19310722_senate_12_131.xml

<?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>1931-07-22</date>
    <parliament.no>12</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>4</period.no>
    <chamber>SENATE</chamber>
    <page.no>4181</page.no>
    <proof>0</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <para class="block">Senate. </para>
    <business.start>
      <day.start>1931-07-22</day.start>
      <para>The <inline font-weight="bold">President (Senator the Hon. w. Kingsmill)</inline> took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers. </para>
    </business.start>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTION</title>
        <page.no>4181</page.no>
        <type>Questions</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>NEWSOUTH WALES FINANCE</title>
          <page.no>4181</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4181</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>K1L</name.id>
              <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role>VicePresident of the Executive Council</role>
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator BARNES</name>
            </talker>
            <para>. - <inline font-style="italic">by leave</inline> - The following is a telegram which has been sent by the Prime Minister to the Premier of New South &#34;Wales: - </para>
          </talk.start>
          <quote>
            <para>I desire to convey &#39; to you the following information which summarizes the attitude or the Loan Council to your request that certain moneys be provided to meet the cash require&#34;ments of New South Wales during July, August, and September. Before Loan Council could approach banks for issue of treasurybills on behalf of Government of . New South Wales,, following action by Government of New South Wales would be necessary: - (1) New South Wales to agree to assume responsibility for payment of interest on its public debt; (2) New South Wales to rejoin Loan Council; (3) New South Wales to pass and bring into operation legislation giving effect to decisions&#39; of Premiers Conference, including  reductions&#39; in expenditure. I am proposing to all States that Loan Council meetingbe held on 5th August, when question of requirements of States to meet deficits, New South Wales loan of &#163;4,000,000 maturing 10 th August, &#39; and loan programmes of States for present financial year would be considered. I also propose that Premiers Conference be held about 10th August when questions relating to rates of interest on bank deposits and advances, financial assistance by banks to governments and industry during present financial year, and result of National Conversion Loan would be considered. Representatives of banks would also be asked to attend Premiers Conference during discussions in which they were concerned. I am awaiting further advices from you before again approaching Loan Council. </para>
            <para>Scullin, for Chairman Loan Council. 22nd July, 1931. </para>
          </quote>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTION</title>
        <page.no>4182</page.no>
        <type>Questions</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>SEEKING MARKETS OVERSEAS</title>
          <page.no>4182</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4182</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>K1L</name.id>
              <electorate />
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator BARNES</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- On the 17th July, SenatorR. D. Elliott asked the. Minister representing the Minister for Markets the following questions, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice: -</inline></para>
          </talk.start>
          <list type="decimal-dotted">
            <item label="1.">
              <para>Is it a fact that the Leader of the Government in the Senate has on several occasions lately referred to representatives of the Government in various countries of the world as seeking markets for Australian products? </para>
            </item>
            <item label="2.">
              <para>If so, who are these representatives, where are they operating, and for how long have they been operating? </para>
            </item>
          </list>
          <para class="block">My remarks had reference to the activities of the Minister for Markets and other members of the Government who, at the Imperial Conference last year, discussed trade relations with representatives of other dominions present there, and also to the successful conclusion of the trade agreement with Canada by the Minister for Markets. Representatives of the Government helping in this work are - (a) The High Commissioner for Australia in Great Britain; (b) the Trade Commissioner for Australia in Canada. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. L.</inline> E. Macgregor; (c) the Australian TradeRepresentative in France, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. C.</inline> H.  Voss;  (d) the official secretary to the Commissioner-General for Australia in the United States of America, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. D.</inline> M. Dow. The services of <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. A.</inline> E. Hyland, the Director of Trade Publicity, who at present is carrying out publicity work in Great Britain with very satisfactory results, and whose services it is now proposed to use in Canada in order to take advantage of the opportunities which present themselves under the new trade agreement, are also utilized in connexion with the development of Australia&#39;s oversea trade. With the exception of <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Macgregor</inline> and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Hyland</inline> (in so far as his new duties are concerned), the officials named have been representing the Government for a period of more than two years. </para>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTION</title>
        <page.no>4182</page.no>
        <type>Questions</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS DELAYED</title>
          <page.no>4182</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4182</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JYH</name.id>
              <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
              <party>CP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>0</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
              <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- I should like to know if there is any reason why there should be so much delay in answering a simple question I submitted last week upon railway administration? </para>
          </talk.start>
        </speech>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4182</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>K1L</name.id>
              <electorate />
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator BARNES</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- I understand that the reply to the honorable senator&#39;s question is now under consideration. I regret the delay, but it cannot be avoided. </para>
          </talk.start>
        </speech>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4182</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JZD</name.id>
              <electorate>QUEENSLAND</electorate>
              <party />
              <role />
              <in.gov>0</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">FOLL, Hattil</name>
              <name role="display">Senator FOLL</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- Twice recently I have asked questions in regard to the proposals of the Government with reference to purchasers of homes under the housing scheme and the war service homes scheme, and also in regard to superannuation economy. I should like to know when I may expect a reply ? </para>
          </talk.start>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4182</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K1L</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator BARNES</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The matter of the purchasers of homes is now under consideration. I regret that I cannot give the honorable senator any information in regard to superannuation economy. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>ESTIMATES 1931-32</title>
        <page.no>4182</page.no>
        <type>miscellaneous</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <speech>
        <talk.start>
          <talker>
            <page.no>4182</page.no>
            <time.stamp />
            <name.id>K1L</name.id>
            <electorate />
            <party>ALP</party>
            <role />
            <in.gov>1</in.gov>
            <first.speech>0</first.speech>
            <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
            <name role="display">Senator BARNES</name>
          </talker>
          <para>- I lay on the  table - </para>
        </talk.start>
        <quote>
          <para>Estimates of Receipts and Expenditure for the year ending the 30th June, 1932. </para>
        </quote>
      </speech>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTION</title>
        <page.no>4182</page.no>
        <type>Questions</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>STATUTE OF WESTMINSTER</title>
          <page.no>4182</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <interjection>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4182</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>K0F</name.id>
              <electorate />
              <party />
              <role />
              <in.gov>0</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">PEARCE, George</name>
              <name role="display">Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE</name>
            </talker>
            <para>asked the Leader of the Government in the Senate, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
          </talk.start>
        </interjection>
        <quote>
          <para>Is it the intention of the Government to bring before the Senate a resolution to approve of the Statute of Westminster, so that both Houses of the Parliament shall be able to express their views on this most important question affecting the constitutional powers of the Parliament ? </para>
        </quote>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4182</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>K1L</name.id>
              <electorate />
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator BARNES</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- Yes. As it is desirable that the resolution should be passed in the same form by both Houses, and as certain amendments have been proposed in another place, it is desirable that the resolution should be dealt with consecutively and not simultaneously. </para>
          </talk.start>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTION</title>
        <page.no>4183</page.no>
        <type>Questions</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>IMPORTATION OF POSTAGE STAMPS</title>
          <page.no>4183</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4183</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>KP8</name.id>
              <electorate>WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
              <party />
              <role />
              <in.gov>0</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">JOHNSTON, Edward</name>
              <name role="display">Senator E B JOHNSTON</name>
            </talker>
            <para>asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Customs, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
          </talk.start>
          <list type="decimal-dotted">
            <item label="1.">
              <para>What duties, charges, or restrictions are imposed on the importation of new and used postage stamps into the Commonwealth? </para>
            </item>
            <item label="2.">
              <para>How long have such charges been in force ? </para>
            </item>
            <item label="3.">
              <para>Have philatelic societies objected to these restrictions ? </para>
            </item>
            <item label="4.">
              <para>Is it proposed to afford any relief in this matter ? </para>
            </item>
          </list>
        </speech>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4183</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JVF</name.id>
              <electorate>NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role>Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Works and Railways</role>
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">DOOLEY, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator DOOLEY</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- The answers to the honorable senator&#39;s questions are as follow :  - </para>
          </talk.start>
          <list type="decimal-dotted">
            <item label="1.">
              <para>There are no restrictions on the importation of such goods, but they are subject to payment of primage duty and sales tax. The present rates are 10 per cent, ad valorem and 6 per cent, respectively, and operated from 11th July, 1931. </para>
            </item>
            <item label="2.">
              <para>Primage duty and sales tax were first imposed on 10th July, 1930, and 18th August, 1930, respectively, the rate being 2&#189; per cent, in each case. Primage duties on these goods have been as follows: - On and after 10th July, 1930, <inline font-style="italic">2&#189;</inline> per cent, ad valorem; on and after 0th November, 1930, 4 per cent, ad valorem; on and after 11th July, 1931, 10 per cent, ad valorem. Sales tax has been imposed thus - On and after 18th August, 1930, <inline font-style="italic">2&#189;</inline> per cent.; on and after ll,th July, 1931, C per cent. </para>
            </item>
            <item label="3.">
              <para>Representations have been made to the  Department of Trade and Customs in regard to the exemption from primage duty of postage  stamps sent on approval to dealers and collectors. </para>
            </item>
            <item label="4.">
              <para>Relief has been granted by an arrangement that provides that, where stamps are received on approval, duty is only finally collected on the stamps actually retained. </para>
            </item>
          </list>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTION</title>
        <page.no>4183</page.no>
        <type>Questions</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>BUTTER SUBSTITUTE</title>
          <page.no>4183</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4183</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JVF</name.id>
              <electorate />
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">DOOLEY, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator DOOLEY</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- Information is  being obtained in reference to a question  asked by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Hayes</inline> relating to the manufacture and sale in Victoria of a butter substitute. </para>
          </talk.start>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTION</title>
        <page.no>4183</page.no>
        <type>Questions</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>DARWIN ABORIGINES: MEDICAL EXAMINATION</title>
          <page.no>4183</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4183</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JQP</name.id>
              <electorate>QUEENSLAND</electorate>
              <party />
              <role />
              <in.gov>0</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">COOPER, Walter</name>
              <name role="display">Senator COOPER</name>
            </talker>
            <para>asked the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, upon <inline font-style="italic">notice -</inline></para>
          </talk.start>
          <list type="decimal-dotted">
            <item label="1.">
              <para>Ts it a fact that, owing to the compulsory &#34;medical and &#39;physical examinations of the aboriginals at Darwin, a number of adults have &#34;gone bush <inline font-style="italic">&#34;?</inline></para>
            </item>
            <item label="2.">
              <para>If so, will the Government insist upon the adoption of more humane and kindly methods in dealing with aboriginals, in place of purely scientific methods ? </para>
            </item>
          </list>
        </speech>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4183</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JVF</name.id>
              <electorate />
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">DOOLEY, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator DOOLEY</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- Inquiries are being made into the matter mentioned by the honorable senator. </para>
          </talk.start>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>CUSTOMSTARIFF (CANADIAN PREFERENCE)</title>
        <page.no>4183</page.no>
        <type>miscellaneous</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <para>Bill returned from the House of Representatives with a message intimating, that it had made the amendment requested by the Senate. </para>
      <para>Bill (on motion by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Dooley)</inline> read a third time. </para>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>DEBT CONVERSION AGREEMENT BILL</title>
        <page.no>4183</page.no>
        <type>bill</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <para>Bill received from the House of Representatives. </para>
      <para>Standing and sessional orders suspended, and bill (on motion by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Dooley)</inline> read a first time. </para>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>Second Reading</title>
          <page.no>4183</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4183</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JVF</name.id>
              <electorate>New South WalesAssistant Minister</electorate>
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">DOOLEY, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator DOOLEY</name>
            </talker>
            <para>.   -  I move - </para>
          </talk.start>
          <quote>
            <para>That the bill be now  read a second  time. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">This is a bill to give approval to an agreement made between the Commonwealth and all the States to authorize the Commonwealth to arrange a conversion of all Commonwealth and State debts payable in Australia. The conversion is to be based on the terms and conditions set out in the Commonwealth Debt Conversion Bill, which is now awaiting the royal assent. The agreement has been signed by the Prime Minister and all the State Premiers, and is subject to ratification by the Commonwealth and State Parliaments. The presentation of the agreement has been somewhat delayed while eminent counsel and Commonwealth and State law officers have discussed and settled the terms of the agreement. The principle of the bill is so well known that there is no need for me to discuss it further. </para>
          <para>
            <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Sir GEORGE</inline>PEARCE (Western Australia) &#91;3.17&#93;.  -  There is really nothing in this measure which the Senate could very well alter since it merely cites the Debt Conversion Agreement arrived at between the Commonwealth and the States which has already been signed by all the parties to it. The clauses of the bill are of a purely machinery character. This is the final stage of the debt conversion programme, and I  am sure that every one desires that the measure should become law as soon as possible. I support the second reading. </para>
          <para>Question resolved in the affirmative. </para>
          <para>Bill read a second time and passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate. </para>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTION</title>
        <page.no>4184</page.no>
        <type>Questions</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <subdebate.1>
        <subdebateinfo>
          <title>ESTIMATES AND BUDGET PAPERS 1931-32</title>
          <page.no>4184</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo>
        <para>Additions, NewWorks, Buildings, Etc. </para>
        <para>Debate resumed from the 21st July <inline font-style="italic">(vide</inline> page 4122), on motion by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Dooley</inline> - </para>
        <quote>
          <para>That the papers be printed. </para>
        </quote>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4184</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>K1L</name.id>
              <electorate>Victoria</electorate>
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role>VicePresident of the Executive Council</role>
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator BARNES</name>
            </talker>
            <para>. - Yesterday the Leader of the Opposition <inline font-weight="bold">(Senator Pearce)</inline> directed the attention of the Senate to what he alleged had been done by the Government in connexion with the reduction of Public Service expenditure, and the maternity allowance. The right honorable gentleman alleged that had the Government given effect to the suggestions that were made some months ago by members of the Opposition, there would not have been any need for such drastic cuts as have been made. The ideas of the Government regarding the methods that should be adopted for the effective and economical administration of the affairs of this country were placed before this Parliament in legislative form ; but, unfortunately, we found ourselves not sufficiently powerful in the Senate to secure the passage of measures that were agreed to by another place, and which, in our opinion, would have enabled us to avoid the present cuts. The Government was bombed out of its trenches, and, like the soldiers at Mons, was compelled, by the force of the opposing numbers in the Senate, to retreat to fresh territory. It has had to accept the only olive branch that has been held out, and to submit only those proposals that it had a possibility of passing through the Senate. </para>
          </talk.start>
          <para>One factor in our present situation that cannot be laid at the door of any party is the fall that has taken place in the prices. of our primary products, principally wheat and wool. None of us could have prevented that occurrence. It &#34;was brought about because of the fact that, in the majority of cases, other countries are in a worse position than Australia, bad though our situation is. People in other parts of the world would be only too glad to consume the primary products of this country, but they have nothing with which to purchase them, and at the prices ruling it does not pay our primary producers to place them on themarket. The national revenue of Australia has declined almost electrically by &#163;200,000,000 a year. That fact makes it easily understandable why Australia is confronting such grave difficulties, and why she cannot find employment for her people. </para>
          <para>The Government has been blamed because it has imposed a tariff on many commodities that were being imported into this country when it assumed office. It is said that that has caused certain, of our troubles to arise. At <inline font-style="italic">the-</inline> present juncture, primary produce is of very little value to Australia, because she cannot get from it sufficient to buy in other countries the commodities that she needs. This is a young country, however, and the Government is determined so to develop it as to make it as nearly as possible self-supporting and self-sufficient. But that cannot be done merely by growing wheat and wool. The young men and women of Australia are among the most highly educated in the world. When they leave our schools they go into the industries of this country, and because of the training that is given, it is possible for a mere boy to invent a machine that will, perhaps, displace 500 men. The problem that confronts us is, what is to be done with those 500 men? This problem is not confined to Australia, but is world-wide. There appears to me to be only one remedy. There are in Australia, and in other countries, some very earnest men and women who say that the only cure is to lengthen the hours of labour and to reduce the wages that are paid. What sense would there be in lengthening hours, when one machine can displace 500 men ? That machine should be at the service of the people; and if the invention is worth twopence, it ought to be the means of . restricting the hours of labour, of making life easier, and of bringing a greater measure of comfort, ease  and contentment to the human race. All over the world the circumstances of millions of people are similar to those of many of our people. A large number of the best men in Australia are to-day walking the roads. They are willing and able to work, and are skilled in the work they want to perform, but none is offering. Surely such a state of affairs should be the concern, not only of the Government, but of every person in the community ! In this matter the Government can claim the sympathy of the Opposition and expect . to receive it. It was faced with this position when it brought forward what it considered would provide a remedy, but it did not receive the sympathetic consideration of the Opposition in this chamber, and its proposals were defeated. Yesterday, <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Foll</inline> spoke of the shortcomings of this Government. He omitted to mention that although it has been in office for eighteen months, it has not been in power. That being so, it is unreasonable to expect any government in the period mentioned, to remedy the many wrongs clone by previous administrations over a period of fifteen years: </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4185</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JRW</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">CRAWFORD, Thomas</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Crawford</name>
              </talker>
              <para>-  Mention a few of those things. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4185</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K1L</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator BARNES</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I will. The previous government so mishandled the finances of this country that during the last year of its administration it was twice refused credit in London. It adopted a policy of borrow, boom and burst, with the result that when this Government came into power it was faced with a Herculean task to overcome the difficulties that confronted it. These were not to be removed by the waving of a magic wand. For eighteen months now this Government has been endeavouring to straighten out the affairs of this country with a view to establishing the confidence of overseas investors in its capacity to carry on and meet its obligations. I am not sure that&#39; we have quite succeeded yet, but we have done a great &#34;deal in that direction and I anticipate that, within the next month or so, we shall have put our finances on a satisfactory basis. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>The reduction of soldiers&#39;, invalid and old-age pensions is one of the most distasteful tasks that has ever been under taken by the Ministry. I am also sure that these economies: are equally unpleasant to honorable senators opposite. But we all have to admit that these severe cuts are unavoidable if we are to pay our way as a nation. Our invalid and old-age pensioners, -and our war pensioners will acknowledge that reduced payment is better than nothing, and they can rest assured that if action had not been taken to check the financial drift, the Government would have been unable to meet its obligations. </para>
          <para>It has been charged against this Government that it has cut down our defence expenditure to a dangerous limit. Our justification is the definite trend of thought in all countries towards disarmament. No one will deny that expenditure on world armaments is crippling practically every country. No nation can prosper if it is compelled to maintain huge standing armies of men producing nothing, and to spend vast sums upon armaments. Leaders of public thought in all countries are directing their attention to this wasteful andwholly useless &#39; expenditure, the sole purpose of which is to cause the destruction of human life, and are endeavouring to persuade their people that only good will accrue to them from a policy of disarmament, Australia is so isolated that even if an aggressor succeeded in landing armed forces on our soil, we should, even with our limited defence resources, be able to overcome them. <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Foll</inline> stressed the importance of an efficient air defence force. I heartily agree with him. Ten years ago in this chamber, in advocating this policy, I stated that if we directed our attention to the perfection of our air defences we could, to a large extent at all events, dispense with standing armies and battleships, and need not fear foreign aggression. But I do not wish to unduly delay the Senate. I think that, on the whole, honorable senators opposite have dealt generously with this Government. My only complaint is that they have not passed those measures which we considered necessary to meet our present difficulties. </para>
          <para class="block">SenatorR.  D. ELLIOTT  (Victoria)  &#91;3:37&#93;.  - Before dealing with the budget, which I approach with a good deal of bewilderment, I should like to refer briefly to one or two points  that have been mentioned by Ministers. Yesterday, <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly,</inline> defending the tariff policy of this Government, invited honorable senators on this side to specify items in respect of &#34;which the tariff was adversely affecting the interests of the people. I shall endeavour to do so, and in very few words I invite him to consider the significance of the statistical information relating to the variation since 1911, in nominal and real wages. In 1911, the average nominal wage in industry was 51s. 3d. per week; in 1930, it was 99s. 4d.; an increase of 92 per cent. By contrast, real wages, by which I mean their purchasing power, in 1911 was still 51s. 3d. per week, and in 1930, 53s. 7d., an increase of only 2s. 4d. If the honorable senator will take these figures for his text, and study the problem carefully, he may be brought to realize that the present high tariff is having anything but a beneficial effect upon industry, and the people generally. The Leader of the Senate <inline font-weight="bold">(Senator Barnes)</inline> just now expressed regret that honorable senators on &#34;this side had not passed certain measures which the Government sent up to this chamber. Obviously, the honorable gentleman had in mind the fiduciary note issue proposal, which the Senate very properly rejected. It must be disturbing to many honorable senators to know that members of the present Ministry still entertain the thought that an inflation of the currency will get Australia out of her present troubles. Again, I suggest that Ministers should study the history of currency inflation in other countries. Experience has shown that disaster inevitably follows in the train of any such legislation. It surprises me also to find that we have in responsible positions to-day men who believe that Australia can be selfsupporting and self-sufficient. That is the reflection of an attitude of mind which inclines to the belief that we are super men. The sooner those in responsible positions realize that we are governed by world economic conditions the better it will be for Australia. </para>
          <para>This budget has been misnamed, even as the party which is supposed to represent the working people of Australiathe present Labour party - is misnamed.&#34; </para>
          <para class="block">Instead of this being a Theodore-Scullin budgetit should be known as the TheodoreScullinLyonsLathamPearce budget. My understanding of the position is that the present budget is based almost entirely on the agreement entered into at the conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers and Leaders of the Opposition held at Melbourne in May last. Any praise or blame for it should be shared by the Leaders of the Opposition as well as by the Leaders of the Governments. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4186</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JRW</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">CRAWFORD, Thomas</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Crawford</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- It will not smell sweet under&#34; any name. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT.- My bewilderment increases when I realize that those leaders, representing both Governments and the Oppositions, are so far removed from a knowledge of business in Australia as to believe that this country can go on increasing the already heavy, burden which taxation places on industry; The effect of that taxation is to limit enterprise and to discourage people from expanding their businesses. I had hoped that the leaders of the Opposition, at least, would have realized that point and emphasized it at the recent conference in Melbourne. Apparently, it was missed ; I know not why. I hope that it was not because those who attended the conference were so far removed from the experience of business as to fail to appreciate the awful plight of business to-day. The conference resolutions as embodied in this budget effect reductions in salaries and wages. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4186</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KPT</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">KNEEBONE, Henry</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Kneebone</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- There is more reduction than construction. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
        </speech>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4186</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JYH</name.id>
              <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
              <party>CP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>0</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
              <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
            </talker>
            <para>- While reducing , the purchasing power of the people, the budget does not do anything to reduce the cost of living. It is the old story of concentration, not on the standard of living, but on the cost of living. Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition <inline font-weight="bold">(Senator Pearce)</inline> spoke of his determination to reduce the tariff. I feel that the Melbourne conference presented that opportunity. When dealing with the reduced purchasing power of the people, something ought&#39; to have been done to lower the cost of living. That opportunity, however, was not availed of. There should have been some stipulation that a reduction of wages should be accompanied by a fall in the cost of living as reflected in the tariff. Those important factors were overlooked by all the leaders who participated in the conference. I do not know whether that was because the leaders of one party in this Parliament were apparently ignored. Are we to understand that that party alone represents the best interests of this country, the interests both of business enterprise and of the workers? I shall not attempt to answer that question. </para>
          </talk.start>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4187</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The Government consulted the Country party&#39;s step-father - the Nationalist party. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT.- I know of no blood relationship existing between the two parties. The Minister is attempting to throw sand. Had the leaders of the Country party been consulted, I feel sure that a definite suggestion would have been made that a reduction in the cost of living should go hand in hand with a reduction of the earning power of the&#39; people. </para>
          <para>
            <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline>reminded us yesterday that the country began to wake up when the present Government came into power. There is evidence of that awakening in  the speech which the present Prime Minister <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Scullin)</inline> delivered in. the middle of June. The right honorable gentleman then said that it seemed to him that we were living under conditions that were somewhat artificial. </para>
          <para>Let me go a little further, and deal with the speeches of <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Scullin</inline> and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Theodore,</inline> which I believe are bound up with this budget. My bewilderment increases when I go through the document and try to reconcile the figures quoted by the Prime Minister in the middle of June with those contained in the budget papers, prepared, I understand, at the end of June. In not one instance can I reconcile the two sets of figures. I grant that they are based upon the then existing conditions; but whichever way we look at them - whether we take them as they are, or have regard to the economies which are to be effected - they vary considerably, the difference ranging between &#163;200,000 and &#163;19,000,000. Does that variation mean that responsible Ministers are careless in -presenting figures to us, or that they have been misguided by their officials? If Ministers will snend an hour or two in comparing the figures they will find themselves bewildered. The Leader of the Government <inline font-weight="bold">(Senator Barnes)</inline> quoted figures to show that our national income has decreased by &#163;200,000,000 per annum, it being now only &#163;450,000,000. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Scullin</inline> pointed out that the expenditure of governments in Australia has risen to &#163;198,000,000 per annum. If we add to that amount the &#163;36,000,000 expended each year by municipalities, we arrive at the total governmental expenditure of &#163;234,000,000 per annum - and that in a country with a population of about 6,500,000 persons! In other words, the cost of government is 52 per cent, of the total national income. How is it possible for individuals to stand up against that cost, or for industries to be developed? That heavy cost places such a burden on industry that progress is impossible. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4187</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Does the honorable senator suggest a further reduction of old-age pensions? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4187</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That subject has been fully discussed within the last few days. The Prime Minister also pointed out that at that time there were 360,000 unemployed workers in Australia. Since then the number has been given as 400,000. The right honorable gentleman said, that it cost the governments of Australia &#163;9,000,000 a year to provide sustenance for the unemployed, and that, unless something was done, the cost would increase to &#163;12,000,000, or even &#163;14,000,000, a year. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4187</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- It will be at least &#163;12,000,000 this year. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4187</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I hold that the present maintenance system must be drastically reformed. Is money to the tune of &#163;9,000,000 per annum to be lavished on the maintenance of idleness? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4187</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The honorable senator has already denied men. the right to work ; now he would deny them the right to live. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4187</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- If the Minister will wait a moment, he will find that I do ; not deny any one the right to work. It is the present Government which has taken from men that right, because it has taken away the freedom, both of the workers and of those who could provide work for them. This expenditure, amounting, as the Minister says, to &#163; 12,000,000, is still being lavished on the maintenance of idleness without any serious attempt to organize work and create assets for this vast expenditure. The Government has done nothing to organize this labour lying idle. It is subsidizing idleness and declaring with pride that it  is costing &#163;12,000,000 to do so. This idleness is eating into the very vitals of this country. Recently an employer applied at an unemployment camp in Sydney, where 1,000 men were idle, for 100 men for sleeper cutting, and only one man volunteered. One man out of 1,000! Such has been the effect of a policy of subsidizing idleness. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K1Z</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">RAE, Arthur</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Rae</name>
              </talker>
              <para>-What evidence has the honorable senator to support that statement? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The incident was reported in most of the newspapers of Australia on a recent date. I feel confident that the majority of the people are beginning to realize that  artificial and expensive methods of dealing with unemployment do not solve the problem of unemployment, but aggravate it. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- It will break the nation. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I am glad to hear the Minister say so, but why is the Government continuing this system? Why is it not facing the facts and doing something to rectify the position? Is it because there is no anxiety on its part to investigate the question, or is it that it is following the easiest course? These questions are suggested to me, because I understand that two Ministers during their period of office actually did not visit the headquarters of their departments. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- If the honorable senator is referring to the Defence Department, I was Minister for three weeks only. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I understand that a Defence Minister was in office for three weeks, and during that period did not visit his headquarters. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I was in Western Australia all the time and had not the opportunity to do so. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K2L</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">REID, Matthew</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Reid</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Where do the motor cars come in? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4188</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I have not investigated the matter of motor cars. I have given my attention to matters of a constructive and more serious nature. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>In its endeavour to secure revenue in order to make good the nation&#39;s deficit, the Government proposes to impose extra taxation on the people who, it says, can afford to pay, whereas the plan adopted at the Premiers Conference was intended to spread the burden so that there should be no privileged section of the community. The policy adopted by the present Government in this respect makes one believe that democracy is an instrument for destroying privileges. The people are divided into two classes, the taxers and the taxed. The consequences are too well known for me to retail them. The number of voters on the Commonwealth electoral roll is 3,600,000. Of this number only 268,000, or 8 per cent., paid federal income tax in the year 1929. The rest, over 92 per cent, of the voters, have no individual sense of responsibility for the financial future of the country, though, in fact, it is the greatest of their responsibilities. The rank and file of the community still believe, pathetically, that the State is a &#39;bottomless purse. That notion, as a little further experience will prove, is a bottomless fallacy, and it is the duty of the Government to make that clear to all sections of the community. Disraeli taught us that direct taxation should not be based on large exemptions, that no class should be relieved from contributing taxation required for the benefit of all, and that direct taxation should be as general as indirect. It is a principle which still awaits adoption by a courageous government. Is it right that all enterprise, ability and success should be penalized by those who hold the reins of power at the present time, and who speak with pride of the increase in direct taxation on the minority of the electors? <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Scullin</inline> commenting upon the taxation proposals, said - </para>
          <quote>
            <para>This, it is expected, will stimulate business activity, and promote employment. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">A little further on he said - </para>
          <quote>
            <para>Were it not for the gravity of the situation, nothing would have induced the Government to accept this plan. Except that there is no alternative but default, with consequent disaster to Australia, some of these proposals would not have received a moment&#39;s consideration*. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">What confidence can we have in this Government? If it had been given freedom of action, would the legislation passed within the last week or two have been introduced? I may mention in passing that the figures given by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Scullin</inline> do not agree with those supplied in the budget papers. I come now to the question of the revival of industry. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Scullin</inline> said - </para>
          <quote>
            <para>One of the most important problems with which we are faced is to provide work for our large army of unemployed. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">A little further on he said - </para>
          <quote>
            <para>I hope that it will give a sense of security to the people, and that it will enable business to revive, and moneys to be released for employment in this country. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">The Government has chilled confidence to the heart, frozen enterprise, deterred investment in industry, and discouraged the natural play of employment-making factors ; it has retarded a &#39;business revival, which would come much sooner if the present political misery were terminated. The present welter of political weakness and confusion is a disgrace to British common sense. </para>
          <para>I come now to what <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Theodore</inline> had to say. He said with pride that the income tax had risen from a pre-war total of &#163;2,800,000 to a present total of &#163;26,000,000, which I ask honorable senators to bear in mind is provided by 8 per cent, of the total voters of Australia. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4189</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K2L</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">REID, Matthew</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Reid</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Is that something to be proud of? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4189</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That is the feature of our taxation in which we are asked to take pride, but the effect of this heavy impost on industry is that it is hindered in its development. Industry cannot stand up against this ever increasing burden. Let us look further into <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Theodore&#39;s</inline> financial mind. He said - </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <quote>
            <para>The stoppage of the flow of loan moneys, which were cut off suddenly in 1929, deprived the nation of &#163;30,000,000 a year. In these two ways alone the national income has been reduced by more than &#163;90,000,000 a year. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">He there referred definitely to loan moneys as income-! There we have an example of the great financial genius who is apparently dominating the </para>
          <para class="block">Federal Parliament to-day. A few moments ago I heard an interjection by a Minister in regard to the monetary policy pursued by the banks. Those institutions are always the target for the shafts &#39;of Labour. But if the people&#39; who level charges against the banks would only peruse the pages of Australian history, they would find that during the last 100 years the activities of these institutions have been  devoted almost entirely to a development of Australia almost unprecedented in the world&#39;s history to the lasting advantage of the country at large. It is the policy of the present Government which has forced them to adopt the attitude of the man who lends an umbrella on a fine day and demands its return when it rains. The effect of that policy has been to restrict, damage and even kill, the credit of the country, and to cause suffering to every individual in the community, even to the workmen whose interests are supposed to be represented by the party now in power. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Theodore</inline> went on to say that - </para>
          <quote>
            <para>The primary producers have been almost ruined; they probably are bearing a greater share of the loss occasioned by the depression than any other class, with the exception of those workers who have been entirely deprived of their employment. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">I think we have heard enough about unemployment to-day, but what has the Government done for the farmers? It  has  made promise after promise, hut its promises have been of straw, and the farmers to-day are so disgusted that they pay no regard whatever to any promise or statement made by the present Government. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4189</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KOZ</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">HOARE, Albert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Hoare</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- What about the 4s. per bushel on wheat? The honorable senator did not vote for that. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4189</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I think we have, heard sufficient to show that the Government was never in earnest in its statements about that 4s. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4189</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JZD</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">FOLL, Hattil</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Foll</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- As a matter of fact, it is a good thing for the Government the bill did not go through. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4189</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That is so. I was away on the other side of the world at the time. but I understand that the Government, having&#39; learned that if the bill was forced through at a certain sitting it would have no chance of passing, followed the course of pushing it through during that sitting. The Government is so anxious to help the primary producers of Australia that it has not yet awakened to a realization of the conditions existing in Russia to-day. A shipload of timber recently reached our shores, but the Government is so ignorant of the conditions existing in Russia, although it was fortified by the action taken by the Canadian Government, in prohibiting Russian goods, that it allowed this timber to come into Australia. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4190</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Why does not the honorable senator say what is preventing the Government from developing the paper pulp industry? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4190</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- It is not for any member of the Opposition to state what object the Government has in view. It is the&#39; duty of the Government to give a lead to the country; but the present Government has given the people no constructive lead. Its lead has been in all cases in the direction of destruction, but fortunately, in that respect, it has always been blocked by the Senate. The effect of its policy has been to increase unemployment so that the percentage is now 25.8 against 4.7 in 1911. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>It is difficult to deal with figures in the budget, because the general Estimates of revenue and expenditure were not tabled in this chamber until this afternoon. The only proposal the Government has to balance the budget is to impose further taxation on the small percentage of the electors that it thinks possesses the resources out of which extra taxation can be drawn. Unfortunately, there is no Minister in the Senate who can give us information on matters affecting the budget. I should like to touch on the ordinary votes of departments. The proposed expenditure on the Prime Minister&#39;s Department for next year is &#163;251,900. I wonder whether it is not possible to make a careful survey of the sub-departments of the main departments in order to see if we cannot materially reduce the . overhead charges connected with them. I have in mind the branch of the Prime Minister&#39;s Department which deals with science and industry. It is a .branch of Commonwealth activities which is doing astoundingly good work for Australia, and it is not my desire to restrict these activities. </para>
          <para class="block">On the contrary, I should like to encourage the department to greater effort for the benefit of the community. I feel, however, that certain overhead charges may be eliminated with advantage. I know that the organization works in cooperation with institutions in the Mother Country, and I was wondering whether with the money provided for this branch of the Prime Minister&#39;s Department we could not ensure greater possibilities for advancement and greater opportunities for the exchange of experience, and whether the money could not be devoted to a direct contribution to larger organizations in Great Britain, conditional upon adequate subordinate organizations being set up hy them in Australia to study our affairs. Under such a scheme Commonwealth officers could work even more closely with those in other parts of the world. Some of our scientists could interchange with those in other portions of the Empire and thus obtain greater experience and continuity of employment. At the same time we could eliminate a good deal of the unnecessary overhead expense directly concerned with the institute. </para>
          <para>The expenditure in connexion with the Attorney-General&#39;s Department is to be reduced this year to &#163;156,000 as compared with &#163;179,000 for the past financial year. Unfortunately, I am unable to examine these figures in detail, but if that department displays as much effort in other directions as it has in trying to defeat parliamentary government, as we have known it in the past, in connexion with the issue of regulations under the Transport Workers Act, I have no hesitation in saying that it is over-staffed to an extent that would astonish &#39; us if we were able to obtain details. </para>
          <para>I come now to the Department of Trade and Customs. Although the revenue last year fell from &#163;41,000,000 to &#163;28,000,000 the expenditure was reduced by only &#163;35,000. Surely with closer  supervision over that department economies could have been effected in keeping with the reduced work involved. </para>
          <para>The estimated expenditure in the Department of Public Works for the present financial year is &#163;183,000. It is the responsibility of that department merely to supervise additions, new works, and buildings, which, including the activities of the Postmaster-General&#39;s Department covering telegraphic and telephonic work, amounts to &#163;829,000. Is &#163;183,000 expended annually in supervising an expenditure of &#163;829,000? </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4191</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JVF</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DOOLEY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Dooley</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Various banks and other public buildings are in course of construction. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT.- I understand that the cost of such buildings is included. I maintain that if a staff costing &#163;183,000 a year is required to supervise work of the value I have mentioned, there is extravagance of a nature that should make one blush. I hold that that amount of work could be undertaken by a staff which should not cost more than &#163;10,000 a year. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4191</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JVF</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DOOLEY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Dooley</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The alternative would be to discharge all hands. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT.- The alternative is to put the country on an even keel so that something like a reasonable financial outlook will be taken by all government departments. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4191</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JVF</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DOOLEY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Dooley</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- And there would be more unemployment. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4191</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- If governmental expenditure were reduced, employment would be increased as the result of diminished direct taxation on industry, which, as I mentioned earlier, has reached such a high point that industry is quite unable to bear it. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4191</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KOJ</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">HAYS, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Herbert Hays</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Let private enterprise do the work. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT.- Yes, but it is a part of this Government&#39;s policy not to allow private enterprise to do anything which can be undertaken by the Government. The advisers of the Government will not countenance private enterprise because they are- endeavouring to justify the expenditure of their departments at great expense to the Commonwealth. &#34;When a public service inspector is about to visit a department, the officers accumulate on their tables evidence of the volume of work they are supposed to be performing. In the&#34; case of the Defence Department I am informed that confidential documents have been lying on some of the clerks&#39; tables for weeks awaiting the arrival of the inspector, so that he will be impressed with the tremendous amount of important work that is requiring the attention of the officials concerned. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4191</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That statement is grossly inaccurate. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT.- I suggest that if the Assistant Minister <inline font-weight="bold">(Senator Daly)</inline> paid an unexpected visit to many of the government departments he would, find that many of the officers have not sufficient work to occupy their time. I again direct his attention to the expenditure of &#163;183,000 for overhead, in the Department of Public &#34;Works, which is expended in supervising work to cost &#163;829,000. If a private contracting or engineering firm were to undertake such work, a staff costing about &#163;10,000 would be found adequate. In this department a good deal of unnecessary duplication exists. The State governments have Works Departments quite capable of undertaking public works under the supervision of Commonwealth officers. When Commonwealth works of an unusual character have to be undertaken a State staff could surely be loaned for the purpose. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4191</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JZD</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">FOLL, Hattil</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Foll</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- It would be interesting to know what the Canberra Forestry School is costing the Commonwealth annually. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT.- Quite so. I happen to know something about engineering activities and overhead expenses; but I have not a knowledge of the internal &#39;administration of the Works Department. I recognize, however, that the Minister has not been well advised in matters affecting public works which, I submit, are not being conducted in the most efficient or economical manner. I know that it is the desire of departmental heads to appoint a large and expensive staff, and tq occupy a big suite of offices in order to make their own positions appear more important. In the circumstances I Have outlined, I should like the Minister controlling the Works Department to thoroughly investigate its operations, to see if some relief cannot be given to the taxpayers who are suffering so much to-day in consequence of heavy and unnecessary taxation. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4191</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JVF</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DOOLEY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Dooley</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I shall supply the honorable senator with some figures concerning the Works Department. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT.- I now wish to refer to the Department of Health. 1 am not very familiar with the activities of this department, but I feel that an annual expenditure of &#163;109,300 is excessive, particularly when every State Government conducts a Health Department. The Commonwealth Government could have one or two officers working in cooperation with the State officers in health matters, but I suppose that such a policy would not be in keeping with the dignity of that department. Drastic reductions in this department would result in further money- being made available to industry and in the taxpayers being thus relieved of unnecessary burdens. Such a relief from taxation would encourage industrial activity and create employment for many of the 400,000 wretched men who are now, unfortunately, out of work. </para>
          <para>The estimated expenditure on the Department of Markets for the present financial year is &#163;99,000, as against &#163;119,000 during the preceding financial year. As we should be continually seeking new markets, this is one of the most important initiating departments in the Commonwealth. What is this department doing? Judging from the answers I received to some questions I submitted to the Leader of the Government in the Senate <inline font-weight="bold">(Senator Barnes)</inline> some few days ago, it is not as active as it should be. Here, again, there is evidence of unnecessary duplication. Recently I attended a conference of butter factory managers in Melbourne, and the temperature of many of the factory managers present went up by 10 degrees in consequence, of the friction existing between Commonwealth and State butter inspectors. At that conference the managers declared, almost in unison, that one system of inspection was sufficient, and that, if provision were made in that direction, there would be something .in the nature of uniformity. Under the existing arrangement, there is endless conflict and confusion. If honorable members will study the report of that conference, they will find that the factory managers were in direct conflict with the federal inspector and that he was in conflict with the State inspectors. The industry is in such a state, owing to overlapping in the matter of inspection, that it does not know where it is. The present system is disturbing the industry, and seriously interfering with the profitable marketing of butter. Notwithstanding these disadvantages, the Government still persists in maintaining unnecessarily expensive departments. There is no need for any duplication in the matter of butter inspection. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4192</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Even the poor_ consumers have to pay an extra 4d. a lb. for the- right to eat it. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4192</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The honorable senator is endeavouring to throw sand in the eyes of honorable senators. The objections which exist in connexion with the inspection of butter are also to be found in relation to the inspection of fruit. These inspections should all be co-ordinated under one head. A department which is to cost &#163;99,000 during this financial year should be efficient enough to secure something in the nature of new and permanent overseas markets. In this department there is great scope for economies, and efforts should have been made in the direction I have indicated before a reduction of pensions was suggested. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>I propose now to refer to the Department of Transport. I am not conversant with the sub-departments of this branch; but I understand that the Navigation Act is administered by &#39;that department. According to the estimates, I find that last year &#163;36,000 was paid towards the construction of a new lighthouse steamer. This expenditure has been incurred while four such steamers are owned by the department, two of which are out of commission. One of the vessels out of commission has been offered for sale, and the other is laid up. Is it reasonable to seek authority for the expenditure of additional money when vessels are lying idle? Moreover, the State governments have vessels in their lighthouse services which attend to lights within their harbours, while those in the Commonwealth service control coastal lights. Surely there is room for economy in the Navigation Department, in both lighthouse services and inspection of shipping. A vessel can proceed from Brisbane to Southport and up to the Gulf of Carpentaria on the certificate of a Queensland State officer, but, if it should enter interstate waters, a Commonwealth official must issue a .certificate. A steamer trading between, say, Renmark and Murray Bridge, on the river Murray, is subject to State inspection ; but, if it should enter Victoria, a Commonwealth certificate is necessary involving a special trip to the Murray. This, unnecessary duplication, which involves heavy expenditure, is of such&#39; a nature that I wonder that it does not make the Minister blush. There are other figures which could be analyzed in the same way; but I do not wish to be tempted too far in this fascinating subject. </para>
          <para class="block"> I now come to the question of receipts. &#34;We find that the revenue from customs and excise-has decreased from &#163;41,000,0.00 to an estimated amount of &#163;28,000,000. The Government estimates the customs revenue this year will be a little more than it was last year. Has a government any foresight at all if, under the present customs duties, it expects to obtain additional revenue this year? Ministers must have their&#39; tongues in their cheeks when they estimate a higher  revenue  from this source this year than was obtained last year. If we go a little further, we find that it is estimated the increased sales tax will return an additional &#163;3,000,000; the amount received last year was below the estimate. It is estimated that land taxation will be reduced ; but the Government is still optimistic. </para>
          <para>I come now to k income taxation. It is astounding to realize that the income tax collections last year were the greatest in the history of Australia. They increased from &#163;11,120,029 to &#163;13,604,374. The latter figure was &#163;3,500,000 over the estimate, which the Prime Minister <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Scullin)</inline> issued only a fortnight before the budget was presented. </para>
          <para>The Government is to be congratulated upon the fact that its estimate of receipts on account of deaths was greatly exceeded. When one realizes the difficulties under which men of affairs have been labouring during the last year, one does not wonder at it. Notwithstanding the decreased values of properties and other assets, the revenue from this source exceeded the estimate by &#163;268,865. I hope that the Government is proud of the achievement. It is pessimistic, how- ever, in regard to the probable receipts from the same source for the current financial, year. </para>
          <para>I notice that. the payment this year on account of interest, sinking fund, and exchange is estimated to decrease by over &#163;4,000,000. I have no comment to make upon that; but I should like to know how the decrease has been made possible. </para>
          <para>A few days ago I asked to be supplied with particulars concerning the working of the Commonwealth Railways. The expenditure on this item in 1930-31 was &#163;1,056,000, and the receipts &#163;309,000, the loss thus being &#163;747,000. The expenses are mounting . all the time, while the revenue is coming down. Last week I asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport if he would furnish details of applications that had been made to the Arbitration Court by the railway departments of the States. I understand that all the States have made application to the court and have secured a reduction of wages by 10 per cent. ; but I am told that the Commonwealth Government has not made such an application. Apparently it does not desire to do anything that will materially affect that happy state which causes the loss on the Commonwealth Railways to increase every year ! </para>
          <para>There are one or two points in the budget speech of the Treasurer to which I should like to direct attention. The deficit for the year 1930-31 amounted to &#163;10,756,899, although the estimate of the Prime Minister a fortnight before the budget was delivered was &#163;14,000,000. The amount applied towards the redemption of Commonwealth debt was &#163;4,644,359. On the other hand, the war debt was reduced during the year by &#163;5,250,000. Did the Government apply the amount of &#163;4,644,359 to the reduction of the war debt? Surely the &#163;4,644,359 would  pur-chase  more on the open market than &#163;5,250,000 worth of stock! </para>
          <para>The expenditure on miscellaneous services was increased by &#163;255,000, the estimated expenditure being &#163;996,000. The increase of &#163;373,000 in the provision for overseas exchange more than accounts for the total increase under this head. </para>
          <para class="block">Yet we find that, in dealing with the Hoover plan, the Treasurer states - </para>
          <quote>
            <para>As these proposals have not yet been finally accepted by all the governments concerned, it was thought wise to prepare the budget on the position as it stands at present, and provision is made for paying the interest on our war debt, as well as for the receipt of reparation moneys. Should, however, the plan be brought into operation, the relief to the Commonwealth budget during 1931-32 will be &#163;4,028,000, so that the anticipated deficit of &#163;5,176,300 will be reduced to &#163;1,148,300. </para>
            <para>The benefit to the Commonwealth is arrived at as follows:- - </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">
            <graphic href="131332193107220_13_0.jpg" />
          </para>
          <para class="block">Yet on the previous page the statement was made that the provision for exchange in connexion with miscellaneous items amounts to only &#163;373,000 ! </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4194</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLachlan</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The point with which the honorable senator is now dealing is the Treasurer&#39;s statement regarding the relief that may be obtained from, the Hoover Plan. The two matters must be separated. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <para>SenatorR. D. ELLIOTT. - Under the heading, &#34; Conclusion &#34;, the Treasurer states - </para>
          <quote>
            <para>Australia and many other countries are passing through critical times. The outstanding causes of the trouble have been beyond the control of the Government. The effects of the external monetary system have been dogging our steps at every turn. All our attempts in the past twelve months to stimulate a recovery of trade, to maintain the stability and usefulness of our credit structure, to restore employment, and to secure to the workers and the primary producers their assured reward, have been frustrated by external events and influences. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">That is a point with which very few honorable senators who sit on this side will agree. </para>
          <para>I should like to emphasize that there can be no real trade recovery without a  return of confidence; and that that is not possible unless and until a wise and courageous government, no matter to what political party it may belong, not only inscribes public economy on its banner, but puts into practice its most rigid principles and drastically and ruthlessly reduces national expenses. Until the present rate of expenditure on hon-essential unproductive, and uneconomical services is drastically curtailed, there is little hope for the future. If industry is to thrive, it must expand. It cannot retain its competitive powers if it stagnates-; yet it must stagnate and decay unless capital is forthcoming for its expansion, and those who provide the capital are assured of a reasonable and legitimate profit. Unless the present uncertainty is removed, all that will remain for the working people will be an accumulation of socalled industrial and social reforms amidst the ruins of a former prosperity. The achievements of private enterprise and initiative, now so foolishly discouraged, have been the <inline font-style="italic">most</inline> potent factors in raising the standards of living during the last half century. We must follow figures, not ideals. We are dealing with realities, not the dreams of politicians. Our principal business should be to acquire an economic mastery of the natural resources that we possess. The Treasurer is not only entrusted with the task of finding the money to pay the bills that are presented . to him ; he is also the keeper of the nation&#39;s purse and the guardian of its credit. That is one of the essentials which is most generally overlooked by those who are in power in Australia to-day. Taxation must be lowered, expenditure must come down, and national credit must be conserved instead of being squandered. The cost of living must be. reduced if there is to be any hope for those amen who are now looking for employment. The well-being of a nation depends upon the continuous production of new wealth. A higher standard of living can never be brought about by the mere redistribution of the accumulated savings of the people. </para>
          <para>In conclusion, I would say that there is no difficulty ahead of us which cannot be overcome if we act with ordinary foresight and common sense, and in the spirit of goodwill and co-operation; provided the Government of the day will give  some security of tenure and some freedom from ever-changing legislation, and will apply British principles to the problems that confront us. </para>
        </speech>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4195</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>K09</name.id>
              <electorate>Tasmania</electorate>
              <party />
              <role />
              <in.gov>0</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
              <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
            </talker>
            <para>.- The honorable senator who preceded me referred to this budget as a fascinating document. I have always understood the term &#34; fascinating &#34; to mean &#34; attractive &#34;. To me, and to the people of Australia, there is nothing attractive in this budget. It is a budget that is unique in the history of the Commonwealth, and it must cause our people very grave concern. We all realize how serious is the position that confronts Australia to-day, and how essential it is that severe measures shall be adopted to correct it </para>
          </talk.start>
          <para>I wish first to deal with almost the last paragraph in the budget speech, in which the Treasurer makes the following statement : - </para>
          <quote>
            <para>The effects of the external monetary system have been dogging our steps at every turn. All our attempts in the past twelve months to stimulate a recovery of trade, to maintain the stability and usefulness of our credit structure, to restore employment and to secure to the workers and the primary producers their assured reward, have been frustrated by external events and influences. </para>
          </quote>
          <para class="block">I cannot agree&#34; that that statement truly represents what has occurred during the last twelve months, so far as this Government is concerned. Instead of its attempts having tended to a recovery of trade and to the maintenance of the stability aud usefulness of our credit structure, the few attempts that have &#39;been made - I say few advisedly, because little, or nothing, has been done during the last twelve months - have had the opposite result. Oan the Treasurer, or any member of the Government, point to any action by the Government during the last twelve months that h&#39;as tended to a recovery of trade in Australia? On the contrary, is it not a fact that all its actions have prejudiced the continuation of trade, diminished though it was? &#34; Honorable senators must be aware that those who are engaged in our most important industries have been so terrorised by the inaction of the Government that they have been considerably hampered in carrying on even at the diminished level at which trade stood in the year before last. No encouragement whatever has been given to those people to launch out, but, on the contrary, everything that has been done has helped to retard a recovery of trade. </para>
          <para>What has been done during the last twelve months to minimize to any extent the evil of unemployment that is in our midst? I have failed to find in the records of the Government a single instance of anything material having been done that would help to minimize the unemployed problem.  Nothing has been done to help our manufacturing concerns and our primary industries but it has been made more difficult than ever for many of those industries to be carried on. </para>
          <para>Yesterday we listened with very great attention to the remarks of <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline> in relation to the importation of certain commodities.  His  contention was that those commodities should be manufactured in Australia. To all intents and purposes the honorable senator was advocating a policy of exclusion with regard to trade relations with other countries, and in support of his view-point, he quoted certain figures relating to imports from the United Kingdom, France, Italy and the United States of America. Subsequently the honorable gentleman was good enough to supply me with the official list of imports, and I desire now to direct the attention of honorable senators to a number of the items, but with a different purpose in view. <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline> complained that in  1928-29  we imported from France, boots and shoes to the value of  &#163;13,000,  and from the United Kingdom to the value of  &#163;212,000.  Clearly the inference to be drawn from his remarks was that it was a national crime to allow even the importation of that comparatively small quantity of boots and shoes from the Mother Country and France. Apparently the honorable gentleman is unaware that for many years our boot and shoe manufacturers had practically captured the whole of the Australian market, and for some years were doing an important export- trade. I feel sure that when the honorable gentleman realizes this fact, he will regret that, as regards the importation of boots and shoes at all events, he advocated the exclusion of trade with other countries. I have studied the reports of the Tariff Board dealing with these items, and I find that our imports  of boots and shoes is less than 4 per cent, of the total Australian consumption. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Those figures relate to the trade position after, this Government came into power. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- They refer to the trade during the year prior to the accession to office of this Government. As . I have stated, at one time we had an important export trade in boots and shoes, but for reasons which are known to all who are familiar with the industrial and economic history of Australia, that trade has almost disappeared. In 1919-20, our exports of boots and shoes totalled in value ?828,622; in 1927-28, they had declined to ?20,000- a clear loss of over ?800,000. Practically the whole of our trade with New Zealand has gone. In 1919-20 our exports to the sister dominion totalled ?575,000; in 1927-28 they were only ?4,000. We have had the same experience in South Africa. In 1919-20 our trade with that country was worth ?107,000; in 1927-28, it had dropped to ?1,000. The cause for this disastrous decline in our export trade in boots and shoes is not far to seek. It is due entirely to the ever-increasing cost of production, and it is to be regretted that this Government, which has declared its intention to do everything possible to stimulate industry, has made no attempt to eliminate some of the causes which are responsible for our declining export trade in various commodities. I am not blaming this Government solely for the increasing costs of production, due to high tariffs, Arbitration Court awards, and other causes. Every government, and indeed Parliament itself, must accept its share of the responsibility. My complaint now is that this Government has not attempted to apply the remedy, but has accentuated the trouble. I admit that some years must elapse before our costs of production can be reduced to a level that will again make it possible for  Australia to engage in the export of secondary products, but action should not be too long delayed. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JZD</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">FOLL, Hattil</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Foll</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The present Government has made the position more difficult by the imposition of the sales tax and other legislation. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Exactly. In his budget speech the Treasurer declared that this Government had made every effort to improve the conditions of industry in the Commonwealth. As a matter of fact it has done nothing of a. practical nature in this direction. Consequently the condition of&#39; industry throughout the Commonwealth has steadily become worse. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>
            <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline>also complained that in 1927 28 our imports from France of hats and caps totalled ?48,000, and from Great Britain, ?322,000. Again the tariff board report throws some light upon the real position. I find that, as regards hats for women and children, the Australian, manufacturers in that year supplied 74 per cent, of our total requirements and as regards men&#39;s hats, considerably over 80 per cent. The honorable senator went on to complain about our imports of olive oil, perfumery and a number of other manufactured commodities from France. He omitted all reference to our exports to that country. To put the position in its true light, it should be stated that, in the year mentioned, our total imports from France were valued at ?3,700,000, while our exports to that country totalled in value ?15,141,000. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- How much wool did we export to France in that year? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The amount of our wool exports does not affect the facts. The fact remains that our- trade balance with France has always been very much in our favour, so what possible objection can there be to our limited volume of imports from that country? And why should we shut out French trade with Australia? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I have never suggested that we should do that. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That was the in,ference to be drawn from the honorable senator&#39;s remarks. He declared, with all the emphasis at his command, that there was no reason why we should not produce everything which we were importing from France or, for that matter, from any other country. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The latter portion of the honorable senator&#39;s statement is inaccurate. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JZD</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">FOLL, Hattil</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Foll</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Many of the items on the list of prohibited -imports are of French manufacture. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4196</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- -That is so.. We should bear in mind the fact that a cer- tain percentage of our citizens come from the various countries of Europe, and. it is only natural that their love of country should induce them to give some preference to commodities imported from the countries to which they belong. This is particularly true of certain foodstuffs and, I suggest, that to some extent it explains the small percentage of imports of commodities which are manufactured in this country. There can be no objection to their preference provided they are prepared to contribute, through the tariff, to the revenue of the country.. <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline> mentioned also the importation of blankets and said that we should supply the whole of our requirements. I agree with the honorable senator that Australian blankets are as good as, if not better, than those manufactured in any other country, and again I remind the honorable senator that, from 92 per cent, to 95 per cent, of our requirements are supplied by Australian manufacturers. Many people living in the tropical portions of Queensland prefer to sleep under cotton blankets which are much more suitable to the climate. If <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline> studies the report of the. Tariff Board, he will find that although we imported a certain quantity of blankets from the United States of America, they were all cotton blankets, and, I assume, were intended for use in our tropical climate. Still another complaint of the honorable senator was that we imported rugs. I agree with him that our manufacturers produce a better, travelling rug than can be obtained in any other country, and again I remind him that they supply 90 per cent, of our total requirements. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
        </speech>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4197</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>JTL</name.id>
              <electorate />
              <party>ALP</party>
              <role />
              <in.gov>1</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
              <name role="display">Senator DALY</name>
            </talker>
            <para>-Does not the honorable senator think that the remaining 10 per cent, should be manufactured here? </para>
          </talk.start>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4197</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- If the honorable senator takes that stand, clearly he believes that we should do no trade at all with other nations. Does he not realize that no country can live to itself ? I am not prepared to accept the doctrine which, apparently, has been accepted by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly,</inline> that we, in Australia, should try to live to ourselves. As in the case of an individual, a nation which ignores its obligations to others will live to- regret its attitude. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4197</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I have never suggested that we should live to ourselves. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4197</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That was the tenor of the honorable senator&#39;s remarks. When it comes to prohibiting the importation of goods from Great Britain, my opposition to the Government&#39;s policy becomes stronger than ever. I remind honorable senators that, since the war, Great Britain has faced greater problems than have confronted any other country. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4197</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JRW</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">CRAWFORD, Thomas</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Crawford</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Does not the honorable senator believe that we should work out our own salvation? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4197</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Where should we be to-day had we relied solely on ourselves? Surely, honorable senators realize what Australia owes to the Mother Country! Yet, some of them are willing to sacrifice the Mother Country in order to gain a political advantage. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4197</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That is not fair. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4197</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Australia has sent mission after mission to the Old Country to urge the people there to trade more with Australia. A few years ago I was privileged to visit Britain as a member of the biggest delegation which ever left these shores. The delegation comprised more than 600 Australian citizens, the majority of whom had come from the Old Country. At every opportunity the delegation urged the people of Britain to buy more Australian goods. So successful was that delegation that this year a delegation of about 300 citizens of Britain is expected to visit Australia. As a member of the delegation which visited Britain, I took a somewhat active part in advocating greater trade with Australia. But sometimes I found myself awkwardly placed. Having voiced Australia&#39;s desire that Britain should consume more Australian goods, I found it embarrassing to be told that the people of Britain were anxious to trade more with Australia, but, because of the high tariff wall, even under the British preferential tariff, one firm alone had found its trade with Australia fall off to the extent of 85 per cent. Before I left Australia, T had protested against the tariff wall being raised so high against our own flesh and blood. A prohibitive tariff tends to produce men and women of the jellyfish type - individuals so spineless that they want to be sheltered from that competition which&#39; requires them to do their best. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para class="block">According to the official <inline font-style="italic">Year-Booh</inline> for 1927-28, the Australian production of apparel was valued at &#163;40,268,558, whereas the importations of apparel in that year were valued at only &#163;5,878,498. That is a wonderful record for a young country like Australia. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That industry, apparently, unlike the berry industry of Tasmania, did not need any bounty. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- There is no need for a bounty because the duties are so high. Moreover, the apparel-making industry is not a primary industry. Yesterday, the Minister pleaded the cause of the Australian olive oil industry largely on the ground that it is a primary industry. He did not tell us that the Tariff Board was unanimously averse from imposing exceptionally heavy duties on olive oil, because it found that there had been a falling off in the production of olive oil in Australia, not because of the price at which it had to be sold, but because there was no desire on the part of the producers of olive oil to extend their plantations, and also because many previously existing plantations had been neglected. One difficulty associated with the olive oil industry is that it takes ten years for an olive tree to become fully productive. Yesterday, <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline> said that Australia imports furniture from the Old Country to the value of many thousands of pounds each year. T find in the <inline font-style="italic">Year-Booh</inline> that the total value of the wood and wicker furniture manufactured in Australia is given as &#163;27,735,030, whereas furniture to the value of only &#163;2,144,551 was imported in the same year. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That was &#163;2,144,551 too much. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The Statistician also shows that Australia&#39;s production of stationery in that year was valued at &#163;17,324,368, and that stationery to the value of &#163;2,425,228 was imported. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Over &#163;2,000,000 too much. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The honorable senator&#39;s interjections show that he believes in shutting out goods from other countries in order that Australians may live to themselves. I remind him that &#34;where there is no vision the people perish &#34;. I suggest to <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline> that, instead of acting in a way which will arouse animosity on the part of other nations, we should endeavour to gain their goodwill. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Why did the honorable senator ask the Government to shut out all competition in the hop and jam industries ? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The honorable senator is romancing. I. again wish to enter an emphatic protest against the action of the Government in practically excluding from this country goods from other countries, without the sanction of Parliament. Notwithstanding what the Prime Minister <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Scullin),</inline> or the Minister for Trade and Customs <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Forde),</inline> might say, I am convinced that no good can come to any country whose government deliberately violates its laws. Never previously have we had an instanoe of a government deliberately breaking the country&#39;s law in order to foist its policy on the people. I shall refer to this matter again late&#34;r, when I will deal with it in greater detail. I remind the Government that its actions are being watched carefully by those interests overseas on which we depend largely for our trade and financial assistance. What can be their opinion of Australia when they find a government, in defiance of the law, doing things which it ought not to do without first having received parliamentary sanction ? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KP8</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">JOHNSTON, Edward</name>
                <name role="display">Senator E B Johnston</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The Government will not even send the tariff schedules up for our consideration. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4198</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Before any tariff schedule is tabled, the law requires-&#39; that certain things shall be done. Parliament has passed a&#39; law which requires that no alteration of the tariff shall be made, or new duties imposed, until the Tariff Board has made an investigation and submitted a report. The Government ha9 ignored that legislation, because it has imposed new duties before asking the Tariff Board to make an investigation. That is a violation of the law. In. my opinion, not one duty which has been imposed without a previous investigation and report by the Tariff Board would stand if contested. It is not right that any government should assume the role of an autocrat and say that it will do as it pleases, regardless of the law, merely because its supporters receive a majority of votes at an election. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>I come now to one of the most repugnant features of the budget. I realize that in the attempt to balance the ledger the Government must do things which otherwise it would not do ; but that does not justify it in seeking to obtain additional revenue by wrongful means. It is possible to place impositions on the people, which will have an effect entirely different from that expected. On page 7 of the rehabilitation plan there is a lengthy paragraph dealing with increased taxation. A few months ago. heavy additional taxation was imposed upon a particular section of the people of Australia, the section upon whom more than any other we depend for the carrying on of the industrial life of the country; and in some cases the tax previously paid by those taxpayers was increased by as much as 2,000 per cent. That inequity of last year is this year accentuated &#39;by a further imposition on the same class of people. I am afraid that the Government will find it is likely to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Every additional &#163;100,000 taken from the community means &#163;100,000 less to provide employment. The proposal is unfair to the country, to industry, primary or secondary, and to the individuals from whom extra revenue is proposed to be extracted. In fact, it is the most unjust burden of taxation ever attempted to be imposed by the Commonwealth Government. During the war, when taxation had to be increased year by year in order to furnish our troops with the sinews of war, no one protested. The people of Australia wore prepared to meet their obligations as long as they could do so, and those obligations continued for some time after the war; hut during these years no attempt was made to impose such a burdensome tax as was imposed on one section qf the community last year, and is now sought to be accentuated. It is now proposed to increase last year&#39;s super tax of <inline font-style="italic">1\</inline> per cent, on income derived from property by a further 2-J per cent., and the alteration is estimated to yield an additional revenue of &#163;830,000. The effect of last year&#39;s increase was to impose a tax of &#163;13 6s. 8d. on a person with an income of &#163;300 from property who had previously been exempt, and a tax of &#163;29 8s. 4d. com pared with &#163;2 4s. 8d. previously paid by a person who derived an income of &#163;400 from property. Under the present proposals this person will contribute &#163;37 10s., whereas one whose income is &#163;400 from personal exertion will pay only &#163;4 2s. 7d. The person with property will thus pay nine times more than the taxation paid by a man with the same income derived from personal exertion, although it may be income from a business in which he takes no active part. During the short space of twelve months taxation on one section of the community will have been increased to the extent of 2,250 per cent., whereas in the case of another section it will not exceed 15 per cent. I protest against this imposition, which has been outlined in the budget speech. </para>
          <para>Honorable senators may reasonably ask in what way I propose to make up the amount of revenue that will be lost if the taxation proposed is not imposed. If honorable senators will look at the estimates for additions, new works, buildings, &#38;c, they will see that notwithstanding the depression and shortage of money we are experiencing, it is proposed this year to spend on public works out of revenue &#163;829,000 against &#163;74,000 spent last year out of revenue. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4199</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KPT</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">KNEEBONE, Henry</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Kneebone</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- That is in order to avoid borrowing. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4199</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- It is better not to carry out the works than to crush, the people out of existence. People are more valuable than works. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4199</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JRW</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">CRAWFORD, Thomas</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Crawford</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The money will provide employment. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4199</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Let us see how it i3 proposed to be spent. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4199</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JRW</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">CRAWFORD, Thomas</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Crawford</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- More than half of it is to be spent on postal works. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4199</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Is there any increase in the revenue of the postal department? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4199</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K1L</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Barnes</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The department is being run at a loss. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4199</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- If that is so, is it reasonable in these times of stress to spend an additional &#163;500,000 on postal works, and rely on getting the money to do so by imposing crushing burdens on the people, whose savings are always available for developing enterprises ? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4200</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K1L</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Barnes</name>
              </talker>
              <para>-  Does the honorable senator suggest that the expenditure on postal works should be curtailed? </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4200</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- This is a proposal for additional expenditure. The money for the construction of these works .is to  be provided hy ; the very people who a few months ago . were heavily burdened by additional taxation imposts, and under the present proposals are to have a further burden placed upon them. It is most unfair. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>Undoubtedly the Government has found it exceedingly difficult to prepare a budget statement pleasing to the people of Australia. Any government in power at the present time would find it. difficult to do so. I do not suggest that where it is possible to obtain revenue we should abstain from securing it, but I think that we should very carefully consider the effect on the general community of unduly heavy imposts. The budget contains proposals for obtaining increased revenue by means of customs duties, sales tax, primage duty and increased income tax. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4200</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KOJ</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">HAYS, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Herbert Hays</name>
              </talker>
              <para>-  An increase of customs duties will not bring about an increase of revenue. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4200</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- No. There has been a considerable falling off in the revenue derived from customs duties. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4200</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KOJ</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">HAYS, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Herbert Hays</name>
              </talker>
              <para>-  And it is questionable. whether an increased income tax will bring in increased revenue. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4200</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- There has also been a considerable falling off in the income tax revenue. &#34;When our income taxation rises above a certain level it achieves the opposite result to that which the Government has in view. Its only effect is to damage the prosperity of the country. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4200</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KOJ</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">HAYS, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Herbert Hays</name>
              </talker>
              <para>-  Many people are now obliged to borrow money in order to pay their income tax. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4200</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K09</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PAYNE, Herbert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator PAYNE</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I know of instances in which that has occurred. People have had to arrange loans in order to pay their income tax because the drop in their income this year compared with last year&#39;s income upon which they have been assessed has been enormous. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>I did not rise to attack the Government, but I think that I have pointed out that the only way. in which Australia can be helped in its present position is. by a continued reduction of expenditure and not by an increase of taxation. During the last election certain gentlemen in a very sheltered position expressed their surprise at my attitude -towards the, determination of the Government which was then administering the affairs of the country that certain abuses in the Public Service should be prevented from recurring. 1 told them that these abuses had to go, and they replied that they would vote Labour. I said that I knew they were doing the best they could to get all the people to vote Labour. I informed them that if such a system continued, the people of Australia would take a hand in the matter, and that instead of them having to submit to a 10 per cent, or a 15 per cent, reduction they would have to meet something much heavier. The cost of government in Australia is far too heavy for a community of 6,000,000 persons. Government expenditure must be drastically reduced; that is the only way in which we can ensure the salvation of . Australia. To attempt to do so by imposing additional taxation will only accentuate our difficulties. </para>
        </speech>
        <speech>
          <talk.start>
            <talker>
              <page.no>4200</page.no>
              <time.stamp />
              <name.id>KTR</name.id>
              <electorate>South Australia</electorate>
              <party />
              <role />
              <in.gov>0</in.gov>
              <first.speech>0</first.speech>
              <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
              <name role="display">Senator MCLACHLAN</name>
            </talker>
            <para>. -  The discussion on this motion enables honorable senators to express their opinions concerning the Government and its administration during the past twelve months. My only regret is that the Standing Orders prevent me expressing in appropriate language my opinions concerning the administration of this Government, although I have  a  high personal regard for some of its members. This Government which has &#34; boxed &#34; the financial compass will go down to posterity, particularly as regards its financial proposals, as the weathercock government. I cannot adequately express my opinion concerning its ineptitude, weakness and procrastination in dealing with the situation which it has at last admitted is indeed serious. Not only in connexion with major matters, but in relation to minor issues it has utterly failed this country, and brought it into a state of political and financial chaos. To-day the Leader of the Government in the Senate ( <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Barnes)</inline> uttered  a  statement which is in absolute contradic-  tion to one recently made by the right honorable the Prime Minister <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Scullin).</inline> Although the Prime Minister said that there was no alternative to the present&#34; proposals the Minister in this chamber said that there was. </para>
          </talk.start>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4201</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K1L</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">BARNES, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Barnes</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- What was the alternative? . </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4201</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The Minister said that if the proposals of the Government had been accepted all would have been well; but the Prime Minister has at last come to a recognition of sound principles of finance as opposed to the fantastic scheme which he and those with whom he is associated submitted to Parliament some time ago. If we accept the statement of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Government is unrepentant and still believes in the issue of fiduciary notes and a general interference with the currency of this country. If the Government&#39;s financial proposals had been adopted, there is not the slightest doubt that they would have inflicted infinitely more hardship upon the community than the burdens which unfortunately they are now asked to bear under the legislation recently passed by this Parliament. I should like to remind SenatorR. D. Elliott, who delivered an able speech, with a portion of which I am in entire agreement, that the measures recently passed by this Parliament are not the last word in the matter of the financial and economic rehabilitation of the Commonwealth. They constitute only a portion of the plan upon which . the country must embark in order to rectify the position which we, in common with other countries, are confronted. Already steps have been taken in that direction by the Prime Minister who has intimated that he proposes to convene a further conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers, including those responsible for railway administration, to discuss the tremendous leakage in Australia&#39;s finance and particularly with respect to railway deficits. It is obvious to the Prime Minister, if not to the Minister in charge of this House, that the legislation already passed is. only an instalment of what is necessary. The Minister should realize that the time has arrived when the Government must take its courage in both hands if confidence is to be restored, and those 400,000 men who are unemployed, and whose morale has been seriously affected by the lack of work are to again be employed in reproductive work. The Government talks about reduction in defence expenditure; but we cannot overlook the fact that at present we are paying no less than &#163;12,000,000 a year in the form of doles to sustain a large number of the people in this country. I ask the Leader of the Government in this House <inline font-weight="bold">(Senator Barnes)</inline> - a man who has led men in other directions - if he cannot see something wrong in our economic make-up when there are 400,000 men unemployed at a time when there is abundance of work which should be undertaken. The Government, having preached a false economic doctrine, has been afraid to retrace its steps and to do the right thing. Having regard to the way in which the Government&#39;s economic proposals have been received by both branches of the legislature, it should take courage and endeavour to adopt other measures which will assist in placing large numbers of men in employment, as has been done by the Premier of Queensland, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Moore.</inline></para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>The people of this country are clamouring for further reforms such as those to which <inline font-weight="bold">Senator B.</inline><inline font-style="italic">D.</inline> Elliott referred. Some time ago there was a similar clamour in Great Britain, when the government of the day had to listen to demands for reform which resulted in the appointment of the Geddes Commission. The adoption of the recommendations of that commission was responsible for saving the British taxpayers millions of pounds sterling per annum. It is unthinkable that during a period of depression such as we are now experiencing there should be overlapping in governmental activities, or such a tremendous loss on our State railway systems as we are at present suffering. That is&#39; the big problem which transcends all other financial issues, and which must be tackled. For the financial year ended the 30th June, 1930, no less than &#163;10,500,000 was absolutely lost by our six State railway systems, which aggregates within a few thousand pounds of the total of the State deficits during that period. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4202</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JYH</name.id>
                <electorate>VICTORIA</electorate>
                <party>CP</party>
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">ELLIOTT, Robert</name>
                <name role="display">Senator R D ELLIOTT</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Within &#163;30,000. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4202</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Moreover, as State railway accounts are not prepared on the most approved methods, the actual loss on the State railways during the period mentioned may be in excess of &#163;10,500,000. It is absolutely essential that something should be done in this regard. <inline font-weight="bold">Senator R.</inline> D. Elliott should not regard the Government&#39;s financial proposals, which have recently been under discussion, as the Alpha and Omega of the Government&#39;s scheme of rehabilitation and reconstruction, but as only one step in the direction of securing a certain amount of confidence in the minds of overseas and Australian financiers. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>Last night the Assistant. Minister <inline font-weight="bold">(Senator Daly)</inline> referred to the importation of certain commodities. That so able a politician and such an astute member, of the profession to which I belong should have delivered himself into the hands of honorable senators on this side of the chamber in the way he did is beyond my comprehension. He quoted the quantities and values of certain commodities imported into this country prior to the advent of this Government. When one examines the individual items one finds that, with two exceptions, they are protected by an average duty of over 45 per cent. Notwithstanding the imposition of such a heavy duty, hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of these goods were able to come in over our tariff wall. Why should that be so ? </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4202</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Because of borrowed money. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4202</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Our borrowing policy has not been solely responsible. Those commodities were imported into Australia because there was a, demand for them. Why has there been a demand? The imposition of embargoes and high customs duties merely encourages inefficiency on the part of the Australian manufacturers. There must be something wrong in the make-up of some of our Australian industries if they cannot compete with overseas manufacturers with the assistance of heavy customs duties in addition to the natural protection mentioned by SenatorFoll. I ask the Assistant Minister to study the duties in operation at the time these goods wei&#39;e imported. It should be the policy of the Government to provide a measure of protection to enable Australian industries to work efficiently and to Overcome the disabilities under which they are suffering; but the use of what I may term a sledge-hammer, in the form of embargoes, results only in inefficiency. The imposition of embargoes not only buttresses inefficiency, but prevents healthy competition between oversea and local manufacturers. What are we doing by imposing embargoes? I do not wish to refer to any particular industry, but I shall give some actual facts. A firm that is manufacturing in Australia a very high class article indeed was working under a moderate tariff. The Government came along and, without any request or consultation, decided to impose an embargo on the importation of this particular article. There had been trickling over the tariff wall a certain quantity of goods similar in quality and class to those manufactured by this particular concern. The proprietors did not fear that competition, but rather regarded it as being helpful to their business, because it kept their managers, departmental heads and every unit in the factory up to date. What has happened? A gentleman on the other side of the world heard of the embargo and despatched his representative to Australia. I here interpolate that the article in question is used to only a limited extent ; but I could mention other articles whose use is much more extensive. Upon arrival, this representative informed the Australian manufacturer that he proposed to start a factory. I cite this as a concrete case to illustrate a principle. What isgoing to be the result? There is not sufficient work in this line in Australia to&#39; maintain two factories side by side, and the effect must be to crush either the old established industry that has so far been working satisfactorily, or the overseas manufacturer. Who is likely to go down under such conditions? A concern that has the backing of the financial and scientific resources which are the result of the production of this article over a period of a couple of hundred years will operate alongside the Australian industry, in a field where there is room for only one manufacturer. One or the other must go down. Which has the greater chance of surviving? I leave the answer to the imagination of honorable senators. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>The policy of the Government is one of extreme protection, and of prohibition up to a point; but lot it pause and consider what it is doing. I know that it will have regard for the primary industries, because it has become alarmed at the condition to which those industries have sunk. I urge it also to have regard for the condition of some of our secondary industries, whose friend it professes to be. </para>
          <para>Having dealt with the broader question, I should like to make a few observations regarding the administration of the Customs Department. I have seldom seen more astounding things done than have been done in the conduct of this department during the last twelve months. Representations have reached me from Queensland, New South &#34;Wales and South Australia, but I have forborne from either worrying my friends from Queensland and New South Wales with them or of introducing the matter in the Senate in any other way. I expected that within a reasonable period an opportunity would have been afforded us to discuss the tariff schedule. That schedule, however, has been placed in cold storage, and the Government is retiring into the cool shades that are provided by short adjournments. The tariff will wend its weary way through the other branch of the legislature, and probably arrive here some few months later. We shall have no other opportunity of discussing what I consider is a manifest injustice to a certain class of trader, in which I have no interest personally, as well as to a large section of the public. </para>
          <para>At the request of certain people, and I understand without any investigation by the Tariff Board, the Government has imposed an additional duty of 5s. a gallon on all spirits not bottled in bond. The suggestion is that this action was taken for the purpose of protecting the public in connexion with the purity of the spirit retailed. That is all a myth. In whatever way the duty came to be imposed, it has been of no benefit to the consumer. That fact was elicited by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator E.</inline> B. Johnston in the reply to a question that he asked the other day. I suggest that the duty was imposed at the instigation of those who are interested in the bottled whisky trade, and that those who are bringing whisky out in other forms were neither- considered nor consulted. I also point out that it is not the function of the Commonwealth Government to ensure the purity of the- spirit after it leaves the bond. That is the function of the State authorities. </para>
          <para>Representations were made to me in January and February last ; but I thought that, having seen the effect of its action, the Government would have had sufficient sense to cancel the duty. The grounds of objection that have been placed before me are as follow: - </para>
          <list type="decimal-dotted">
            <item label="1.">
              <para>The additional duty of 5s. per gallon on spirits bottled out of bond (on top of heavy customs and excise duties) is an unfair tas on the retailers of Australia, and prevents them from selling bulk spirits to the public at a cheaper rate than bottled proprietary spirits. </para>
            </item>
            <item label="2.">
              <para>A tax of this nature is not in force in any other part of the world. </para>
            </item>
            <item label="3.">
              <para>The said tax does not give the slightest, extra protection to the public. </para>
            </item>
            <item label="4.">
              <para>The said tax does not, and cannot, create any additional employment. </para>
            </item>
            <item label="5.">
              <para>The said tax is responsible for practically no additional revenue to the Commonwealth Government. </para>
            </item>
          </list>
          <para class="block">I shall show directly that in the future no revenue whatever will be obtained from this additional duty. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4203</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KP8</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">JOHNSTON, Edward</name>
                <name role="display">Senator E B Johnston</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- It has provided a little extra employment in connexion with the bottling of the liquor and its restoration to the casks. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4203</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- This communication continues - </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <list type="decimal-dotted">
            <item label="6.">
              <para>The said tax imposes a serious disability on the hotelkeepers throughout Australia (99 per cent, of whom are not in a position to establish bonded warehouses in which to bottle their spirits). </para>
            </item>
            <item label="7.">
              <para>The real object of the said tax is to prevent hotelkeepers -from selling bulk whisky to the public and to force them to deal exclusively with the proprietary lines of . spirits bottled by the whisky combine. </para>
            </item>
            <item label="8.">
              <para>The tax in question was asked for by mem bers of the whisky combine who are the only beneficiaries under this special tax. </para>
            </item>
          </list>
          <para class="block">I also received representations from my own State, in which the whole of the hotel trade rebelled against this impost and telegraphed me expressing strongly the views that were held in regard to the stupidity and ineffectiveness of it </para>
          <para>The result of the operation of this proposal has been ascertained in another place. If the Minister, as a practical  man of affairs, had applied common sense to the matter, he would have seen immediately what was going to happen. As <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Johnston</inline> has pointed out, the whisky is bottled in bond, and immediately afterwards is emptied into the casks again. I understand that it is more beneficial for it to remain in the wood. </para>
          <para>In reply to a question asked &#62;by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Johnston</inline> on the 14th July, the Minister &#34; removed the cork from the bottle &#34;. He said that those who held the whisky broke it down in bond. This delightful operation of breaking down simply connotes the return of the broken down liquor- to the casks whence it comes originally, and its consignment in that form to various country centres in the different States; with the result that the publican at the other end has to pay not only for the carriage on the whisky, but also for the water that has been added to it. That is an example of the economic management of the Minister for Trade and Customs <inline font-weight="bold">(Mr. Forde).</inline> I do not know whether this gentleman, who is so busy running round the country, has ever thought seriously about what he is doing in connexion with this matter. It is too ridiculous. </para>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4204</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>K0F</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">PEARCE, George</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Sir George Pearce</name>
              </talker>
              <para>-  It is Gilbertian </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4204</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator MCLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The right honorable senator has &#34; hit the nail on the head &#34;. If I did not know the Minister&#39;s temperate habits so well, I might be tempted to believe that he had been suffering from the fumes of the spirit before it was broken down. If, having seen that he had made a mistake, he would acknowledge his error in a manly way, he would show that he had a big grasp of affairs. But how does he try to buttress himself? He says that the revenue will suffer to the extent of &#163;15,000 per annum if this additional duty is removed. Some honorable members of another place thought that it was advisable to wait a month or two to see what really happened. On the 20th May last, in reply to a question asked in the House of Representatives, the Minister for Trade and Customs stated that the total duty collected on this class of imported and locally-made spirit amounted to &#163;1,053 for the quarter. It would mean that if they took the whole year at the same rate it would return only &#163;4,000,  aa  against the Minister&#39;s estimate of &#163;15,000. Moreover, during portion of the time they were not operating the system by which, as <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Johnston</inline> has pointed out, i* is so easy to avoid the duty altogether. The estimated revenue is not sufficient to make the additional impost worth  while, particularly in view of its effect upon a number of importers. The position is made exceedingly difficult for the importer who is outside the combine and gets his supply from some other source. I also remind the Minister that many importers are not living in centres where there is a bond store. I have in mind one man who is doing an important trade importing Scotch whisky of a .quality that would satisfy the palate of the keenest judge of &#34; mountain dew &#34;.  His  imported whisky has a ready sale throughout the length and breadth of South Australia, and I believe it is not unknown even to those connoisseurs who preside over the destinies of the State at Parliament House, Adelaide. Aa this importer has his place of business 300 miles from the city of Adelaide, it would be unreasonable to ask him to send someone to Adelaide to have his whisky bottled, and perhaps later, put into casks before he could distribute it to his customers. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4204</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JZD</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">FOLL, Hattil</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Foll</name>
              </talker>
              <para>-  We were given to understand that the purpose of this extra duty was to guarantee the purity of the spirit. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4204</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- Effective supervision of all spirituous liquors is the only guarantee of purity, and this business, I may add, is in the hands of the State authorities. I believe complaints as to purity of spirits are, as a rule, traceable to something that has been introduced into the bottle. I, therefore, suggest that this argument has been advanced merely to cover the Minister&#39;s mistake, because the mere act of bottling a spirit is no guarantee of its purity. If this is the view of the department, it is time that our customs administration was placed in the hands of a commission outside ministerial control. I wish to make it clear, however, that I am not hinting that the Minister has been actuated by any ulterior motive. He has  simply got into a muddle, and I suppose he is merely doing what others would do in similar circumstances, namely, offering what he regards as the most reasonable excuse to cover his mistake. If customs administration were in the hands of skilled officials who thoroughly understood the manifold phases of importers&#39; business affairs, mistakes of this nature would not be made. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4205</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KPT</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">KNEEBONE, Henry</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Kneebone</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The honorable senator is making a reflection upon the department. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4205</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I cannot  help that. We aro asked to approve -the action of the Minister in imposing this extra duty on bulk whisky, and I say -that the reasons offered will not stand investigation. I implore the Minister to retrace his steps at once and not inflict this additional hardship upon a section of the trade. This is a matter which, in ordinary circumstances, I should not have  mentioned in the debate on the budget speech, but I think it is preferable that J should do this now instead of taking <inline font-style="italic">the</inline> more unusual course of moving the  -adjournment of the Senate. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4205</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KP8</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">JOHNSTON, Edward</name>
                <name role="display">Senator E B Johnston</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- It is a public scandal- </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4205</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The imposition of the extra duty in the first place -was, undoubtedly, a public scandal, and I urge <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Daly</inline> to bring under the notice of the Minister for Trade and Customs the representations which have teen made in this chamber this afternoon. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <interjection>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4205</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>JTL</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">DALY, John</name>
                <name role="display">Senator Daly</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- The honorable senator is putting up a very good case. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </interjection>
          <continue>
            <talk.start>
              <talker>
                <page.no>4205</page.no>
                <time.stamp />
                <name.id>KTR</name.id>
                <electorate />
                <party />
                <role />
                <in.gov>0</in.gov>
                <first.speech>0</first.speech>
                <name role="metadata">MCLACHLAN, Alexander</name>
                <name role="display">Senator McLACHLAN</name>
              </talker>
              <para>- I have endeavoured not to exaggerate the effect of the Minister&#39;s action upon an important section of the trade in all the States. On the contrary, I have confined myself to the facts as disclosed in the administration of this duty. If the Minister wishes to deal honestly with this branch of the trade he will have to adopt -the suggestions that have been made. </para>
            </talk.start>
          </continue>
          <para>Debate (on motion by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator O&#39;halloran)</inline> adjourned. </para>
        </speech>
      </subdebate.1>
    </debate>
    <debate>
      <debateinfo>
        <title>INCOME TAX BILL 1931</title>
        <page.no>4205</page.no>
        <type>bill</type>
      </debateinfo>
      <para>Bill received from the House of Repre sentatives and (on motion by <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Dooley)</inline> read a first time. </para>
    </debate>
    <adjournment>
      <adjournmentinfo>
        <page.no>4205</page.no>
        <time.stamp>17:58:00</time.stamp>
      </adjournmentinfo>
      <para>Senate adjourned at 5.58 p.m. </para>
    </adjournment>
  </chamber.xscript>
</hansard>