sought. Particulars as to the number and size of the holdings, irrespective of their value, would be of advantage. The honorable senator might be able to get some portion of the information sought without incurring any expense. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I shall make inquiries, and see whether we cannot get as much additional information on the subject as is possible. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER'S REPORT</title>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6435</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator CLEMONS</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ask the Minister of Defence, without notice, another question with regard to information which honorable senators have sought toobtain from the Ministry. Yesterday he agreed that the report of the Public Service Commissioner should be circulated amongst the members of the Senate. It is hoped by him, I suppose, and certainly by us, that this will practically be the last day of the session, and that it will mostly be devoted to the consideration of the Appropriation Bill in Committee. I again ask the Minister why it is that, up to this hour, no member of the Senate has received a copy of this report, and whether he can explain why it has not been circulated ? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K0X</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PLAYFORD, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Senator PLAYFORD</name>
</talker>
<para>- I gave an instruction yesterday that the report was to be distributed immediately that could be done, butmy secretary was informed that sufficient copies were not available. That was all I could do in the matter. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator CLEMONS</name>
</talker>
<para>- The circulation of the report has been delayed so long that no knowledge of its contents will become known before the Appropriation Bill is dealt with. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>APPROPRIATION BILL</title>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<type>bill</type>
</debateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-style="italic">In Committee</inline>(Consideration resumed from 10th October, <inline font-style="italic">vide</inline> page 6380). </para>
<para>Clauses 2 and 3 postponed. </para>
<para>Schedule - </para>
<para>Parliament : The President : Controller of Refreshment Rooms. </para>
<para>Divisions 1 to 10(The <inline font-style="italic">Parliament),</inline></para>
<para class="block">£30,167. </para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K7D</name.id>
<electorate>Queensland</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">STEWART, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator STEWART</name>
</talker>
<para>. - I move - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>That the House of Representatives be requested to reduce the item "President, £1,100," by£500. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">On previous occasions I have explained the reason why I have sought to make this reduction. It is not on account of any personal feeling towards the senator who has occupied the Chair very efficiently during the last five or six years, but because I believe that the salary is too high. I find that while the salary of a senator in the United States is $5,000, equivalent to £1,000, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives each receives a salary of $8,000, equivalent to £1,600, or about £100 more than is paid to the President of our Senate. If our President were paid in the same proportion as the President of the American Senate, instead of getting , £1,100 as President, and £400 as senator, he would be paid about £650 in all. In Canada the payments are very much smaller than is the case here. The Speaker ofthe Senate gets a salary of about £300 a year, together with an allowance of £300 a year as senator, and it is the same with the Speaker of the House of Commons. If my proposal were adopted, the total payment to the President of our Senate would be £1,000. That </para>
<para>I consider to be quite sufficient for the office. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KAH</name.id>
<electorate>New South Wales</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WALKER, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator WALKER</name>
</talker>
<para>. - I am one of those who think that the President of the Senate should, at any rate, be paid as high a salary as is paid to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. I should have to enter my objection to <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Stewart's</inline> motion on that ground, if there were no other. Throughout Australia the Presidents of the Legislative Councils are looked upon as gentlemen holding such high positions that they should be able to maintain them properly out of their official incomes. We have nothing to do with the President's private means. It would be very' invidious if the President of the Senate were not paid as liberal a salary as is received by the President of any other House of Legislature in Australia. We canvery well afford to pay such a salary as will enable our President to maintain his official dignity in comparison with the occupant of any other position with which his can be compared. It must be remembered that in Great Britain the occupant of a corresponding office receives a salary of £5,000 a year. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KKL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Simon</name>
<name role="display">Senator Fraser</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable senator would not vote for anything like that, surely. What is the use of talking nonsense ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KAH</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WALKER, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator WALKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I wish to see the dignity of the Commonwealth Parliament maintained, and desire that our officials should be paid on a fairly liberal scale. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K7D</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">STEWART, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator Stewart</name>
</talker>
<para>- Extravagance ! </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KAH</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WALKER, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator WALKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- No. I do not believe in extravagance, but I shall do all I can to maintain thedignity of the office. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6436</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator CLEMONS</name>
</talker>
<para>. - I quite recognise that the matter raised by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Stewart</inline> is one about which there can be considerable difference of opinion ; but we must allrecognise that the honorable senator has raised the point at an opportune moment. He has' raised it under circumstances that are within our knowledge. We have had a public intimation from the present occupant of the office of President that be does not intend to seek re-election to this Parliament. We are therefore in the fortunate position that we can debate the matter without the slightest reference to personal circumstances. I am glad that we all recognise that. The personal note need not be introduced into the debate. The argument has been used that in order to main tain the dignity of the Chair it is necessary to attach a high salary to it. I venture to say that that is not entirely true. I~do not accept the statement that we enhance the dignity of the Chair merely by attaching a large monetary consideration to the occupant of it. It may also be argued that the position of President of the Senate is one of very great importance, and that it is open to the whole of Australia as a high and important post. I venture to say that that argument is very fallacious. The range of choice is, as we all know, limited to the thirty-six senators who will be in this chamber when Parliament meets at the commencement of next session. I do not believe that it is necessary, in order to choose a fit and proper occupant of the Chair out of those thirty-six senators, to regard the selection as being made from all Australia. Nor do I regard the occupant of the Chair as having to discharge any particularly onerous duties apart from those discharged by any other senator. I do not wish to enter into particulars as to what the duties of the President of the Senate are, but I venture to say that he has to discharge no more onerous duties than those discharged by the occupant of the chair in which you, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Chairman,</inline> are now sitting. Indeed, if we had to determine which of the two presiding officers had the harder work to do, I fancy that most of us would say the Chairman of Committees - that is to say, if the question were one of personal hardship. With regard to another question that has been raised, I venture to submit that the Senate will be setting a salutary example to Australian Parliaments generally if it agrees to make a reduction in the salary of its President. A salary of <inline font-style="italic">£1,000</inline> a year is, in my opinion, quite sufficient. I venture to hope that the Senate will give the motion very serious consideration, and that, remembering the circumstance that the present opportunity is one when the question can be determined apart from personal considerations, it will not be influenced by the erroneous impression that the dignity of the office will be enhanced simply by attaching a high salary to it. If the Senate were meeting for the first time, composed of thirty-six senators, who had by some means acquired a full knowledge of what the duties of the President were, does it seem likely that we should decide to allot to the occupant of the chair a larger total salary than ^1,000 a year? I venture to say that if the question were put before the Senate in that form, not surrounded by personal considerations, there would be no doubt as to what the decision would be. I hope that <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Stewart's</inline> motion will not only be pressed, but will be carried. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6437</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JU7</name.id>
<electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DE LARGIE, Hugh</name>
<name role="display">Senator DE LARGIE</name>
</talker>
<para>. - Honorable senators always recognise when a matter of this kind comes before us that it is an extremely delicate one to discuss. Whether we like it or not, there is always the feeling that the personal element is mixed up with the question. But it is fortunate that at the present time, owing to the fact that the gentleman who at present holds the office of President does not intend" to seek reelection, we can discuss the matter with the greatest freedom. I do not think that it is the duty of this Parliament to continue setting the example of paying high salaries to its officers. The amount to which it is proposed to reduce the present salary is a reasonable one. It will still leave it at a. very handsome figure. It is time we began to set an example to the States Parliaments in this direction. It must have been realized bv many senators on many occasions that not only in connexion with Parliaments, but in other departments of government, there is in Australia too much dignity to maintain. When we desire that any State Parliament or public department shall do any little bit of business for us that we believe it is well qualified to do, we are met with questions of dignity at every turn. It is time that we set an example; and if we, as the highest House of Legislature i'n Australia, determined to do what is proposed, we shall virtually compel the States Legislatures to be more economical in regard to equivalent offices. If we can achieve that purpose we shall have done very good work. It must be admitted, itf we compare the allowances paid to some Speakers and Presidents connected with Legislatures in Australia with the payments made in this Parliament, our salaries are not extravagant; but, at the same time, I agree with <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Clemons</inline> that the amount of money that we pay in connexion with a certain office does not add anything to its dignity. If we were to consider that view of the matter, what would have to be said of the President of the United States? </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6437</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KAH</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WALKER, James</name>
<name role="display">Senator Walker</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is being proposed to increase his salary to ^20,000 a year. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JU7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DE LARGIE, Hugh</name>
<name role="display">Senator DE LARGIE</name>
</talker>
<para>- If there is any public man in the world who requires a considerable sum to be paid to him to maintain his official dignity, surely it is the President of the United States. But the principal man in that great Republic receives a salary of something like £10,000 a year. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KLZ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GOULD, Albert</name>
<name role="display">Senator Lt Col Gould</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is an entirely different position. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JU7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DE LARGIE, Hugh</name>
<name role="display">Senator DE LARGIE</name>
</talker>
<para>- I admit that the comparison is not perfect, but I quote that instance to show that the amount of money attached to an office certainly does not add to its dignity. I am quite sure that no amount of money that might be paid to the President qf the United States would add greater dignity and honour to the office. Perhaps there is no man in the world whose words carry more weight than do those of the President of the United States. Nevertheless, he is paid the comparatively modest sum of £10,000 per annum. Looked at in that light, we should all realize that we shall not deprive the office of President of the Senate of any dignity by reducing the salary as proposed by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Stewart.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KKL</name.id>
<electorate>Victoria</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Simon</name>
<name role="display">Senator FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>.- It may sound very well to move a reduction of £500 in a salary of this kind, and probably another place would agree to the proposal. I feel certain, however, that if the Senate were to request that a reduction be made in the Speaker's salary, our interference would be resented. I think that <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Clemons</inline> is taking a wrong view of the situation. If the President were a senator from Western Australia, South Australia, or a remote part of Queensland, he would have to separate himself from his family, and undertake an immense amount of travelling. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator Clemons</name>
</talker>
<para>- So has every senator from distant places. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KKL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Simon</name>
<name role="display">Senator FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Senators may obtain pairs, but the President is bound to be here all the time. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KOS</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HENDERSON, George</name>
<name role="display">Senator Henderson</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable senator ought not to mention pairs. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KKL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Simon</name>
<name role="display">Senator FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I remember the pairs referred to. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KOS</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HENDERSON, George</name>
<name role="display">Senator Henderson</name>
</talker>
<para>- I should think so ! </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KKL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Simon</name>
<name role="display">Senator FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am not ashamed of the transaction. We are not supposed to aggrandize all those positions, of which I do not think Victoria has any great share. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator Clemons</name>
</talker>
<para>- Ira view of the announcement in the newspapers this morning, </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<para class="block">I should think Victoria has a very fair share. </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KKL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Simon</name>
<name role="display">Senator FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Every man in an exalted position like that of President has to put his hand in his pocket to assist all sorts of charities, and, possibly, he may finish up the year with a balance on the wrong side. I am not in favour of high salaries ; but surely we ought to recognise the demands of a position of this kind ; and I hope the Senate will not make the reduction proposed. The salary of the President is fairly well on a par with the salaries paid to Presidents of Legislative Councils, and, of course, the President of the Senate, living as he does away from his own State, has greater demands made upon him. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator Clemons</name>
</talker>
<para>- There are no greater demands on the President than there are on any other senator. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KKL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRASER, Simon</name>
<name role="display">Senator FRASER</name>
</talker>
<para>- A senator mav refuse to comply with those demands, whereas the President may at any time have to contribute anything from £10 to £50 for a charity. Of course, a wealthy man could afford to keep up a, position of the kind; but we are not all wealthy. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6D</name.id>
<electorate>Western Australia</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SMITH, Miles</name>
<name role="display">Senator STANIFORTH SMITH</name>
</talker>
<para>. - This proposal is a sort of hardy annual, though on this occasion it has received unexpected support from a member of the Opposition. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6M</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CLEMONS, John</name>
<name role="display">Senator Clemons</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why unexpected? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>6438</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K6D</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SMITH, Miles</name>
<name role="display">Senator STANIFORTH SMITH</name>