Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 23 AUGUST 1928

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Questions. [23 AUGUST.] Questions, 345

THURSDAY, 23 AUGUST, 1928.

The SPEAKeR (Hon. W. Bertram. Jfrzra) took the <'hair at 10.30 a.m.

APPROPRIATION BILL. No. 1. ASSENT.

The SPEAKEH a.nnounced ilw reecipt from His Excellency the Uovenw1· of a message conYeying His Excellency's n.'8ent to this Bill.

QL'ESTIONS. ScGGEST!lD I'ROHTBITION OF li\IPORT.\TTON OR

DESTRCCT!ON OF ALSATIAN Doos.

Mr. MORGAN (Jluril/o) asked thP Pre­rnicr-

" In vjE'\Y of the Federal GoYPrnrnenfs decision to prohibit Hue importation of Alsatian dog~ and the si'atcment that anv action t? dc;:;troy or sterilise such dog5 already In Australia will haYe to be taken by the States. does the Govermnent intend acting in this matter, and, if so, what steps aro propos0d to hf~ taken? ,.

The PREMIER (Hon. vY. :YlcCormack, Cairns) replied·-

" ~rhe Que0nslund Go,-crnn1cnt so fat· back as 1926 recommended that the im­portation of this class of dog should be prohibited. This step was taken in the interests of the pastora 1 irhlustrv of Queensland. Any further action reqttired is now being considered bv the Depart­ment of Agriculture and Stock."

VALUATION .\ND SALE OF KEEROONGOOLOO STATE STATION.

Mr. MORGAN (Jlurilla) asked the Secre­tary for Labour and Industry-

" 1. Referring to the further statement of M<·. J. Barr (late general manager of State stations), in which ho reiterates that he had nothing whatever to do with the fixing of the price accepted for Kee­roongooloo State station or the guaran­teeing of the numbers of stock at the date of sale, and further, that he considers this station to be worth much more than £120,000, will he reconsider this matter and lay upon the ta,ble of the House the written valuation of the station by the late general manager and the agreement covering this sale?

" 2. Seeing that, according to Mr. Barr, the station was originally purchased from ::\1essrs. Field a.nd Vickcrv on a walk-in­walk-out delivery, does "he consider it reasonable to ha vc sold this Bta tion back to the original owner . .;, after making con­siderable improvements upon it, at a monetary loss of £41,000 subject to a bangtail muster of the stock to be made after reasona.ble conditions permit? "

The SECHETARY FOR LABOUR AND I:'-JDUSTRY (Hon. D. A. Gledson, lps1cich) replied-

" 1. I have a ]ready stated to the hon. member that a sale was made by the Trade Commi'"ioncr in conjunction with the late general manager, who was pre­sent during the negotiations with the purc,hasers. The numbers of stock agreed upon were those certified to by the late general manager for th<= auction sale of the 5th April, 1927:-

Males Females

Total

12.081 7,291

19,373 595 horses. rrhese figures v,~cr(' not the station book figures, but the etock figures supplied by ::\Ir. Barr as at 31st December, 1926, and on which the Capital Cost Committee, operating nnrlcr the· Sta.te Enterprises Act of 1918, with his assistance, detcr­lnint'd i he rcscrYc price for rru-ction sale. The general manager, State stations, also furnished certificate of stock num­bers etch financial year, and on 30th .June, 1927, he certified that the stock on Kee1·oongoolDo was-

Males Females

Total

11,870 7,195

19,066 517 horses. This cr,rtifica tc has not been lost or destron'd. There were no sales of stock betwe0n 31st Decem bcr, 1926, and 30th .June, 1927. As a matter of fact, in :i':oYcmbor, 1926, Keeroongooloo had been submitted to forty-two (42) agents throughout the State and in tho Southern States at £180,000, ' walk-in-walk-out.' \Yith stock numbers certified to by the gC'nf'ral n1anager :-

Males Females

12,168 7,671

Total 19,839 520 horses. But no offer was received up to the 7th .January, 1927, as no one would even inspect on the conditions offered. No offers were received for Keeroongooloo

346 Que8tion8, [ASSEMBLY.] Que8tion8.

at the audion sak on the 5th April, 1927, and subsequently, in May, 1927. negotiations, which wore commenced with T. A. Field at the sugg<'stion of t.he lat0 general ntanager, "\YCl:c continued a.nd resulted in the sale to Messrs. Field and Vickcry of the property in Novem.ber, 1927. at the price stated. Mr. Barr, m a report. on Keeroongooloo State station on 5th September, 1927, had stated that­' Under the p1!escnt price of cattle and from a State station point of view. I do not coni'ider Ke 0 roongooloo a. paying propusition. . . . If a. good price is offered for Keeroongooloo T think the ( ~oYernmcnt would he bottnr (o acZ'ept it..' ?\o offer W<J' ]'(•ceivt'd for Kr>eroongooloo at the auction sale of 1\pril, 1927. The price of £120.000 was the best offer received. The- hon. n10n1bC'r's friend. ML Barr, was appoi ntcd by the G<n'Cl'llor ju Council in (ktolwr. 1920, as geupJ·al uwnager, anri \\'aR fol' ~·r-ven and a~ha1f vea.rs in control of the Star<' statiou'. ~orith the result~ as ~ho,Yn in t.he annual repol'ts of the Trade Connniss]oner.

'' 2. Does the hon. member (who is sup­posed to be a rcpn '"'tatiYe cattleman) suggest that the market value of a cattle ::'tation was equal to or gret'.tl'r than that 1n·e,-ailing in .July, 1919, when Kceroou­gooloo State ~tation was purchased?"

I:.;scRA:\CE CmJPANIEs' DEPOSITS WITH TREASURER.

:Yir. PETERSO?\ (Xormanby) a<ked the Treasurer-

" 1. What IS the total amount of deposits by insurance compames (all (•lasses) under the Insurance Acts?

"2. During the last financial 0-ear, what rate or rates of interest were fixed with respect to such deposits?

'· 3. vVhat was the total amount of inh'rcst on such dep<"it;; paid to the co1npanies entitled thereto.,

'· 4. vYhat were (a) the dates of pay­ment of mterest and (b) the total amounts paid on the ·respective dates? "

The TREASURER (Hon. '"~'· McCormack, r'ainu~) replied-

'· 1. £1.375,425. '· 2 On cash dqoosits-

For half-yc<tr ended 31st December. 1927. £5 2s. 5d. per centum per ann urn.

For half-y<'ar ended 30th J unc, 1928, £5 5s. 7d. per ccnturn per annum.

On securities-The rate of interest, 'arving from

3 per cent. to 6~ per c<>nt. per annum, borne by the respective securities.

" 3. £70,165 9s. "4. (a) and (b)-

bt September, 1927 1st OetobN, 1927 15th December, 1927 1st January, 1928 1st March, 1928 1st April, 1928 15th June, 1928 1st July, 1928

£ s. d. 540 0 0

62 10 0 1,620 0 0

32,259 16 5 540 0 0 200 0 0

1,620 0 0 33,323 2 7

£70,165 9 0"

Cr..IDJS ON STATE IKSURANCE OFFICE FOR COTTON DESTROYED BY FLOOD.

Mr. PETER SON (N ormanby) asked the Trcasurer-

" Referring to the statement of the Queensland Cotton Board in the ' Queens­land Producer,' relating to cotton which was harvested and awaiting transport, but was destroyed by flood, that althougJ:t this cotton was covered by the board s insurance policy, and the claim on the State Insurance Department had been made by the Cotton Board some time ago, the State Insurance C?mmissioner wished to make some mdcpendent inquiries before reaching finality: . In Yiew of the time that has elapsed smce the floods. will he take steps to expedite this mattPr, and state when it is antici­pated the claim will be paid? "

The TREAS1JRER (Hon. W. McCormack, ('o irns) replied-

'' The invcstiaation which was neces­·.al-y to assess the loss~s payable, is being expedited, and it is expected that the claim will be adjusted within a month."

STATE CONTRIBUTION TO COTTON GUARANTEE.

l'.Ir. PETERSO::\" (_.T orrnm1by) asked the Secretary for Agr·iculture-

" In view of thP statement in the Pre­miOI''s last policy speech, reading 'Pro­vided the Commonwealth Government "·ill eo-operate and share in the increased cost, the Queensland Governrnent will agree to an incrca•e of 1cl. per lb. m the ex:istino· cotton guarantee. If the Commonwe~lth declim· to assist, the State Go,·c·mment will still agree to guarantee its share of the inerea·,e-viz .. ~d. per lb. -it being considered that the growers ha ye a good ease at this stage of the development of the industry.' And m ,-j('W of his statf'mcnt in to-clay's press, and sePing that the Commonwcalt.h Go­,-cmrnent has done its part towards the stabil isation of this important industry, will ho endeavour to induce the State Qoyermnenr to fulfil its part of the nnder­taking as stated in its policy speech 'i "

The RECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE (Hon. W. B'organ Smith, Maclcay) replied-

" The Queensland Government, as is cus­tomary fulfilled the promise given to rotton'-grov-ers by the Premier: The Commonwealth GoYernmcnt declmed to co-operate, but the Queensland Gove_rn­mcnt carried ont its part by paymg cotton-growers in 1926 an extra ~d. per lb. This payment involved an amount' of £18,771 17s. 10d. These facts are known· to evervone interested in the inclustr} ; the questioner appears to be the only exception. The Cotton .Board apparent lv does not share the view of the honoin·ablo member that the Com­monwealth Government has done its part to stabilise this industry, as indica~ed by the press statement by their chairman, published yestcrda:·."

APPLICATIONS BY DESTITUTE PERSONS FOR RATIONS, 1927-28.

).1r. WALKER (Cooroom): I desire to ask the Home Secretary if he can answer the

Questions. [23 AUGUST.) Questions. 347

following questions which I addressed to him on Tuesday, the 21st instant:-

'· 1. H~ts he any statistics showing the number of a pplieations by destitute persons for rations during last financial year-( a) Residents; (b) travellers? If ~o. what were the numbers of each'!

" 2. Since his a nswcr to my question of 25th Kovember last. has the issue of

travellers' rations been discontinued at any further police stations?

"3. What are the present instructions regarding the issue of rations to sing!P ll18ll? "

The HOME SECRETARY (Hon. J. Stop· ford, Jiount Jiorgan) replied-

,, 1.-

Kl'MBER OF PERSOXS IN METROPOLITA::-1 AREA RECEIVING RELIEF RATIONS DURING EACH MONTH ENDING 30TH JUNE, 1927-28 .

1

. ~--,- ------------~-----,-------

I ! Wives of

Wives of I Wives of Able-Month. I Aged and i ·widows. ' Deserted Men bodied Able-

1 Sick Men.; Aged and i Women. Away. Men. bodied Sick Men. 1 Men. I I ! -----I

July I 13 12 82 45 242 5 I August

I 20 16 83 47 266 5

September 16 10 83 44 320 5 October

I

17 13 94 45 357 4 November .. 8 4 so 51 365 3 1 December 14 10 92 51 443 2 January I 13 G 85 45

I

479 1 February 15 12 88

I 51 532 3

s89 l\Iarch 35 32 98 48 I

123 398 ~'-Pril 37 33 99 50 139 382 370 J\Ia_;· 40 31 lOO

I 57

I 159 463 455

June 38 34 117 56 138 494 483 I

Totals 266 213 ~~_I 590 I 3,56J 1,765 1,698 I ·-----

·------·~· ---~~

COcNTRY REr,mF.

Place. I' PERSOXS RELIEVED,

1927-28.

~~~~-~~~ ~~~~~--

Adavale .. Allora . , Alma-den Alpha Aramac Atherton Angathella Ayr .. Babinda Banana Baralaba I1arcaldine Beaudesert lleenleigh Bcii ..

.. 1 3

25 1

Rjggenden .. "' Blackall.. Blackbutt B!air Athol JJoonah Booval .. Boulia .. Bowen .. Brand on Bundaberg Burketown Caboolture Cairns .. Cal!iope Canungra Cape !la Card well Charlcville .. ChartPrs Tow~ers Childers Chillagoe Chinchilla Clermont Cleveland Cl on curry Collinsville Condamine Cooktown Coolangatta

3 11

16 2

110 29

4 6 1 3 1

2 5

138

35 101 112 274 305 887 445 130

65 188 697 277

7 213 240

9 152

7 6 7J5

31~ '797 13

9 184 58 319

69 2 39

106 1 374

10 417 70 106 25 86

146 20 3 198 8 105

25 30 4 185 2 42

1 12

12 6

Total 9,196 -----···

COcN'PRY RELIEF-continued.

Place.

PEltSONS REI.!EVED, 1927-28.

Residents./ Travellers.

----------1------1 Coo m era Coomin~a Coo ran Cooroy .. Cooyar .. Corda!ba Crow·s Nest Croydon Cunnamulla Da.iarra Da!by .. Da;-:boro Dirranbandi Duaringa Duchess .. Edmonton Eidsvo!d Einaslcigh Emerald Emu Park Eromanga Esk Eton Eu!o .. Eumundi E'\Yan .. Farleigh Finch Hatton Forest Hill Forsayth Fossilbrook Gatton .. Gayndah Gecrgetown Gilliat .. Gin Gin G!adstone Goodna Goombungee Goomeri Goondiwindi Gordonvale Greenmount Gym pie

··I I

2 1

2 2

13 3

2

· io7 96

163 16

181 48

400

134 118 161

66 20

9 221 1 5

6 2 388 9 177

19

21 2 535

4 42

21 8

111 98 23 44

6 203 4 456

32 103

8 242 2 226 1 291

142 83 1,786

348 Questions. [ASSEMBLY.] Paper•

COUNTRY RELIEF-continued.

I PERSONS REI.IEVED, i 1927-28.

Place.

l Residents., Travellers.

---------- I Halifax .. Harrisville He bel Herberton Home Hill Howard Hughenden Hungerford Ilfracombe Imbil Ingham Ing!ewood Innisfail Ipswich Irvinebank Isisford .. Jackson Jandowae Jericho Jondaryan Julia Creek Jundah .. Kalbar .. Kidston Kilcoy Kilkivan Killarney Kingaroy Kuranda Kynnna .. Laid!ey.. . . Landsborough .. Laura Leyburn Longreach Lowood lVIackay Mackinlay Malanda Many Peaks Marburg Mareeba Marian .. lVIarlborough lVIarmor M"ryborough Meringandan Miles .. Millaa Millaa lliillmerran Mirani .. Miriam Vale Mitchell Mooretown Yroorooka Morven .. Mossman Mouri!yan Mundubbera Mungana ~furgon Muttaburra Mt. Carbine :i\'lt. Cuthbert Mt. Garnet Mt. Isa .. Mt. Larcom Mt. Molloy Mt. Morgan Mt. Mulligan lilt. Perry Mt. Surprise Nambour Nanango Nebo •• Nerang .. Nobby .. Normanton North Pine Nundah Oakey •. Oxley .. Pentland Peranga Pialba .. Pittsworth

39 87 7 47

7 33 65

20 728 47 434

5 203 116 609 172

16 354 459 1,288

2 3 31 58

1 1U 3 118

313 13

4 3

6 . 257 7 207 1 71

536 80 30

14 617 14 111

1 160

39 176 8 293

41 970 20 95

2 u 205 291 181

1 382 251 3;>8

1 15 197

32 10 48

169 1 387 3 311 1 198

so

3

745 7 3 3

28 4

323

195 28

383 25

58

45 ~~

329 45

216 33 12 15

1,116 52±

54 46

20 465

2 514 62

85 5 6

17 12 153

COUNTRY RELIEF-continued.

Place.

I PERSONS RELIEVED,

I 192~-28.

i Residents.) Travellers.

·------1 ''----i

"I Port Douglas Prairie .. Proserpine Pros ton .. I Quilpie .. Rathdowney Ravenshoe Ravenswood Ravenswood Redcliffe Richmond

~~ncti~~ I Roma .. .. Rockhampton .. Rosedale Rosewood Sand gate Sapphire Sarina .. Sellheim Selwyn . . . . South J ohnstone South Kolan .. South port Springsure Stannary Hills Stanthorpe Stonehenge St. George St. J.awrence Surat .. Tallebudgera Tambo .. Tara Ta.nnymorel Taroom Texas .. Thargomindah Thursday Island Tiara .. .. ~:roogoolawah· .. Toowoomba Torrens Creek Townsville Tully .. Walkerston Wallaville Wallumbilla Warra .. Warwick vYestwood Windorah Winton .. Wondai Woodford \Yoodridge Wowan .. 'Vyandra Wynnum Yaamba Yangan Yeppoon Yeulba .. Yungaburra

Totals

3 1 4 1

36 598 13 22

177 104

2 1

19

2 55

1 12

5

2

41 3 1

211

303

3

6 12 .

1

1 23

6

8

721 2

13

5,919

36 146 559

2 47

45 3

17 4

197 327 103 525

8 362 85

3 310 211

6(} 3 1

· is1 541 139

'2oz 27

H 26 10

4 552 492 489

99 892

23 701

68 212 410 152

13 15± 386 473

277 114

22 36

104 10

154 71

40,558*

• 40,558 represents issues of rations to travellers.

"2. No.

" 3. Single men are given rations at the police .stations in the country ,;vhen travelling m search of employment.

PAPER.

The following paper was laid on the table, and ordered to be pnnted:-

Fortv-third Report of the Registrar of Friendly Societies, Building Societies, and Industrial and Provident So­cieties.

Farm P1·oduce Agents [23 AuousT.] Act Amendment Bill. 349

S"CSPE~SION OF STAKDING ORDERS. BRISBANE ROMAX C'A'rHOLIC CATHEDRAl" LAND

SALES BILL. The PRE1HER (Hon. W. McCormack,

Cairns): I beg to move-,, That so much of the Standing Orders

rclatmg to the introduction and passage of private Bills be suspended so as to enable a Bill to vest in new trustees the lands comprised in certain deeds of grant. being allotments 3. 4, 5, 6, 13, 14, 15. and 16 of section 33, parish of North Brisbane, city of Brisbane, granted for the purpose of the erection thercon of a church, school, and clergv­man's residence, and for other purposes in conncciion with the Roman Catholic Church; and to enable the trustees for the time being thereof to sell the same or any part or parts thereof and appl~· the proceeds to the purchase of other lands and the erection of a church thereon in a more convenient situation; and for other purposes, to be introduced by a pnvate member and pacsed through all its stages as if it were a public Bill."

Question put and passed.

F l R~I PRODUCE AGENTS ACT AMEKDMENT BILL.

INITIATION IN CoMMITTEE. (.11r. Pollock, Gregory, in the chair.)

The SRCHETARY FOR AGRICULTURE (Hon. '\\'. Forgan Smith, 111ackay): I beg to lTIOYe-

" That it is desirable that a Bill be introduced to amend the Farm Produce Agents Act of 1917 in cet·ta,ifl par­ticulars."

The object and purpose of this Bill is to remedy some .of the def~cts <:a.used by amend­ments made m the Leg1slahve Council when the principal Act was before that Chamber in 1917. Thu principal Act makes provision fo>· certaw thmgs, and the amendments in the Legislative Council prevented the Go­vemment giving effect to the principles of tlw Act. For example, the Act provides that produce agents shall be compelled to re.nd!_lr certain accounts. to their principals mt.hm a, gll'en date. It JS also provided that a trust fund shall be provided by such agents into •.vhich any payments made on behalf of their customers shall be paid and those funds be protected ; yet no provision was made to g·i Ye effect to that.

The PREMIER (Hon. W. McCormack, Cairns): I might explain to the Committee that by an oversight, the Governor's message recommending the necessary appropriation to give effect to the provisions of the Bill was not handed to Mr. Speaker and read by him before the House went into Committee as r0quired by the Standing Orders. I there­fore move, Mr. Pollock-

" That you do now leave the chair, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.''

Hon, vY. H. BARNES: Then you are not infallible on that side. You always expect us to be infallible. 'Ill'

Question put and passed. The House resumed. The Committee obtained leave to sit again

at a latE'r hour of the sitting.

GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE RECOMi\IENDING APPROPRIATION.

The I'REMIER (Hon. W. McCormack Cairns): I desire to present a message fro~ Hie Excellency the Governor.

. The SPEAKER read the message recommend­m~· the necE'ssary appropriation to give effect to the Bill.

RESUMPTION oF CoMMITTEE.

(Jfr. l'o/loek, Gregory, in the chair.)

Question again stated--" That it is desirable that a Bill be

introduced to amend thE' Farm Produce Agents Act of 1917 m certa,in par­ticular;;:,."

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE IHon. W. Forgan Smith, Mackay) : At a previous sitting of the Committee I moved the motion now before the Committee pro­viding for the Order of Leave for the Bill which we propose to discuss. It is an amend­ment of the Farm Produce Agents Act, which, with this amending Bill, is de·"igned to pro­tect the farmers against undesirable practices that may be followed in certain circumstances. I have pointed out that under the principal Act it is provided that the farmer who sends his produce to a produce agent registered under the Act receives certain protection, inasmuch as an account of the proceeds received for the produce must be rendered to the principal within a given period, and any payments received on account of the customer must be paid into a trust fund established for that purpose.

The principal Act also provides that such moneys held in trust shall not be subject to any calls other than those included within the objects for which the trust account is estab­lished. In other words, the farmer's money is protected against any operations of an illegal character. Owing, however, to amend­ments which were intro.duced bv the Legisla­tiyo Council, effective powers for seeing that those provisions were carried out were denied to the Department of Agriculture ; and, whilst agents are require·d by the law to do certain things, the department-according to a ruling of the Supreme Court-has no autho­rity to send an inspector to see that they do those things. An aggrieved party-a farmer, for example-has the right under the Act to nominate an individual to examine his account with the agent. A case occurred quite recently in which a fruit farmer who was an aggrieved party, nominated-th~ough the Committee of Direction-an accountant to examine the accounts of the agent. That accountant-a well-known man in Brisbane and a fnJly qualified accountant-reported to the Committee of Direction that the only one who could understand the books of that agent was the agent himself, and he was unable to give an effective or proper report on behalf of the farmer.

Mr. MooRE: You want to say that they must keep books of a certain sort.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: \V e are taking power similar to the nower in the Auctioneers and Commission Agents Act to see that the agents keep proper accounts.

Mr. KING: On the same lines as the Trust Accounts Act?

Hon. W. Forgan Smith.]

350 Farm Produce Agents [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICCLTCRE: Quite so. We are taking power to see that the law is carried out in that respect, that pro­vision having been removed by the Legisla­tive Council in 1917. The situation has arisen only recently. No new principle is contained in the Bill, which merely makes the principle underlying the Act operative and more effec­tive. The amending Bill, with the principal Act, is designed to protect farmers and ensure that they get a fair deal; and, of course it is a measure which produce merchants ~nd others who are carrying on their business in a proper manner will no doubt welcome.

Mr. BRAND: You do not mean to sav that the farmers have not had a squa~e go before?

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: A member of the so-called Farmers' Party asks me whether I suggest that the farmer's have not had a " square go" before. The hon. mPmhPr for Bu:r!'UD.1 ought to kncv.- that it is a common complaint with farmers that th~y do not g:et a " square (l'O" from agents of this descnptwn. The bas1s of all law is to compel the individual who is likelv to do the unfair thing to do the right thing, an.d to protect people against the nefarious practices in which he may be eng·aged.

Mr. BRAKD: In that case vou ouo-ht t~ have done it long ago. . a

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: The hon. member sees that he is on verv dangerous ground, and now seeks to chang'8 his ground. He suggests indignantly that produc" merchants have alwavs done certain things in the past; but, realising his dan­gerou·· att1tude, suggests that we should have clone it long ago. The need for it has onlv just arisen as a ·result of the case that I have just quoted. For the further information of the hon. member for Bm·rum, it is stated. on the authont;~, of quite a larg-e nu~>Iber of representative farmers-this is a matter with which a so-called reprcsenta tive of the farmers should make himself fully acquainted -that there is growing up, particularly in rega~·d t.o the. fruit industry. a practice of dealmg m qmte n number of ways with a view to dcfeatmg the purpose of the Act. I propose to deal more fully with that aspec1 at a later Bta.ge of the Bill. as it is not customary to go into details of that kind at this stage. ·

Mr. MooRE: Did the agent to whom vou refer object to the inspection of his books'. or was it that the inspector could not under­stand them when he saw them?

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: He had no authority in law to object. If a person forwards goods to a produce mer­chant registered under the Act, and the a.ccount ~ales are not rendered at a proper tunc, or 1f he thmks the account sales are not a proper ·record of the transactions. he can demand to see the books of the agent. or lw can legally nominate a person to examine them on his behalf; but the ·department charged with the administration of this Act could not make such an inspection. Und2r this Bill an officer of the department will have authority, the same as other Govern­ment officers have authority under similar measures.

Mr. KELSO: You a,.,-e suggesting that many agents do not keep proper books of account.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: That is true.

[Hon. W. J!'organ Smith.

Hon. vY. H. BARNES: Their businesses would be in a shocking state if they did not keep proper books.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: ~Iany produce agents are carrying out the main purposes of the Act faithfully and well, and I do not anticipate any objection from them on that score at all. This Bill will give greater protection to the farmer, and will furthl'r facilitate the operations of the Act in general.

:VIr. :.YIOORE (,1ubigny): The :Viinister seemed to think that this is a Yery simple matter, and one not likely to arouse .eny dis­cussion. He commenced his explanatory speech by as~,erting that in times gone by the Lcgislatin' Council had made certain amend­ments, having for their object the protection of certain individuals. I recollect that one amendment made in that Chamber was to the pffect that the State produce agency should not also be a dealer; but· the Govern­ment have !wen breaking· the law in that res pert e\ er sit•Ct' thev etnbarked on tl1l"' Lus1nes... ...

The SEcRETARY FOR Aomcc-LTcRE: J'\on­Sf'll~P.

:!\~r. :VIOORE: They have been buying and sellmg-speculat.ing all the time. 'ThP Legis­lative Council made that amendment to pre­vent such an abuse growing; but the law has been ignored by the Government.

When the :Y1inister introduced the Bill, I t houg·ht it was for the purpose of legalising ti1e acti,-ities in that direction. in which the Sta tP prodncP agency ha~-, bee'n engaged for some considerable time. It has been ·dealing en•r since the ('stablishment of the agency, and the amendment made by the Legislative Council had for its object the protection of farmers ,vho forwarded their produce for sa le. At the time wc were of the opinion tl~at tiiP matter would be a difficult one.

ThP SECRETARY FOR AGRICCLTc-m:: Do you not kno·w thar the Rtatc prodncl' agency \Ya8

"'tablishc'd under a special Act? ·

:VIr. :VlOORE : I do: but the Govemment have conunit1ed breaches of the law. The real object of this Bill is not to protect the farmNs. because they lun-e that protection alrcad~-. The~· can inspect an agent's books, or they can appoint agents to inspect the books. \Yith a view to ascertaining whether or not the Ltrrners are receiYing fair treatment. \Yhat HIP Go,-ernment, who are engaged in thi:;: parhcular business, no"\v want to do is t J appoint an inspector to go round and

examine the books of produce [11 a.m.] agents in order to see who are

sending them produce. That is an exh'aorclinar.v point of Yiew. The Score­tar~· for ~-\griculture n1u~t recognise that his GoYernnlent are running a business in -con1-pctition with other produce ag·ents, and that 1 he farmer alrc.ocl;v has protection under the la"-· ShoCJld any farmer consigning produce t·J an agent so desire, he can nominate some­onP to go and inspect the books of the agent to whom he consigned his produce. This Bill ,,-ill give pmYer to a Go,-ernment official to go round inspecting the books of produce agents on a fishing expedition in the hope that he may find out SOlllJ'thing which will do injury to the business of such agents. That is an extraordinary principle to enunciate, and is not affo·rding protection to the pro­ducer, because he already in la"· has that protection.

Farm Produce Agents [23 AUGUST.] Act Amendme11t Bill. 351

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: You have a lot of bogies in your mind.

Mr. MOORE: The hon. gentleman a-d­mitted that the producer has the right now t0 go and inspect, or to appoint an ag·ent to inspect the books of the agent to whom he consigned his produce relative to that trans­action. \Vhy, then, should a Government inspector be entitled to go round on a fish­ing expedition to try to find out something?

:\fr. BRUCE: To save the farmer the trouble.

YJ:r. MOO RE: That is not the objective at all. If a farmer fools he is aggrieved, has he not an opportunity now of appointing some­one to make that inspection?

Mr. Bm:CE: You would have him come down 500 or 600 miles to do so. It is penalis­ing the poor fanner to compel him to appoint an agent.

MI·. MOORE : There are other people representing him at the present time whom he can appoint. Why not stick to that prin­ciple, instead of allowing someone who has no interest in the transaction to go round in order to tn· to catch him in another direc­tion 1 This" principle of spying on business men is carried on in a lot of Government departments, but the principle is wrong. This is another example of Government inter­ference and hampering industry; and it is another action of the Government that is tending to irritate the people beyond endur­ance. The position is becoming insufferable, and it is gradually growing to a stage when it \Yill pay a person to kPcp out of business or pay someone in order to make a favour­able report. That is the position towards which things a-re tending, and it should be resisted.

Ho>!. vV. H. BARNES (1Vy11num): Some­one may say that I am a person engaged partly in this business: but, for the infor­mation of this Committee, I would sav that 1ny businc~s is very~ rnuch grPator in~ direc­tions other than that referred to by the :VIinist<'r.

The S>:CRETARY FOR AGRIC1:LTURE : This Bill won't affect you, then.

HoN. W. H. BARNES : It is not a per­sonal question at all. I want that to be dearly understood. If it were a personal matte-r, I would have no right to be heard, but there is the equity of the position, which every hon. member ought to realise. The time is opportune to endorse the remarks made by the leader of this party. The Minister and members of this Committee cannot form any idea at all of the number of irritating pinpricks to which people engaged in business are subjected to-day.

I have in m:: bag some cheques, attached to which are the necessa,ry statements, which I was hoping to have the opportunity of sign­ing when I \Hts not required in this f'hamber. For the information of hon. members, I want to say what a person engaged in this business has to do to-day. He has so many things to do that he wants an extra staff to carry out the regulations as thev exist. I'have in mv hand accounts to which hon. members will see the stamps of the Committee of Direc­tion attached. Those stamps do not come out of the pocket of the produce merchant or the merchant handling the produce. Their cost comes out of the pocket of the unfortunate producer. I also desire it to be understood

that tny criticisrr1 is not. directed against the State produce agency, which, as I have stated before, under the management of M'l'. Park, is well managed. Nor am I here to make any comment with regard to any other pro­duce agency, because I ,realise that in these days of competition people have to stand on their own merits. I have in mv hand an account sales about which I pt•ot}ose to say something.

The SECRETARY FOR ~\GRICL:LTuRE: You know that has nothing to do with the Bill we are now considering.

Hox. \V. H. BARNES: The document is open for anyone to seP. and shows that the commission is £2 h. 8d. on a total sale value of £26 14s. 6d .. and that the sender had to pay £2 10s. 3d. as a contt·ibution to the Egg Pool Board.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICFLTL:RE: \Ve are not dnalinp; with the Prirnar~y Producers Organisation and Marketing Act just now.

Hox. W. H. BARNES: But these are facts which ('xist and, if the hon. gentleman went throug·h my bag--

Tht; SECRETARY FOil AGRIC'CLTl'RE: Hand it OYt.~r! \L~Lughtor.)

Hox. W. H. BARNES: Does the hon. gentleman suggest that I should hand over something that belongs to other people'~

The SECBETAHY FOR AGRICCLTCRE: You sug­gested that, if I w<>nt 1 hrough your bag, 1. should find ccriuin thing-s.

HON. W. II. BARl\'T~S: Instances such as that show what is happening to-day. At c,·cry tnrn tl1e prodnccr has the right to be elllply protected. and there is no excuse for the. man who does not play the game in busme". There must be a full regard for 1 he iutcrcsts of the producer. It has been said that goods have to be paid for prompt]~· and \Yithin a certain time; but I know that to-day, if a 1nan \VhosP goods were sold by an agent-I rder now to reputable agents --had to wait until the agent got the money to l"'-" into a trust account,, it would be abso­lutely impossible to carry out the provisions of this rncasurP. Hon. n1en1bcrs 1nav say, ·' V\l'"hy '?" Let 1ne rcrnind these hon. ~ me~1~ b(·rs that in uuu1y jnst.ances capital fund~ must be drawn upon in order to feed tlw trust account so that the producer may he paid promptly for his goods. because the man who does not pay promptly is going to be left. becans~ competition is exceptionally keen.

To illustrate a case that came under my notice within the last fortnight, a \YOman__::_ I thought it "as a man at fn·st-wrote down to my firm somewhat along these lines: "''Ye arc consigning you to-day so many crates of poultry. I understand that agents sometimes Jlllt up goods for sale, and, having got a certain price for them, pay the sender of the goods at some other price." My first thought was to refuse absolutely to handle the stuff which had been consigned; but, as it was not clcsirahle th,tt perishable goods should be so dealt with. I sold tbcm, pa i(}. for them, and wrote telling the lady tha1 in future she must cease consigning goods to my firm to be sold, as, whate>er else we might be, Wfl at least were honest, and would not be treated in the manner she adopted. She replied to this effect: " I have dealt with Barnes Limited for twenty years. and to get such a letter as vou have written is most insulting." As I 'said previously, I did not

Hon. lT. H. Barnes.]

352 Farm Produce Agents [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

know until late,. that the writer was a larh­but I wroto finally to her saying that, unles.< slw apologised, I would issue a writ for defamation. The apology came quickly. I quote that instance to show that there arc two sides to all things.

The SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND INDtiSTRY : That shows your sense of chivalry.

Ho:-;. W. H. BARNRS: Mv honour is the first consideration with me, and thtt principle should animate overv otlwr member. These arc small matter•., l ·know, but one gets tired of hearing men in public life unjustifiably accused of being practically dishonest. In my place of business the day before Exhibition Day I noticed some perishable stuff, and I said to the man in charge, " Get rid of it, as by Thursday it will be no good.'' We rang np the Committee of Direction and wore told not to sell it under a certain price. Do you know what the ans\Yer was? ·'If vou can't get the price, let it go rotten." J'.fy answer was-I defy any institution of that kind-" Get the best price you can in the interests of the producer." I did not care if I was sum­moned on account of it. JYiy duty ··' <'S

perfectly dear, and I am not going to be dominated in a matter of that kind bv ·ill\' institution. , ,

\\'here vou receive thousands of consign­ments during the week. you haYo not the time to start tinkering with your books, If you did, you would be in a worse position than was the case in some of the SvdneY happenings with which thP L" hour Party h~s unfortunately been associated. You would be in a very 1nuch worse positiDD. g;,.~erv honest agent should be out to assist in ~ reasonable way in anything that is for thf~ protection of the producers, but I agree with the Leader of the Opposition that we should not make it a fishing expedition just for the purpose of trying to get information quite foreign to what 'vas origirall:/ intended.

Mr. KERR (8nO(f(ttru): The Minister, in introducing the Bill, certainly touched on some vcr;,~ in1portant point~,' with which, ~nfortunately, eYcryone has to agT<1e. For mstancc, we all agree that trust funds, should be protected by requiring produce agents to keep proper .rcccmnts; but this Bill pro­poses to go further than that.

The Minister said definitelv that the Bill was designed to remedy dcfect~s intmducpd bv the Legislative Council, meaning that at on;, stage of the Farm Pro-duce Agents Bill in 1917 certain clauses were cut out bv the Legislative Council. \Ve han in Queensland a tremendous lot of legislation by regulation, and what the Legislative Council did by its amendn;ents ':"as to st?p this pernicious policy of dealmg with public matters such as this by regulation when wch matters arc outside t~c ambit of the Act. I know that regula­tiOns must be placed on the table of the House, and that objection can then be taken to them. That has been done in this House and in the past in the Legislative Council. On many occasions regulations were laid on the table. of the Council, and the objection taken which was upheld by the Council. That i_s one direction in which a Legislative Council IS very _much to be desired in Queensland. It IS qmte certain that this Bill is designe-d to give. the Government power to govern by regulatiOn. We all know that the Sugar Acquisition Act of 1915 gave tremendous power to the Government, and they have used that power on a number of occasions. The

[Hon. W. H. Barnes.

part of the clause in the Farm Produce Agents Bill of 1917 to whid1 the L0gislative Conncil objected provided that the Governor in Council might make regulations respect­ing-

" All such obsen-ances as are not spcci­fir,llly provided for in this Act, and which the G oye1·nor in Council considers it desirable thcll farm produce agents should compl~v with iu cxPrcising ur carrying on their business."

I take it that a similar clause will be con­tainocl in this Bill, because the Government consider its absence a -defect in the Act.

There is a nrovision in the 1917 Act that all rcquiremerits not specifically provided for in the Act may be clralt with by regulation. I \von!d likP the Minister to tell us whether suf'h a provision is going to be inserted in thi' Bill. The Committee should take the 1csponsibility of placing ihe legislation on the ::tatute-book; and under no circunlstances ehould a far-reaching power outside the ambit of the measure be dealt with by regula­tion. The Minister should toll us \\'bother thi-3 particular proYi~ion is going to creep into thi:c; nH:-asurc

Mr. DEA('ON (Cunninyham): After listen­ing to the ::\linister, I am not satisfied wit · the prm·isions of tht> mpasure he is bring­ing do\vn. It Recrris to lllP that wo havo fcr­.[!'GttCJ) onP thing-\Ye are not giving the fanner prot('('tion against dealers who are alw agonL;, \Yhcn we arc sending produce to rr.a.rkct for ~ale bv auction it is rough to lmd that the,- arc rigging the market against us. \V,, want protPction against that. It is not only unfair, but unscrupulous.

Tlw SECRETARY FOR AGIHCtiLTURE: Not ne 1rly so unscrupulous as your propaganda against tho State produce agency. You knov,, the greater part of what you have said against it is false.

Mr. DEACON: I know that they get all kinds of produce from the South. The State butchery d0partmenl does the same thing. It buys in the South, and floods the m~rket here. That is not fair dealing. No State agcnc·y has the right to break the market a.g·ainst the man who sends his stork there. That is not what it was crc<tted for. \Ve want to make it clear that that sort of thing­;, not to be carried on anv further, and that ('YCr_v protcrtion is giYCll against the market being broken.

The SECREl'.'.RY FOR AGRICULTURE: You arc dealing with forestalling. There is such a section in the New South \Vales Act.

Mr. DEACON: I want something to pre­Yent any agent from breaking the market.

'I' he SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : There is a clause in the New South \Valf'~ Act dealing with forestalling the mukct or boosting prices. Do you trant a similar provision in this Bill'

Mr. DEACON: I do not want anything to rrcvent them boosting the market. They cannot do that ioo much. (Laughter.) I want something done the other way-to keep them fr'bm preventing produce from going up to a fair price by breaking the market. The Minister has not said anything about the introduction of any such provision as that simply because it affects the business of the agency under his control.

A GovERN>IENT MEMBER : Other agents do it as well.

Farm Produce Agents, Etc., Bill. [23 AuGUST.] Land Tax Act Ammdment Bill. 353

Mr. DEAC0:\1': If other agents are doing that by buying somewhere else and brea~ing the market they should be controlled m a proper way.

The SECRETARY FOR AGlHCULTUBE: You will hear a great deal about it at a later stage of the Bill.

Mr. DEACON: I kno\\ what that probably meanP-that '"e shall hear no more about these things. We have had that before, and perhaps this is another instance of it. I do not care what the effect is, what I want is full protection for farmers; and ono of the things against which we want protection is illegal deaUng. This practice does go on. The farmer realises that the prices for which his produce is eold :1t auction should be fair, and he oends )Woducco clown to bo sold at auction, only to fh>d that one of these agents, who also is a dealPr, has broken the market against him. That is unfair.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS : Y on arc not n1aking a charge against any of your colleagues?

lllr. DEACON: I am making a charge against the State produce agency. It is one of the worst offenders. I will leaYe it with the ::.Iinister at that. Now he hac, that charge against two things which the GoYernment are controlling. It is unfair to the producer.

Mr. MORGA~ (Jim·i/la): On the face of it. this motion appears to be a Yery good thing; but. after the cxplana tion of the ~\Iinister, I have come to the conclusion that the sting is in the tail. It is establishing a Yery dangerous precedent. \Ye are propos­ing to give the Minister power to send a Government representatiYe to a produce agent.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICFLTPRE: \V e do that now in regard to trust funds held by olicitors, co1nmission agents, and auctioneers.

Mr. MORGAN: But in those rases the State is not in competition with the private indi,-idual concerned. In this case the State is in f'ompetition with him, which is a very important point. If the State produce agency -desires cf~rtain inforn1ation, or if the Government wish to make it a political matter, they can send a Government repre­sentative to a man who is competing with the State, and see if thoro is any way in which they can bring about a prosecution. That is not the point of yiew of the Britisher. It is not British fair play. If you arc in competition with somebody else, why not stand on \·our merits? If the farmer who is sending his pro-duce to an agent for sale Lelieves that he is not getting a fair deal. he has the right to haYe the books of the merchant or agent concerned examined by any person whom he ·chooses; and there is no reason why the Goyernment should be able to send a Government l'eprcsentatiyo with a view to going through the books of the merchant or agent concerned and finding out whether an offence has been committed. I think we arc placing too great a power in the hands of the Government.

Moreover, when we consider that the State is in competition ,vith these a!-(onts, naturally the fact that the State has this power will tend to increase the quantity of produce that goes to the State agency. The agency should stand on its merits. 'Vhen it was established I did not object to it, and I do business with it, becau~e I recognise that in certain matters

1928-z

that course is to my advantage; but I do not want to see the agency preferred over the ordinary agent who is engaged in private enterprise. It ought to be able to compete fairly and squarely, and it should not have any adv-antage oyer the individual carrying on a similar trade or occupation. I do not think the Minister is justified in bringing forward this Bill. I do not intend to vote in favour of a proposal to give the Govern­ment, through their State produce agency. an unfair advantage oYer other produce agents. If that principle were adopted, ir could be applied to every business in this State.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRJCTLTURE: Do vou know the prm·isions of the Auctioneers and Commission Agents Act?

Mr. 2\IORGAX: I do, and I ha Ye no objec­tion to them.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICL'LTURE: \Ve are taking ••xactly the same powers under this Bill.

Mr. MORGA~: It is not right that ono competitor should be given an unfair advan­tage over another, by permitting him to examine the books and ascertain the methods of the other. I shall wait until the Bill is presented; but, if it proposes to give the State produce agency any advantage over· other agents, then it \vill not haYe my support.

Question put and paesed. 'I1w Hou·e resumed. The CHAIRMAN reported that the Committee

had come to a resolution. Resolution agreed to.

FIRST READIKG.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTrRE (Hon. W. Forgan Smith, JlaPkay) presented the Bill. and moved-

,, That tlw Bill be now read a first tin1c."

Question put and passed. Second reading of the Bill made an Order

of the Day for Tuesday next.

L.'l.i'\D TAX ACT AMEND:ME='lT BILL.

Ixrnwrox 1x CmDUTTEE. (Jir. J'o//ock, Circgory, in the chair.)

Question elated-" That it is desirable that a Bill be

introduced to amend the Land Tax Act. of 1915 by extending the operation of the super land tax until the close of th<' financial ,·car ending the thirtieth day of June, 1929"-

0n which J\Ir. SIZER (Sundgate) had mov0d the following amendment:-

" Omit all the words after the word- -'by.'

and insert in lieu therea.f the wor·ds-' aLolishing all taxation on land under this Act with the exception of a ta~ 0n undcyeloped land.' "

)11'. KI:\'G (Lognn): It was most extra­ordinary that the Treasurer should submit this motion and WaYc the matter aside as bcjng of little in1portanrc, and not give any 1easons why the Bill should be introduced and paosed The motion has been supported

Mr. King.]

354 Land Tax Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

by hon. mc;nbers opposite; but some of the a'·gumonts that have been adduc0d in support of the reimposition of the euper tax, to say the least of it, were very crude. I recognise,

and the members of the Govern­[11.30 a.m.] ment Party recognise, too, that

the reimposition of this tax is duo solely to the financial exigencies of the Government. It is the settled, considered policy of this party that the land tax should be abolished. If the Opposition are fortunate enough to secure the reins of government at the next election-and I have very groat hopes that we shall be successful-then thev ,,-ill give effect to that desire, and abolish the land tax and super land tax at the earliest oppmtunity.

The policy of the Government is not to abolish land tax, but to abolish the right of private ownership of property.

0PPOSITIO>i MEl\IBERS: Hear, hear !

Mr. KING: That is one reason why they still continue the land tax and reimpose the super land tax, which was introduced as a war measure. We all know that the members of the Government Party desire the abolition of private ownership of property, although we also know that they do not practise it. Since they came into power it has been abso­lutely impossible to secure the alienation of any Crown land on a freehold tenure. Lease­hold tenure is their pet policy. The leasehold tenure system is supported by the members of the GoYernment simply to lessen the value of freehold tenure, and by taxing it to the utmost make the conditions of ownership of freehold so onerous that it will not pay a pcr·wn to hold frc'ehold property at all.

It has been said that the members of the Oppo,ition, in asking for the abolition of the super land t>tx and the land tax, arc argu1ng on behalf of the rid1 and not the poor. I absolutely deny . that. I am not arzuing crther for the r1ch or for the poor. If it wore possible, I would go further than the motion suggests, and not on!~, abolish the land tax and super land tax in this State, but I would provide that both the State and Commonwealth should evacuate the field of land taxation altogether. I have giwn this matter some consideration, and my humble opinion is that the local authorities should be the sole land taxing authorities in the State. Local authorities were creaLd many years ago for the purpose of relieving the Crown of many duties, but their powers of taxation were verv limited. Thev had there­fore, a difficulty i.n carrying on. ·I rer::,ember many years ago being a member of a deputa­tion of representatives of local authorities that waited on the then Home Secretary, the Hon. J. G. Appcl, and let me sav that hon. gentleman was 0110 of the ablest 'IIorne SPc­•rdaries Queensland ever had-certain! v the most sympathetic. The object of the· dc,puta­tion was to endeavour to per,uade the Go­yernment to re-ne''' the payment of snbsic1ies to local authorities.

The hon: gentleman, in renly to that depu­tation, sa1d 1n effect, "Well, gcntlPlnen, if we grant subsidies to local authorities, the natural corollary is that we shall rrquire to introduc0 a land tax; and it is not the policv of a Liberal Government to do that. Ilo\\:_ ever. \Ve vdll increase your powprs to rate Lnd RO that you will ha,-c ample scope to raise. whateyf.r funds ),-ou require for tlw purposn of carrying out ,,our duties." That was dam' on the distinct under,tanding that the Government did not impose taxation on

[lllr. King.

land. But since the present Go,-ernment assumed office a land tax has been intro­duced. That tax came into operation in 1915, at which time droughts we-re ravaging the country, and the man on the land could ill afford to vay the imposition. I mention that to show how genuine the Government were in their concern for the unfortunate pe·ition of the man on the land at that time.

In 'upport of my contention that local authorities should be the sole taxing autho­rity so far as land is concerned, I emphasise tha.t these authorities receive practically the whole of the1r revenue in that wav, that they catTy out many important funrtio.ns, and that thev have relieved the Govermncnt of a great deal of v:ork. It might be said that the local authoritie;; are semi-goYcrninent departments; but, notwithstanding that they are carrying out their duties, many of which were delegated to them by the Government, they are not being treated fairly by the Go­vernment, inasmuch as many of their privi-­leges have been restricted or overridden by c·.ubsoquent Acts of Parliament.

Let me give an instance. It is well known that rates on land are a preferential payment -a first charge on the land. The Gove;·n­ment, ho\vevcr, have shown a mark(?d tendencv to ignore that fact. For instance, under the \Vater Act, the Commi~sione1· of Irrigation has authority to incur cr;r­tain expenditm·e on behalf of a pers'?n who is negligent in p0rforming ccrtrun work. The cost of that work, if unpaid. is made a charge upon the land. I do not object to that, but I do consider it most mrreasonablc that it should be a charge in priority to the local authority rates, because the local authoritv has far marC' important duties to perform 'than an authority such as I have mentioned.

I cite that instance to show that the right& of local authorities are being curbi!C'd, and, although I do not propose to give a lecture on local autho-rities generally, I propot>C to inform hon. members just what some of the duties of these authorities are. Thev are cha.rged with the maintenance and cont1·ol of roads; the provision of drainage, sewerage, light, and -,xater supply; and latterly have been responsible for a part of the cost of main road development work.

All these duties' devolve on the local autho­rities, who must get the cost out of the land or the landowners.

Not only have thev to meet all these charges, but they have 'other charges imposed on them for services which are for the benefit of the ,vhole of the communitv. For instance, thev have to provide for the health of the con1munily; and in that connection they have to provide infectioms diseases hospitals for certain diseases that arc notifiable under the Health Act. 'The local authorities not only have to provide the hospitals, but they have to provide for their upkeep and for the treat­ment of the patients without an:-· hope of repayment. The hard part is that, >vhilst tho local authoriti0s a re nutinta.lning these hospitals and tl·c ~tin<£ the patiPnls. they are prohibited frorn rnaki ng any charge on the­patients.

The CHAIRMAJ\: Q,.clcr 1 I wc,nld ask the hon. member to keep lo the question b0fore the Committee.

Mr. IG"'G: All this is a charp:c upon the land, as the revenue of the local aut horitics must be obtained by a tax on lando,vners.

Land Tax Act [23 AuGusT.] A nu ndment Bill. 355

On top of these infectious diseases hospitals we have the ordinary hospitals. In .addition to certain moneYs found by the Government for the upkeep of the hospitals, the local authorities are charged with 40 per cent. of the cost of the upkeep of these hospitals. How do they get that money? Another charge on the land. It is all part of rny argument that the local authorities should be the sole land-taxing authorities in this State.

I would like to compare the land tax in this State with the laEd taxes in the other States of Australia. In N cw South vVales they recognise that there should not be any land tax except in regard to land in the western districts which is not under the control of any local authoritv. The land tax in the other 'states is as follows:-

Victoria-~d. in the £1, plus 5 per cent. super tax;

South Australia-N. in the £1 on land of over £5,000 in value, but no supe1· tax;

\Ycstern Achtralia-1d. in the £1, with no super tax;

Queensland-1-d. to 6d. in the £1, with a super tax of 1d. to 2d. in the £1.

Queensland has the heaviest land tax of any State in the Commonwealth and receives the greatest. rm·enue from the land in so far as land tax is concerned. The amount raised by way of a tflx on la.nd in Quee-nsland last year ex< e>eded £2,500,000, made up as follO\YS :-

State land tax (an increase of £17,092 on the previous yoar) ... .. ...

Commonwealth land tax (de­rived from Queensland) ...

Hospitals precept (according to return laid on table of House by Home Secretary)

Hat<':" rceciYcd by 111uniripal a uthoritiC' for ycJor 1926 ...

Total

£ 421,580

46,138

84,000

1,974,428

£2,526,146

'Ihat is a tremendous sum to take out of the land. \Vhy should th.-• land be called upon to va.y this largo taxation y,-hcn it is so unnc,'e" a ry? It will probably be asked ho1v -..ve c.u1 UYoid this-ho1v "' e can n1a.kc both cnch meet if we abolish this land taxa­tion. It can bu done if the Governnwnt are genuine in tlwir df>~ire to reduce taxation by cntting the losses on the State ent<'rprises. If the,- do that, they can cut out the land tax a1togethcr.

I gin_" corrlllt.trativo figures to sho\v how this <.m be done-

Co:rpArm;ox or LAxD T.<x\-rrox wr-rH LossEs o:, STITE Ex1'EHPRISEs FOH FouR YEARS To 3\ m ,Tl'xE, 1927.

StaL• land taxation Lo~s on State ente-rprises

Difference

A Ycrage land tax' tion per ann urn

£ 1.848,311 1,511, 756

£336,555

£462,080 If there ,,-ere no !ones on the State enter­

pri-. -s the land tax required to give the same n·sHlt ,,-ould amount to £84,140 per annum. Tlw land holders of QuPens]and have, there­fore. ]wen umrc"essarily taxed to the extent oi £377.940 per annum.

There need not have been any primary tax on country land. Instead of that, however, there is a tax of £113,912. Thew need not ha_ve been any super tax, if the State enter­jn·rsPe had been cut out. In place of that, w: haYe a super tax of £48,936. The un­developed land tax was £3,196, which wonld ren1ain the sarne, because we are in fa-.,vur as an Opposition of retaining the undeveloped land tax.

Then take citv and town lands. The prir~rary tax need" only have been £26,258 as agamst £170,155. There need not have been .any super tax on city and town lands, instead of which there is a tax of £71,195: the undeveloped land tax, of course, would rcmam the ~ame-£14,186. Thereforf', if the Government had only recognised their obliga­tions to the people of Queensland by desist­ing from following the foolish policy of State enterprises and cutting them out, there need not have been any land taxation at all.

Speaking generaJ!y, to gain " true co-ncep­tion of the economic aspect of the situation so far as land is concerned, we have to realise several very important things. \Ve must L'cognisP, in the first place, that we are a debto-r State, and, therefore, WP must C'Cport. \Ve also have to realise that we are depending upon the primary industries very largely for our maintenance. \Ve also have to realise that secondarv industries must be encouraged in order tO lesFen the imports and at the earne time provide an increasing home market for primary products; and, last but by no means least, we have to realise· that the incomr· of cYcryone mmt be derived from production, and, therefore, greater and n1ore favourable consideration n1ust be given to tho actual producers than ha~ been done itl the past. I say definitely that any political party which in its policy or .administ1·ation fails to give justice and consideration to the wealth producer must uitimately bring the country to a condition of fmancial chaos.

The SECHETARY FOR AGRICULTt:RE: There is a chance of your being converted to om· agTicultural policy.

::\Ir. KI="G: I am trying to convert the Government to tlw conviction that land taxa­tion-we must bea•r in mind that all wealth comes from the land-is not going to help to impro,-e our condition. I realise that the Government in adhering to their present policy need this money; but, at the samo ti1ne, it seems rather a sorry spectacle to sec them face-d with financial ruin if they abolish a tax which only yields them a small return, which '\\as i1nposed as a war measure, but which, nevertheless, is retained fou·rteen_ years after the war started. I hope that we shall at anv rate be able to ]Hevail on them to clrop i he super tax .and ultimate]~· abolish the land tax altogether.

::\Ir. FRY (li'urilpu): I think there can be no doubt about the necessity for the primary producing industries to the State. 'Without them the State must fail. A land tax which i;; dc~igned to break up largo e-"tates with the object of increasing production in primary industries is good : but, whilot it may hayo the effcc·t of breaking up estates and incrPasing production in pri1nary indus­tries, it has the reverse dToct when a.pplied to "~'condar.v industries, bccau·,e it irnposes .a burden ''"hich increaseR the cost of produc­tion. 1t1~v opinion is that a GoYCrnrnent should nwintain a proper ratio bctwrcn thA co~t of aL11ni1Ji~t ration and the country's pro· ductiYc adiYitics. and shou1d cxcrcJS(

Mr. Fry.]

'356 Land Tax Act [ ASSEl\IBL Y.] Amendment Bill.

constant care to see that industries are nourished and encouraged to expand. If the Government find revenue falling short of their •requirements, they should take steps to promote greater production, and render further development and greater enterprise possible. The·reby they would naturally reap a greater ·retu·rn through the ordinary taxes levied upon industry.

A land tax seems to be unnechsary in a citv like Bri8bane·, and in rnanv other cities, where the local authorities are· quite capable of imposing all the taxes which industry can bear. Local authorities impose very heavy land taxes now, as was shown b·,· the hon. member for Toombul ycstr,rday ..ind by the hon. men1ber fo·r Logan this 1norning, both of whom g·ave us a good deal of information as to the effect of land taxation on the life .of the community.

The point that concerns me most is how the "or king people in m.v electorate are going to fare if the imposition of the land tax is going to add that little extra bmden to industrv which will close factoric·· and deprive them of their employment.. I cannot for the life of me see ho>Y the 'freasurer can argue that it is a good thing for the Govern­ment not to borrow money--which they can get at from 5~ to 6 per cent.-and at the same time impose on industry a tax to meet which it must bDrrow else-where ar.d pav bank interest of 7 per cent. •

Society being one body and industrv bein"' a commercial unit of that body supplying th~ necessary ewployment and money vital to the Pxistcnce of the body of which it is a part it is economicallv unsound that the Govern: ment should ded{ne to borrow at from 5~ to 6 per rent., and at the same time compel indus­trY to b8rrow at 7 per cent. to make good the rev·onue required by the Government. There is a loss of 1 pcc· cont., which is a burden imposed upon the industries of the State, and that 1 per cent, might have the effect of closing industr;~·, with its natural result-unemployment. Tlw Treasurer in­formr d us that he had £2,000.000 of loan fund;; in hand. If that bP so. the difficultv is all the more auwntuated. Instead of statc~manlike efforts being made to encourage industry with a view to its recovery and expansion. another burden is placed upon it. A man mig;ht be able to carry 1 cwt., but the addition of the smallest weight might compel him to drop his load. ThP same thing applies with equal force to industry. Industry may bP o,ble to carry a cPrtain w~ight, but an added weight in the shape of land taxation may have the effect of dosing the doors.

\Vhen addr"ssing public ecrvants in the .Cnited States, President Coolidge said-

" 'I'he Government which laYs taxes on the people not required by ur'gcnt public Heccssit:; and wund public policy is not a protector of liberty. but an instrument of tyranny. It condemns the citizen to servitude. Unless the people can eniov that reasonable security in the posses­sion of ihcir property which was guaran­teed by the constitution against unreason­able ta•cation, freedom is at an end. _\ gainst the recurring t· ndcucv in this direction there must be interposed a con­stant effort of an informed electorate, and of patriotic public servant·,. The import­ance of a constant reiteration of these principles cannot be ·over-estimated. They cannot be denied. They must not t.e ignored."

[lVlr. Fry.

President Coolidge had nothing to gain po:itically when speaking on what he con­sidered to be a matter vital to the interests of the whole of the people of America. Industry should be nourished; the arteri0' o.f indL~Rtry should not be drained dry. The super land tax-a war measure-should not be reimposed at the present time, and I am oppo.ced to it for that reason. Land taxation, if fair in its iucidcnco, is a form of taxation b which no serious objection can be raised ; tut excess in any direction is bad for the community. The Government sfiould co­operate in a genuine way with the people with a Yicw to doing everything for the good of the people. The Treasurer shou Id c 1-operate with the industries of the State in an endeavour to provide the neccs~ary Pmployment and the necessary revenue to met't his requirements. With the ever­increasing expansion of industry and in­creased production duo to wise encourage­ment, industry will be able to bear heavier l'lllancial obligctions.

[12 noon.] This tax is imposed upon city properti~s

generally ; but there is a difference in. the ability to pay between the retail sellmg house and the factory. A retail selling houee is not bound to sell Queensland-made goo·ds. It sells those goods which the people desire, and, if Queensland factories arc unable to produce goods at a price which can success· fully compete with goods from the Southern States, then the retail house purchases and sells Southern-made goods. Con.;equently, there is no market for the locally produced article. \Ye can see how difficult it is under those circumstances for the manufacturer to meet the taxation bill, even though it may be a land tax. :Most of the States impose land taxes of varying incidence, and in 1nany instances in the business world even a profit of a per cent, makes all the difference between the mcccss and failure of an enterprise. The sncce's of enterprises depends entirely upon quick su!es and the turnover of capital. If an industry requires a. profit of 6 per cent. to carrv on and has onlv one turnover in the twelve ~n1onth~~ then it ~1ust in1pose a charge of 6 per cent. On the other hand, if it can have a turnoyer twice in the year, it is only necessary to irnposo a charge of 3 per cent. ; if it has a turnover four times in the year, then its profits nr.nd only be H per cent., or, if its turnover is six ti1nes in a year, its profit need be 1 per cent. on!::. If the corn­petition of Southern firms is the cause of om.all sales of locall v manufactured article·-, then the output of local factories declines.

It will thus be seen that taxation helps to increase the cost of production and the gradual suppres.;ion of our own factories until it eventuallv drives them off the market altogether. , My argument is that this tax or the primary land tax may be the very tax which will send some manufacturer off the market.

This tax ma;- also have the effect of diYPrt­ing into Go,;'~rnrncnt loans n1oncv which otherwise would go into industry. In' the past the GoYernment have encouraged people to tnkc n1oncv out of indu~tl·':· and inve~t it jn Gcl\-ernmer'lt lomJs. \Ye· !Garn from the Trca<urer. in reply to a qncstinn by the hon. nH'mbcr for \Yarwick the other dav. that the public of A ustra!ia ha vc subscribed £39,302,697 to Government tax-free loans. Some of that money has been taken from Queensland industries. There is no doubt

Land Tax Act [23 clUGUS'I.] Amendment Bill. 357

that the money invested in Queensland in Governnwnt loans would otherwise have been invested in industrv. These Government loans return nothing 'to the State; in addition to which, the people are being taxed in order to tneet the interest falling due on them. This super land tax may impose the extra burden which will force monev out of indus­try into tax-free Government 'loans.

'rho position seems to nro to re~olve .iLself into a domestic one, because, if as the result of the action of the Government Queensland factories are closing down and unemployment i-; created, how arc ·we to progres2.? It 1nay be said, and ·rightly so, that if people bought goods produced in Queensland factories at the price charged by thc,;e factoric;, the addi­tional taxation now sought to be imposed would not have such a great effect. But with free trade between the States and the com­petition which exists behYeon local factories and factories in New South \Vales and Vic­toria, we must seriouslv consider wha.t effect an.v ?.dditional burden upon industry is likely to have on the community as a whole. Rather than have this tnx placed upon industry, I should prefer the Trc asur<'r to utilise the £2.000.000 of loan monev in the Treasurv in sub;;;idising industry. ~ "

'l'he super land tax ma:- be quite all right as applied to large estates which arc not being nsc·d for productive purposE-s; but, "hilst it mav ha\'E' a beneficial effect in the direction of ~breaking np large agricultural an•as, it has an entirely different effect when applied to factor:" sites. People who imagine that the I ax is paid by the owrwrs of these factory sites arC' very much mistaken. because in most of the. forms of lease now c!'rawn up there is a provision that any increased taxa­tion in respect of the leased ptemises shall immediately bc~ome part and parcel of the rental charged. That being so, it will bo apparent that the productive forces in the community are bearing the burden, which brings 1no to this point: Can the working man of Queensland afford to have more fac­tories f'losing down by reason of excessive taxation? I am concerned narticularlv about the people I represent, 98 Jler cent. of whom are wage earners. There is a large a1nount of unemplovment in my eledorate, and, whether it pleases or displeases hon. members on the other side, I must reduce the question before the Committee to a domestic one­how dons it affect m•,' constituents? I am afraid the continual burden of taxation will ha Ye the effect of incrPasing the cost of pro­duction in Queensland factories. so that they will not be able to compete with factories in the Southern States. and, as in that case unemplovment will follow in Queensland, I oppose the proposal of the Government to r0irnpose the super land tax.

Mr. BULCOCK (Rarcnn): We int·roduce this Bill each ,-ear. At one time I thought it would be a very good idea lo repeal it as opportunity offered, but the arguments of hon. m cm hers opnosit<> have pro•. eel the ne~essity for the Bill. Everv Yo:u when this debRto Comes un thC're. i~ :t (.};1np:~d nttitndc on the nart of the Onposition in rPgnrd to the Rill. This year their argunwnt i .:. " Abolish the lnnd tax!" L:1st vear jt was, " Distri~ hute it more equita}Jl·'"'",. .! " Th0r0 is no con­tinuity of policy, no hitrmonv of thought. and no deep understandi'ng of the principles 1mderlying taxation c,o far a1 members of the Opposition are concerned.

\Ye ha.-c a very definite proposition before us this morning. The Opposition have moved for the abolition of the land tax and the wper land tax, and apparently t.hey ba~e their claim on some alleged hardsh1p that 1s being inflicted on industry as a com~quence of the continuation of these respectJvo taxes.

At 12.10 p.m.,

Mr. WEIR (i~Iaryhorough\, one of the panel of Temporary Chairmen, roheved the ChaH­Jnan in the chair.

:\1r. BULCOCK: During the whole of ,this debate, not only this year but. on previous occasiQ,lls hon. members oppos1te have con­tented thcmsclvc·· with generalities. I ron1en1bcr tbat la;;;t year the Premier a .ked for specific in~tance~s of hard~hips baYing arisen, and, although the debate dragged its \Veary way for 1nany hours, hon. members on the other side were totally unable to get av, ay from the generalities that t.hev indulge in all the time, and wore totally mcapablc of bringing forward any concrete instance to demonctrate their argument that the !11('1dcnce of this tax is harsh and is tending to impede the conduct of both secondary and primary industrie" YYithin the State.

Hon. members who have addressed them­selves to this question have failed to take into consideration one of the factors that must be associated intimately with the amend­ment. I refer to their absolute in-ability to realise that the amount of money that they propose to surrender-the am'?l!nt of money that will be lost to the State 1f thrs forn1 of taxation be abandom"l-must bo reimbursed to the ~tatc from oth 'l' sources. \V e all know that hon. members opposite are prone to get up and '"Y that there has bc-en wanton .and "~irked \vaste and e~,_travaganco financrally in Queensland; but, ag·ain, when ~t comes to a question of binding them down to concrete examples, generally speabng. they are s1lent. Hon. members opposite have not rndwated in what direction we should make a cones­ponding reduction in our expenditure in order that \Ye mav be enabled to abandon thls taxation; and,v since hon. mmnbors oppo­site haYo not been able to do that, it i,; obvious that the amoui1t of taxation we ''· ould surrender \\·ould have to be secured from some otlwr source. \Vhat is their propo­sition" Apparently they. arc true to the policv which they. came mto this Hot!se to enunciate-that is, to help the nch-the men who have aggregations of land-at tho expense of the working· masoes and the land­less people of this Sta to. That is the policy they would embark upon. That is the policy upon which they were returned, They come into this Ilousn anJ make spcnous pleas for tho men well able to bear taxation, and they ask that this tax be wiped out.

\Vhat is tho natural corolle"ry to abandon­ino- this taxation? Is it not a i'eduction of th~ exemption ba'i' that has been laid down bv tho Government? The funds must be made g-'aocl. 'l'h,;t mu't he ob,-iow· to anybo;:!Y.~ and si1100 the funds n1ust bo rnado good, IS 11

not obvious, since they say. _th01~o can ~e: 1 no

innoaso in the taxable rrrtw or the h1;;ner inccmes, that th,, taxation mu''t ultimately be imnosod on tho lower incomes? ·we have alreaclv one instance of that form of political philosophv in South Australia, ,.-here the Premier has irnposod an i1~cornc tax on the cmallest salaries that arc received in that State. Hon. gentlemen oppo.oitc arc true to•

JJir. B1llcock.]

358 Land Tax Act [ASSEMBLY.) Amendment Bill.

label in that regard. This is tho point that must be taken into consideration: they >vould abandon one form of taxation and be forced to recoup themselves by taxing those loss able to bear taxation. ·

Hon. members opposite talk about spend­ing our Lc<cn Fund balances. They say that it is iniquitous and "\Yrong to hoard up n1oney, as they suggest and allege the Govcrnrncnt arc doing. and that this money should he spent: but it has to b0 rcmemberpd that, when this rnoney is spent, it increases the interest bill, whieh has to he met out of the consolidate-d revenue; so that, on the ono hand, the Opposition are asking the GoYcrn­ment to al1andon in the forn1 0f t~txation one source of income, and on the other hand to add to the liabilities of lhe State by a rock­le·., expenditure of loan money.

I just mention that to show how incon­sistent tho Opposition are in approaching this que,,tion of finance. They apparently give no consrderahon to the inter-related questions. They are only capable of dealing ,,·ith one question at a tim_o, and in .a very cursory manner endeavourmg to convmce this House and the people out- ide that thev ha vo a case. If they will take the int-er-related factors­and, of course, they will not, bec,tuse it does not suit their political book to do so-and if _they analyse the econornic circumstances we n;rght be ~b~e to get ~,;Jme satisfactory expres­Sion of oprnton from thern.

In discussing this tax and i\s incidence on -graziers and pastoralists, hon. members oppo­site are prone to say that soP10 grave hard­ship is being inflicted on lhat particular section. Take the question from the point of view of the sheep men. Many years ago t~e forerunners of our worth)' friends oppo­site enabled certain privileged interests in the State to acquire big nggregations of freehold land in the pastoretl areas of the State. Xaturally these concession hunters seledod the best types of 1 and the-re >wre to be found in the f'ClJtral-wP;;;tern "•.reas of the State, and enormous tra{'~s of land ·were alienated w.hich to-day pay a land ta:-c. \Ye are on tho verge of a polity of closer settle­ment at the present time, <Jnd it is indeed a fortunate thing for Quoomland tlut all the 1:-Jn(J nv11ila.b10 '' rrs not t:-tkf'n up in frc·~impk, and that "ome land re:nained under leasehold tenurP to bP n1adc availt1.b~e for the purpo:-'-"es of cloP,er settlement <Js tmre >Yent on.

Mr. \Y. A. Rt:ssrLL: ThP land \>as pur­chflsed.

Mr. DL;LCO('K: Tnw. the land '-',-as pur­chased: nnd the operations of this 1ncasure are "uch as to tend to break un ihose bi" estate.~: htlt rny ol,ql c(jn~idPr0tl' opi1~i~n i~ tJ~Rt It will be nec('"~Jr~.7 to irr1posc a mnrh ~1ghrr incidrnce of tnxntion on thosp holding .. , m order to accrnnplish that verv desiral;lo objef'tiYC'. ~

J\,fr. CL_iYTON: Yoll know nothing about taxft!ion.

Mr. Dl'LCOCK: 1 .d m0 ask th0 hon. memb,~r to refre~.h his mind in relation to Mount Abundance. •.-hich was the biggest payer of super land tax in Queensland. The Government propo,e-d to alienate that land and a fair basis of sett.len1ent was offered: The compan:-, lough~ bitterly, and to the verv last moment. In spit<> of the fact that thev Were the bigg<>st super land tJx payers in th0 State--, they strenuouslv desired to hold the land. and even whcm they lost it they made

[Mr. B1llcock.

certain OYC'rtures to enable then1 to r0gain possession of the lane!. Does that look as i hough the opor4tions of the super land tax arc as injurious. as hon. rnernbcrs ·would lead the Committee to believe"! I could mention other ldSes in whic-h that position would npply. \Vo know that it applies g-cnrrally to ,, Jl the big fre~hold aggregations in Queens­land, otherwise the owners would diYidc their bnd and sell it, or convert it to a leasehold basi:". ] Ion. n1mnbcrs opposite arc enrl0a vour­ing to bolster up a case that has no intrinsic merit. The case they have pnt before the Co:nmittce for the last two or three day_; has br on rnl!y a pka for the protection of the land speculator.

The SrcwTARY FOR AGRICuLTURE: A plea for privilege.

Mr. BULCOCK: Imagine what would happen if, by some mysterious chance, the amendment moved by the Opposition ''ere carried. IL·,tead of furthering our policy of doscr settlement, would it not lca<l to specula­i ion in land; would it not involve hardship on individnals who desire to get land and 1m Yl' beconH' unwary victin1s of people \vho desire to tnkc advotntagc of them? Although it mnet b<' admitted that ihe Act in itself has not sucr:Pedt~d. in brcaki11g up rnany of the lurgf' agg-regations in the State, it has~ on the other hand. prevented greater and gn:ater aggrcgations from occurring. The iucidence of the primary land tax and super tax i,; the best g-uarantLe we have of closer sPttlement. nnd, if we were to abandon this particular forn1 of taxation-not considering it solelv in rPlation ,._, the revenue it pro­duces, hut regarding it as a social qncstion intimatelY inter-related and correlated with the question of closer settlement-then it is obvious that we would deal a ver.v very grave blow at lhe dr -ire of the people to have land m11de aYailable for them for closer 'c·ttlcmcnt purpoces.

Let n1o for a rnoment exan1ine the incidence d this taxatim,. I cannot believe-and I know nobody can proyc-that this taxation inflicts an.v form of hardship on the sheep graziers of this State. They meet their obligations. I &dmit that frpehold land carry­ing land tax and ,,uper tax involves a greater burden on ihe holder than he would have to bear in the case of leasehold-which is not an argu1nent against the tax, but an argu­ment in favour of leasehold tenure_ \Ye have indN'd instances where people have desired to convert their frePhold to lease­hold tenure. It would be well for hon. mem­bers opposite to remember that the teachings of history are that the big social changes that have taken place in the world, evolution and 1·evolntion. han• arisen out of land tenure. \Ye· kno"- that the K<>renskY Government in Russia need not haYc be~n superseded if there had been a sa tisfactorv form of land tenure. \V e know that th~- true basis of prospcrit:-, and happiness for a State and the people of a State is to have people settled upon small areas of land, which give them an opportunity to succeed and thrive and prosper.

Hon. members opposite arc continually talking ahout the dq)]'e'sion in tho agri­cultural industry. They carefully refrain from quoting figm'<'S. They carefully refrain from citing the number of farms affected by the incidence of land tax, both primary e,nd super tax. Il >Yould be very interesting

Land Tax Act [23 AUGUST.] Amendment Bill. 359

to work out the actual proportion of farms affected, because it is so small that it almost disappccrs in comparison with the total num-. her of farms in the State which are not paying any tax whatever.

There is just another question as-.. ociatcd with this question before the Committee, that is the question whether we arc really pros­perou;:;; from an agricultural point of viP\V. If the FPderal Govcrmne11t did their dut , we would Le n1orc pro:'<pcrous. \\'c \\~Juld haYO ample proh C'tion fur our cotton indus­try at thi:~ stage of its existence. and \\ c would h .. ·ve ample protection for an indnstrv that promise, to be<:ome very important-the peanut industry-but ;y1r. Sta n lcy Brucc, the Prime l\Iinister, speaking in S:vc1ney the other day at a luncheon tenclere:l to hi'<ll by the Farmers and Settlers' Association, "Conunontcd y(..-ry fasourably on the agricul­;ural prosperity of Australia as a y,-holl'. Royal Con11ni~~ions, including the Con1n1is­sion on the Constituticn. haYc recently been examining people as to the < .Jnclition of Queensland: ar,d we ha Ye scc11 a lcA.rncd professor of eronornics who gave cvidmwc before that Commission in Sydney not long ago sa:ving that Queensland is the 1nrst pro:3-perous and is destined to become the richc,t State in the Commonwealth. People who exan1ine the ef'onon1ic equation. apart fron1 i he hurly-burly of part,,- politics, alw":,-s admit that the principles whieh haYe been c~unciatcd by this party arc sound.

Hon. mcmbrrc,, opposite shonld not corn" into this Chamber and plead for special ,consideration by way of taxation rcJiC'f on a certain privileged da'·' in the community. It is stated by hem. mr'mbers opposite that this is a class tax. Even though it be a elass ta.x. what doe& that mean?- h it not a privileged class tax·? J)otc3 it not n.1nount to tax on land? There i:;:. aiJother equation involved. 'l'hc leaseholder pays re ut. unci the tax paid hy the frc'nholder is the equi­valent of that rental. lf hon. m em hers oppo site shnd for the abolition of land ta.x ancl super land tax, then to he logical it y;ould be necessarv to ::;;tand for the ~ bolition ot rent, \Vhich jq t:1xatio~t in another fonn imposed upon the ka,eholrlcr. Hon. mem­bers opposite say) "AlvJ1i"h lnnd taxailou.''

In conclusion, might I <uggest that they make represcntatiO!ts to their politica.l k•adcr in the Fc•dcral .<:Jh•'rc•, '\fr. Bru< •\ that he totallY r1bandon l•'cdcrol land taxa­tion. _\n argvumPnt ]n fa your of the [1 boli­tion of land tas:atioll i:; n1on: valuable fron1 the Federa1 point of ·,·i·cw than from the State point -of vie"·· Economically the Federal Government ar'-' C'ncroac,hing npon the pre~,:crves of the State in 0rnbarking on a land tax>ttion policy; and a bcttPr t csc can be put up for the abolition of the Federal land tax than ca-n be put up for the .1 boli­tion of the State land tax. I •u:;gc't to hon. members opposite th,-.t thc·v bring all their influcmce to bear. and prevail upon the {)O\Yers that be in tho FPdr'ral ar.::·na to abandon Federal land t:n:ation.

Mr. DncON: \Ylw not m:,kc rcpre<•nta­tions to Mr. Scullin '1

Mr. BULCOCK: J Ul,\TCc with the Yicws expressed by JYir. Scullin it1 rcptrd to CCi'·

tain phases of land taxation and ·with so1ne cxpre~:sions of opinion indulged in by hin1 in the Federal ParliamPnt quite rcccntlv.

'The hon. member says, '' }:Ia.ke represent~-

tions to Mr. Scull1n." It is not nccf'~"ary for me to n1ak{~ rcprcsL'ntations to J\lr. Scullin. because I fmd mvself in harmonv with him on this same question. I sngtrest to hon. members opposite that they conrlno their attention to the Prime ji,Iinistcr, who has power to ab::tndon this. forrn of t~.xation, and has not ~done so. Hon. rnembcrs oppo­site support the Federal Govcrmnon1, who t,hcy say represent their desires, but thc.~­havc the audacihc to come i:1to this Chamber and protest a!l'ainst tho imposition of a similar form of taxation ; a11d they do so in order to 1nakc some politieal C'apital \vith a view to gaining some political support.

It is obvious that there is an drction approa.r-hing, and hon. n1Pn1bcrs opposite make these pleas in this Chamber in order that they may say to their snpporters. " \Ye 0ndeavouted to relieve you of th0 land tax: and since we have clone that it ought to be good enough for a donation to help us to fight your cause, beransc, if we nre returned to the Government sid8 of the Chamber, we shall carry our agitation into · el1'oci." If they do reach the Trea' ury benches, th 'n the workers and th0 people oi Queensland must not bo allowed to lose sight of the fact that the abolition of th0 land tax \Vill mean a reduction of exemptions and the small~~r salaried men and wages me-n of t,hc Stat0 will be compelled to ma-ke good the amonnt involved bv the abolition of the land tax. Despite what hon. members opposite may say to the contrary. there is no argument for tho abolition of the land tax, and I hope that the amendment will bo defeated.

Mr. BELL (Fassifr ·n): I desire to sup­port tlw amendment. which opens up a discussion on the C[UC"tion of land taxation generally. This form of taxation is .so seriously interfering with busine"s that there s.hould be some immediate revision. For many years we wore led to believe by the Tr·easurcr !hat super land taxation would be abolished; but .,o long as the present Government rernain on the Trea3urv benches so will they int roduco snper land" to xa.tion as a hardy annnal. The rwople of Queens­land are looking· for sorne relief in ta.xation, because it is having a rno.;;;t distros'3ing effcr·t upon prodnrtion in this State. and has a Yl'l'Y in1portant bearing upon the unmnploy­ment which is so rife here.

This super land tax is evidently again l'('irr1po~cd for rf:Yenuc-producing purposes. The Governm<>nt find that thov < ,~nnot carrv on and {;:tnnot honour thci;. prouuscs tO ,,bolish it. therefore, the:v have to reimpose it for the purpose stated.

Tlw hon. membe-r who has just resumed his ;;eat stated that the Opposition were continually advocating the c1bolition of this tax because it hit the big man. That is

not so. W c all know that. in the [12.30 p.m.l ultimate, it. is the people \vho

have to pay taxation. That moTe particularly applies to taxfttion as applied to citv areas. It is a well-known fact that the super' land t::Lx Jnore particularly hits the ritv a1·L~as than the .countrv <:lrF-'l.S. As a tmitter of fact. the rcYenuc derived from citv areas in land taxation amount<:ed last ve;tr to £255,536, while the rc1·enue derived from the taxation of country lands amounted only to £166.000. V\'ho pa: s that taxation? That taxation is recovered hy the owners by increasing the rents on the. users of buildings. \vho. in turn, pass it on to the general public in added costs. It is tho people of

ll!r. Bell.]

360 Land Tax Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

Queensland who ultimately pay the tax because it is pa,sed on to them.

The unfortunate 1nan who cannot p,!~s on this taxation is the man on the la.nd -the produri•r. He c·umo' jlrtS:l the lax on to rho con~umers by increasing the price of hie, produce, as is done in the cities. Land tax was primarily imposed by thi;; Government with tho idea of bursting up big estates. The taxation on undeveloped la.nds la.ct ycu produced a total of £17,282, of which £3,196 was paid in resjJcct of country lands. H is almo"t inexplicable to me why this tax should be reimposed for tho purpose of bursting up big· estates \Yhen \VG

find that land is fast going out of ocC'l]1ation as a result of the adminietration of the pre­sent Government. Th8 fig-m·es which are available to us show t.hat land is going out of occupation year bv year in .i.nf'reasing areas. Accordillg to the latest figures supplied by th,• " Commonwealth Official Year Book " in 1915, 69,070.921 acres of land in Queensland ",vere unoccupie,d, and in 1925 thi: area had increu :;;cd to 100,224~068 1-::-::rcs, nn in ere~ se D£ 31,153,147 acres. That is an enormom increaE:A in ten =,~cars.

At 12.33 p.m.,

Tho CHAIR).lAX rc;-:;tunccl the chair.

::\[!'. DELL: I make bold to Rav that >inc" 1925 further areas of land hai'C gone out of ''' "Upation. According to the latest ofli0ial flgures the area of Cro .\'11 ln nd self'ctc l in 1936 amounte:! to 3,243,117 acreo, >vhile the forfPitur~'"' and snrrciH:lPrs in the san10 period totalled 3,918.921. or a decrease in the total area of land in use for that yPar of 675.801 acres. \Vh,v, then, this reimpo·Jition of a ·uper land tax on undeveloped land? The tllJdeniablc fact remains that this is taxation purely for re,·enue purpose The land is not required, and is going out of occupation. It is not being put to profitable use to-day and, therefore, it is not uecessary to rci1npose this tax to burst up the big estates.

Of course, we realise that the Government arc only carrying out a plank in their plat· form, because !hp;· do not believe in private ownership; but, in the interesb of Queens· land generally, it is high time !hat some rernission of taxation \Yas granted, more par­ticularh land taxation. Land taxation is simply 'a further eharge on the cost of pro. duction which has to borne by the farmer.

In advocating a reduction of this tax, I do not do so in the interests of the big land­owner~. because land tax hits most severch the holder of a small area of land. That m a;, be his main asset, which he ma:v require t;:, n1ortgagc to a bank or financial institution f'·O that he may raise rnoncy for necessary improYements; so that, if his asset is depre­ciated by excessi..-e taxation, deYclopn1ent is not likely to take place to the same extent as it should. ~\nother most pernicious system adopted

by the Government is that of adding the value of standing timber on land lo the value of the land itself for ta.xation purposes. That dou not encourage the private owner to undertake reafforestation vvork. Thoro arc rnany areas in Southern Quecnsland-'-and I dare say the same position exists thronghout the State-most suitable for reafforestation. purposes; but these areas will not be planted with tre0;;;; beeause owners arc g-iven no incentive so long :ts standing tirnber increases the valuation of the land for taxation purposes.

[Mr. Bell.

Excessive taxation and harassing conditions will not encourage capital to come to thi-< country, and, as the introduction of capital is so <'SSential to the development of our rcsources-\.vhich, of course, will provide employment for more men and women-it i-< important that some change in the present system should be made.

I was particularly impressed with a remark made 'by a member of the Empire Prcs, Delegation which visited this State some time ago. It was to this effect-

" Capital is the shyest bird in tlw eeonornic aYiary, and, if not fed imnH'­diatdy, it will fly away to other fiPld><."

That is what is happening in Queenslalld to·dav. Capital is not coming here, but i' fl:vin.i away; and the ::ooner thr- present harm,sing conditions are removed the bcttc1~ it "ill be for the State.

Another reason whv the Government should withdraw from the field of land taxation is that additional duties are being imposed upon locnl authoritic; for the m a intonance of ho~­pitah, road in1proven1cnts, etc.; yet the Govcrnrrwnt continue to invade the maiu a Yen ne by wl;lich these local authorities raise their revpnue-l1nd taxation. In the intcrc ~t..; of the variom shire councils, there shonld be a revision of taxation, particularly upon freehold land.

I ha;;p pointc.d __ out my reasons for opposing the reimposition of this hcxation, which th<· Gcvernnu~nt pro1nised they \VOuld remit <tt

the Padiest moment. They are, however, still i1nposing it; and \VC on this side make bold to say that they will continue to do >'O

as long as they remain in pO\.YCl'. \Vc know that they must raise money to carry on th,, •,en·ices of the State; but thev shouhl remember that, if taxation reaches an uneco­nomical level, the effect will be to increase unemployment. If taxation be reduced, people will use their money for the dcYelop­mem of industry; and th<' developm<'ut of all our industries is ahso1nt"'ly essential.

In conclusion. I ask th,~t the amendllleut be carried so that the whole question of land taxation may be reviewed in the interei'ts of Queensland generall;c.

:Hr. WEIR (~lfaryuorou(!h): In the conrsn of !he last few years, during \\ bieh we Pa\'e discussed from time to time the reintroduc­tion of this measure, there has not been a great deal of change in the attitude of those who have studied the question of super tax gencralh·, but there has been a decided change in the attitude of the Opposition. and that is one of the reasons why they are in opposition.

Taking the basis of the super tax, ono >l'ould naturally be inclined to listen a good deal to the coutention of the hon. member f01· Barcoo. who said that the object of this tax was to break up large estates. I am one of those who regret that we did not get the re• ult out of this measure that we hoped to p;ct, but we are satisfied that is only because the super tax is not sufficiently high. \Ye are sati·fied the basis is cound, and the work j, still ahead of us. If we want evidence of that. let us go carefall:v through the figures quoted bv the hon. member for Barcoo. who wiselv discriminated between th~ amount of tax 1;aid by owners of town properties as against the owners of count!'\' properties. If we study these figures carefully, we shall see there is not much kick coming from those

Land 'l'ax Act [23 AUGUST.] Amendment Bill. 36I

who profess to represent country landowners, because, after all, they are not paying the tax, I repeat that. 'The tax in the aggre­gate is being paid Ly the 1nan who o\vns city property. That is one reason "hy I say the taxation basis is very sound. Everyone knows that in all big cities land speculators and companies haYe gro,·nl up. Their nan1es are legion, and these are the people who to-day are unduly inflating the value of land, and the super tax is in a measure designed to stop these twople from unduly inflating vrt!u<'s. In other _,-orc1s. if it has had the effect, as stated by hon. members opposite, of reducing values, then it has served some good purpose in that it has reduced values which arc not the genuine values of the land.

In reviewing the figureB "'PPlied by the Cornmissioner of TaxC's. hon. n1crnbers must realise the function this super tax has per­formed. Out of a total of £120,131 yielded from this super tax, roughly £70,000 is found by ownero of city properties, and onlc £48.000 by the n1an ov ning countr~~ property. And e\~cn that can be tli ~socted to still better advantage to enable tH to rea1iso exactl;.;­v.-hrro tliC 1noncy is co1ning frorn. The Opposition arc guilt,- of the sam<> old cry for the protection of v<estod intorbt-', a crY which is publicly expressed by onl0- one member of the party-the hon. member for Oxle::. Other members of the party discuss the question with their tongues in their cheeks; but th,, hon. member for Oxley. althoug·h persecuted by these people, at ]past is honest in his con­victjons on thi~ and on n1l oihPr matters.

\Vho is finding· this bxation? Ld us look at Table D. According to that Lablo, of the £~3.000 paid on 11ropcrty owned by country residents, 2~0 people pay £30.000-240 people out of a total of g31. or. roug-hly. 25 per cent. only, are finding £30,000 out of the £48.000. That is why I say th0 Opposition, 'vith their tongues in their checks, :-hll have a sneaking rega·rd for vested interests in this country. The same old Opposition truly represented b,­the hon. member for Oxle,- ! I am prepared to put it in this '""Y : The 240 people I am spc~king of arc in the schedule represented bY owrwrs of 5.000 acres and over, which means that in the main the super tax is being found by tho large and wealthy landowners. If you go further and dissect that, it will be found from Table E. dealing with countrv lands, that companies owning country lands find £18,396 out of the £48.000. We:1lthy companies! Yet we heat· the wail about these people, and the same old cry, even in 1928, that. this super tax is ruining the farmer. That is all bunknm. The quicker thev realise that people with g-rown-up minds will not swallow that. stnff the better it will be for themselves.

:11r. Kr;.;G: You mnst take that in con­junction with the other respomibilities with rrJ;rard to taxation.

Mr. \VEIR: That is just the point I was g-oing to rai~c. \Ye n1n;;;t take that in con· junction vdth other rc;;;ponsihi1it!cs in rcgar{l (o taxation. Because £48.000 was received in ~:;,upcr tax from pcoplP own~ng country property. it does no: follow that that tax is levic'd on rountr,- prupcrties, but just the reverse. There are people who hold leasehold properties which do not pay super tax who aro also owner~ {)f highly improved properties in the n1nin thoroughfares of Brif:banc. They P''V the· :::.npPi" tax on th-). aggregate Yalue of their combined town and

countcv freehold properties. They have prob­ablv freehold property in the country of only a small va 1 ue. Most of them are big lea~eho!<lers, the greater and most valuable part o£ their freehold property being in the cit.y; bnt the tax paid by these people also includes the tax on their country properties. That is known to cverv member of the Committee. Yet Opposition members por­oistent ly tell us that it is the small farmer who is paying the tax, when it is not the small farmer at all.

Table D of the Commissioner's report shows the incidence of the tax in regard to holders of under 100 acres of land; but such a holder must go a long way up the scale bofort' he comes within the ambit of the super tax. That proves my contention that those who do pay super land tax arc the owners of freehold land of great value. The classifica­tion shmn that there were only 351 owners of under 100 acre': of land included in the number 'dw paid the super tax of £48,936. A man nu1v be the owner of 100 acres of ianc! Jockccl up in a company, but he is not tax.·d on that at all-that is not neces­sarily the basis of taxation. He may be tbe owner of valuable freehold land in the city the value of which is added to the value of hi>: freehold land in the country, and he is h:xcd. on the as·gregatc- value; and that is 1; hat makH his super tax relatively high.

The Commissioner's report shows that £71,195 \Yas colle< tee! 'in respect of super tax on cit:: and town In nds. Those taxpayers arc in the 'ame po.,ition practically-they mav havr· dual interest'. It is clear that, of the. £255,000 collected in respect of city and town lA.n·ds, only £71,195 is in respect of super tax. The argument of tho Opposition is that the man in the country is finding the bulk of this taxation; and in making that statement to the " cocky " farmer they refle-ct upon the intelligt•nee of those to whom they are directing these observations. Such arguments will not go down with people who studv the issue keenlv in these enlight-ened times. -

The contention of the hon. member for Barcoo that the basis has not shifted is sound; and my contention is that, if we have £>tiled at all, it is in not having got enough revenue in this direction. The principle is good.

Let me take an authoritv-one who was a blatant adYocate of this ve;·y same principle, but who to-·day, with his tongue in his cheek, is taking up a different attitude. I J·efcr lo the hon. member for Normanby. Everyone here heard his references yesterday to the super tax. Whether he was really genuine in the viev.rs he expresses now is not for me to say, but a reference to his statement m o.de a few year, ago is yery interesting.

1\Tr. KING: IIe was man enough to admit that he had made a mistake.

JHr. WEIR: I think the biggest mistake he ever made was to join the party of the hon. member. The hon. member for Oxley is still making the same mistake, and the Opposition are blaming him for something he said a few days ago. Hon. members on the other side should refer their internal disputes to the Arbitration Court.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: Why did thcv ostracise the hon. member for Oxloy? Persecution!

Jir·. Weir.]

362 Land Tax Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

i'lh·. \VEIR: Let me quote what the hon. member for Normanby had to say when speaking on this question of the land tax and dealing with the merits and demerits of frcc­holrl and ]paschold tenure-

" \Vhen I meet Iand!e,-s men who desire ro get on th<l land-men with hardly any capital at all, hut men who will become a great asset to this State if they arc placed on the land-I know which prin­ciple appeals to them. \Vhcn the real difference between thn freehold and tb.' perpetual leasehold systems is explained to them. I am sure they will take the perpntua 1 lease eYcry time. Perhaps I may be pardoned for referring to my own electorate, but I can assure hon. members that as fast as land is thrown QJWI1 there it is taken up under the perpct;1al lease­hold system."

So it is to-day. The hon. member for Nor­manGy has ch;,nged, but the people have not changed.

.\n 0PPO~!TION METhlBEil: Thcv d<m't want lea.'ehold. ·

Mr. WRTR: They arc asking for land every \\ePk in the year.

:\Ir. KIXG: They cannot get it under any other tenure.

:Mr. \VRIR: They arc asking for it. because they arc convinced of the wisdom of getting )Wqwtual leasehold. Further on the hon. member for Normanby ea id-

" All the decent land that is made available is rushed, and I am trying my bE·st to get more land thrown open under the same tenure. I think that dispose' o£ the main objection of hon. members opposite to the system of land taxation propo-sed by this Govcrmrwni."

That is the way the hon. member for Nor­mauby at that time disposed of it.

Let us sec what he savs as to the policy of the Govermnent. He refers to ::'\Ir. Bcbbing­ton. then mt'mber for Drayton, as leader of the Farmers' Party, and he proceeds--

" I haYE' giYen a good nun1bcr of illus­trations of tho increase in prin1ary pro~ duction as a result of this Gm·crnmcnt coming into power. If the land tax pro· po,als o£ the Government. are put in their entirety before the people in .a 1nanncr fairly and squarely. I make bold to say that the people of Queensland will be heartily behind them. The hon. member for Pittsworth gave examples to show how the land tax had reduced land values in his electorate. \Vhat I want to know is this-I am asking a fair and pertinent question: Tho hon. member has recentlv gone through an election, and both h~ and the hon. member for Drayton no doubt placed before their people the iniquities of the land tax proposals of this Government, and can he tell me, if hi' electors an" sufff':ring in tho V\, ay in which he indicates in his speech, why it is they g-ave such a big vote for the Labour nn­didate? "

And the people arc the same now. The Opposition have not altered either; but the hon. member for 1'\ormanby ha,, alten'd. Let us go a little further-

" As far as the larger areas in tho Darling Downs are concPrned, upon wllirh oomc may have to pay land tax, it is not necessary that they should have 1,000 acres on the Darling Downs to make a

[Jir. Weir,

decent living. Those areas can well stand cutting up, and they could come within £1.280 exemption, and then get tho benefit of both a remission of the land tax and a reduction of the income tax. If the hon. member's contention is correct that the farmers were being forced off the land, I would like to ask him this ques­tion: How is it that in the returns of the land tax paid we find that only 9.8 per cent. of agriculturists pay land tax in (~ueens I and ? How can he reconcile that fact with the statement that the whole of the primary producers are being handi­capped by the land tax proposals of this GovC?rnmf1 nt ?"

That \Vas a bare statement of the position of tho party on this side of the House by the ['resent member for Norman by; and, as I say, the position has not altered, although the hon. member for J\'ormanby has seen fit to go onr there to help th0m. The point is that the basic principle of the Government's land tax and super tax proposals is the same to-day as it v:as then. If the expected results have not horn achiov,'d, it is to my mind dne to the fact that the incidence of our

tpPr t;.x has not bcr>n high enough. The mca'Ur<' of success that would be derived from the super tax is determined by the amount of tax thai is charged. If we want further to break up large estates '"" shall need to go further; and, if 1A o do) 1-ve can take the r<>.]Jonsibilit~· of doing what we bolie1·e to bP a beneficial art in the interest'' of the people in t.his State who arc land­hungr.v. If we arc to reach our goal, then we must take the Iwxt step.

I merely rose to make reference to the altered opinions of the hon. member for Normanby, who ye,terday attempted to make a case ugainet h;nd taxation; and I sug­g-est, in conclusion, that hon. members oppo­Site are merely turning tJ1cir pol.itic- d ~~ats to provide an arg-urnont for party pohtica.-l purposes. l\o ·wonder they nre in oppo'lition ~

Mr. ROBEUTR (H'z.<l Tnowuolllba) · Tho hon. ml!mbcr for Maryborongh, who has championed land taxation, claims that it is a Yery useful method of compelling the sub­division of estates; but ho o.bo added t.hat. the property owner in the city paid the t;:-: to a verv larac 0xtcnt. I ngrc·e w1th tnc latter po~tion ~of his etatcmcnt. and that is 1">.hy I intend to H!pport the amendment.

Let me first take the 1n0tropoljs as an example. A large number of buildings ar · being erected, not becatisc they are warranted bv business but bec;;uso the landowners aro compelled to pay ht'avy taxation, and are t·ndt avouring to obtain son1c r0venuc to 1neet that impost. In the citv of Brisbane, where reasonab1v sized busi1lc~~os crnploying a number of peoph' wPre at one tin,e condnctNl. those premises have now been snbdivided. providing ~n1a1l ~hops emplo7ing one or o hands. That jJosition hos been created by the heavy impost of taxation rendering it impossible to find tenants for the propert;·.

We know that one of the planks of the party oppoeite is to reduce the 'alue of land, and t,ho Government arz doing that very well. The other day a hblc was quoted showing the amount of money collected by way of hospital tax, ami, in contradiction of the ac,,;ertion that the tax is only a minor matter, I would point out that in the Too­woomba hospita 1 area the tax amounts to £7.580; in the Bunclaberg area to £10,914; and in the Brisbane area to £24,369. This

Land Tax Act [23 AUGUST.] Amendment Bill_ 363

mane\' n1u~t be vrovidcd OHt of profits, thereby reducing !he opportunities to employ labour.

I listen I'd to the 1'C'lla.rko b-' the hon. rncmbcr for Barcoo, and I ha vo nCrw procned from_ the librar-; the " Economic Record " for the rnonth,o{l\1ay, sho<,~Ting, not the taxa­tion, but the taxable capacity, which I intend to u"'e to disprO\'C ~ome of the .::;tatcn1cnts made b.v that hon. nwmhcr. \Ye hear f!Uite a Jot about the unemplodJWnt in Victoria, Nc'N South \\""ates, and South Anstralia, but we know that there is a·. much uncmploy· ment in this State; but in this State we hav,, a Government which has been in power for thirteen years--a Govt:•rnment that \vas elected pledged to abolish unemployment.

[2 p.m.] rrho Governn1ent, prirw to their return,

put right in the forefror,t of their policy the question of uncrnployrn~nt, ho1v it could be avoided. and the dutv of the Govc··nmont to the people of tho Sta,tc; but, after twelve vcars' adrninistra.tion, ·we find ourselves in the deplorable position that., a,, compa,rc·d with ::.\cw South \Vttlc and the oth<'r Stales, unemployment in Qt1censland under a Labour Govcrnrrwnt is rampant. I have in rny po~­se.,,ion the last available official fig-m·es con· tained in the "Official Year Book," 1\o. 20. 1927. It is one of tho misemble failingo of the Government that from time to time thcv <1uestion Opposition figures. On the authorit: ... of this book, I find the percentage of uncm­p!o,-ment in the various Sta t~s to bo-

New South \V ales Victoria Qu2~nsland South Australia ·western Australia.

Per cent. 7.4 6.4 8.4 5.4 7.1

I hope these oificial figures will be accepted. I do not know that the,- will, bccansc I have heard so much C'ross-qlwstioning of figures; but I cannot get any rnore definite figures. I accept them, and I hope hon. m em bc•rs vvill be srrtisfiod tha,t in this Ehtc• tlwre is a larger percentage of un<'mployrncllt than in an'" other State in the Commonwealth, and a lot more than th~re ought to be.

The SECRETARY FOR l'cBL1C \VOl'KS: Only half of vvhat there was unckr yonr GoYern­rncnt.

Mr. ROBETITS: That is the kind of -tate­ment that emanates from the GoYCl'llnwnt benche-s. The ~hnister knov s 1hat is wrong.

The SECRETARY FOR I'cBL1C \Yorxs: I sa·,-it is correct. ~

::Y.fr. ROBEn.rrs: I know m,· n wiih farnilie~ in the citv of Toovvoomba who have boon unemployed for tweln• months

l\fr. KEHR: There arc anv nurnhor of them in Brisbane. ~

The SECRF.TARY FOR PrnLrC \Yor.Ks: \Yhon your Govcrnm0nt were in po\vcr~ people left the Sta.te in thousa,ndc.

Mr. ROBETITS: \Yhcn I was interrupted on this question of mtcmplo:,'ment, I was about to deal with the table whid1 sets forth the taxation per head in several of the States. Here aro the ftguros-

! l923·24.1192,!-2ii.J~2G-27. ;1917-18

S, d. s. d. 8. d. s. d, Yictoria 12 0 16 0 20 () 25 0 Queensla:C:ci .. 20 () ()9 0 I 84 0 87 0 South Australia .. 26 0 33 0 ' 44 0 48 0

Those figures are the justification for the hon. member for Sand;;ato moving his arnendment. There is evidence that Quef·ns­land is overburdened with taxation, and that this taxa.tlon is the c'luse of the E.tagnation that we find on every ha·1cl. Employm; llt has be<:orno restricted, for, unfortunat~ly, CD1-

ployors have to get rid of their labour,, a,s it is unprofitable. Is any further enclcnco required in support of our rcqnc:-;t t~at e"penditure should be lui'ened and taxatwn reduced in order that employment shall be no further curtailed?

Mr. MORGAN (Jfurilla); According to a statement made by an hon. member opposite, I am one of those who are supposed to have been driven out of Victoria owing to the fact that land was dear in that St.1te, and that, when I came to Queensland, I did so to get cheaper land. That is not so. The fact that land was clearer in Victoria is because the land was worth the money. Cheap land i,; no good to anyone. Land that is worth only 10s. per acre, for ('xample, is land that is valued at that price because it cannot produce a great deal. On tho other hand, land worth £100 per acre, as so1ne of our sugar land is, is capablo of producing a Yaluable commodity. It follows, therefore, that land increases in Yaluf' in accordance with tho value of what it pro­duces. It is ridiculous for hon. member3 opposite to say that everything that is done to depreciate the value of la,nd is to the benefit of the State. It is not; on the contr .. try, it is of incalculable harm to the State. We clo not want to reduce land Yalues; nt•ither do we desire that that land should be oyer­valued. \Yhat wo desire is that the pro­ductivity of the land shall be such ao to make that land v-aluable. When I came to Queens­land twf'nty years ago, land on the Darling Downs was selling at an average price of £10 per acre, and there \\as quite a lot of it available. To-day that land may be pur­chased for about £5 por acre. b that not injurious to the SLttn?

1\Ir. HY:--iES: Tho land tax breaks up land monopoly.

Mr. MORGA~: If the hon. gentleman claims that the laud tax is responsible for that decreased value of land on the Downs, then he can claim that the Labour Govcrn­Incnt have done an cnorrnous arrwunt of c'amage to the State. Let me illustrate my point. \Vhen land was valued at £10 per acre on the Downs the owners of the land were able to borrow up to two.thirds of the total v alne of their holding, the borrowed money being utilised to effect improvements that would increase the earning capacity of the land. With a depreciation in Yalue to £5 per acre, owners of land arc iinding that the banks are pressing them to reduce their ov-erdrafts. for the simple reason that the se~urity heJ.d by the financial institutions is depreciating in value. Surely hem. mem· hers opposite will admit that iiuoh a con­dition of affairs has been inJunous to the Darling Downs ' In my own case-and I can speak from experience-when I left Victoria I sold my land there at over £7 oer acre, and, with the cash realised on the sale, came to Queensbnd. 'fhe land which I sold in Victoria has to.day appreciated in value to such an extent that it was resold recently for £20 per acre. \Vhen I came to Queensland I invested my money in land selected, not adjacent to the railway line, but some 35 miles from railway facilities,

1J1r_ 111organ.]

364 Land Tax Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendmm! Bill.

I pioneered land which had only previously been ridden over; it had never boon put into productive use. To-day I can eay with­out fear of contradiction that, if I put that land up for sale by public auction, I could not get back the money I have spent on improvements. Had I stopped. in Victoria, my unearned. increment-as the Labour Party term it-would have been the differ­once between the £7 and £20 per acre. On my holding in Queensland the l!ncarned incre­ment is nothing. 'That is only one of many similar casH. After having worked the property-and my family and I have worked hard all these years-I ha ye received only a living from that holding. Men who have made money out of land are those who, having purchased it in the first place at £1 per acre, sold it at an opportune time for £10 per acre. Yet the Labour Partv would take that money away from them. ·

When a man goes into the country and pioneers, and pro' os bv hard work that land is capable of producing some commodity that pw peoJ?IO want, it is not the people who live m t.he crty who Cl'eht<e the ,-aluc of that lr:nd. It is crea.tcd by the man \Vho has gone out and demonstrated bv hard work that the land is c::tpable of producing a certain crop which is of value to the communih. Yet the Labour Party say to him. '·You arc not entitled to any increase in- the value of that land. because it is the people who live in rhr cities who ha.ve created that value." That is a ridiculous argument. ·we arc ;;uffcring to-da,­bccame t.he lands ir, Onec'mland hr.vc no't increased in value dur~ng the last tc'n or tvvelve _years. As a matter of fact. c•xePpt in a few rsolr.tcd cases, they ha,-c ,]0c;·ea·ced in value. I a.m not go1ng- to saY tbat sugar lands _have dccrca31'd in vahw, bnt. generally speakmg, farm lands Ill Qncensland are n0t of the same value M thr'7 ,_,·ere hn·nrv years ago. That is dl'trimcntrJ 'o the fmm:e 'pros­perity of the State.

\Yhy is it that \Vl<icm Au'tl·.Llia i, going ahead by leaps and bounds? The.- ha.-e a Labour Govcrnnlf'Ilt in l10l\"Cr ~n that Stnte, but the Leader of that (Jo,·ernmcnt must bo a man of great .f·rrpacity. I sllonJd like to meet that g0ntlcman, }wcausc he h1.-, done many things of which I approYc. One thing that he did not ·do was to stop people coming from the other States, as was done in Queens land by onr Labour Government. The very moment our GoYcrnrnent jinpo.-;od a land tax and did awa.v \vith freehold tcnnr0 thcv stemmed the t'ide of people coming fr~m th;, other States. The result "as iha.t the son-; of farmers in the crowded areas of Yictoria and other States who wished to go on the land went to \Y f''otern A nsiralia lvccause the GoYernmont of \Ycstcrn Australia djd not adopt the tactics adopted bv the r.abour Go­vernment in ihis State. "The Premier of \Ve-.tern Australia. did not impos0 a lan.J t~tx, and he did not reduce the value of land. He did all he could io inrrease the value of land, and he also gaYe the people the free· hold of living areas. That is whv to-dav wo are in seriou-s competition with v~-,.cstern VAu~­tralia; and in itnother fh·e years, if our land sdtlement decreases in the way it has been decreasing- and s0Hkment in \\~est ern A us­tralia continues to incrC'a~c as it hr1s in the last five ;vears, ·western Australia will be the third mos( important Sta.to in the Common­wealth of Australia. That will b;, a seriom thing for Queensland. \Vestern Australia Is going ahead by leaps and bounds bec:tUsc it has a sane Go,crnment, while Queenshnd is

[Mr. Morgan.

going back bee a uBe \VC ha.Yc a Go,~crnlnent which taxes the backbone of the conntry­tho man who goes on tho ·land with a view to making a living from it.

I wish to deal short];- with the cattle ;,,dus. try and in that conn~ction I wish to poillt ont that the Secretary for Agricult.ur0, wlJCn opening the meat exhibit at the Royal National Show in 1927, <tclmitted the difficul­ties under which the meat industr; ;, as struggling, and stn•s->cd the need for organi­sation and of CYCry po· ~1bln assishtnrC' h::u1g afforded. The hon. gcntlcm;m reco~·nhcd that fact, and I hope he ruognises tho.t there is some necessitv for the l~overnmcnt of the dav giving all Pos~iblo assistance to th0 11It.n

wh"o is engaged in the cattlc-grovYing indu~~t!~y of Queensland.

The SECRETARY FOR AGlllCCLTCRE: I ,tan cl for every word I then said.

Mr. M ORGAN: I ha.ve no complaint to make about that spec,·h; but I 1;ant to show the hon. gentleman how, if he desires, Jw ca11 assist the rr.an who has a block of land on which he is depasturing cattle. The Governor's Speech for 1928 contains this-

" Fol1o,Yil1g on the rcyJOrt of tht2 Br·cf Cattle Indnstrv Commi,.sion, it is the intention of m:v advisers 1o intro~1u"c a Land Acts Am~ndrnent Bill io gin; ':rr•ct to f~crtain reconlnJC'ndutions of tbc Coln­n1i:3sion in regard to land tcL.ll'"s.''

I hope that will be done. If, a' i!I the case of the wool industry. concl c·sion< in the shapP of reduC'iion of Cro-..vn rentaL:; rrrc giY('ll, lQ,QQQ 3CTCS l't'ntPd at 2d. per aC:'P

p0r annurn rccci·dng a reduction to ld. w1IJ get a c•mccssicn '"Lrth £41 13'. 4cl. per annum. On the other hand, 10,0CO acres of freehold valued at £1 per acre pay land ta" at the rate of 5~d. in the £, equal to £229 13s. 4d. per annum. as against the re-ntal of £41 13s. 4d. paid b:· the leasoholder occupy­ing tho · 'une area, nnd gets no concess1o11 ,d;ateYcr. Ono man has boug-ht a freehold. for which he has paid according to the law of the land, and has done nothing unlawful. Because he is unfortunnte enough t0 own a freehold he is compelll'd to paY a land tax of £229 13s. 4d., while the man who has a leasehold 0f the same area gets a concession in taxation of £41 13s. 4d. per annum.

Mr. HAKLON: \Yhat arc you boosting free­hold for?

Mr. :VIORGAN: Hon. members opposite say that the land tax will also burst up large estates, but wo know that is not so. That policy has been exploded throug·hout Aus­tralia. The land tax does not break up large estates.

You would not allow me, ::\1r. Pollock, to entn into a debate as to tho merit" ot· demerits of freehold and leaseh0ld on dus occ-asion; but I claim that it would be much better for the State from a taxation poiut of yicw if we broug-ht liYina areas ur_dCl' freehold instead of ~leasehold~ tenure. 'fh,, figures I ha ye giYcn show the disady~nt -.gL\ under ·nrhich frecholdcYs are labounng at the present moment. The only w·.y in ,vhich tho GoYcrnrncnt can g·iye thr, cattle-g-rower relief is by reducing the land tax upoa hi' property. They arc going- to give the cattle­owners some help, if they po,sess leaseholds, bv reducing their rcntals; but, unless they g~ve the man with freehold a re-duction in land. taxation, they cannot give him any concession at all. Surely lw i, deserving of sorn8 consideration ! la he a criminal

Land Tax Act [23 AUGUST.] Amendment Bill. 365

ben me he owns land? He has not com­mitted any oiience, and the money he p<tid for the land has been used by the Go,·ern­rnent. In many cases lando'''ners are ;,vorfO

off to-day than they were when they bou,;h the land twenty years ago, because, 1t has not incrc·ascd in value since then.

Mr. W. COOPER (Roscwood) : I have listened to the remarks of hon. members opposit", and I am somewhat surprised to know that the_1 are of the opinion that the small ma.n on the land has been the most seYcrely hit l:y this tax. It appears to me that the)- are not. very much concerned with the ~rnall farrner or grazier; their conrern is for the v- calthy landowner. I suppose that m:v electo!'ate is one of the mcc,t closely settled in Amtralia. The largest holding surveyed b.~ previous Governments was 45 acres. Since then the farmers ha.-e found that a re>t too small, and ono man has bought another out, so that the areas held for the pur­pose of intcn6ive cultivation have bcYn prar­tically doubled. I can. however, say without fear of contradiction that no agriculturist or dairyn1an oe even grazier in n1y electorate pays land tax, consequently there cannot be <my hardship in their cases.

The hon. member for :Ylurilla said that the grazier owning 10,000 acres under a freehold tenure was penalised in comparison with the man occupymg a similar are>t of leasehold country, showing that the latter is infinitely better for the man without means than to pllrchase a freehold. I have advocated the <Idvantages of leasehold against hechold ever since I have boon in the House, and I have shown as far as I could that tho man with a leasehold has a better opportunity of suc­ceeding in dairying, agricultural, or pastoral pursuits. The hon. member for Murilla based his case on these fact,: The land he sold in Victoria increased in value from £7 to £20 an acre, showing plainly that the hon. mem­ber, like many others, did not take up land for the purpose of making a living, but to secure the unearned increment which after a period of year.s might be realised from it as a result of rail ways, roads, or other improve­ment., being mgde in the district, fer which the common taxpayer had to put his hand into his pocket. When he sees what he eonsiders the hest opportunity, he selb, per­haps, to some unfortunate fellow from another State who does not know the actual value of land or how it has increased in Yaluc. That is one of the motives that actuate the holders of large areas of land. although we know that the land is only worth what it will actually produce. If a Victorian such as the hon. member for Murilla comes OYN here and goes to agents who· take him down in the wa:v they generally do unless one is ,·ery well acquainted with land values, all I can say is that I am sorry for him. I r£'gret that that is the case with man~7

unfortunate m<'n who have come here and taken up land; but that is not a reason whv this Government should not take up tlw' stand that a certain amount of royenue is required for the State, and, moreo.ver, that th· re l!ro men on the land and elsewhere who lw,·e large faLJi!ies who v; ant the oppor­tunitv of s0curing some part of Queensland on v.·hiell thr.'.· 1nay carry on agrif'ultural and CJth< r pm.,,nits. They have a right to the hnd, and. ii speculators will hold it for the purpo.-p of getting unearned increment, it i11 nothing mere or less than the duty of the GoYernment to tax land so as to break up large aggregations.

Th0 small farmer holding from 50 acre-; to 100 acrec; is entitled to 'an exemption of £1,500 on the unimproved capita.[ value of the land, and the loeal anthority values arG

invariably adopted by the Commissioner for Taxes. Consequently no one can complain. If land v.aluh haYc decreased in Queensland, it has not been duo to an:v land legislation or taxation legislation in1poscd by thi::; G-o­VNnmcnt, bnt to the exorbitant interc-ct ra:ee charged selectors by the -financial institntiDns. During the drought the unfortunate shP~fl­rnen found themselves in difficulties; and, whilst the banks were prepared to Qd,·an<::e then1 money for tho purpose of carrying -on to a certain extent in the hope of the drought breaking, a.s ~oon as the ,, hocpn1en found thcmsclv0s in a con:.or, thf~ demand for a reduction of their overdl'ftft3 was ahva~ ':o. held over their heads by their bankr•rs. ·sh; krw.v perfectly well that under tho prevailing con­ditions it 'vas impossible to cornnly with such a d0mand. A.s soon as goorl sc·t ;)ons return. the properties owned by i h'eso selectors and forfeited to the hanks under the lt~gal righl-s contained in the uvJrtgagL.;:; 1f ill be sol·d by public aurtion, thn bank~ taking y·ery line care not to lose any money ther<'Ly The banks havo ahvay~ Lcen a ~c·t of f:.;hy­loc•ks-always rca.d-y to take their ponnd of flesh from the man on the land and from anybody r;lse. It is tho dut:v of thc•,,e finanei'd institutions t<J assist in the dm·clopmont of the State bv reducing the interest rate on rheir loans. "

The CHAIRMAN: Order ! The hon. mem­ber is getting <1 little away from the question.

Mr. \V. COOPER: I apologise', Mr. Pollock. The que,tion befom the Committee to-clay is whether .\le arc going to relieve the­large merchants and the la-rge landowners in the city from the rcsponsibilit y of contri­buting some of the revenue to carry on the necessary scrYiccs of the S!atc. or whether "e are to continue land tax and super 1 and hx until the finances Df the State are in such a healthy position as to enable this relief to be given.

Up to the present time the Shto has enclea voured to keep ><11 its institutions going; and I can assure the people of Queens­land that, if hon. members opposite were returned to power, they could not rednce taxation. My experience has taught me thrrt-, regardless of whethc1· the party in pow<'J' l::e Tory or Liberal, once they are in the habit of securing a certain amount of taxation it is a most cl ifficult thing to induce them to forgo a portion of it, especi>t!ly in trying times such as the present.

[2.30 p.rn.] Question-That the words proposed to be

omitted (Jir. Sizt r's amendment) stand part of the question-put; and the Committeo divided:- ·

AYES, 32. Mr. Barber Mr .. Tones

Bertram 1{ irwan Bow , Larcombe

, Brassington , Llewelyn Bruce , Lloyd Bulcock McCormack Collins , McLachlan Cooper. F. A. " Mullan Cooper, W. ., 0' Keefe Dash Riordan Dunstan , Ryan, H. J. Ferricks , Smith Foley Weir Gledson " Wellington Hanlon , Wilson

, Hym~s , Winstanley Tellers: :Mr. Brassington and ~fr. Bruce.

JJ!r. W. Cooper.]

366 Land Tax Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

Mr. Appel Barnes, G. P. Bell

, Brand ,, Clayton

Uostello Deacon Edwards

, Fry Grimstone Kelso Kerr

., King

"\Qt<:S, 25,

.liir. Maxwell ., Moore , Morgan , Peterson

Roberts , Russell, H: , Russell, W.

Sizer n Swayne , Taylor

Walker ,, Warren

M. A.

Tellers: Mr. II. ~I. Rus~ell and Mr. W. A. Rnssell.

PAIR. AYE, "KO.

:Mr. Wrigbt ~Ir. \V. H. Barnes

Resolved in the affirmative.

Question-Original motion-" That it is desirable that the Bill be introduced "-put; and the Committee divided:-

i\Ir Barber Bertram Bow

, Brassington RTU('('

Bulcock Cci1ins

, Cooper, F. A , Cooper, W.

Dash Dunstan Ferricks

, Foley Gledson Hanlon

, Hynes Jones

Tellers:

Mr. Appel , Barnes, G. P.

Bell Brand Clayton CostE:!llo Deacon Edwards

, Fry Grim stone Kelso Kerr King

AYF.S, 33.

1Ir. Kirwan Larcombe

, Llewelyn Lloyd

. , l\f cCormack , JIIcLachlan

Mul1an , O'Keefe

Riordan , Hyan, H .• T.

Smith , Stopford , Weir , Wellington u \Vilson , \Vinstanley

l:lr. Dash and ::.ur lfynes.

:XoES, 25.

Mr . .lllaxwell ., Moore , Morgan ,. I>eterson , Hoberts , Russell, H. M. , Hu,.dl, W. A.

.Sizer , ~wayne

, Taylor Walker

, 'Varren

Tellers : :l-Ir. Brand and ~Ir. Clayton.

PAIR,

~0.

l\Tr. Wri.ght Mr W. !I. Barnes

Resolved in the affirmative.

The House resumed.

The CHAI!l:I1'AN reported that the Committee had come to a re·solution.

Resolution agreed to.

FIRST READING.

The TREASUHER (Hon. W. McCormack, Cairns) presented the Bill, and moved-

" That the Bill be now read a first tin1c."

Question put and passed.

Sccoml reading of tho Bill made an Order of the Day for Tuesday next.

ADDRESS IN REPLY .

RESUMPTION OF DEBATE.

Question stated-" That the fo !!owing Address be pre­

sented to the Governo·r in reply to the Speech delivere-d by His Excellency in opening this, the third session of the twenty-fourth Parliament of Queens­land:-" May it plc:t~e Your Excellency,-

" We, His :Yiajesty's loyal and dutiful subjects, the members of the Legislative Assembly of Queensland, in Parliament assembled, desire to assure Your Excel­lency of our continued loyalty and affec­tion towa·rds thn Throne and Person of our Most Gracious Sovereign, and to tender our thanks to Your Excellency for the Speech with which you have been pkased to open the pre-sent session.

"The various n1oasures to -which Your Excellency has referre-d, and all other matters that may be brought before us, will receiye our most careful considera­tion, and it will be our earnest endea­vour so to deal with them that our labours may tend to the advancement and prosperity of the State"-

On which Mr. l\IOORE (Aubig11y) had moved-

" That the question be anwnded by the addition of the follov:ing words:-

' but we desire to inform Your Excel­lencv that the Government does not po ..... 'ess the confidence of this House.' "

}Ir. HYNF:S (l'owmvill"): I desire to pre­face n1y remarks by extending 1ny congratu~ lations to the mover and seconder of the motion for the adoption of the Addre3S in Heply.

I also take this O)lportunity, which is thP first I haYe had, of 0xpressing my deep regret at the demise of Mr. John Payne, the late hon. member for Mitohell. It is rather fitting that the present hon. member for 1Iitchell. Mr. Bow. should haYe bcPn chosen by the electors of 1\Titchell to rcprc-8ent that i1n110rtant con,,tituency in :::urt,'::>­sion to the late nwmlwr. J\Ir. Bo\1· is a man whom I ha,ye known for vcrv n1anv vcar~. lfc is conversant ,vith thP rc~uirC'm~nt's and aspirations of the Mitchcll electoratP. and i a fit prr:;;on to surr"ed the grand o]d man '.dw fdled the position of hon. member for Mitchell for twcntv-thre .. c Years YYith credit to himself and "-{th p:rr .. ,·t honour to this part~·. (Hear. hear!) The pre"·.Pnce of \Ir. Bow in this C:hamber is a fitting reply tu the motion of no confidence launched hv the Opposition, and is a sure indication that the electors of Que0nsland hnve confidence in tho administration and l~;:iisbtion of this ptlrb-. Everything. ap]1a-rently, was in favour of the Tory Party during the campai,m. There \Yere Yrry fo".V labourers \Vorking in the electorate: the nwn from the stations had drifted awav to oihcr dl--trict~ nntl othPr States of the Commow;·ca1t.h. the sunJcortNs of hon. m em bors op)1osite being mostlv tho'o left on the big runs, which in norr•al years employ such a large numb_r of ardPnt snn­portcrs of this party. In addition to thet, the party opposite had the a~o;;ist<~nec of nny arnonnt of D1oney, nnd had, frorn th~ir YiC'\Y­polnt, a good {'andidatc. 0:8twithstancling thcso favourable fcahm s from thc Torv point of view, :'\fr. Bow was elcdeJ to th{~

AddreHs in Reply. [23 AuausT.] Address in Reply. 367

Chamber. confidence party.

That proY· s that th0 people haTe m the adminj,tration of thi,

I want to refer to staterncnts rnad0 by Opposition uicmbcrs in connection ,,-ith th(~ unemployment problem. l:ncmployment lS

not peculiar to Queensland. 'Throughout the Commonwealth and the ciYilisod world the sarne problmn is taxing the ingenuity of political parties to-day. The latest figures from the United States of America show that the number of unemployed in that country is estimated to be 4,000,0:JO. while some of the senators in Congress stated that it had reached 8,000,000. That is in America, the most highly indmtrialised country in the worl·d. Most countries in Europe arc pa,ing through a cri'3is due i_o unernploymcnt. rrhi::; problem is taxing the ing0nnity of statesrncn in Great Britain. In two counties in Wales there are out of employment 200,000 miners, who have no prospect of gAtting work in Britain. Still we arc told that the position has been brought about in Queensland through the maladministration of the Labour Party. I admit that we haYe not employ­ment enough in Qucu1sland; there is evi­dence of that eyerywhere. Even in t,he Government son-ice '"" arc obliged to put men on short time. In my own electorate of Townsville there are permanent employees who are pooling \\ork and losiug one day a fortnight in order to keep all going. '\Ye shall always have unemployment so long as the existing capitalistic system laots. Any person with a smattering of economics knows that unemployment will exist while that system continues.

Mr. Kn;a: Nomense!

::'vfr. HYNES: It will pcnn11nently dis­appear with the total disappearance of the capitaliotic system and the ultimate attain­ment of our objecti,-e-that is. the socialisa­tion of industry.

Any person who has applied himself to the study of this problem kno,,-s that what I have f.-li·d is correct, and that we shall haYe unemployrncnt so long- as th(~ capitalistic system of production is in existence. It is unfair to say that we arc re,ponsiblc for the position in Queensland, and it is incorrect to state that it is more acute hero than in the other States of the Commonwealth. We haYc onlv to take into consideration the figures ":hich have been published bv tlw Commonwealth Stat;:-'tiC'ian for the- Rv_'cond quarter of the present ve:u. The-e ITi re the lie direct to those members opposite who haw blatantly stated that the maladminis­tration of this partv has been instrumental in Inaking the uncnlplovn1ent nrobl{~n1 rnor·­acute in Queensland tha;1 in the other States. Fig-ures haye been quoted by the Premier and other 117on1bers of this 'party sho\Ying that there 1s n1ore une1nployrnont in the other States than here. Hon. members opposite haYe answered that bv savinrr that those figures arc not correct: { p~opo'".< to quote an authorit" '"hich hon. member.< may accept-the " Brisbane Com·ier " of 19th July-

" The ro~ult" of the quarterly in,·csti­g<ttions made under the direction d the :Minister for Home and Territories bY the Commonwealth Statistician (:\IJ~. Chas. II. 1'.-ickens) as to unemployment in Australia Jun-e been made available for the ,ccond quarter of 1928. "\lthouglt

the im-estigation is confined to t ade unionisto, the figures may be taken as a fair indication of the unemployment position among workers generally, except­ing as regard::; occupations of a purely casual nature, or tho;;c of a more or less permanent nature, such as railway~ and trarnways, public service, etc., in respect of wloich no returns are col­lected. Unemployment due to strikes is also excluded. The percentage rates for the various States and Australia ao a whole were :-New South Wales, 10.9; Victoria, 12.2; Queensland, 7.1; South Australia, 16.1; ·western Australia, 9.5; Tasmania, 10.7; and Australia, 11.2."

That shows clearly, on no less an authority than the figures of the Commonwealth Statis­i.icia.n, and admitted by what I might call the oflici11l mouthpiece or organ of hon. members opposite, to be substantially correct, that there is less unemployment in Queens­land under a Labour Government than in 'l'ory-governed States. There is an obliga­tion and a responsibili t.Y on every person in the community to a~sist in dealing with the qnemployrnent position as it presents itself to-day. Every right-thinking citizen ought to be doing something. Instead of that, we fincl that hon. members opposite, for the purpose of gaining some political kudos, are using arguments and stating inaccuracies which arc calculated to bring them into favour with the unfortunate per­·'ons who are out of work. I say that is a ghoulish thing to do, and is not worthy of the dignity of a political party.

I have said that a responsibility rests on cYcryonc, and I shall quote an extract from the report of the Development and Migra­tion Commis-ion recently submitted to the Commonwealth Government. One of the remarks of Ji.fr. Gepp, the chairman, indi­cates that the duty of solving the problem is the rc-ponsibility of every citizen in the Commonwe>~lth. This is ,.;hat he has to :-ay-

'· It is important that it should be realised that to take up the problem of unemployment _is not the duty solely of Go,-ernments or of an v one section of the community. Improv~ments are pos­sible onlv if concerted action is taken bv all indi,~idnals and organisations intel:­osted in the welfare of Australia. It is ho)wcl that the maintenance of a spirit of eo-operation behveen Govenuncn ts, <'mployers, and workers will pave the Y>ay to a considora.hle rneasurement of a eh icve­ment."

That is the only way in which the position can be faced. E.vory hon. member on this side realis0s that it is a tragic thing- to sec able-bodied and capable workers without the opportunity of working- to secure the where­" ithal to liYe. It is the duty of everybody to endeavour to r0medv this position. '\Vc should all do something' to afford some relief for these people, instead of attempting to make political kudos out of an unfortunate situation. Hon. memberc oppo;ite should rnakc somP helpful suggestions to enab]o us to deal with the position. It is quite falla­cious to argue that a reduction of ta,mtion, an increase in hours, or the abolition of tho Board of 'Trade and Arbitration is going to romedv the trouble. That is not a hclri1ul ~uggcs'tion. but only indiratPs that hon. !llClll­bers opposite .ar0 not }Joncst \vhcn the.\-

JJ1r. Hynes.]

368 Address in Reply. [ASSE:\fBL Y.] Address in Reply.

express concern at the, position m connection with unemployment.

Mr. Knw: Why did you take awav from them the right to work? ·

Mr. HYNES : I desire to make some refer­ence to the causes of unemployment. The report from which I intend to quote has not been compiled by any adherent of the Labour policy, but by a commission appointed by a Tory Government. The membero of that commission give their opinion as to some of the causes of unemployment and depression. I should like to have some of those opinions placed in " Hansard " so that the people outside will understand what are the causes of industri~l and commercial depression through whiCh we are passing in Australia to-day, which has a reflex effect on the em­ployment market. In dealing with the years 1927-28 the report states- •

" The results of a review of business ,conditions existing in Victoria during the past few years conducted by the com­wittec of the, Victorian branch of the Economic Societv of Australia and New Zealand are published in issues of the ' Economic Hecord ' of :May, 1926, and November, 1927. Profiting by the con­clusion reached by the above committee viewing Australia as a whole, it is pos­sible to enumerute the following particu­lar causes of depression that set in at the latter half of 1927:-

" 1. Adverse weather conditions.-From 1925 up till recently portions of Queens­land experienced dry conditions, and suffered losses of stock, and this applied to 1926 and 1927 in parts of K ew South Wales and South Australia. The heavy cost of hand feeding reduced the spend­ing power of the pastoralists, and this reacted adversely upon the numerous secondary industries. Within the period of growth of agricultural crops during the 1927 season in New South vValeo, Victoria, and South Australia, distribu­tion of rainfall was such as to have a depressing effect upon business, quite apart from the ultimate effect upon the spending power of the agricultural com­munity."

It also states-" 2. The Cornrncmwc"1lth wheat yield

for the 1927-28 sca,on \vas con:cidcrably below those of recent years, despite the large increase in production in \Vestern Australia. The average yield per acre for the Commonwealth was 9.3 bushels, which v.as the lo,..est since 1919-20. 'The yield for 1924-25 was 15.2 bushels; for 1925-26 11.2 bushels: for 1926-27 13.7 bushels. The States of New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia have all experienced reduced yields, owing to the adverse seasonal conditionR.''

[3 p.m.l " This reduced the spending powe;· of

primary producers jn r!1osc Sta.tc:'i rrnd al~o the n1nnber nf workera required to harvest aud handle the crops.

" World prices h•ll in 1926 anc! 1927, and, as a result, Anstrn.lian exports -,yero reduced in value. 'rhis. combined with the fall in the Amtraiian wholesale price level, adversely affected business.

"Imports exceeded exports by nearly £13.000.000. a.nd th0 deficiency in respect of tho balanc0 of internatio'lal paymods

[Jllr. Hynes.

as a \1 hole was about £27,000,000. 'l'ho efl'ect of such a positioJt upon credit con­ditions has alreadv be0n referred to and is fully discussed ·in the report by' Pro­fPS'30i~ Copl.:.~nd."

Thoro we ha.-o the roasl'ns for the depression and consequent unemployment in this State set _out b) a. Con~rnis:;;ion composed of expL·rts, whiCh was appomtccl to investigate the posi­tiOn from a scientific point of view. The Commi8'ion had the a 'sistancc and help of Professor Copland, a gentleman who has the reputation of being one of the most eminent economists in Australia. At the present time Profc'·.sor Coplancl is the Dc,,n of Faculty of Commerce in the :'11dbourne University, and in his report, "hich is a<tached to the report of the Commission, he giYc' the cansEs of unen1ployment; but iu not one single instance through the whole of his long rcpe>rt does he sta.te that tax~tion is resnonsible or is a factor. which has brought · rtbout unemploy­ment m Queensland or the other States. In dealing with the importation of motor vehicles and oil-and we admit this is a factor which ha.s helped to bring about the present position-the Commission points out that we are spending millions of pounds in importing articles ,,-hich ought to be pro­duced here. That rnoney is being taken out of circulation, therefore the people who ordinarily might be employed in the manu­facture of those articles in this country must of nece·sity be unemployed. The Commi'8ion giYes the value in millions of pounds of tho imports of motor vehicles, etc., into t.he Com­monwealth--

1922-23 1923~24 1924-25 1925-26 1926-27

12.45 18.78 20.38 22.66 24.06

That is to say, from 1922 to 19~7 there has been an annual increaee in the value of motor vehicles, etc., imported into the Common­wealth of approximately £12,000,000. In ot,her words, we douhled the number imported during those year~.

The value of imports of petroleum during the same period-~the figures are again given in millions-\\ as-

1922--23 1923-24 1924-25 1925-26 1926-27

The report ,;ays-

3.59 4.56 5.88 7.19 7.56

" These figures suggest a diversion of expenditure from other commo-dities and this must eontri bute to depression in cer­tain industries. The immediate depres­sion caused bv a transference of demand from a commoditv manufactured at ham<· to a commodity· imp01·tod from abroad would be greater than that caused hy tranoference of demand from one home manufacture to another."

That is the opinion expressed by a Commis­sion which has had e.-cry facility placed at its disposaJ in order to iuwstigaic scientific­ally tho cause of unemployment in Australia.

The only thing hon. members opposite can suggest wh~,' unon1plo~nnent exists in this State is increased taxation. I intend to dea 1 with that aspecJ· of the matter with a view to showing that the incidence of taxation has not been increased by thi' party in recent ;:ears. In any ccsc•, as is pointed out by the C'ommis::;ion, the trani'fcrenco of such a large

Address in Reply. [23 AUGUST.] Address in Reply. 369

amount of monev to the other side of the world must have an injurious eifoct upon employment in our country, in which it should have been spent.

Another aspect of unemployment. which should be considered, and whtch 1s also referred to in the report of the Develop­ment and Migration Gommission, ts. ~he progreis of invention and the mechamsu_tg of industry. On that quesbon the Commts­ston has this to say-

" IrnproYelnc-nts in the rncans ~f p_ro­duction by invention and the applwatwn of machinery are frequently accompamed bv the displac0ment of labour and the unemployment of those displaced pend­ing their absorptio_n in other brar:chcs of industry. On tlns account opposttlon is frequently expressed by those engaged in industry to the introduction of labour­saving devices, it being felt that the immediate disadvantage to those dts­placed outweighs the general ad 1·antage to the community resulting from the use of improved methods."

In other words, with an improvement in the technique of industry or with the intro-duc­tion of new machinery. labour is displaced and unemployment created. I remember in the district whore I was reared-the Mackay district-there wero thirty-three sugar mills operating at one t.ime, and, although the output then was not as great as it is to-day, there arc only thirty-three sugar mills in the whole of Queensland at prec,ont. That clearly shows that the application of modern science to industrv must inevitablv be accompanied by a red;Jction in the n;Jmber of persons employed.

Hon. members opposite may say. " \Yhat i .. your solution?" Our solution has been to reduce the hours of employment; and I venture to say that it is the only scientific •J.nd logical way of dealing with the position. The trouble has been that it has been most difficult to put that solution into practice. because, whilst "\VC are in cornpetition with ether States of the Commonwealth and other countries of the world whose employees work longer hours, it would be injurious to indus­try in Quecndand to go beyond a certain point. I say, however, that we have demon­,tl·ated that we can compete successfully with other States and other countries since we have adopted the 44-hour week for Queens­land industry. The proof of that fact is that there are fewer unemployed in Queens­land than in the States where the woeklv working hours are in excess of forty-fom:. We realise that, if we in Queensland were working forty-eight hours, there would be moro unemployment.

The main trouble is that the people who own industries and those hon. members on the other side who represent the c~pitalistic viewpoint say that the workers should not participate in any improvements that have been brought about by modern invention, but that the workers should continue work­ing the old hours under the old conditions, despite the fact that the genius of man has brought about a changed condition of affairs. On the other hand, it is our firm conviction that WO c,hou]d participate in those improve­ment~ and benefits by instituting a shorter 1vorlnng 1vcek.

Another aspect of the unemployment prob­lem was touched upon particularly by the hon. member for Oxley, who, I understand,

1928-2 A

has been ostracised by his party for making statements in public that should only have been ma·de in the caucus room. (Government laughter.) The hon. member for Oxley is at least very frank and from his point of view makes probably the best speech delivered on the Opposition side. 'The hon. member is frank enough to admit that the policy of the other side is the introduction of more migrants into this country and the breaking down of the industrial conditions of the workers of Queensland. He freely states that this is the only remedy, as he calls it, for the present position. Ho has stated in this House that we can make no poss1blc progress unless we break down the artifi_cial conditions surrounding industry, meanrng, of course, the Board of Tra·de and Arbitra­tion and the 44-hour week. The hon. mem­ber for Oxley has been carpeted. for express­ing these views on the floor of the House, as they were only meant to be expressed in the secrecy of the Tory caucus room.

Mr. KING: You are entirely wrong.

Mr. HYNES: The hon. member seems to b0 getting quite wrath about the thing. The Brisbane " Daily Mail " in an article to-day states that the' Opposition are castigating the hon. member and asking him to withdraw his presence from the front cross-bench because he ha.s been making indiscreet state­ments on the floor of the House and damag­ing their campaign when they are facing the electors.

Mr. KING: Tell us something you know something about.

:Ylr. IIY.:\ES: I a~ stating the opinion of the Tor,v press-your literary mouthpiece.

In connection with migration I am one of those who say, and say definitely, that I would not like to see anyone come into this country until the whole of our people arc in lucrative employment. Every person who is brought in here means the displacement of some Australian or some Queensland citizen -some bread-winner, who probably has a family dependent upon his earnings. There is no question about the introduction of migrants from overseas adversely affecting the unemployment position in 'Queensland. I would not ask hon. members to accept my unsupported testimony for that, but the report of the commission I have already quoted-a commi·,sion of experts appointed by a Tory Government, which has this to say-

;, It is also important to note--" Mr. KrxG: What is the date of the report?

Mr. HY::\ES : I am quoting from page 18; it is tho most recent report available. I got it at my home last week, so it was presented to the Commonwealth ]:>arliament during the last month. I am surprised at the Deputy Leader of the Opposition doubting this report. -

:\1r. FRY: I ask you to read it because I know you are not quoting correctly.

:\1r. HY~ES : When the hon. member for Kurilpa has finished preaching I shall pro­ceed. I am rather surprised that in a debate of this kind hon. members opposite ha vr• not taken the trouble to read the most imnortant document on uncmplm ment and industrv that has ever been presented in the Commonwealth. but still profess. like the hon. member for Oxlev and their Deputy LeadPr, that they are ali fait with everything

Mr. Hynes.1

370 Address in Reply. [ ASSE:NIBL Y. Address in Reply.

that is happening industrially m this coun­hT

Mr. KrxG: \Ve haYe read it.

Mr. HYNES: On page 18 of that report, dealing with. the effects of migration on employment, rt says-

" It was also important to note that the effects to migration depend upon the type of migrant who is moving to Aus­tralia. Migrant land settlers absorbed pursuant to a land settlement scheme should increase rather than decrease the scope of employment; and mig-ration of domestics, boy farm workers,_ and ecpecially skilled workers for new mdus­tries will generally have the same effect. On the other hand a large flow of artisans and labour~rs would intensify any unemployment. already existing amongst those classes."

It is clear that the introduction of artisans and labourers would intensify the position. Still, hon. members opposite 'have said that thev would like to see 500,000 labourers bundled into Queensland in order to break down the artificial conditions obtaining here in industry.

1Ir. Knw: That is not true.

Mr. HYNES: That was said on the Opposition benches last year. Underneath the· whole discussion on unemployment I < •1-n easilv discern the voice of the sweater cryinl' out for cheap unrestricted labour. The atten­tion of the people outside should be drawn to the fact that ther~ is somethin~ sinister behind the whole of the propagan?a that IS

going on ins.ide and outside ParlJantC'nt 111

connection wrth the attempt to break down and filch from us the industrial conditions which we hc1.ve fought so hard to •ecure for the people.

I would like to make some reference to the statement that Queensland is in a \Yorsc posi­tioll through tho maladministration . of the Labour Partv since we took office m 1915 than the other States of the Commonwcrdth, which we are told are blessed with Tory government. We should alw.ays bear in mind the fact that. a ·Country whiCh exports more goods than it imports is ir, a solvent con­dition. If hon. members oppo•Jte were honest, they would ngrec that that is so.

}fr. KTxG: Yl'e said so this morning.

:Oir. HYKES: I a"' pleased the Dcput:c Lnder of the Opposition is frank enough to admit i h ~t a < otmtr;· which exports more than it imports is in a solvent condition, and t.hat there is no indicfLtion of maladm1111stration in this eountry, where the Governnwnt. vvho have improved i.hP industriol colHlitions of the workers, have been able to show that we arc solvent. I haYe taken the lahst iic;urcs with regard to imports and P'Xport, for 1927-28 from the Commonwealth "Year Book":-

Imports into Qu~ensland Exports from Queensland

£ ll. 758.344 21.555.187

That shows an Pxcc-"s of pxports OY('r inq1or1 ~ of £9.7fl5,843. Taking the five :ccare <'IH.led 30th June, 1927, the Commonw:•a lth ae a whole showed an a·dverse trade belnnce of £50.000.000. During the same period Qtwene­]and exported approximately £33.000.000 worth of goods more than it imported.

Mr. I-I. M. Rt~SSELL: Those fignn•,, an· not correct.

[Mr. Hynrs.

Mr. HYKES : They are correct. They an· taken from the figures of the Commonwealth Statistician, who is the best authority I can quote.

All the people who apply themselves to a study of the situation know that one of the troubles in Australia to-dav is that we export h•ss than we import. For the five vears I have specified, Q!Jeensland exported £33,000,000 worth of goods more than she imported, showing that in this State under the Labour regirne \VG arc in a solvent position, whereas other States which are Tory-goYerncd are insolvent so far as the trade balance is concerned.

Another matter to which I want to refer is population. I have heard a perpetual whine from country members about how bad things are in the rural districts, 'and that primary industries arc being choked by the Labour Party's administration. How, then, is it that we find a smaller proportion of the population in the metropolis in Queensland than in any of the other States with the exception of Tasmania? Is nnt that a sure indication lhat the legislation enacted by this party since taking office in 1915 has been helpful, and has induced people to remain in the rural districts rather than flock to the cities? It is a healthy sign. In case hon. members may question the accuracy of that statement, I shall quote the fignn'' given on page 858 of the Com­monwealth ''Year Book" for 1926. \\hich. are the latest available- ·

State or Country.

N. S. Wales Victoria .. Queensland .. S. Australia W. Australia Tasmania Australia

j Per­:\Ietropolis. Population.j rcr:,t~gc

I Total.

Sydney Melbourne Brisbane Adelair!c Perth Hobart 6 cities

1,070,510 944,400 274,260 316.865 184;::23

55,130 2,845,388

45·60 55·17 31·09 55·94 48·(14 26·67 46·63

Hon. members will notice that the position in Queensland is much better than in any of the other States with the exception of Tasmania-and I do not know that we can refer to Tasmania as being a State of Aus­tralia. If the population in Queensland were drifting to the cities, as one hon. member opposite said the other day, on account of the maladministration of the Labour Party, Tory Governments in other States must be making a very bad fist ol their jobs.

If Queensland is such a wretched place to liYc in, how is it that population has been flocking to Queensland to a g-reater extent than to the Tory-gowrned States of ~he Commonwealth? Is it not a healthy srgn to find people coming here of their own accord?

::"Jo dcliberatp attempt has been made by the Queensland Government to encourage ]WOple to come to this State; but. we find that many of tho"" y:ho crrme ol'lgmally a.; migrants to thP othc,· BtatPs of _the Common­'.'i< alth eventual! v found theu· Wii.,V m to QlHecnsland. \Yh;·" D'•cnuse after thirteen v-,<1rs of L'tbour GoYerrnuent the people find this is the best St .tte in which to settle and make their homco. Ir:> conm,ction with popu­lation. the Commonwcaith "Year Book" f?r 1927 gin' the annual rates of increase rn

Address in Reply. [23 AUGUST.) Address in Reply. 371

population in various countries from 1896 to 1926. The annual rate of incn,ase during tho period 1921-26 in the State, and following countrieB were:-

Australia Kew South \-Vales. Victoria Queensland South Australia \Vestern Australia r_ra,«mania. New Zealand England and \Vale· Canada ... . .. United States of America

Perc•Jntago. 2.09 2.01 2 2.81 2.27 2.44 0.33 1.95

.62 1.58 1.67

The table from which I have quoted gives the rato of increase in t-wcnty~six countries and the component parts of Australia for the period 1921-26, according to which thoro hac· been a greater percentage increase of population in Quoem!and than thoro has been in any country in the civilised world. That surel..-,~ does not indirato n1aladministration, or that this is an und,c-ira ble State in \vhich to live! People arc coming here he£·]:: and unsolicited. No definite efiort has hcon made to induce them to come here; but the popula­tion of t,his State under a Labour Govcnnnont is increasing at a greater extent than it is in any vther part of the world.

A great deal has been said about the increase in taxation in recent vcar;:; under a Labour Government in Quecnsl~nd. I ·do not wish to flog this snb!cct, which has been flogged to death during the variolls debates. The Commis,ioner vf Taxes in his last report states-

"ThE' aesessments made during the financial v<'ar 1927-28, based on income earned during the year ended 30th J uno, 1927, as compared with the asse·sments i~sncrl dnrint; the pr0vious financial year~ and based on incvme earned during the vcar ended 30th .J nnc. 1926. show a inatcrial an:>r::tg-e cleerca<o in tax per assr ssment, and this result is almost sin1ilar to the corrcspondiEg compa.rioSon mentioned in m~- last an111ni report.

" The revenue, ho\VCVfT, fron1 income tax, for the financial year 1927-2°., was greater than for the previous year. This is due to the large increasr• in the number of asf3<.=:.::~mcnts issued dnring tho la~t. as compared with the previouE year."

Those remarks dca.! with the figures that hon. membe-rs opposite hase been tearing- to piPCC··. As pointed out b:-· the Commi•oioner there has boon an increase in the revenue drriYcd from incorne taxation. bnt no increa,..:e in the amount paid by indiviJua1 taxpavt'rs. "There ha:::. bcon an jncreasc in thP nurnher of tax­payors. 'rho Commissioner points out on rct;;·c 4 of his r"port--

" The itnTe='bga-tiorJ-s m .do resulted 1n an increase of tax amvunting to £243,207 1 :~. ,~,{. Tho policy of this office, as indic1trd in 111:, 1" st n~port, in regard to ihG sysh~1nntic inspc•ction of taxprryers' account,,;, v,,,1s eontiiu1·'d du.ring 1h>J year, end it. is regretted to hav-e to rc]JOrt that a large pPr< 2ntz:~ :{o of the ta.xpaycrs inspected hod rcnrlcr<'cl fa.hc returns. and a number of prosecutions were in ,tit~ltcd as a result. As indicakcl above. the rcvencw benefited mate ria!lv b-.- 1lw _,, <ldivitics. and it is hoped th;,t th · moral c>ffc,.t will be far-rCJching."

Onn of the reasons \Yhy there has been an incrca·,c h1 the, atnount of income tax col-

Jected is because in prcvio1.1.s year· a large number of people-and these, I take it. our opponents arc defending-made false returns. They committed a c1·iminal vffenco by send­ing in false returns, but the staff of the Commissioner of Taxes was able tv lvcate those defaulters, and their action was respon­sible for an increased an1ount being collected in income tax.

[3.30 p.m.] ;\l[r. MORGA:>!: Don't forget that some of

them were your own State servants.

Mr. HYNES: I suppose there arc dis­honest State servants, just as there are dis­hvr,est and untruthful politicians.

Since the groat war there has been an all-rvund increase in taxativn throughout the whole civilised world. Apart from the whole cost of the war, which has ultimately to be borne b:v the taxpayer. there has been a ·decrease in the purchasing power of money. The pound sterling to-day has not the same value as befvre the war. As a matter vf fact, what cvuld be purchased for £1 in 1915 would in moJt cvuntries cost £2 to-day. Money, therefore, has not the same value. I have taken the following figurn showing the taxation per head in the various coun­trie·'·· detailed from ono of the authorities I have quvtcd :-

United Kingdom France Germany Italy .. United States Canada Australia New Zealand South Africa

£ -'· d. 3 11 4 3 7 0 1 10 8 2 2 8 1 7 11 3 8 3 3 8 1 6 3 0 6 15 4

t -'· d. 15 2 8

8 5 10 5 6 E) 3 8 9 (\ 1 11 6 19 4 9 1 G

14 f) 9 11 17 2

It . will be seen from these figures that in rvimtrios where there have been no Labour Governrnents a material increase-in fact, an t.larming increase in taxation per head of population--has taken place. \Ve all admit that there has been an increase in bxation in Queensland since 1914: and it is ridiculous for hon. members opposite to place the argument before a House of intelligent men that the Labour GovcrnmPnt are lTBponsible. Sim1lar increases are f'vi­dent throughv1.1.t the whole civilised world.

I have alrea·dy pointed vut that there has br,:n a decrease in the number of factories in Queensland in one particular industry-that is the sugar industry. A generativn ago, in the district I v. as broug·ht up in, there were sorno thirty-three sugar factories; to-da:v there are only eight mills, doing more efliciently and effectively the work of those thirtv-three factories. That is in the district whi<;h the Secretary for Agri­culture has tho honour to represent. It is m,- birthplace, and, as I am remind('d, thew eight mi1ls aro producing five times as n1twh sug-ar as the thirty-three mills produced fo;merly.

Notwithstanding the fact that better condi­tions operate in the factories in Queensland a.s compared with the other States. the furthr·" fact that a 44-hour week is in C~)c:raticn generally here. and thal· this is thr best lE~ioni~cd State in the Con1n1on­wealth. ,,,o find that the ,-aluo cf output JV-'1' e!llploycp i:~ ;'Tcatcr in ~uccn J<tnd than

JJ1r. Hl,llC3.]

372 Address in Reply. [ASSEl\IBLY.] Address in Reply.

in States under Tory Governments. The fig·ures are-

Value of Output per Employee.

£ New South Wales 963 Victoria 767 Queensland 1,005 South Australia 838 Western Australia 640 Tasmania 713

After all the talk about the union loafer and the effect of organisations of labour it is found that, so far as the value of outJut per employee is concerned, Queensland is far ahead of the To-ry States, where the workers do not enjoy the advantages rrivcn to their comrades in Queensland by a L"abour Govern· ment.

On this question of factories, I have an extract from the sixty-first annual meeting ot the report of the Ipswich \Voollen Manu­facturing Company, Limited. At that meet­ing, which was held on the 21st instant the chairman of directors in presenting his r~port made some• optimistic references to the future cf the industry in Ips" ich, and, in addition to placmg a large sum to reserve funds, the .directors were able to declare a dividend of 7 per cent. to the shareholders. Here is a factory which has been operating for a num­ber of years, undN' the 44-hour week in recent years, and under all the conditions prescribed by the Arbitration Courts, etc.; still, it can pay a dividend of 7 per cent, t~is year1 !'nd will in all probability pay a higher dindend next vear. As the chairman of director" pointed out, notwithstandirw the keen competition from other places the" com­pan;v was able to keep its employees working durmg the whole of the vear. In the face of that. I am surpris<;d that hon. members oppo­site have the temerrty to say that all the indus­tries in Queensland are languishing by reason of the 44-hour week and what thev ·choose to terr;r the maladministration of this partY. The dnecto;·ate of that company is striking an ophmistrc note as to the future-and it must be 'remrmbered that, when the note of optimism is struck, it is with the full know­ledge that there will be no change in the government of this State, because there is no person pessimistic enough to assume that next year or the year after Labour will bo out of power in Queensland.

I desire to refer also to the increased surrar production in ·Queensland since Lab~ur assumed office.

:\Ir. MAXWELL: What about the unemploy­ment?

:\fr. HY;\TES: I have admitted that we have an unemployment problem in Queens­land; but I would remind the hon. member that the position is not as bad here as it is in Ton -governed States.

:i'.h. MAXWELL: You know that is wrong. The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC WORKS: It is

correct. Mr. HYNES: This is a comparison of the

sugar production in the years 1918 and 1927-

Acres cultivated Acres crushed .. Tons cane Tons sugar

[1Wr. Hynes.

1918.

160,534 111,572

1,674,829 189,978

1927.

211,762 3,548,421

468,000

That shows that from 1918 to 1927 the pro­duction of sugar increased from 180,000 tons to 468,000 tons, which indicates that the manufacturing and primary industries of this State are not languishing.

While listening to the debate my {)hief con­cern has been, not on account of what was going to happen to the amendment, but I was really perturbed as there seemed to be some sinister conspiracy existing bebveen members of the Opposition and people out­side to decry tho Board of Trade and Arbi­tration in t~is State with a .view to arousing public opmwn agamst It m order that it m~y be abolished. And I think they are gomg to be assisted in that direction by their Tory friends in the Federal Parliament. I have followed pretty closely industrial events durmg the last twelve months and I know that a definite and concerted 'effort will be mad" by the big employer's and the big Gnancial interests in the near future to 'lbolish arbitration in Australia Is it not logi:al to assume that the Empioyers' Asso­cratron and the big financial institutions who pay the election expenses of hon. members opposite will demand a quid pro quo for the assistance thcv have given, and that that qurd pro quo will be the abolition of the A.rbitration Court in order to bring about a deerease in the wages paid to tho workers and to interfe,re injuriously with the living standards of the workers in this State? That is a logical argument. I have listened to verv many people discussin~; the Board of Trade and Arbitration. The hon. member for Oxley said that that tribunal, assisted by the tariff, \Yas ru1n1ng industry and causing unernploy~ ment, and that it was also ·responsible for th~ high cost of living. There is a sinister move behind the whole busine'8.

I have heard seYeral politicians decrying the Arbitration Court. Mr. Latham, the Federal Attornev-Gcneral. in int.roducing the now famous amendment of the Federal Arbi­tration Act, distinctly stated that he had beE'n approached with a view to abolishing or ending the Act. ·rathE'r than amending it, and he ',~id the actions of the parties concerned­lH meant the worke1·s-will decide what will h0 done in the future-meaning that in all probability, if any of the unions felt them­selves aggrieved at these harassing conditions. these penal conditions, which have been placed in the Federal Arbitration Act, and wouJ.d not accept them, then he probably would abolish ihe Act altogether. I fancy that is what is in the air. The Prime Minister had the same thing to say. As reported in the Federa-l " HansRrd," ,page 3275, Mr. Latham, Com­monwealth Attorney-General, referring to the operation of the Federal Arbitration Court, lwd this to sa:;-

u Clain1s nO\V 1nade arc for inrreases in wage-;, reduction of hours, and alterations of conditions of emplovment, which ma0-or may not be elL irable. but which "' a general rule cannot be clairnC'd on ordinary humanitarian grounds, as \Vas the case in tlw past. Thus the causes which produced the expensive ~ystcm of regulation of industry hn",Te now, ov,ing to the llnplication of lcgisb tivo remedies, aln1ost diE a ppearcd."

The SPEAKER : Order ~ The hon. member has exhausted the time allowed him under the Standing Orders.

Address ?:n Reply. (23 AUGUST.] Address in Reply. 373

, :vtr._ TAYLOR (Windsor): I have been h~tcn1ng to the debate for some tin1c this afternoor_t, and I notice the audience is gradu­ally gettmg kss and less; but I think I han• got the intelligence of the Chamber present to listen to the few remarks I have to make.

The SECRETARY >OR Pen.Tc "WoRKS: Hear, hear! That is a Yery happy opening.

Mr. TAYLOR: Thank van. I would lil;e to compliment the hon. m0rnber for i\fitchel] on his maiden effort in this House. and also on his success at the election. I would also compliment the hon. member for Stanlev on his success. Some hon members on· the other side have made a grcat deal out of the victory of the hon. member for MikhPll, stating that the result expn·"sPd the con­fidence of the people of Queensland. in the present Administration.

GO\'ERN~IENT ME)fBERS: Hear. hear!

Mr. TAYLOR: Hon. members opposite did not see fit to run a candidate for the Stanley electorate. They know quito well that, 1f they had run et candidate fm that electorate--

An_ OPPOSITION ME1IBER: He \vou~d be still running.

Mr. TA YLOR : He would bo ,till running; and the confidence of the people of Qneem­land would have boon manifo,ted in a dif­ferent direction from what it was in the 11itrhell eleetorate.

One cannot but have been struck ,duritw the cours~ of this dohate by th: r~marks of ihe P_rem1er. He has been living in a rnazc of dtfficult problems and final analvses for the last six months. The;· h>1unt his dreams b-­night; the~ aro with' him by day; am! !-,;, confesses his absolute helplc'ssncss as to whar to do to improve the situation which con­fronts him. Since I have beer: in this Chamber I ha vo never listened to a more pitiable cx':tibition by a leadei· of a great party than the remarks the Premier ha-; made from time to time about the terriblv difficult problems which confront him. Who helped to create those difficult problems?

He and his pa.rty hanc been responsible for a number of the problems which confroat us at the present time.

Mr. FoLEY: Rubbish:

Mr. TAYLOR: It is absolutelv true. The hon. member kl'OW3 that, and '<1uite a number of hon. members sitting behind the Premier know it, too. No GovPrn.mcnt \vho have had control of the aifairs of Queensbud have had a better opportunit·,· to make 1hr best of things which existed in' the State than the socialistic Administration m the last thirteen y0ars. Ev0r~·thing has hPcn i11 dtc>ir favour. \Vo haYo ha-d droughts; but ·:hat about t~w public finances? 'compared y;[th the porwd when they came into office, th" revenue has doubled; and thcv hnYc nothiP~ to complain of in that regard.' Yet the Pre: mier gets up in this CharnbPr and con{e-,;es in his helplessness tha.t h<> docs' not, rn lJ v know what to do in order to improve. th., present condition of nffair:-;. \Vf>. haxc nncrn­ploYmPnt in evf'ry dircf'tion. and a gc::1rral feeling of distrust in regard to the fut'ure.

The SECTIETABY FOR PrnLrc y,~ORKS: \Ye have had all this before.

Mr. TAYLOR: YPo. and the hon. member is goi~g to. have it again; he is v.oing to have 1t behmd as well as before. The Go-

vernment seem to think that all thev have to do is to be tax gatherer". They seem to have had the opinion for many years t bat their main function in carrying on 1 he afi'airs of Queensland is to impose taxation. spend money on unprofitable State enterprises, and call upon tho taxpaYers to make good tho position. Hon. members opposite know tJu,r is absolutely true.

\1\'hen we speak on this side of the Chamber in this strain, we a.re 'told that we are running down the State. Could anyone imagine anything more ridiculous than that? Can hon. members not understand th" difference between criticising the Govern­ment and running ·down the State 9 No man -I do not care on which side of the House ho sits-can truthfully run down this State or any other State in the Commo-nwealth; and the very fact that Queensland is in as ~·ood a position as she is in to-day is certainlv not due to the administration o{ the socialis'­tic Government, bqt is in spite of it. If Queensland had not been the magnifiCent State it is, we should haYe been in a very much morc difficult position than we are to-day. I have not the slighte't hesitation in > .• Iying that the greatest enemies of the development of this State and the industries of Queensland are not the Opposition but the socialistic Administration; and sooner or later the workers and the people generally will find that out. The sooner they find it out the better for themsehes and for the whole of the State.

During this diccussion quite a lot has been said about nnemployment. \s the· hon. Jnernbcr for Town~.ville said, it is a regret­table state of affairs. Auv man who is engaged in industry must s'ympathiso with the genuine uncrnploycd man~ or woman who is out of t>mployment. We say Queensland is a grc,ct State, and \VC belie vc it. I can understand unemployment in the crowded cities of Europe, where the whole of the population is dependent upon trade and industr~T for a living, so that when any stagnation occurs a tremendous number of people aro out of work; but in this great State, \Yitb its huge undevelope-d territory, the fact that we have so much unemployment is no credit to the Government of the State. It is no use telling us that there is Je,.,s in queensland than in the other States of the Commonwealth. That is not going to help' UR one bit. There ought to be less unemploy­ment in this State at anY time 'and at all times. There should be practically none in a fine State like this. Bqt here it is. What is going to be the solution of it'? It is \vork thttt the unemployed want to-day, and the spineless inactiYity which the Govorn­mcnt are sho-..,-ing in dealing with this problem is no credit to them. Here \Ye ha vc the Premier getting up and saying that be has £2,000,000 of loan money that he does not know what to -do with. Then hon. members on that side of the Chamber say that we want them to spend it in unprofit­ablc wavs. vYe do not. The whole trouble of the GoYernment ha,; bccn that they have not rcalisc,d, as I have said on 1nore than one 0·8' asion in this House that thev are simply trustees of yublic funds, and, as" such, thcv haYe not reahse-d the great responsibility winch rests upon them of spending these furcds in the wav they should have been spent in many clirectioD.s.

Seasonal industries ha n• been as a cause of unemployment.

mentioned I suppose

lrfr. Taylor.]

374 Address in Reply. [ASSEl\iiBL Y.] Address in Reply.

that they cowo into the question in a certain way; but hon. members mt+st and do know that the period of employment in seasonal industries is longer than it ha~ ever been. ·will anybody say that the period of employ­ment in the sugar industry does not last longer than it used to? "Will hon. members say that the period of employment in the shearing industry ·does not now last longer? They know per!cdl_-;- well that it does. We hayo ahYays had these seasonal industries, and to blome them for the> amount of unem­ployment is not a fair thing at all. Tho ;period of employment in these industries :is longer.

l\1r. DASH: It cannot be.

:'\lr. TA YLOR: I say that it is longer; ilnd anyone who studies the sugar or the wool industry must acknowledge that to be the case. In the past the efforts of Govern­ments in connection with unemployment haYe not been to deal with tho causes of unem­ployment, but to attempt to remedy the result of thost) causes. \V e are anxious tv deal with the causes of unemplovment to-dav; .and if we can remove those cause~ we sh;ll not have the present unprecedented number of idle persons.

The que,,tion of the Australian tttriff has been mentioned, and the Bruce-Page Go­vnnment have boon blamed for a lot of things obtaining in Au"tralia to-,day. Hon. members opposite point out that, if the Federal Government did this or that in connection with the tariff, the position would be very much easier. There is no countrv in the world, I suppo,,,e, that has a pe;fect tariff; but I claim that the present Aus­trajian tariff is the fairest tariff in the world; and surelv the time must come when Australian indQstries will be maintained on the existing tariff. For yean and years we have been raising the tariff wall, and what 1s the rc>sult to-day? Hon. rncmben opposite know that what I am saying is per;ectly true. The tariff has been continuallv increased; yet we have record unemploymm:i't throughout the wholo Commonwealth and vve are still i1n parting a trPmondous a {nount of goods-goods which in a number of instances 1.vc should be able to n1anufacturc in ALtstralia. \Vhat is Queensland doinrr' \\"t' talk abOLlt importinrr these rroods fr;lll oypr:-:tas; but what are v 1ve doi~g'? \Yha1 quantity of goods is this State importirw from thl' other States of the Commom>, oalth -goods that should bo manufactured in this State? Thoro must bo some reason for the position. I do not know for certain, but I should fay that quite 60 per cent. or 70 per ~ent. oJ the boots worn in Queensland are made in Victoria or ::'<Jew South \Vales from Qmeensland hides. Who is to blame for that'! Thoro must be something wrong! I speak a, nn Australran. I as bcrn in Victoria and I. recollect that in p1·o-fcderation day~ the V1ctorran GO\-ernments built a high protective wall around the whole of their State whilst Now f'Duth \Valu was practically 'a froo­tradP State. Queensland had a moderate tariff. \Vhat was ~he res~1lt '! Victoria dug m hPr secondary mdustnes, and had them firm!:; cm bedded; and, when fGderation came, that State ha,d the pull OYer all the ·other States of the Commonwealth, and has 1t to-day. J'\ o matter what tDwn in this State, what shop, or store one visits. I guarantee that one can take from the shelves 'Of that particular store or ehop goods manu-

[Mr. Taylor.

facturcd in or obtained from Victoria or Xcw South Wales.

[4 p.m.l ~,ir. F'OLEY: Yet thev have thcic· unornploy-

ment problems. ·

Mr. TA YLOH : Tha.t is so; but we ""Y y,'C h 1ve a State a good many tim~" bot: -r tl1ou -victoria. VVe certainly havt~ a la.rg(~r unde­veloped State than Victoria, and we 'huc~l•l not have the amount of unemployment that is existing. Getting back to the industriGs, Victcria ha,cl her industries ell established when federation was established. The ntl:er States had to compete with Yict,ric, and I L'aim that, largely on account of the action of the Gm·ermnent opposite, the indLL l'ies of this State have not boon able to do "0. Yo•1 rnay say it is duo to hours, wages, flf whac you like; but the fact remains that Victoria had the pull then and has the pull to-clay. Shortly after federation .,, as established lhlll.

nH:-rnbers will rcn1cmbcr the1·c as a f:l :~Lr,rv at the corner of Albcrt street oppl)ltte the Albert Street Methodist Church.

The SECRETARY FOR l'tlBLIO Hunter's boot factory.

WORKS:

Mr. TA YLOR : Where is it to-day"! :'-. e;t in Queensland. Another factory of a ,mailcr naturo existed in the -valley, and oth --n., in various parto of the State; and, although we ha vc two or three large factories carrying on similar business to-day, the ono~ I have indicated were not able to continue to com­pete with their Southern competitors and th~y had to get out. I say that, their non­existence is largely tho result of taxation imposed by this Go,-ornmcnt.

The SECRETARY FOR l'I;nLIC .WORKS: That factory was closed long befo;·e we camo into power.

-:\lr. TA YLOR : I am not contending that it was not. A good deal hao been said about the tariff. As hon. members know, .\ns­i ralia's bt:st customer for primary produds is Great Britain, and vve arc Grf -.tt Britain's second-best customer for quite a lot of articles manufactured thoro. Is there CJ.ny­thing wrong with that? Can we expect to trade with Great Britain-who is our b,-st rustomer-and expect Great Britain to .o,erhl out emptc· ships to Queensland and Austr'llia to take a way our priman· prod nets '! \",' e COUld not reasonably expC'Ct it. rrhcrc ITlUSt

be trade reciprocity between all the Dominions. ·what are we striving to got from Great Britain at the pn"ent time and have to a large extent secured? Prefer0"'CO on our sugar. \Ye have received from l:n•ot Britain preference in connection w.it.h onr sugar industry an1onnting to 1niltion3 of pounds.

Mr. Bm;cE: We want more.

Mr. TAYLOR: If we can get it; but we have to be careful ir, this direction, because the working man or indnstrirtlist­call him what you like-in Great Britain has a fear-and. the responsible men in charge of nffair:3 in Great Britain ha Ye 1o 1 cali~~~ it-­that we in Australia. 'vant to maintain our present standards of IiYing and pull down his standards. \Ye have to try to visualise what his outlook on that quc<tion is. Tha,t is really one of the things he is afraid of­that by continually granting preference to our manufacturers he will incrco.sc the standards in Australia and pull down his own.

The hon. member for Town•villc quoted from the report of the Development and

Address in Reply. [23 AUGUST.] Address in Reply. 375

Migration Commisc.ion. He said that it was a Tor,- report and that it was a Torv Govern­ment who appointed the Commissioii. Snrely the hon. member knows that the late Labour Premier of South Australia., :\h. Gunn, is a member of that Commi•-sion; yet he gets up :>nd. tells this Home that it >e a Tory report, msbgated by a TDry Government ! \Vhv cannot the hon. member be truthful1 He knows th[l t staten1ent of hif< i~ not tnw; and he also kno""' that l\ir. G-unn is an ex- Lnbo- r Pren1ier, and one of thP honoured uH'nlbei''3 of tbe Commi•-sion who prepared tlnr report.

Mr. HY~ES: I ,aid he was appointed by a Tory Government.

Mr. TAYLOR: You said it wns a Tor .. report.

Mr. HY~ES: "'o.

Mr. TAYLOR: I say you rlicl. I folio .;ed your speech closely.

Mr. Hnms: I say I did not .sa~· "'·

The SPEAKER: Order ~

Mr. TAYLOR: HowevPr, dre fact l'Cmains that J\fr. Gunn is one of the 111< 'll! b(~l'~ of tlw CDmmission and that he a'si-tecl to frame that reporL

Mr. HYXES: lie ran ;:nva" fiOlH his job in .South Australia.

Mr. TAYLOR: I do not kno·--- whctlwr hP ran away from his job in South ,\ustralia or not; but, when the Prime :\linistcr asked Mr. Gunn to accept a seat on that Comrnis-5ion, I felt thaJ he showed that he "-a, the big statesrna.n the people say he i~.

Mr. BnucE: It showed the '• gun" was loaded.

Mr. TA YLOR:. There as nothing to prc­;·cnt the Prune JYllmster of Australia appoint­Ing son:w r)('rson. other than ~Ir. Gnnn; but he n-:tl!sed that 111 :vir. Gunn he vvotdd have a va~uablc n1ernber of the Con1n1i~sion and accordinf(ly he ar>pointed him. '

Speaking on the incidence of taxation the Cornmission had this to say- '

" While the incidence of taxation is not a Jnajor cause of unernp1ovlnent in ~,\u.'3traEa, the Cornn1ission flpsire~ to draw ,-ttention to the nccessih· for the studv of taxation laws, vv-ith tllc v-iew to dctet:­nuning their ,;ffect in retarding develop­rncnL ..

Mr. FoLEY: Showing that thev- did not know. ~

Mr. T'A YLOR: Thev- were candid enou~h to admit they did nor know; vet the h;;1. member ea id he knew somethiitg about it. Cmning nearer home, T quote our own Pre­mier. At pag·e 1521 of " Hansard " for last ;,pq'>ion, 1he Premier is reported a:;;. ,,aying-

" I think it is recognised that there is a point beyond which taxation does inter­fere with dev-elopment. In other words, It Is doubtful whet-her taxation-the rnone.v taken a'vay fron1 industry-is as \I ell used by_ the State in creating employ­ment as If It wore left to be utilised in the expansion of industn-.

1-Ir. FoLEY: Quite logical.»

Mr. TA YLOR: I quite agree vv-ith the Premier, but I do not know how long the hon. member who has ju.;t interjected has been agreeing with him-

. . . It is a "ell-knovnt economic truth that all taxation does that to some

extent. I hold, however, that this form of tax does not do it to the same extent as a tax on business where labour is employed."

ThP hon. g·entleman was speaking then Df the supPr land tax.

::Yir. BRUCE: \Vhat do you think thev do with the money they get? "

l\lr. TAYLOR: The rnone·-· is ccrtainlv not spent profitably. " ·

Then, at page 1523 of the same v-olume Df "Hansarcl," the Premier had this to say-

'· I am free, as I said before, to admit that taxation beyond a certain point do~' damage not only to the taxpayer-who I believe is the least injured-but to tl;ie community in g-eneral. If a taxpayer has an income of £25,000 to tax and is compelled to pay a ta.x of £10,000 or even £15,000, no one will say that he will starve on the remaining £10,000, although he may have to restrict his enterprise"-

And this is what I would like hon. members to note-

'· and thus do a tremendous amount of dan1age to the con1n1unity."

The hon. gentleman then proceeded to dPal with the matter of motor cars; and in this connection I do not wish to be misunderstood in any re1narks I rnav n1ake. I for one vwuld. be , pry glad to see the day when Australia will be in a position to manufacture its own motor cars. But what is the good of blindfoldincr ourseh·e~ to the fact that wo cannot loo]~ for any great progress in that clirPetion for 1nany years to con1e?

I am one of those who are of the opinion that the motor car manufacturers of Great Britain lost their vvav and missed the busi­ness by not realising w'lmt were the Australian requirements in that direction. If they had onl v risen to the occasion as thev slwuld hav:e done, and as vyas pointed out' to them again and agaiu. there probably wDuld not have bc,~n ftO n1anv ... -\_nlerican motor cars in Australia as there, are to-·dav-. The Premier stated that the importati~n of American motor cars is ono of the existing causes of nnC'mplo ment; and I interjected at the time­that 60 'per cent. of the cost of the motor ( tr~ \Yas for Australian rnatcrials and for "·age~ paid to Australian worker~. The Premier did not appear to ag-ree with that. and replied, ''Prov-ided the bodies and acccs­~orie::_: are n1ade in Australia." To ,,~hirh I replied, "Thev arc ma-de in Australia." It is just as well to find out wherC' we arc in connection \vith these motor cars and whether their importation <&jnto Australia is doing the ·damage that the' Premier would like us to believe ; and, in ·order to get F-On1c infonnation on the rnattcr, I wroto to the managing director of I-loldcns Limi(Pd. in Adelaide. the sctme night. telling him what I have stated, and asking him to giv-e me all particulars he could. I got this reply from him dated 29th July-

" Dear 1\fr. Taylor,-I am in recoip~ of your letter dated the 26th instant. and am very pleased indeed that you wrote n1e in regard. to t.he matter under discussion, because the Premier has an cntirelv erroneous idea and you aro absolutely right.

" The fact uf th0 matter is that at least 60 per cent. of the selling- price of most motor cars sold in Australia

JJf1·. Taylor.l

376 Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

remains in Australia. The position to-day is on account of the big- differential customs tariff between assembled and unassembled chassi' ; almost all the big---oiling- cars como out to Australia in unacsembled condition. This applies tD such cars as Ford, Chcvrolet, Buick, Oldsmobilc. Oakland, Pontiac, Dodg-e, Chrysler, Overland, Willys Knig-ht, Fal­con Knight, Morris Cowley, Austin, Singer, Rovor, Essex, Rugby, etc.

" The only cars to which the foreg-oing­sta tcmcnt does not apply are the more expensive cars, of which only a few arc sold, such as Packard, :Moon, Rolls­Royce, Sunbeam, Bentley-so that we could Fay at least 95 per cont. of the cars importe-d to Australia come out in 'knock-down ' form, as n1entioncd above.

" The whole of these cars require, first of all. to be <ts-.embled in Australia; secondlv, to have bodies built in Aus-tralia; ·thirdly, tyres "

While on the question of tyres, mig-ht I say that, if hon. members go to Pctrie Big-ht, they will see a magnificent building- which hns just been completed for the Dunlop Company, and in the "Daily Standard'' about a week or a fornight ago there was an illu·tration of an extension-I think it was 50,000 of 60,000 square feet-that was being- made to one of the tvre fartoric< in ?\(•w South \Vales. In face of the fig-ures I ha Ye quob d, I cannot undcn.;tancl how anv rnan with his eyes open can go about and say that the American motor car is causing unemployment. What about the buildings ltl our own State and in our own city of Bnsbane which are housing- motor ( ars to-day )Jy the thousand? Who found employ­ment m the erection of those building-s? c.arpcntcrs, bricklayers, plasterers, and all kmds of tradesmen ha vc been eng-ag-ed in putting- up these building-s. In Australia to-day_ there are probe bl:v EOO,OOO motor cars m active work, and probably anything- up to 400.000 or 450,000 garages in the private homes Df people to house those cars. Vlho built those g-arag-es? Australian work­men out of Australian mutcrial. Then what about all the serYice statiom throug-hDut this State and the other States of the Common­wealth?

The letter continues-

" and, in many instances, batteries are built in Australia, sparking- plug-s are also locally made, so that we can d0finitely say that the landed cost price of the chassis does not represent more than 30 per cent. to 40 per cent. of the total selling- pric0 of the car, meaning­that at least 60 per cent. to 70 per cent. of the money received by a distributor from the sale of a car remains in A us­tralia.

"I venture to sav that the wages bill iu connection with these industries as mentioned above runs into at least £5,000,000 per annum, in addition to which the salaries of salesmen in reg-ard to sclhng cars, and all tlw clerical assist­anc8 in regard to the office work must be added."

Then he g-oe•,, on to mention the oil indns­try. Hon. members know that before ever we imported a single motor car into Aus­tralia \Ve spent an enormous amount of

[Mr. Taylor.

money in the importation of oil. Kerosene and l;_,bricating- oils have been imported into Australia from tho start; and we shall have· to import them for a long- time to come, so that the oil bill which hon members quote does not only represent the bill for petrol for running motor cars; it includes oils for household use and the lubrication of machinery. The writer goes on to say-

" If, in a·ddition, one considered the number of service stations all over Australia, tog-ether with the employees of the oil companies, I venture to say that the wag-es and salaries pai-d as a result of the importation of motor cars in Australia runs into at least £10.000,000 per annu1n.

" For your information, I an1 wribng to Mr. Harrison, of :Molbourn0, who is the secretarv of the J\1otor Traders' Associa­tion of 'Australia. I believe that he has a lot of information, particularly col­lated. which I will ask him to send up to you."

I am sorrv that information has not com<' along-- ·

" It is a well-known fac( in reg-ard to the automobile industry that the g-roat<'!' portion of the expenditure in connection with the motor car is made at the plac<' where the car is uced, and not at thP place "\Yhere it is n1adc, and I can cpr­tainly say, from n1y o-wn per:::onal ob~cr­vation, that this is perfectly true.

" I am sorry that I have no mor•' -definite -details that I can give you. but I might conclude by just mentimJ­ing- some of the ftrms that are entirely dependent on the motor business, to g-ive you some idea of the amount of capital invested and the expenditure in wag-eo­apart from the distributor'. this is, of whom there arc at least three hundred to four hundred substantial firms in A us­tra1ia paying out large amounts in wages to the assemblers and to the salesmen and staff. There arc the tyre companie,__ viz., The Dunlop Rubber Company, the Perdriau R4bber Company, Barnet Glass Rubber Company, Goodyear Tyre Com­pany, and several other small firms; then there are the oil companies-viz., the Vacuum Oil Company, the Shell Oil Company, and several other sma llcr companies, such as Texaco, etc. Theu there are body-building- companic "·. atnongst ''{hich is n1y own firn1., with a wages bill of three-quarters of a million pounds per a.nnum. There ar0 several other substantial bodv-builders-viz., T. J. Richards and Sons, Limited, Adelaide, Melbourne and vYaddington, of Sydney, the Ford :VIotor Company, of Geelong, in addition to which thPJ'e are a host of other small bodv-buildcrs whose wages bill shoulc! run' into ot least £2,000,000 a year.

" It is interesting- to note that, in connection with the body-building- b~si­ness, at least 80 per cent. of the matenals required arc manufactured in Australia. Fir>t and foremost, there is the timber industrv, of which we are the largest customer. Then there arc the paint eompanies, the leather manufacturers, the foundries casting both malleable and brass casts for tho hard,varc, the bow socket 1nanufacturers, screw manu­facturers, nail manufacturers, stool works,

Address in Reply. [23 AUGUST.] Address in Reply. 377

factories 1naking wadding and padding, spring factories, and a host of others making the minor artides required in connection with thp boch. Then therG arc the various batten·· nw11ufacturers, and quite a number of factories engaged in the manufacture of spare parts.

"I shoulJ not have much hesitation in saying that the motor car industry, ·directly and indirectly, is amongst the first thr0e or foue larg·est employers of labour in Australia.''

I am not barracking for th0 Anwrican motor car; but, notwithstanding the displacement that has taken placP-therc has been replacement in quite a number of ·directions since the advent of the motor industrv-I contend that everyone who o·ocs about in Brisbane or any other citv in~ the Common­wealth with his eyes opc'n cannot but feel that the motor industrv is not one that has helped to create un<'Jl!plovment. Notwith­standing th~t we have to import the chassis, I can11ot think so for a nlon1cnt.

Then let hon. members cast their minds back to the last Exhibition. Did thev ever see anything like th0 num bpr of rnoto~r car" that were there? Were thPrP as manv cabs and buses and tram,? Two or three' times the number of motor cars that have ever be·en se0n previously at an Exhibition were parked in the streets in and around the show grounds. .:\fembers should rea!isL' that, so that the motor industrv has not been the cause of unemployment.'

::Yfr. FoLEY: It is a sign of prosperity to a certain extent.

:Mr. TAYLOR: It indicates a certain amount of prosperihc. I have said that what we need in ()ueensland is permanently repro­ductive and developmental schemes so that we can assist the unemployed. \Ve on this side are told that we never offer anv suggestions. Ever since I have been in Parliament we ha ye b0en offering suggestions: but that is just about as far as we have got.

Mr. FOLEY: Valuable suggestions.

Mr. TAYLOR: I thank th" hon. member for the interjection. They ar0 valuable wg­gestions-suggcstions which the Government have not. heeded in any wav whatever. In my opinion. there aro ·three a venues where profita.ble work can be done without adding to the debt of the St>tte, and without involv­ing an expensive system of administration. Th0se the Government ought to be prepared to tackle. I am quite prepared to hear the Premier say that it cannot be done, as I have lward him sav before: but I maintain that it can be done.

The first suggestion I would mak0 is in connection >vith forestrv; the second in con­nection with the local, authorities: and the third in connection with main roads. I cer­tainly think my proposal is f<easible, >tnd the Government should consider it and see if something cannot be done.

The Se.c-retary for Labou1· and Industry told us the othf'r day that the total contribu­tions to the· Unemp.lovmPnt Insuranc<e Fund during- the time it has been in existence amonnt to £1.319.000. HP al'o told us th"t on the 30th .June last thP fund was in credit £10.000. I think that. if common sensa had hePn nscd in rf"::(>trd to that fund, it would have 11C'cn £750.000 in credit 0n that date instc:td of only £10,000, and it would have

don<' all the work that it has done during the period the Act has be0n in operation. l mention £750,000 as the sum which would be at cre.dit, because I realise that some people must receive benefits from that fund, such as women and others for whom profit­able 0mployment could not be found by any Government organisation. In the Governor's Speech we. \Yore told that the Government made a profit on forestry last year of £169,000. What is to prevent them from borrowing a certain amount of money from th0 rn0mployment Insurance Fund, paying to it 1 per cent. or 1~ pc·r cent. or 2 per cent.­at anv rak, some interest-and providing that. i'f a man is entitled to £10 or £15 from the fund, he should have three or four weeks' work at the award rate applicable to the oecupation in which he is engaged?

Just at present an Empire Forestry Con­ferencP is being held in Perth. Men inter­ested in forestry in Great Britain, Canada, and oth0r part; of the world have come to Australia to see what can be done within tlw Empire to promote forestry. It is a profitabl0 unde·rtaking from first to last. You may haYP to wait for a year or two. I com­pliment th0 Gov0rnm<'T1t on what thev have done in comwction with forestry in this State.

Mr. C'L.\YTOK: Th0v have made a good profiL '

Mr. TAYLOR: Still the•.- haY<' est:tblishod forestrv on a. sounder founda.tion than has been the r CJ'·G during the past fiftv or sixh years. I iike to give credit w,herC' I think it is duP. If the same amount of money had bc0n expendPcl and the same care taken with regard to forestry fifty or sixty vears. ':go we would have been in a very fine pos1hon in Oue0nslancl to-day. \V0 must have long vision in connection with thPse matters. It is not sufficient merelv to look ahca.d to the next vear, or two vearS, or three years, or five years: but for ten' years, fifteen years, a1_1d up to fifty years. We cannot supply the t1mber r0'1uirernents of the Commonwealth, but are compelled to import timber from different parts of the world, not only to this StatE' hut to evcrv State of the Commonwealth. Land that is absolutely ummitable for the production of other growth is aclmira.bly suited for the growth of timber. and very good timber, too. I read in the " Standard" a few clays af!'O an article dealing w!th hard­woods and other Australian woods 1mporb:d into Great Britain, special mention being made of walnut. There is a limitless market for harclwoods walnut. de., and at v<>r:v payable rates. ' I raised this matter in this House on a previous oeca;;ion, and t_he Tre.a­surer was inclined to take some notice of 1t. Vi'hv is Western Australia to r0ccive a huge sharE' of money from overseas? Cannot we put fon' arcl a case that mmt an pea 1 to the people of GrPat Britain and to the Dewlop­ment and Migration Commission. and so assist the Empire. assist ourselve~. af!d reduce the unemployment t.hat <'XIsts m Queensland, the Commonwpalth, and perhaps throughout the world? It is only necessar~­to apply common sense. I see no difficult,v whatever in adopting my suggestion, even 1f the Government do not pay any interest at all, proviJcd they 0st • blish " redemption fund into which to make annual payments on behalf of the Unemployment InsurancP Fund in the same wav that' local authorities have .to mako annual payments in respect of

Mr. Taylor.]

378 Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

monev borrowed from the Treasurer. In fif. teen, V twenty, or twenty-iiYf' years the fund would probably grew to such dim~nsions that it would be able to meet any emergency that rnig,ht a,rise in connection ''Yith Hll('mplo:,-­rncnt; but that cannot possibly be done nndPr the methods tlu;t are now adopted. 'When these times come and unemployment incre:ases, we have now to raise the rate of contribution -dealing with the efl'ects and not the ctm<cs. The local authorities have all the necessarv machinery to carry out work wit.hin thei.r areas. Before th(• GovcrnuH~nt decide to grant any lo:tns io local authorities, they require a schedule of tho works upon which the money is proposed to Le c>xpended, and in that vva:-- can 0xcrcisc some SUlH'rYision over tho expenditure. and seo to it that the money is being utilised for tho pm·poso for which it was borrowed.

I will stick to the big towns, although my argument applies to the small towns just the same. Take \Yarwick, Toowoomba, Mary­borough, and Rockhampton, \Yhern \\'O haYe a

number of unemployed. \Yhat is [4.30 p.m.) to vroyent the GoYernnll'nt loncl-

ing to the local anthorities in those centre,; a certain amount of mom'y, with the stipulation that it is not to be spent on maintenance work but on new and deY6lop­rnental \VOrk in thei1~ respective areas'? The GoYcrnment could lend 1hat monev at a low rate of intere"'t, say 1~ per Cf'nt. to 2 per cent .. and make the terms of redemption spread oyer a period of thirty, forty, or fifty years. \Ve would achieve work of a reproductiYe or developmental nature .and the Gon'rnmcnt would get their money back.

_\nyone perusing the report of the Auditor­General must be struck with the negligible amount of money that local authorities are in arrears in ihejr rcpayn1cnts of Govcrnrnent loans a.nd interest. I am not talking about harbour boards ctr thn Metropolitan \Vater Supply and Sewerage Board. By this means we could have a large amount of road-making and bridge-building carried on throughout the State. The third di;·ection--and it is the one to which I attach the lc•ast importanee~is the Main Roads Commission. Wlw should not the Commission get some of the money if it is available, although, if the local authorities and the work of reafforestation could absorb it all, I would put those works first. I hope the Government will be able to put up a gDocl case before the Foreotr,v Com­mis.,ion that will shortly visit Queensland, and show that this State can do something big. vVe do not want to be always moaning, like the Premier, about the difficult problems in front of us. \Vhy, he wants a dose of salts or something of that kind to cure him. (Laughter.) Hn talks about the dismal crowd on this side of the House, and hon. members opposite talk about the J cremiahs in the Opposition. The J eremiahs are to be found on the Government benches, and the Govern­ment have the money to expend in the -direc­tions I have indicated.

Th<' SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: I am pleased to see there is one optimist in the 0]Jposition.

Mr. TA YLOR: I am an optimist, and an Australian too !

The SECRETARY FOR l'UBLIC \YORKS: You are a cheerful optimist.

Mr. TA YLOR: I want to see Australia occupy the place she should occupy as ono

[Mr. Taylor.

of the greatr'st countries on God's earth. I believe in that, -and I shall always believe in it. (Hear. h0ar !)

'I'hc SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: That is the note to strike.

Mr. TA YLOR: We all want to do eyery­thing possible to further her industries and assist in her development.

There is one matter of which I am reminded to which I desire to refer. On 14th August the Leader of the Opposition asked the Secretary for Public. Lands-

" 1. \V hat was the total amount of collections during each of the past three financial years from motor registrations and licenses?''

The Secretary for Public Lands replied-

"1925-126 1926-27 1927-28

:£ 189,632 253,779 373,230."

Therefore. nearly :£1,000,000 was received fron1 motm· r0gi~tratio11s and lif'enses, which sum ought. to be added to the figures I mentioned a few moments ago.

I now de,;iro to reply to the hon. membPr for Townsviile in regard to the position of oul' industries in Queensland. The Registrar­General for this State, in connection with some industrial statistics recently published, said this-

" Goods to the Yaluo of £41,327,767 were produced from raw materials worth :£23,912.241. In 1925-26 the value of out­put was :£45,900,668, and raw materials used :£26.710,520. Output per employee wets. therefore, £859 in 1926-27 and :£910 in 1925-26."

The Registrar-General also shows that, with very few exceptions, there has been a decline in the principal articles manufactured in Queensland, as appca·rs from the following figures:-

_1926·2~ 1_1925·2_6_

r~eather, lbs. 3,425,5041 4,002,757 Soap, cwt. 84,914 94,267 Bricks 22,543,000 24,733,000 Meat, frozen, preserved, 107,154,543 1215,846,728

etc., at mcatworks, lbs. Bacon and hams, lbs. 17,97l,B92 ll 18,013,086 Butter, lbs 49,054,847 60,491,765 Cheese, lbs. 9,243,279 I 12,565,572 Confectionery . . £297,282 ' £362,269 Jams and JcJlie,, lbs. 5,570,172 5,038.934 Pulped Fruit, lbs. 373,642 416,854 Preserved Fruit, lbs. 6,244,427 3,853,051 l'lour, tons . . . . 52,959 61,587 Bran and Pollard, bushel 2,082,538 2,611,659 Sugar, raw, tons . . 457.914 479,023 Aerated water, dozen . . 2,682,1<22 2,890,177 Beer and Stout, gallon · 6,675,966 7,045,713 Boots and Shoes, pairs . . 728,279 767,104 Timber, sawn, samnills 129,780,650 131,662,444

only, supc~c~r~. _fe_e~t-------~---·~------

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICUL'rURE: What about last year's figures?

Mr. 'I' A YLOR: I am quoting from the latest figures published by the Registrar­General.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRIC"CLTURE: You are comparing a record year with a drought year. That is the explanation of the disparity.

Address in Reply. [23 AUGUST.] Address ·in Reply. 379

Mr. TAYLOR: I have not picked out any particular year, and a1n prepared to accept the hon. gentleman's CXl1lanation.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICuLTuRE : During the last year the production in butter and ,,heese exceeded that in the year 1925-26.

Mr. TA YLOR: Although I do not claim t., have all the knowledge in connection with the wool industry, I desire to say a word or two as to its effect on the wealth production of Austrrdia. Last yea·r wool to the value of £64,000,000 was sent overseas; and, if we add to that figure the value of wool used locally and the amount represented in mutton, skins, and by-products utilised both here and over­seas, we find that the sheep-raising industry has an annual value of from £70,000,000 to £80.000,000 per annum. It is vital to Queens­land that the woo] industry should have all the encouragement that this Government and the Commonwealth Government can give it if it is going to survive.

. \ sho-rt time ago I was on a hoJ.ding in the Longreach district. That holding, which had an area of 80,000 acres of magnificent sheep land, was as bare as this floor, and had not had_ a sheep on it since September, 1925. I am JUst as keen on closer settlement .as any other hon. member of this House; but closer settlement is not going to give the country another 10 inches of rain.

:Mr. BRUCE: Neither is wider settlement.

Mr. TAYLCIR: I am not saying it is, but a drought such as has been experienced in Central Queensland during the last few years would have played havoc with small settlers. They never could have lived.

Mr. Bow : They have been there all through.

Mr. TAYLOR: As a rule a man who goes on a 15,000 or 20,000 acre blcck ha' just enough n-ioney to work that bJ.ock. Ho has no surplus behind him, and, if hn c•tl·ik<·s conditions ··uch as I have mentioned, he i' down and out. I welcome closBr settlement a.<; mu<'h as any hon. member on the other side of the Chamber. provided we arc going to maintain the standard of production >Yhich Queensland has maintained dnrir.;;- ptLst years. Ilut clo_scr settlement ic; not going to sp"ll success m the Central-V\'cst. i\lore efficient methods have to be adopted bv pastoralists and bv Governments-State and otherwise-so thai:. when a drought does come, we do not get " hit to log " the way we have been at the preBcnt time.

Mr. PoLLOCK: \Vhy did J\Ir. Bruce not allow us to use that experiment farm?

Mr. TAYLOR: I am very ploa,sed that Mr. Bruce did not allow you to use that experi­ment farm. If we are going to experiment in C;mtral Queensland, or in any other part or Queensland, to see what is the best food to grow and how to conserve it in order to save our sheep in a drought period, you do not want an experiment farm. You want the Bxperiment plots on different stations throughout the whole a.rea-not on one par­ticular area on Saltern Creek, w,hich might prove something in that area but which might not be a bit of use at I-Iughenden or Win ton.

Mr. POLLOCK: Nonsense!

Mr. TAYLOR: I do not call it nonsense. The last time I was up there I only struck one holding-Roclney Downs--whore there was any Mitchcll gras, hay stacked at all. Mr. Shannon, of Rodney Downs, gathers some every year. There "as not re \"er:;- great deal of it; still, it v. as there, and showed that it could be consPrved.

Mr. Bow: Kot.hing much can be done in that regard.

Mr. TAYLOR: I do not think much can be done in the way of conservation of fodder, and the one thing I regret very much is that the Development and ~\Iigration Commi"ion turned down the Thcodore irriga.tion scheme in the Dawson V;tllcy. l may be w1·ong. All of us may be wrong.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: It has not been turned clown.

Mr. TAYLOR: They have not given it very much encouragement .

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICCLTURE: Your information is wrong.

Mr. TA YLO R : If what the Commissioner of Irrigation says is true, by the co-opera­tion of the pastoralists and the growers on that area sufficient fodder could be grown which would help the pastoralists to a very gr<'at extent in these drought periods. \Ve cann0t eliminate drought, but we can and should minimise as far as ever we can the disastrous effects of droughts. Closer settle­ment is not going to do it. We hear a good deal about railways, and in my conversations with pastoralists in Central Queensland I was told that without exception the most economic way of dealing with the situation is by means of raih' ays. \V hat is the posi­tion to-day? They have no country on which to put their sheep on agistment. That is "·hat we a·re told now, and what would be the good of railways if the drought was of such a uniYersal nature that there were no areas on which to place the stock? The railwavs would be a disastrous failure. These are alf things that want the c:treful considera­tion of members of this Chamber. Great good could be done to that industry by this Government and the Federal Gm·ernment if these things were tackled in the way they should be. but no good can be done by imposing iniquitous taxation. Some of the c&ses we met with up there were pathetic enough to mf!.l<e the heart of a stone bleed, so to spea.k. It was hcartrending to hear the troubles which some of the people who have hecn settled in those areas for twenty, thirty, or forty years ha Ye to contend with: yet they have a land tax and other forms of taxation imposed on them when they have not a chilling in the world. That state of things should be brought to an end. I hope that some of the sugge,tions I have made will be adopted, or at least seriously considered by the Government.

HoNOURABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. M. J. Kirwan. Bri.,bane): I beg to move the adjournment of the •debate.

Question put and passed.

Re-sumption of the debate made an Order 0f the Day for Tuesday next.

The House adjourned at 4.47 p.m.

Mr. Taylor-.]