Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Council

THURSDAY, 8 FEBRUARY 1917

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

3096 Discharged Soldiers' [CO"UNCIL.] Settlement Bill (No. 2).

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

THI:RSDAY, 8 FEBRcARY, 1917.

The PRESIDING CHAIRMAN (Hon. W. F. Taylor) took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

F AC'l'ORIES A~D SHOPS ACTS FURTHER AME~DMENT BILL.

ASSENT.

The PRESIDI~G CHAIRMA~ announced the receipt from the Governor of a message co_nveying His Excellency's assent to this Blll.

MOU='IT MOLLOY RAILWAY BILL.

PRESENNTION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE.

The SECRETARY FOR MIXES (Hon. W. Hamilton) presented the report of the Select Committee on this Bill, and moved that it be printed.

Question put and passed.

RESTORATION TO PAPER OF ORDER FOR SECOND READING.

.'l'he SECR~TARY FOR MINES, by leave, Without notice, moved-That the second reading of the Mount Molloy Railway Bill be made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

Question put and passed.

DISCHARGED SOLDIERS' SETTLEMENT BILL (:='lo. 2).

SECOXD READING-RESu~!PTION OF DEBATE.

HoN. C. F. XIELSO~: 'When I moved the adjournment of the debate I did so not so 'much with a view to making any le~gthy remarks on the subject myself as for the purpogc of giving an opportunity to those hon. members who were not then present and who might wish to speak. The Bill has ostensibly for its object the making pro­vision for se·ttling returned soldiers on land of an attractive kind. In other words, we are expected to believe that it is a Bill by which returned soldiers, if they so care, can avail themse!-:cs of an opportunity of getting some recogmtwn from the country for the services which th"' gave when they volunteered to go and d0fend the Empire in common with other suctions of the Empire.

Personally, I am of opinion that the best part of the Bill is its title. It has a nice name; it is nicely got up; but as for being a?o:thing in t~'' nature of a practical recog­mtwn of our mdebtedness to our soldiers or conceding som<"thing more than the m·dir{ary citizen can obtain under our land laws I fail to see that it makes anv special c~n­Cel'?ion. As an advertising" Bill, as an electioneering .. Bill-if that is the object, or one of the objects, of th" measure-it might ]:le all ri.ght; but I . fail to find anything Ill the BJII of a tangible nature, or in con­sonance with the avowed object of the Bill.

Hon. P. Ml:RPHY: What abont clause 7.

Hon. C. F. NTELSON: Clause 7 gives nothing more than this Government or any

[Hon. G. F. Nielson.

previous Government have given to people settled on the land. Take the first para­graph, which deals with the postponement of the payment of the first deposit by way of rent or instalment of survey . fee. That is not worth talking about, any more than if the Hon. Mr. Murphy gave a beggar in the street a shilling and did not boast about it. 'l'hat is so small and insignificant that it is not worth boasting about. The second paragraph of the same clause pro­vides for the postponement of rent for the first three years. That is not anything at all to boast about. 'Cltirnately the,,e returned soldier cettlers will have to fall into line with everyone else and pay their rent, but in the meantime they are to be subject to restrictions of a hampering nature.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : There will be ar, .ts of land b! t apart for them that the public will not be able to compete for.

Hox. C. I''. :I'nELSOK: I have had the pri vilegP of lookin~ at one of these areas, and I shall have somGthing to say about it later on. The <'~nditioHS are hampering. I arn gwrrre th;!t the pres nt a·dmin::jtration have aboiished se!Gctions of the agricultural farm nature wherebv the selector can nlti­matelv obtain a free"hold. I am aware that they 'are cultivating to the fullest extent their fad with respect to perpetual leases. \Ve are not here to say whether that policy is a wise one or not, but undoubtedly the perpetual lease system is the policy of the Goyernment. For the first five years the returned soldier is to be subject to restric­tions of a hampering nature. He cannot lease the land; he cannot mortgage it; he can borrow nothing on it ; thNe is only one sourc" from which he can obtain money, and that is from the Government Savings Bank. For the first five year.< he must reside continuously on the land, and he cannot alienate it in any way. During the next fiw years. if he wishes to dispose of it. he can only ·do so to anoi·her return0d soldier. I understand some of the'e blocks are to be in the nature of ready-made homes. \Ve see an endeaYonr in that direction on the North Coast railway, and I would just like the }Iinist~r this afternoon to inform us what has be0n the cost per acre of clearing the land near Beerburrum, on the North Coast lin0. I think it is necessary that the Council ''honlcl know the cost.

Hon. P. NluRPHY: \Vhy don't you ask for it?

Hox. C'. F. XIELSOX: We are asking for it now. It is necessary to have this information for thi, reason. \Vhen a re­turned soldier "'elects a piece of land under this Bill he is Emitc•d to an adv ..tnce of £500, and whdever has been spent on the particular block of land in the meantime bv tlw dcpartnwnf bec·omc·" a debt on the bind and is regarded as part of the maximum advance of £500 to which he is entitled. For the sake of argument, the -returned soldier who go0s up to Beerburrum and look& at block 7 or 17, as the case may be, and fancies that p<1rticular block, pttts in an :•.pplication and gets it. but he does not know wh0ther the clearing of three or fonr acre' on that block has cost £50 or £60 an acre. Proba.blv he figures out that he c:m gf't up to £500 from the Savinc-s Bank, with which lw will b<> able to build a hom-e and do so and so. bnt suddenlv he finds that there wer<' fiye acres felled and probably stum]Jed by the Government, which has

Discharged Soldiers' [8 FEBRUARY.] Settlement Bill (No. 2). 3097

;absorbed already £300 or £400 of the advaJOC<' which he thought he was going to get to expend in his own way.

Ilon. P. MuRPHY: Five acres could not .ab· Jrb £300 or £400.

HoN. C. F. ~IELSON: I am glad the Hon. Mr. Murphy has informed me of that, because I could take the Hon. Mr. :Murphv up to ~amhour and show him land that has ·cost £35 an acre to dear, not including the labour. of the OWJ;er, who did not charge his own t11no.

Hon. P. Mc:nPHY: That would Dnly amouut -to half 0£ what you said.

Hon. A. G. C. H HVTHORN: They are paying 9s. and 10s. a day at Beerburrum.

Ho:;. C. F. NIELSON: Yes. and they ·have swell chefs to do the cooking and all kinds of co11venienees. \Vhen you pass down you see the chefs in white coats standing at the tent doors.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: I suppose they ·should have had troughs tD feed out of.

HoN. C. F. NH~LSON: I am quite satis­fied that the cost of clearing that land will .be very excessive. Of course I did not expect the clearing to be done as cheaply .as a private selector would do it, but I think in·comparison with the cost of ordinary dearing that it is excessive, and I think we should be given some information as to what it has co't per acre to clear the land at Beerburrum.

The SF:CRETARY FOR MINES: It was heavily timbered.

Hox. C. F. NIELSON: I am aware that it contained bloodwood and other hardwood, and I might also inform the Minister that I ·could have pointed out to the department a better place in Queensland for the settlement of sol<liers than that particular place. I oo not think it was a well-chosen place at all, but it was probably owing to its nearness to a railway station that it was selected, and it was probably the best piece that could be _got in that locality.

Hon. P. MDRPHY: It is good fruitgrowing eountry.

HoN. C. F. NIELSON: There is other good frnitgrowing country, too. There are hundreds of thousands of acres of good fruit­growing country in that localitv, but not so conYenicntly situated, and I be.lieYe the Rite was chosen because it is well within the view of the tra veiling public.

Hon. P. MURPHY: You are electioneering no,v.

HoN. C. F'. NIELSON: The :Minister in­forms me that at Bcerburrum the contract price was £25 an acre. I am glad to have that informc,tion. The sit" d;d not commend itself tu me, but on·· good feature with regard to it is it:< proxi1Eity to a railway station; but further up better land could have been ,got, although not so near tD a railway station. After all, in the fru;t-growing business, if a selector has to put his fruit on to a cart at all, whether he drin·s 2 or 3 miles more or le,s \" neither here nor there as comnared with a difference in the quality of the· cJil.

Hon. P. MuRPHY: The soil was analysed by the Government .Analyst.

Ho:;. C F. l\IELSO:N: You need not .analyse the soil. You ncc·d only go along and

see what others are doing in the wav of fruitgrowing in thP same district. I hope that the experiment will be a good one. I had occasion, I think it was on thP Addres" in Reply, to voice my opinion about the pos­sibilitv of successful settlement bv returned soldici·s, and I then said-I said· it sorrow­fully, the same as I do now-that I placed no great faith in the success of a scheme of that kind. My fPar is that the young men who left the bush, when they corn· back after a.n ahsenc0 of tv-.'o years or 1norc, ,vill not go back to the bush again. We ha vP to b•.! prepared to handle what we shall haYe to mu t, c~nd that is a rPtnrned soldier prcb· !em. Since I referrPd to the mutter lr 't it has been spoken of in ::Ylelbourne. It will have been nDticed that the Prime ~'Iinister of Australia referred to it the other day. and lw said he r •g-retted that among the rchunrd soldicr3 there "\verc mf'n \vho ,vere put in the way of helping tlwmselves, but they ·did net wish to !Pw<c the cities. That is the fear I expressed before, and the fear I exprC''' now. I only hope that this Bill will achieve what the Gov.ernmcnt hope it wiil. and I hopP, if it does not, that the Government will see fit to liberalise the pro­visions. \Vhen we come to think of it, if we gave them the land, what would it ma.tter? Give them a pcrpetu:d lease and charge no rent at all. Th<> land will not run awav. \Ve are not in a countn where thPre is "a scarcity of land, and we· can afford to give every returned soldier preference in sPlecting any class of land he likes, whether it is a fruit farm at Beerburrum or 160 acres up in the Burnett or somewhere else, and it would not matt0r if we charged no rent at all for the next twenty years. It would probably be wi'<er to do that, with safeguards so that no onl! else could get hold of the land. In­stead of spending money in improving the land for thes0 rc'turnc.d soldierf, it would be far bc>tter to allow them to do their own improvPmcnts and a-dvance money against the improvements from tim0 to tinw. It would be the best test of the individual selcdor, and would put them on their own rttc.:.ources.

The SECR~TARY FOR }liKES : \Ye are only clearing a certain area.

Hox. C. F. NIELSON: I am quite .aware of that, but that has a disadvantage as well as an advantage. It is the first year or two in settlement Dn the land that is the real te ... t of a man's grit. That is the time that tells. If a selector who has not been on the land before ha. the desire that nearlv everv­one has to go on the land, his greatest test is ·during the first t,m year'· If he pulls through that time, as a rule, he will pull throu£rh the rest and be a succe~q. ~atur­·ally, ~ve will have failurr·... I hopp the per· centagc .,·ill be smo.H, but it is only to be <'xpectPd that we shall not haYo all succhses. There will be a space of timP between the abandonment of a block Df land bv one mldier awl the selecting of it by another. and during that space of time there will be a deterioration of the improvements on the land throuc:h lantara and other weeds that grow on the :::\ orth Coast line, and it will be a greater burden to the second selector than to th•· first. I havl' "''en anv number of abandoned selections, and I mereb- wish to warn tlw Government to go slow iu their expenditure on each particular block, as rthcrwiso thev will saddle the .. eJector un­duly, and they should consider whether it

H(m. C. F. Nieison.J

3098 Dis~harged Soldiers' [COUNCIL.] Settlement Bill (No. 2).

would not be wiser to spend nDthing at all and pay the selector for J:is wmk _from time to time as he goes on, which I belwve would be the better :;cheme.

Ho~. P. J. LEAHY: I listened very care­fully tD the remarks made by the Hon. ~h. Nielson, and, as those of a rnan who rs aC'quHinted '' ith agricultural interests, natm·,l]y thev arr• entitled to more than usual attention. I happen to have a very intinrate knowled~e of the Beerburrum

district, where this settlement is f4 p.m.! situated. It is well adapted fDr

certain things and it is not well adapted for others. It has ono very great adyantage-that is, that it i> very con­venient t"o a railway, and I do not think there is anv doubt whatever that it is well adapted for g"rov~·ing pineapples.

The SECRETARY FOR ;\1INE8 : }.Ir. Rose thinks it is admirably suited.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I do not know any man in Queensland who is a better judge of country fDr growing •pineapple· than Mr. Rose. He \Vas. a 1nost succes,,ful farrner at \Voombyc, and he "as in a pocition to retire on his · mDne·;· befDre the Government ap· pointed him· manager of that settlement. Thr\ Hon. l\Ir. :c\ielson suggested that it would be better if the settlcn; were farther from a railway, provided they cDuld get better land. That depends on what it is intended thev should gmw or \Yhat crops thev may gr.ow. I do not know anvtl1ing that can ·be g~own there more profitably than nineappl,•s, and I do know this-because Sorne tirne ago I gre\Y pineapples myself­that pinC'applcs are a very heavy crop, and whilst vou mav be able to cart bananas 10. 12, and" en.n 16 miles profitably, you have a pretty big contract if you are going to cart pineapple. more t!lan a couple of mile,. Xow, none of the land at Beerburrum, Glass Honse ::Ylountains, and Bl'cn' :th is adavted fer grovdng ban.anas. It is 1vcll adapted foe growing pineapples und othC'r fruit, such 'b passion fruit and ora.nges, whilst there are many flats \\ hich, although they arc> not much tD look at, wou:d grow other crops of CDmmercial value, in addi­tion to crops useful on the farm, if they were surface drained. \Vhilst these lands are not as rich as those in the North and some in the Bunrlaberg district, they are nr·.H Brisbane and the railway, and well adapt< cl for man0 kinds of cro1>s. \Ve have to rcn1c1nbcr <llso that the Go\ ernment, so far a;;; I kno\v, havp ro other SlF'h L·rrre an, a 1\ it~in a measurab1c distance cf Bris­bai~e ~tP 1 Ill1 ~l' a raihray. A~, ho\\', it does ndt by any m< •'lll' fol~o\v that the GoYcrn· mcnt will confine thP sdtling- of .·oldiers to C--o 1.\·n land~. In 1nan'·, ca-,;~s it 1-vill be dl'slrable for tlwm to rf'.sunw lnnd. paving a fe1ir value, a~ has h('t'n done in the Southern St<tcs. All of the 0 Tcturr_ed soldiers will 1j_ot I'Llnt to grow pincappl0s~there 1ni~ht be a •:.!ut if they di-rl. Th0 Gowrnrrwnt haYe pmY,'r .mder clause 3 to recumc land, and if they have nDt an,·thing suitable near a railway. it would be much better for them to rc•,mne lan{l at a fai: price than ,('H 1c the soldiers Dn Cro·yn lands of perhaps inferior qtwlitv. That reJP·uk does not refer to Bcerburruin land, hec<Juse 1 think it is well nd·:lpte.cJ for the CrD[ls I haYe mention•J. 1 do not think the Gorcrnment can he credited with any undue liberality or "~nerosity in this matter, although I think the fl"Opo~ition is a very

[Hon. C. F. N1'elson.

fair one. To hPgin w:ith, a 1nan has never­a hope of acquiring the freehold. It has. been said that--

" Hope springs eternal in the human breast."

The SECRETARY FOR MIKES : I thought you said that so soon as a Liberal GDvernment were returned they would convert the lea ·•e­hol·d into freehold

HoN. P .• J. LEAHY: That is exactly the only hope for him. I slwuld havo said th~t if the prc\'·"'nt Governn1e:nt \Vere to ren1a..1n in Dffice theco would be no hope.

IIDn. P. Mt:RPHY: Do vou mean tD say that when a man has acquired his land he cannot sell out after five years?

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I say he will never get tho freehold and be able to sell out unless there is a change of Government.

HDn. P 1\!It:RPHY: IIow is it that all the stations are lea.sehold?

HoN. P. J. LEAIIY: Srrroly the hon. mem· her~ with his OXlJericnrf' of Que('tudand, n1nst know that the cases are not similar. If it were not for the fact that his zeal to support the present Government blinds him to facts, he would not make such an interjection.

Hon. P. :YiuRPHY: You are quite wrong in this case-his zeal to support th<; returned soldier.

HuN. P .. J. LEAHY: Does the hon. mem­ber not know that in remote districts. people do not often settle down there them­selves on large areas? Very often they have a manager, and it dDes not matter to them whether the land is freehold or not. Thev do not lDok on it as a place where thev and their 0hildren and their childr<m's children will live. But the man on the small holding wants wmething of hi,. own, and not something subject to re­appraisement ·every five, ten, or fifteen years. Anyhow, whether he is wise or un­wise, it is the universal sentiment of every civilised country, but this Government give· a plank of the Labour party preference to the returned soldier. If they were to do· the right thing, whilst thev might apply it ordinarily, the:v would waive it in the case of returned soldiers. \Vith the Government a plank is first and everything else is secondarv. I do not wi'h the hon. member leading the Government to think that I am blaming them in regard to this Bill. In­deed, I am somewhat surprised that such a good Bill emanated from such a source, because there are 30me good points in it.

There is also provision in the Bill that a man shall be entitled to obtain an advance· from the Government Savings Bank. The maximum rate of advance which can be made to him under the· Savings Bank Act is lSs. in the £1, and there is apparently no method in this Bill bv which a soldier can get thr, remaining Ss. I presume the Federal Government will raise some money for the purpow of assisting returned soldiers, a.nd perhaps that Ss. will come from that source.

Hon. P. MURPHY :' I understand that £500 each is to be proYirled.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I understand that a man may get up to £SOO, but I also under­stand that this is a loan from the Govern­rnent Savings Bank, and, inasmuch as there is no special prDvision in this Bill, the·

Discharged Soldiers' [8 FEBRUARY.] Settlement Bill (No. 2). 3099'

provisions of the Savings. Bank Act to lend up to 15s. in the £1 will apply. So that, if a man wanted to make £500 worth of improve­ments, he could only get an advance of £375. I have only read the Bill hurriedly but the Hon. Mr. Nielson says that that is so:

Hon. P. Mt:RPHY: I think you are both wrong.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: Clause 8 says-." PorpPiual lease selE'Ctions held bv

discharged soldiers under this Act shall be deemed to be agricultural lands within the meaning of the Queensland Govern­ment Savings Bank Act of 1916.

"The provisions of that Act shall apply to. advances to discharged soldiers !'nder tlns ~\et for the purpose of making Improvilments on such agricultural lands, and also for the purpose of erecting workers' dwellings, with the following modifications:-

(i.) The maximum total amount that may be so advanced to anv discharged soldier shall be five hundred' pounds."

But there is nothing which does away with the provisions of the Savings Bank Act with regard to 15s. in the £1. Will the Minister say whe'ther I am right? Can he borrow the full £500 or can he only get 15s. in the £1?

Hon. C. F. NIELSO;,;; : It depends on the value of the improvements.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: This is only per­petual lease, and they will advance only on the improvements.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: If he wants £500 he will have to make £625 worth of improve­ments.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: No, he will have to expend £6(;6 l3s. 4d. in order to get £500. I also \\.~nt to refer to claui3C 3, which gives the power to H•·•ume land. It will be within the rocollcctio·• of some hon. members-! am sure the Hon. Mr. Nielson and the Hon. Mr. O'Shea will recollect it, because wo had amendment , designed to overcome the objection-that when a similar Bill came before us some few weeks ago the Governmc>nt proposed to take the right to give debontur0; in payment, even if th''Y wore on!:; 2 per cent. or 3 per cent. deben­turu, end they had to be taken at face value. We put in amendments to provide that there must be fiufficicmt debentures to make the equivalent in cash, or that the interr .. t should b .. , 4~ per cent.. I find that this Bill provide, that the Government may pay in cash or debentures, but the interest on the debentures shall not exceed 4~ per cent., so that a man whose land is re,umed may be compelled to take debenturce which would not be more than 2~ per cont. or 3~ per cent. debentures, ;,nd so would gei less than the cash Yalue. '1\'e must remember that the Land C'ourt fixes the value on a eash basi~, and will not take into account a depreciation of currency. If we are to be consist0ut \Ye 1nust have an amendment to protect the owner in such a ease. I agree with the Hon. Mr. Niolson that a laro-e number of returned eoldiers will not desi~·e to go on the land, but I think the number will be larger than he seems to imagine. Relatively, the cities have not sent as many men to the front as the country districts. The country districts have done very well in that respect. A considerable number

of men who went from the country districts were men who \vero VI or king for ,,-ages, and I believe the opportunity for stich men to settle dowa on the land and obtain financial aqistance will induce rnany of them to become ecttlers on the land. I think it will be found that not only will all the land available at Beerburrum be required for this pnrpose, but that land will be required in many other localities. If I might offer any advice at all to tho Govern­ment, I might say that, however anxious we m a v be to distribute these men all over Queensland, unless the returned soldiers have some special preference for some 1 :tr­ticular cl· ;trict, the Government will be wise in settling them in the Southern portion of Quccns]cnc! as nf'ar to a railway as possible and where tl ere is a reliable rainfall.

Ho~. P. 3.fGRPHY: I have a few re­marks to make in reference to the remarks made bv the Hon. Mr. Nielson: but before making. th0•-e remarks I may say that most of the o'·Jjections raised by the hon. member to the Beerburrum land and the chances of euccess of the returned ,,.oldiers there have been answered by the Hon. Mr. Leahy. That hon. member defended the selection of the Bcerburrum land, and in doing so he answered the Hon. :Mr. Nielsen's objections far better than I can do, so that I do not think I need refer further to that subject.

The Hon. ::\1r. Nielson, in commencing his speech. throw a euspicion on the Government with regard to their ennestnc:os in dc6iring­to do the bt•ot they can for the returne.-~ soldiers. I happen to be a member of the subcommittee appointed to deal with the· question of providing land for the rPturned soldiers, and I \\'ant to say right here that in mv opinion tJ.ere is no man in Queens­land 'more de3irou~ of doing the ver,\ best, po'siblo for r~e returred soldiers than ~he pruent Secretary for Lands, the H"!l J. ::YL Hunter. I have watched him vc••y care­fully at all the meetings of the committee, and I have arrived at the conclusion that there is no man n1or0 honed ~n hir"- inh~nt:0~1 to do the ye•·v best for the rctur,wd wlrl!ers who have fought fer the !~mpire. I am quite ~urc the,\ not only the S~CJ'Chl'Y for Lands :·ut the G'.vern' wnt gcnnraFy will be v-ery glad ind0~d to get "risJ ~u~gt.'·-;tL}nS in connc0tion with this maLt. ' h help !hem alonp:; l>ut. wh('n a' pcrsio:J:.~ at~ c:t· t upon him and ·,u·.picinue innuendoes are indulged· in to the c'fc,~t that the Gov•ernment are doing Bo:cnething for the puri_1o~e of helping thnm at clrdion time, I do not think it is fair, and it is my duty as a momb." of the subcommittee to def··nd tho Mini,ter, who is chairman cf that com'llittee, against those aspeL ions. I believe that he is trying to· kg;s1ate to th·· b, .. t advantage for thc re­turned so'di-rs. and I bdicve every hon. nJPmbcr in this C'hamber ha", the same desire, and ~het ; 11 rig"ht-thinking people in the cornmunity ar0 a,nim,;t.Yl by the ·"ame desire, ,. ne! wi- h b e:o C\'CrYthing possible for the rc~turnc J solcl!Pr~cvcn those \Vho arc not in­clined to · :•:tle on the !ani-and that the expon·,,c of doing thi,, should bo borne by the Government on behalf of the community. So far as my knowledge goe' as a member of the mbcommittcoe, IV1r. Rose. whose name has been ment: :mod here this afternoon, was a successful pineapple grower not very far· from Beerburrum. H0 is a man of excellent reputE'. a most gentlemanly fellow, and 111. most intelligent man. I have never met a

Hun . .f' . • 11 urp.hJl·J

:3100 Discharged Soldiers' [COUNCIL.] Settlement Bill (No. 2).

man who impre:::se-d me 1nore as having a i:horough knowledge of thr bu.,int•··, in whieh h: was for so many years engaged-- that is pmcapple growing. I undersbnd ho made an immense success of the business: so much so that I was told con:identiallv that he had sold his farm-which was not· a very large -one-at a price· ,,-hich will enable him to live in comfort fo1· the re·;t of his lifo with­

·out work. He c •me forward .d1d ofi0red his services to the Secrotal"; for Lands .-olun­tarily in connoetion with' the clearing of the Becrhurrum land. and he sup<:>niscd thP work without <'ny recomp0nsc. He ;,. still in char··;c of 1hat w.nk, but I [,~Ji,•vo he•

'hH<;: bcC'ornP a p:1id officc~r of the Govern!nC'nt. and is also directing operations on the btanthorpo fruit lands which ha.-e been set aside for the se':tlement of returned sollierc. As a. member of the mbcommittee it has -come to my knoFledge that the \Y ar Council takes a great interest in findir\tr emplormont for returned soldiers who do not ,,.ant. to £'0

·on the land, and thev haYe been ye~v sucehsfuL I believe that not onlv the Go ·v0rnment, but all the a·;_ocidions 'which are tak!ng an inten"''t in thi~ nutttor, a_rp u~ing then best endeavours to do evorvthm"' thev can to pl!lce in remunerative emplc;"ymen't those sold1ers who want to earn wages in prefprenoe to going on the land. I under· ·stand that the arrangement come to between the State and Commonwealth GovernmenL; is that the State Government should procure ·the land for the returned soldiers. and be­tween the two Governments the men will be financed to the exh'nt of £500 each, The subcommi.ttee ;vhich has charge of the matter thought It w1ser to prepare the are~s at ~eerburrum for the returned wldiers. engag­mg returned men largelv in i!oin"' the work

·under the supervision of .Mr. Rose.n The SECRET.mY FOR :i\1r\ES: The men

seemed to be satisfied when I was up there.

HoN. P. :YfCRPHY: Recentlv His Excel· 1ency the GoYernor, the Pr 2n1ier h•Wernl -other Ministers, and a good mrrn~· of the "",ntside public visited the plac~, and I he­}Jeve every man who went there that dav was satisfied that the be·t that could be done was bC'ing done, There is eo doubt tint, upon land suitable for growing pineappl.»~ and near a railway, profitable crops can be ·grown. The Hon. Mr. Leahy, who has u -great deal of knowledge in thuo matters, says the Becrburrum land is cminontJv suit­able for that rurposc·. and we know' it is bvautifullv situnted with r railw lV runPina right thr.ough it; so th~t it ha's all .th~ ?lements of cucor·-~ for the purpo:c of enabl­mg .return.ed .ooldiCrs to make happy homes on It. wh1ch I have <>vcrv confidence thev will do. ·

Hox. A. G. C. HA WTHORX: I am ~ure that the Council will a'-sist in every wav the speedy passage of this measure. 'r did not take it that tlw Hon. Mr. Xielson w:: .. in any way attributing to the Gov0rnment that they int~oduc• ·d the Bill for <>lectioneerin"' purposes. 'Th:~ flU(!' tlon hP rai:;;ed wr-s a Yer~ reasonable on<l-whc+hor the return• -1 ,olclie.r wa- not going to },c saddlcod with a hiaher eost of c~caring the land than if he "'had done the work himself. But. in view of the <lxplanations that have b00n made since tlw hon. member spoke. it is evident that the -clE'aring; is hcing done entin:"lv under the supervision of a qualified m"•n liiw Ivlr. Rose. and the returned soldier" will "'et the full benefit of the expenditure, so that it seems

·the Government are doing their yery best to . [Hon. P. MllrJ'h!f.

assist these rdurncd sokliers who desirr> to ""tt1f' on thr; ln:nil. T jnln vrit.h nthPr mPm­bcrs in rf'grctting thfl"t frp.o.hokl~ arP not h<>ing provided uml0r the Bill. (Hc'lr, hear!) I am satisfied that the men would be keener in accepting the offer that is made if they knew that at thE' end of '' number of years thev would be able to g<'t a title i,1 fee-simple for· their land. But we must accept cmcli· tions a-; the¥ are, and, as Y\"2 kno\Y that the perpetual l; aschold cyst em is one of the planks in the pl.lLorm of the present Go­V0rnn1t'l1t. V/P lllU'-'t acccr>t the conditions laid down iu the Bill. I am very plea··.ed to see that the Govcrnlllcnt uro l110Yil1t!' :,o actively i:1 thn matter. and I hope that the c '!tle­mcnt o~ discharged soldiCl. on tho Yarious areas th:1t mav bE s,•t ap.ut for them will hP a colnp!ct'e succr-':'c. As re~idcnts of Qu;-ensland, \Vr• cannot do too 1nuch for the di"Jhr"gecl soldi~·r:··. VYhcn ,, t..' l:!'lll('lnbcr the pri\·ations they have endured and the difficulties and cbngus they ha,'o faced, ":0 ctrmot do too much for any rna11 who Js fortunate enou;rh tD return to us, whether he is 1nain1ed or ''vhoJ,,,

Question put and pa, .. <>d.

CO)D1ITTEE. (Hon. TT'. Stcphcns in the chair.)

Clame 1-" Short title and con,,truction of A·· t "-put and passed.

On clause 2-" Interpretation "-

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: The other dav the Hon. Mr. Hall had asked him whe~hcr €oldicrs who had joined the Imperial Forces in England would be allowed to take ad.-antage of the Act. At the time he had not scudicd the definition of "disrhargE·d soldier," and h<:> told the hon. memb0r that they could not take advantage of the Act. On looking at the clause he fouud that the definition was so >vide that it included lll< mbers of the Imperial Forces who had actually been in the firing line, and abo members of the ftghting fore.< ; of their Allies, so that not only would their own returned soldiPrs be able to cbhin land, but tho nlca.,uro 'would encourage men to <.vme from all countries that had been fight­ing the battles of the Empire. He w:~s sorry that he had pr0viously given the Hon. Mr. Hall a wrong impression.

Clauce put and )w.ssed.

On clause 3-" Power to acquire land for purposes of .lct"-

Hox. P. J. LEAHY: That wa< the clause he had referred to whPn speaking on the second reading. 'C'nder the clause a man ''hose land was resumed might suffer a serious injustice. In a similar Bill which the Committee had before them a few weeks ago they inserted an amendment as fol­lows-

" If such debentures be at the date of payment saleable in the open market at fane value, otherwise thP amount of such debenture'• shall be proportionate to the market value thereof, and such owner shall accept the said debentures accord­ingly."

H0 thought the Committee ou'ght to cimilar amendment in the clause. previous Bill the Committee also an amendment, a.• follows:- ·

put in a In the

inserted

" Provided that the interest on such debentures shall not be less than 4~ per

Discharged Soldiers' [8 FEBRUARY.) Settlement Bill (No. 2). 31011

cenfum per annum, and the currency o£ such debentures shall not be for a longer period than ten years."

Trw Government had made the currencv of the debentures twenty vears under ·the clause, and he did not desire to alter that, but if they wished to avoid an injustice being done they should >•Je that debentures were iscmcd of sufficient face value to be equal to cash. Perhaps the Hon. Mr. O'Shea, who had assisted in drawing up the previous amendment, would frame a similar amendment now.

Ho'\'. T. J. O'SHEA: It would be better to postpone the clause, as it would take him some time to draft an amendment.

Clause postponed until after consideration of clause 14.

Clauses 4 to 7, both inclusive, put and passed.

On clause 8-" Acdvances to ,<electors"­Ho~. P. J. LEAHY: He had thought of

makin.cr it freehold, but after thinking the Platter- over he had come to the conclusion that the Government would not acr2pt the amendment, and, therefore, he \Yould not move it.

Clause put and passed. Clauses 9 to 14, both inclusive, put and

passed. Postponed clause 3-" Payment of priceo''­

HoN. P. J. LEAHY moved th0 insertion after the word " par " on line 37 of the following words :- ' '

"if such debentures be at the date of payment salectble in the open market at face value, otherwise the amount of such debentures shall be proportionate to the market value thereof."

The SECRETARY FOR :\1INES: When the previous Bill was before the Council an an1endn1ent of a sin1ilar nature '";as. put which the Minister had refused to accept, and his objecrions were just as strong to-day as they were then, thcr.efore, he must prot<c'>t against the insertion of the amendment.

Hox. P. J. LEAHY: He did not care a pin whether the other Chamber approved or disapproved of the amendment, it was not going to limit his right of action in the least.

The subclause provided that-" Subject to this Act, the Governor in

Council may from time to time issue such debentures as may be necessary for the purposes of this Act. All such debentures shall be secured upon the con­solidated revenue fund, and shall have such currency, not exceeding twenty vears, and shall bear interest at such rate, not exceeding four pounds ten shillings per centum per annum, as shall be fixed by the Governor in Council."

Four pounds ten shilling per annum was the maximum rate of interest, and if the Government chose they could issue debentures at 1 per cent., 2 per cent., 3 per cent., or anything up to 4~ per cent. Three and a·half per cent. deben­tures were usually issued, and if the Go­ve!'n>Tient resumed land the court must value that land on a cash basis. If they said the land was worth £1,000 in the ordinary wa:-;, the owner ·would not get £1,000 cash for it.

If the Committee passed the clause without the amendment the court would still valufr the land on a cash basis and the owner would not get £1,000 in cash, but he would get debentures having a face value of £1,000, and probably bearing 3~ per cent. interest, which would probably not be worth more· than £75 in the open market. In that way the owner would lose 25 p·:r cent. of the purchase monev. \Vas the Government an honest Govermnent or was it not? He sup­posed it was an honest Government; at least he hoped so. If it was an honest Go­vernment it would do the honest thing,

Hon. I'. I\11:RPHY: That was where the· innuendo Citme in again-" an honest Go­vernment would do this."

Hon. P. J. LEAIIY: I said they will do the honest thing,

Hox. P. Ml:RI'HY: Anybody who read the clause would see that that was what was· intended. Subclause (2) provided that-

" 'fhe price or compensation payable· in respect of all land acquired by the· Minister und0r this Act may, at thE> option of the ::\iinister, be paid for by him in cash from the consolidated revenue fund, or in cash the proceeds of the sale of debentures."

The price could be paid by the Minister in cash, and the Minister would not pay lass. than the m·ice agreed upon. Were there any grounds for suspecting that the Govern­ment were unjust or unfair, and would try to take land from people at less than its value? 'fhat was the insinuation of the hon. member. He approved of the amendment because it made the clause plainer, but it was not a fair thing to suggest that the Government wanted to rob someone in con­nection with it.

Ho~. P. J. LEAHY: He did not think he reflected on the Government in any way. His closing remarks were that if they had an honest Government the Government would do thB honest thing. Later on the clause said-" or wholly or in part by ,the issue to the owner of debentures at par. That was his trouble. VVhy did they say " Itt par." That meant that the owner must accept a deben­ture worth £75 in the open market and must allow £100 for it. When they were legisla­ting there is was not for ·them to say, " It is a good Government and it won't .do any­thing wrong." If they were to do that, the best thing would be to pass a Bill of a couple of cl a uses and allow the Government to do as it liked. It was their duty to sorutinisfr ever:vthin.g- very closely, and he thought in the last couple of years they had had abund­ant reason for criticising very closely all Bills that came before them. He wished to prevent the possibility of any injustice being donr·.

Amendment agreed to. Clause, as amended, put and passed.

The Council resumed. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN reported the Bill with an amend­ment, and the report was adopted.

THIRD READING.

On the motion of the SECRETARY FOR MI~ES, the Bill was read a third time, passed, ·and ordered to be returned to thfr Assembly by message in the usual form.

Hon. W. Hamilton.]

:3102 Clermont Flood LCOUNCIL.] Relief Bill.

CLERMONT FLOOD RELIEF BILL.

SECOND READING.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: In moving the second reading of this measure, I may say that the Bill seeks to extend relief to persons whose homes or places of business in Clermont have been destroyed by the recent floods. The devastation and loss of life caused bv these floods are well known to hon. gentlemen, and our sympathy goes out to the unfortunatE' inhabitants for the loss of their relatives in this great disaster.

I turn briefly to the provisions of the Bill. In the first place, it is provided that the Minister shall cause to be surveyed into lots not exceeding :\: acre in area a sufficient number of allotments of Crown land at a site, south of the present railway station at Clermont, to be chosen by the Minister, and also any other area of land acquired for the Crown, for the purpose of providing residence areas for such of the sufferers by the flood as have lost their homes, and shall thereafter cause such land to be opened for lease as perpetual town leases. The Minister may also, at any time within six months after the Bill receives assent, acquire for the Crown, either by agreement or cam· pulsorily, within the town of Clermont, such area as may be required fOl; the purpose of providing residence areas for such of the sufferers as have lost their homes.

It is provided that the only persons authorised or permitted to apply for thes·e leases shall be the sufferers I have already mentioned, and that each application shall be accompanied by evidence that the appli­cant has so lost his home. There is a special provision stating that no area, whether con· sisting of one or more allotments, exceed­ing half an acre shall be applied for or held by the same person.

As to payment of compensation, it is stipu­lated that for the purpose of estimating com­pensation on the re.sumption of any such lands, the value thereof shall be taken to be the value immediately prior to the flood. 'The leases are not to be offered at auction, but are to be open to applicants in the same manner as perpetual lease selections are so open under the Land Act. The lease of such allotment shall not be issued to the successful applicant until he has proved to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that he has erected on the land a home for himself. If there is failure on the part of the person concerned within one year after the issue of a license to occupy, the license shall be cancelled, and all right, title, and inter81lt of the licensee in or to the land shall be forfeited.

There is also 'a <'lause dealing with the question of acquiring sites for husine3s areas. Clause 3 provides th<Lt the Minister, within six months of the oassing of this measure-, ma:v acquire for thf" Crown, com­puleorily or by way of agreement, an area of land abutting on or near to {' 1pella and Hershel streets in Clermont The descrip­tion of these lands is set out in tho schodule. Any additional land that may he required may also be aoquirod for the purpose of pro­viding sitee for busim,<s purposes for sufferers whose places of business werG destroyed by the flood. The Minister may cause the land so acquired to be opened, in areas not cxoeeding half an acre. for lease as perpetual town leases. These leoases shall not be offered at auction, but shall be open

[Hon. W. Hamilton.

to be applied for by applicants as follows:­The Minister (or Commissioner appointed) m<Ly allot any particular allotments to any particular applicant; or if the Minister thinks fit, any allotment may bB opened to bo ballotted for in the same manner as per­petual lease seiections. There is a similar provision as to assessing the value of corn­pen ":ttion on resumption, and also as to cancellation of license to occupy if the person concerned f<tils to erect within one year the requisite building for business pur­poses.

.Provision ·is aJso made whereby all rent received by the Crown for the first period of fifteen years in respect to allotments taken up shall be paid over to the council of the town of Clermont in aid of expenditure by it for relief purposes or in repairing damage ocoosioned by the flood.

It is also provided that the provisions of the S<tvings Bank Act passed this session relating to advance" for the purpose of Precting workers' dwellings shall apply so as to enable advances to be made by the Commissioner to persons who have taken up allotments to enable them to erect the necessary buildings.

The Minister, with the approval of the Governor in Council, may also, within six months of the passing of this measure, ac­quire either by agreAment or compulsorily, any land within the town of Clermont whercon a home or place of business existed prior to the recent flood which was destroyed by that flood.

Those are the salient features of the measure which will result in the building of a new town on high land and make the people safe against such another disastrous calamity. I may add that it seems that some persons who owned the land on the higher part of the tDwn where the milway station is, so soon as the flood was over and they knew the town was likely to be shifted, began to ask three or four times as much as the land was worth before the flood took place. To allow that would appear to be permitting an opportunity for those per­sons to take advantage of the unfortunate circumstances of their neighbours. The Bill deals with that feature of the (Juestion, and the 'PricG to be paid for thosP lands will be fixed on the basis of prices before the flood. If that is done, I do not think anybody can grumble. I beg to move-That the Bill be now read a second time.

HoN. W. H. CAMPBELL: As a member of the commission appointed to visit Cler­mont after the flood, I should like to point out a. few things which I think will require amendment in the Bill. I understand from the Secretarv for Public Instruction that some runendments will be offered to this House. I do not know the nature of them. but there is no doubt that in some parts of the Bill the Government's intentions are not stated in ,a very satisfactory W;ty. '\Vhen I was in Clermont the first meeting we held waq of business people and residents who had ,uffered. and the first question we (lsked them was whether thev were in favour of the perpetual lease offered by Mr. Hardacre or freehoJ,d in return for what thPV had lost and what the Government proposed to take away. from them. The answer was unammous. There was not a dissentient voice in the whole meeting. Subsequently I heard that a larger meeting, apparently of

Clermont Flood [8 FEBRUARY.] Relief Bill. 3103

-all residents in Clermont-not only those who owned land or were tenants-was held, .&nd although there were about eighty persons pre•-ent I believe that they a·pproved of :!\!Ir. Hardacre's proposals by sixteen votes to ten. That is ftn extraordinary thing and I have henrd no explanation of it. I believe that in the meantime the Minister had made some more liberal overtures than the provi­sions contained in this BilL For instance, at the beginning the Government gave them £300 in order to enable them to put on a gang of workmen to clear up the debris and the silt which had coilected in the town. 'The Government also advanced another sum of money for rollecting the rem'lants of -cottages -and houses. amounting to several tonB of iron and timber, and stacking them and preparing the iron for use again in another part of the town. Nobody seems to have any authority to sell this timber and iron. Persons cannot identify it, but still it is the property of those 1vho owned the houses before the flood. I understand the ·Government will get authority to dispose of it, and one of the first charges will be the sum it has cost them to collect it.

So far as the landowners are concerned, the position was put before us very clearly. 'They said to us, " We bought this land <tt a fairly high price at the time." Of course, that was not the same price as that at which it is valued to-day. As the Minister knows, sometimes allotments in these country towns far exceed the prices put on them. Take Longreach. I know that the upset price fixed by the Government was realised, not <lJlly four or fivefold, but seven arid eight­fold. I know of one allotment in the princi­pal street in Longreach for which the upset price was about £30. hut which was run up to about £900. In Clermont also large pric"' were paid.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: See what you ·can get in the old street to-day.

HoN. W. H. CAMPBELL: I h<tve two allotments there and the Minister can have them if he wishes. They w0uld only be e, <!eath trap for anybody on them, and I do not want to pay taxes and rates on them. Still, there iR no provision in this Bill for per,ons who own allotments in that sub­merged area. Clause 2 makes provision for residAnce areas " for such of the sufferers by tho re<'ent flood at Clermont as have lost their homes by that flood." I suppose that -only persons living in the houses who have lost their homes and furniture will be recom­pensed. The man who owned the cottage and the land is not provided for at alL

Hon. T. M. HALL : His land v<tlue is com­pletely destroyed.

HoN. W. H. CAMPBELL: Yes. The Go­vernment tell us that the Government mav resume all the land in Drummond and \Y olfa.ng streets, between the two creeks, but they will not give anything on the resumed area near the station in exchange for it. I think that, probably, is ono of the mistakes mooe in the Bill which the Secretary for Public Instruction proposes to remedy by amendment here. It is also mentioned in another part of the clause that-

" The only persons authori<,ed or per­mitted to apply for such leases shall be such sufferers as aforesaid, and each a.pplication shall be accompanied by evidence that the applicant has so lost his 'home."

A good many of the houses that were swept

away belong to people in the country and some to people in Briobane. They cann~t apply for land in the resumed area, and rt could not be granted to them, because they

would have to reside there. That [5 p.m.] does not seem fair at all. Why

should vou r~:mme land in vVol­fang or Drummond streets, and say that no person shall be allowed to build there, when you do not allow the owners of the land in those streets to build elsewhere? The plan we suggested was better than that proposed bv Mr. Hardacre. We proposed that the lli:nd that was resumed on the high ground should be plotted out, and that similar areas to those held in Drummond street should be allotted to the owners of those lands, and, that as the people in Drummond street ac­quired their land from the Government. they should receive these other allotments m exchange.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : The land in Drummond street would be no good to us.

HoN. W. H. CAMPBELL: It might be good for some purposes. It might be used as a police reserve, or as a trucking reserve for cattle. The Government should show a little generosity in the matter. Surely people who have lost their stores, their furni­ture, and everything they possessed are en­titled to some little consideration. Take the case of the lady whose husband was a solici­tor, who not only lost her husband, but also the cottage he bought, her piano, furniture, wedding presents, and everything else she possessed, and was rescued nearly forty-eight hours later stark naked, held up by a tree. The trouble is that the policy of the Govern­ment is to have nothing but perpetual lease­holds, and, if the Clermont people will not accept that form of tenure, then the Bill will be lost. If we throw the Bill out, that would not suit the people of Clermont at all.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : They decided by sixteen votes to ten that they preferred the perpetual lea'e tenure.

HoN. W. H. CAMPBELL: They did not say that, but they said they accepted the scheme outlined bv Mr. Hardacre in the telegram they got about this Bill. I do not think it is any use inserting an amendment doing away with the perpetual lease, because the Government would not aPcept it, and the Bill would be lost, and the people of Clermont would suffer.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: We would be very inconsistent if we inserted such an amendment in this Bill when we have not put it in any other Bill.

HoN. W. H. CAMP BELL: The Govern­ment could have done it as a matter of exchange without interfering with the prin­ciple of the Land Act of 1916 at all. There is another point I wi,,h to refer to in con­nection with the perpetual lease provision. According to the Bill, the Government pro· po·.e that the rent for the first fifteen year~ shdl be given to the municipal council to enable them to repair some of the damage caused by the flood. be-lieve they ar(' also giving them a loan of £500 to repair the bridge over Sandy Creek. That is generous in a ,,mall way, but the amount that the council will receive during the first fifteen years from the rents will only be about £90 per annum. That will not go very far, and I do not know how they are going to get enough rates to carry on the work of the

Hon. W. H. Gampbell.]

3104 Clermont Flood [COUNCIL.] Relief Bill.

town. Mr. Hard<>cre informed the deputa­tion that waited on him that the people who apply for the land there will only be charo:;ed 3 per cent. on the value that the Govern­ment pay for it. That is to 'ay, where an allotment is worth £150, they will only have to pay £4 10s. per annum; but some por­tions of the land cost the Government noth­ing; that is the resident site on the resump­tion south of the railwav. It is merdY waste land. Supposing that land is valued at £33, the lessee will simply pay £1 a year rental, and on that th<> municipal council will have to le\':: a r:•.tc, I suppose, assessing the capital value a.t twenty times the annual rental.

The. SECRETARY FOR ::\1r~ES: The municipal counCil ,hould be merged in the shire council.

Hox. W. H. CAMPBELL: That is what I would like to 'Pe done, but the shire people have been saving monev all the time, and they will not agree to that. If the GO\·ern­ment would bring in a Bill to merge the municipality in the shire it would be all right, for the munieipal council will not be able to carry on on the amount of rent that will be received during the first fi.fteen years. The Belyando Shire is a rich one, and, if the two local authorities were merged, they could get on very well.

Box. S. G. CURTIS: I rise to support the second reading of the Bill, but I hope that some of the amendments which have b~en indicated by the Hon. Mr. Campbell Will be made in Committee. Like that hon. member and others, I regret very much that the Government have not complied with the wishes of those interested in property at Clermont by agreeing to give the land that has been resumed in exchange for the land which ha, suffered from tht> flood. The Go­vernment of Queensland sold this land as free~old many years ago and received money for It, and now that it has been discovered that that land is subject to flood, it would have been only reasonable on the part of th.e Government to have waived for the ti_me bcimr, their perpetual-lease system, and giVen these unfortunate people a. freehold in exchange for the land that was sold by the Crown many yeers ago. I notice that in the debate which took place in the other Chamber on the Bill, in reply to a remark made by a. member of the Opposition, the Secretary for Public Lands asl{ed " What is the good of freehold?" To the 'Clermont people, who may be in financial straits, a freehold title would be much more beneficial than any leasehold, because on a. freehold title they would be able to obtain an advance much more readilv from financial institutions than they will b·; able to get it on a lease­hold. Banks and other financial institutions object to lei,ding money on leaseholds. The only security they care to make advances on is freehold property. That is another good reason why the Government should gra.nt these people a freehold title in lieu of the land o£ which they are to be deprived bv the Crown. Another flaw in the Bill is that it only proposes to give the right to acquire one of the,e lea· cholds to actual sufferers from the recent flood-t<J people whose pre­mises have been uctuallv de,troyed. I think it will be neceS'laTV to insPrt an amendment in Committr,r~ extendin~ the sa1ne privil0ge to persons \vhose premiSL:'"I. were :in in1.minPnt danger by the recent flood, and ma.v be swept away by some future flood 'till higher than the one which occurred a few weeks ago. I

[Hon. W. H. Campbell.

propose in Committee to move the omissiOn:. of the fourth paragraph of clause 3, which reads-

" The only persons authorised or per­mitted to apply for such leases shall be· such sufferers as last aforesaid, and each application shall b0 accompanied by evi­dencP that the applicant, whether an owner in fee-simple or a lessee, has so• lost his place of business."

That 8eems to be rather ahsurdly worded. The " place of busine~s" is the land on which the business is carried on. It should read " who has lost his business premises." that is the building and the adjuncts to the build­ing. I propose to substitute for that para­graph these words-

"' The only persons authorised or per­mitted to apply for such leases shall be; such sufferers as aforesaid, also all those bona fide owners and lessees who, although they may not have suffered by the recent flood, are desirous of removing their business premises to the higher ground."

Why should there be any objection to a pro­vision of that kind to let all these people get a way from the danger zone ? If the· Government are not prepared to accept that amendment, they will he very arbitrary and unreasonable. The next paragraph in the· same clause which requires attention reads-

" Such notification shall state the capital value of the land-"

That is the land to be resumed by the Go­vernment-

" exclusive of any improvements there­on."

There is nothing in the Bill as to how the improvements on tho land to be resumed by the Government are to be valued, or how they are to be paid for. That is a serious omission from the Bill.

The SECHETARY FOR MINES: Read clause 3. It shows vou that they are to be re­sumed under 'the provisiom of the Public Works Land Resumption Act.

Ho~. G. S, CURTIS : I suppose the same may be said of the last clause, which says-

" The Minister, with the approval of the Governor in Council, may at any time within six months after the passing of this Act acquire for the Crown, either by agreement or compul•orily, any land within the town of Clermont whereon a home or place of business existed prior to the recent flood and which was de­stroyed by the said flood."

I presume the Public Works Land Resump­tion Act will provid·e for compensation to the owners of land and for the improvements on it. I hope the second reading will be pa:,',ed, and that Ne shall speedily get into Committeo, when we can make the required a1nendrr1ents.

HoN. P. MURPHY: It appears to me that the Government are very much in the position of the man and his boy and the donkey. They are tr:ving to do some good· and they Lre not satisfying anybodv, not even the people of Clermont, who are divided in their opinions. Some vmnt leasehold and some want freehold. The difference between a leasehold and freehold in connection with small areas of land, such as will be taken

Glermont Flood [8 FEBRUARY.) ReliPj Bill. 3105

~p, is so small that it is not worth consider­mg. The revenue that the Government would get from this land, oven though they purchase it, will be given to the muni­cipality for fifteen years, so that they will lose over it for fifteen years. The Hon. Mr. Curtis suggests that the man who suffered no damage at all should get compensation, because another flood may come along and damage his property. Why should not per­sons in South Brisbane who suffered damage in the 1893 flood also get compensation? It it well known that a number of persons suf­fered serious damage at that time, and no one was compensated at all.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: They are not moving South Brisbane, but they are moving Clermont.

HoK. P. MURPHY: I think the Govern­ment is doing remarkably well by the unfor­tunate people of Clermont, who, I am SlUE'.

have my sympathy and the sympathy of every right-thinking person. \Ve are ex­ceedingly pleased that the Government are doing something for them, but if they allow themselves to be dragged about by every suggestion made by the people in the dis­trict, then they will be asking most unrea­sonable things. I think the most unreason­able suggestion that could come from any man is that the man who has suffered no damage at all should get compensation. The recent flood in Clermont was the highest flood in that district within the recollection of white men, and it is not likelv that there is going to be a bigger one, and, anyway, on the principle that it is a good thing not to shake hands with the devil till you meet him, it is a good thing not to make pro­vision for misfortunes that mav come some time in the future. The people 'in the future will have the same sense of justice that the present Legislature has, and they will do all they possibly can for people who mav suffer loss. I am in favour of what the Gov-ern­ment are doing now, and I have very great sympathy for those people who suffered in the flood, especially those who not only lost their property but who lost near and dear relatives as well. They are deserving of all our sympathy. I a~ pleased to see that the Government are domg something for them, and the Government are to be commended for it. I am heartily in favour of the Bill.

HoN. T. M. HALL: I cannot allow this occasion to pass without making a few observations in r~egard to the fearful disaster which has overtaken l'lermont. Business has taken me there very frequently during the last twelve or eighteen months. and I had occasion to meet many of those who were Yictims to this terrible disaster, among whom were people who were held in the very highest esteem in the district. Particu­larly do I refer to Mr. and ::Vlrs. Young. the whole of whose spare time was devoted. to charitable work pertaining to the district and particularly Red Cross work and work in connection with assistance to soldiers. I spent many evenings with them when up there on busine>s, and have found their house filled with others who were assisting in that splendid work. We find that many wdl-known men in the district, with whom I associated .-er:;' frequently, arc now dead and their properties destroyed, and it becomes necessarv to see in what wav we can place thos9 who are left, as nearh as possible, in the position they were in before

1916-9D

the dis'Lster. That the particular area on which Clermont is situated has been for ever depreciated a.s a residential site goes with­out saying. It is practically the bed of a. watercourse, and although it . is difficult to say to what extent the Government may be called upon to go in connection with the matter, I certainlv think, with the Hon. Mr. Curtis, that those whose premises are no longer tenable should haye the right of taking up an area. on the site on which the new town is to be situated. Great sympathy is due to those brave-hearted people who have fought the drought which has been raging in that district for vcars. and who have fought other circumstances ·which have made living up there a >ery difficult problem, and that they should be finally wiped out by flood is beyond expression. Anything that the Government can do to alleviate the position of those brave people, who are prepared to make every effort to build up another town, is worthy of our support. The only point in regard to which I differ with the Government is that they have not gone far enough. It does seem a pity that they cannot get awa:r from their .hide-bound policy of perpetual lease, but must stick to that particular plank of their platform. If the Government have not learned that there are circumstances when it is necessary to depart from all laid down rules, then this terrible disaster in connection with Clermont is an instance when the Govern­ment might well set aside their policy and allow those who own freeholds an oppor­tunity of obtaining another freehold on the site of the new town. However, this Bill will have my hearty sympathy and support. The Minister knows the position up there, and knows how many old people there are who have lived there for years and years and have had to battle against adverse circumstances, and if they did not possess the heart of a. lion, they would throw up the place and dear out. I trust the Govern­ment will extend to them their fullesi sympathy, and make this Bill a Bill of general relief to those people, and that in the near future Clermont will prosper, bec-ause there are great possibilities in the surrounding district, apart altogether from the magmficent pastoral country. There are mining possibilities all round the place, and with a little attention on the part of the Government, that town might yet develop into a very big centre, and this catastrophe might, after all, turn out to be a blessing. I shall support the second reading, and in Committee some amendments might be made which the people up there are looking for.

HoN. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: The Hon. Mr. Nielsen, who has had to leave this after­noon, asked me to read out a telegram which he received from Mr. G. A. Hooke, of J\lloray Downs, a well-known pastoralist in Clermont. The telegram is as follows:-

"Feel certain majoritv of business people affected by flood Clermont in favour of freehold tenure which I know they can secure reasonable price."

Thnt is the inforJ'lation of a man who, I m ~~~rstand from tlw Hon. J\fr. Ni0Jwn. is an indPpr,nr! ·nt perron liv;ng in the distrid, and who has no pecuniary interest in the tele­gram in qUf'"tion. I think with the Hon. Mr. Hall and other ,peakers, that this is eminently an occasion on whirh the perpetual loa.sehold

Hon. A. G. C. Hawthorn.]

3106 Olermont Flood [COUNCIL.] Relief Bill.

tenure might be relaxed. Perpetual lease­hold is right enough for land taken up in the future, but in this Bill we are dealing with persons who have had freeholds from the Government. The Government have de­cided to remove the town of Clermont to higher ground. They shoul-d give those people who hold freehoJ.ds at present an opportunity of taking a leasehold or freehoM on the new site, and I hope some hon. mem­ber will move an amendment to that effect. That is only .a fair thing, and it will give the Government an opportunity of meetino­the case if they desire to do so. If they d::;_ not ac<1ept the amendment, then the onus will be on them. I think that with that

amendment probably the Bill [5.30 p.m.] might be a good one. I am glad

to see that the Government are taking action in this direction, but I think that If we made an amendment in th-at dirN­tion i~ would be accepted by the Govern­ment m another place, and the Bill would be passed to-day or to-morrow.

HoN. F. T. BRENTNALL: There ·are several things in connection with this Bill that ought to receive serious attention. In !he first place, it is a Bill brought forward m reg:ard to what one might call .a serious calamity. The object of the Bill is to utilise that c~lamity_ for th<;> trial of an experiment. That IS a pomt I wish to emphasise to hon. members. If we had the opposite party in power we should hear nothing about the abandonment of freehold and the .adoption of leasehold, but we should go on the old lines and do the best we could. But here is an opportunity which the present Go­vernment have not had before. One of the principles of their policy is the perpetual leaseh?ld system, and they seize upon the calamity of the people in that locality as an opportunity for experimenting with that plank in their platform. That is one of my strong o?jections to t~e. Bill, and one in my humble JUdgment sufhment to throw it out.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : It has been the Government's policy since they came in. Persons have been up there trying to raise an agitation against leasehold.

HoN. F. T. BRENTNALL: We have been told that the people on the spot were unani­mo_usly in favour of the freehold system, but agitators_ are .all over the country at the present time, and they persuaded a majority of six to vote in favour of leasehold.

Hon. G. S. CuRTIS: I suppose they are not property-owners?

HoN F. T. BRENTNALL: We cannot say. We have to draw inferences only. I am not in favour of this perpetual leasehold system.

Hon. E. W. H. FowLES : Why not make it optional?

HoN. F. T. BRENTNALL: If we made it optional, nothing would be said about it. It is twenty-three years ago this month since, on three successive Sundays, we had a big flood in Brisbane, which swept in a tre­mendous volume from the hills and moun­tains beyond, and carried -away scores of hou<Jes from the flats in South Brisbane and completely inundated them. Have the people been driven away? Have they had

[Hon. A. G. 0. Hawthorn.

the courage to take the _risks again? They are utilising .and buildmg upon some of those allotments now, building homes and conducting businesses. They had one big flood, but who is so bold as to predict that they will ha\ .c another in another twenty­five yearn or thirty-three year&-the lifetime of a generation'? It may have been an un­wise thing on their part, but these things have to be taken by chance in a tropical or sub-tropical climate. My objection is that the persons who o"'Il the country, if they like to take the risk again, may well ask why the Government should interfere. Why should the Government say, "You shall not go and settle down on this site " ? If the Government undertook to find them a better site, they should find it upon the people's own terms and not on the terms dictated by the fads and fetishes of the •Government themselves. If we are going to force these persons away from low land-it may be absolutely a proper thing to do-I am not in favour of taking an advantage of a natural, meteorological calamity and forcing them to do something which happens to accord with the opinions of the party in power. What is there compulsory about the Bill? First of all, there is the compulsory removal-" You shall not run a risk here again." It was run on low-lying places in South Brisbane, and many of those houses have been built under the Workers' Dwell­ings Act-practically at the public risk more than at the risk of the ovrners. It is going on still, but apparently the people have more faith in Nature's beneficence than in Nature's calamities.

Hon. W. H. CAMPBELL: There is this differ­ence. Only one life was lost here, and 63 up at Clermont.

HoN. F. T. BRENTNALL: We were all predicting in 1893 that there would be periodical floods, and that they would be coming back. They have not been Joming back, and I do not think they will, because th.•re is an opportunity of making :m o:n;let by means of the river which will ~eliev•' us if it does not absolutely prevent ;uch floods in the future. The next comp::tls-:>ry idea in the Bill is the one that is • o me most objectionable, that is, the compulsory tenure. The Government· say to the sufferers, " You must get out of this low-lying land. You must go on to the higher ground, but you can only go on one condition, that is, the condition of perpetual lease." Some of those people do not want it. At least, there were ten out of sixteen, according to the very latest return, who do not want it. Are we to say with absolute certainty that the future is going to be so calamit<Jus as it has been during the last two or three weeks? We have no right to .assume anything of the sort, and I do not think anybody should undertake under those circumstances to make a tenure of that kind compulsory as this Bill proposes to do. If we pass the me.asure, we are giving our consent and our assistance to compelling those persons to go to live where many of them do not want to go •and live under a tenure they do not desire. Yet it is recognised that something should be done to help them. If you could help them with their own assent and accord, and in a way so that everything would work pleasantly and smoothly, well and good. Let them have some little choice in it. So far .as this compulsory leasehold goes, I stand

Clo·mont Flood (8 FEBRUARY.] Relief Bill. 3107

.here and say that on the freedom of m:; British birth and birthright I prefer free­hold. My father and my other progenitors preferred it and my successors will prefer it; the old British idea will commend itself to th~m rather than the nev;· £angled ,,ociali.-tic idea of perpetual leasehold.

In conclusion, let me remind hon. members that we are .ask<ld to get through this Bill this afternoon, to prepare a way for a change of residence and the conditions of residence at Clermont within a few hours. It came here only t\1 o days ago, and we had only yesterday to think over it •and talk about it and consider it, and yet the Minister tells me that he wants to get through with it to-day. I wish him to understand that I am not spe_aking in any captious feeling, and ~ do not Wisn to provoke any feeling about rt at .all, but a Bill like this containing such compulsory principle,•, I think, requires ample time for consideration.

. HoN. A. H. PARXELL: I should just hke to say a few wo!'de with regard to this Biil, as one who resided in Clermont many years ago. In 1870 Clcrmont was visited by a d_isastrous flood. Certainly the loss of hfe then was not so groat as in the recent flood, although fifteen persons were buried on that occasion. \Vhv should the man or the woman who occupied an allot· ment in the flooded area, but whose premises were not washed away, not be allowed to select an allotment in tho higher area? \V hen you come to take the whole of the business places awav, those men and women will be practically 'isolated, and their busi­nesses will be very seriously injured. I ther~fore ~hink they are desening of some consideratwn. Speaking generally, the we&tern towns along the railway were sur­veyed in !-acre allotments with a frontage of 66 feet. I notice bv the Bill that the allotments are to cDntai;, half an acrC'-that is. they will have a frontage of 132 feet. That is more than is required for business purposes, and the resu.lt will be that the lessees will use a portion of the land and lease the remainder and make a profit out Df it.

Last, but not l_east, I think these people should have the nght to convert their future homes into freeholds. Unless thev have a freehold they will find it very diffictllt to get an advance from their bankers. I am sure that nin~ty-nine out of every hundred per­sons are m favour of a freehold tenure. This is an exceptional case, and I would like to see the Government agree to this. Everv hon. member wouJ.d like to see the Bill passed, because it is intended to assist a deserving lot of people who suffered verv severely in tln recent disaster that overtook Clermont.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: It seems to me that instead of the Government offering the-~ people a perpetual lease, it would be better if thev were allowed to pure ha -:e some of the free~old land which, I understand, can be acqmred for a reasonable price. Let

· them put ':P their own buildings on that land and gn:e them the. assistance provided under the Bill. The Bill proposes to give the Government power to resume some higher land that is •at present in private hands. It is very properly provided that that land shall be acquired . at its value prior to the flood. I do not think it would be right that

the owner of. this land should be able to obtain a higher value in consequence of the misfortune'·· of the sufferers from the flood ; but I do object to the Government resuming this land and then passing it on to these people under the perpetual l•·ase tenure. Why do they not allow the people in the submerged portion of Clermont to negotiate with the owners of this land, or why do thev not resume it on behalf of those people and sell it to them ? These people could ballot for the allotments, and then the Government could give them the assistance that is pro-

. posed to be given in the Bill. That would be preferable to the sydem proposed here. There was a meeting held recently in Clermont. It was not very much of a meeting, so far as the number of persons present was concerned. I understand those present were willing to accept the leasehold system, not really be­cause they favoured it, but because' they were afraid they would not get anything else. Well, I do not think it is fair for the Government to take advantage of such a calamity as occurred in Clermont in order t.:J ram down the throats of people principles with regard to land tenure of which those people do not approve.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : You know that ever since this Government came into ·power. all land has been opened under the same. conditions, and that it has brought big prices.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: The hon. gentlemaoo is wrong. When the present Government came into power, in the case of agricul­tural farms they gave a preference to the man who would take up the land as a perpetual lease; but it was still open to .selection as an agricultural farm. In the case of town allotments the l\Iinister is right. The 'Government put up these allotments to auction, though they probably had to strain the law to do it, and they secured certain prices, the rental being fixed at 3 per cent. on the capital value. But the Minister must know what happenod at Maroochydore. Some nine or ten months ago land was put up for auction under perpetual lease condi­tions and brought high prices, but a very considerable number of the purchasers are throwing up the land now; they will not have it on the perpetual lease tenure. I have first-hand knowledge of that.

The SEC'RETARY FOR MINES : Didn't you give them the information that, as soon as a Liberal Government came into power, they would turn it into freehoJ.d?

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: Of course, I gave them that information. I give that informa­tion to everyone who asks for it, and to some who do not. Thes~ people said, "Yes, unchmbtedly that would happen, but it can­not h«ppen for fifteen months, and how are we to get on in the mreantime? vV e want to build, and we cannot raise the money." I would suggest to the Minister they should accPpt an amendment tthat would commit the Government, on behalf of these victims of the flood in Clermont. to rr•ume this land on behalf of the people who want it. Then let them ballot for it, and, after they have got the l«nd, let the Government give them thP assic .. tance which is proposed to be given under the Bill.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : Mav I ask the Minister whether the £400,000 ... which the

Hon. E. W. H. Fowles.]

3108 Clermont Flood [COUNCIL.] Relief Bill.

Treasurer got from the Federal Government on the pretence of the Cl<>rmnnt flood relief fund, will be all earmarked for thi,, disaster?

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: It will h" wanted for State groggeries.

The SECRETARY FOR MI:oiES : You had better give notice of that question. (Laughter.)

Hox. E. W. H. FO"\VLES: At the confer­ence· of Pr~miers at the beginning of the vear the Clermont flood relief was used as a very strong cry by the Treasurer in order t<J squeeze £400,000 out of Ylr. Hughes.

The SECRETARY FOR :iY1rNES: Wasn't he succes'lfu l ?

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: Yes.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: Then, it was a good cry.

Hox. E. "\V. H. FOvVLES: It was a good crv, but it meant that the Government v.·ere m~kino· capital out of the sufferings of the people" of Clermont. Tasmania got £100,000 and this State got the promise of £400,000. If that money was got from the Federal Go­vernment. fo~ the purpose of flood relief, it ought to be earmarked, and not used for anytlung else. (Hear, hcnr !)

The SECRETARY FOR JHIKE3 : It \Yas not got solelv for flood relief in Ulermom. It 'vas for flood relief all over Q.ueen;,land. The fact that floods were so general in this State cau·-ed the Federal authoritiEd to be more generous in the amount of n1onBy they gaYe the Treasurer. It would bko a very large surn of money to repair th'\ damage done to the railways all over the State.

Ho:t-;. E. W H. FOWLES: Then, i' it to go to put in the Raihvay Bill? l'• it to be squandered in day l<J.bour on the rail ways instead of devoting- it strictly to floo-rl relief? Have the Gov2rnm0nt a well-matured scheme for the expenditure of that £400,000?

Tlw SECRETARY FOR JlifrNES : Ye".

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: I would further ae<k if the Government propose to have a board of relief. I woultl suggcct a board conc,ic.ting- of the police magistrate of Cler­mont, probably the mayor of the town ~or the time being--

The SECRETARY FOR MINEF : The Govern­ment officials there can carry out all that is necessary.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: TherA is no board of relief mentioned. I notice the rents received from the perpetual leaseholds for th'' next flfteen years are to be handed over for relief purposes.

The 1:\ECRET.\RY FOR MINES : Tho rents for the next fifteen ve<lro are to go to the muni­cipal council to assist it, I 'uppose, in repair­ing the streets.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: It is quite use­less for :\1inisters to sav that a town shall be hPre or that it shall b.e there. The people who live in that town will oettle wlwr<' the· town is ~;oing to br. Look at l,\" ashin~ton. Tht> Government said it ·was to be up thoro. and the people of vVashin,ton. when they came to gcttlo there, dragged it right down here. Look at Tenterfiel-d. 1 mile awav from th~ railwT\ ! Look at East Maitland anrl West Maitland-2 mile3 away from each

[Hon. E. W. H. Fowles.

other ! The Government determined to esta­lJli~h a town§hip at Duganda:n, but the people· went and built at Boonah, and the town is. at Roonah to-da.Y and not at Dugandan In­stead of brinr:ing in an emotional Bill like this to force the whole of the peo_,le to pack up their portmanteaux and go away IO·

another !'1-tce and to <1cropt a lc"'s advantage­ous tenure than any other place in Queens­land--

The SECRETARY FOR Mr~E,,: That is not so. It is the same tenure on which land ha-. been taken up ever since this Government camo into power.

Ho;,;. E. W. H. FOWLES: Exactly; but this land wa" freehold beforu the present Go­Yernment had got away from the feeding bottle. This land was freehold fifty years ago. If the Government arc sincere in de­siring to help the people of Clermont, they should, as far a' possible, restore them to the same place from which the flood dis­lodged them. (Hear, hear !) That is a fair thing to do. Since those peCJple had their title deeds in a drawer at home, the Go­vernment should not say to them, " We will give you another tenure." They should say, " \V e will do all we can to put you on exactly the same plane as you were before. unless you want a change." Then, I notice the Minister is going to have the residence areas in a spot to be chosen by himself. Has he decided where those residence areas are to be?

Hon. \V. H. CAlYIPBELL : Yes ; on a reserve on the southern side of the railway line.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: All the Bill says is, " at a site, south of the present railway station at Clermont, to be chosen­by the Minister." Then, again, have the Government any proposal with reference to the old flooded lands? Perhaps the Minister may say that those lands are worth nothing. But we know that the flooded land could be put to an excellent use. A Government who· favour proprietary racing might have a race­course there and make a profit.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: Why not puG a State hotel there?

The SECRETARY FOR MI~E:i : And shut it up at 6 o'clock. (Laughter.)

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : They might have a beautiful racecourse on that low­lying land.

Hon. F. T. BRENTNALL: Do you recom­mend that?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: No. I was asking if the Government had a business scheme in regRrd to that land. The most serious point about the· Bill is that it does not make provision for the loescs of the people. It only makes provision for the lost homes and places of business. As was well said bv one hon. member, a number of people ·have lost their all, although they may not have lost their homes or their land. Sur-ely, the Government should bring in a comprehensive scheme to assist those people. In bringing in a Bill like this the Govern­ment should have tried to make it equitable. If the:-' got five or six members of this Cnuncil to act as an advisory committee they might have got a few sugg<3tions which would have been of immense assistance to them. There is one other question I wish to touch upon. In one or two of the clauses

Clermont Flood Relief Bill. [8 FEBRUARY.] Wages Bill. 3109

provioion is made for pavmcnt of compensa· tion. V>iii that compensation be in cash or in debenture8?

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: Compensation means "'-~sh.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : If it were to be paid in debentureo the Bill would sa:y so.

HoN. K W. H. FOWLES : The Govern­ment, out of the generousness of its heart and the leannes'> of its pockets, has brought in this measure suddenly, in order to shov. sympathy to the people of Clermo11t. Do thev propose h malm this a preoede11t? If droughh ovcr­tqkc Quc:-nsland, V.'ill t 1 ·n:,~ ho_;_Tow £10,000,000 to give to the paotoralists for lo•· ou in stock? Is this going to be a pre­·cedent for all tiwe? It might be better to allm the Government 'to take thfl full re<ponsil>ility of this Bill. They have brought it in, and this Council has protc-,ted against the leasehold system in the interests of the Clcrmont sufferers. There may be many of them who would prefer to have their old a!lotm 'nts under ~ freehold tennre and t" ke the rio,k of aEother flood rather than be ·ordered to ;.hift away to another p),. cc aad take up a pe,·petual lease. I understand that something like ninetAen out of the twenty-one soldiers at Beerburrum have pro­tested against the p~rpetual leasehold-the very men in whose int0rests the perpetual leasehold is supposed to be brought in.

The SECRETARY FOR ~liNES: I was up there amongst them a few days ago, and I can say that there was not one word against it. Of ·course. v hen the organiser gets amongst them, they may change their minds.

HoN. E. W. H. FOvYLES: I think thev 'have signed a petition against the leasehold svstem. This Council has prot,sted against the system, but perhaps, in order to expedite matters, w<> might let the Bill go through, even in its very impPrfect shape, although it would be fairer for the Government to restore those who suffered bv the flood to as near as possible- the position in which th~y were previous to the disaster. There is this cle<'ner question in regard to the matter-there are fifty people who were ·swept away and killed b:c this flood. I do not know whriher the Government propose to make any direct ·grant to any of their dependcnti'. Thev ore not all under thP \'\T orkPrs' Compen·;ation Act, and they will not all be insured. It is the easiest thing in the world to give a niere of land for land that has been flooded; it is the easiest thing i11 thP world to build another house: but it is not the easiest thing in the world to bring the de~d back to life.

The SECRETARY FOR l\1TNES : The Govern­ment "·ill do all that is necc·,sary to relieve the suffcrere. '

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: We ought not to leave thnt m fitter ont "hen considering grants in alleviation of suffering caused by the flood.

Qw··tion-That thP Bill be now read a <;econd time-put and passed.

COliBHTTE~'.

(Hon. TV. Stephens in the chair.)

Clauses 1 and 2 put and passed. On cbusc 3-" Provision for business

-arPas ''-The SlWRET ARY FOR MINES moved

the insertion after the word " allotment " on line 25, page 3, of the words " or allotm~nts."

HoN. E. W. H. FOvYLES suggested that a quarter of an acre would be enough for busirwss allotments. and then anyone who wished could purchase two or three allot­ments.

The SECRETARY FOR 11IXES : It is not pro­posed to allow one pereon to monopolise the whole town.

Hoc;. E. \V. H. FOWLES: Half an acre in QueGn street would be a pretty fair holding.

The SECRETARY FOR 1\H:c'\ES: It was the int,-.ution to cut the land up into areas of a quarter of an acre and a third of an acre, and they must not exceed half an acre.

Amendment agreed to, together with a consequential amendment on line 32.

Claus(', as amende.d, put and passed.

On elttuse 4-" Rent fo1· first period"­

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : The rent for the first fifteen ye :u-s was to be pu.i~ over b the town comocil, but the clause chd not sav who was to distribute it. Did the Go­vernment leave it to the town council to appoint the board?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: The Crown would collect the rent and pay it over to the council, and the money would be exper,ded for re lie£ purposes or in repairing the damage occasioned by the flood.

Cla.use put and passed.

Clause 5-" ,!dvances j1·om Sa1'ings Bank" -put and pa5Aed.

Clause 6--" l'o,cers of resumption of flood sites "-agreed to with a verbal amendment.

Schedule put and passed.

The Council resumed. The TE>iPORARY CHAiltlllAN reported the Bill with amendments, and the report was adopted.

::'IIIRD READlNG.

On the motion of the SECRETARY FOR MIXES, the Bill was read a third time, passed, and ordered to be returned to the Assembly by me"age in the usual form.

WAGES BILL.

CoxsmERATION IN Co1DHTTEE OF AssE>fBLY's MESSAGE, C'\ 0. 2.

(Hon. TT'. Stepluns ;, the chair.)

The SECRETARY FOR MIXES moved­That the C·>mmiEee d'J not further insist on their amendment in rlausc 25 (now 23), and agree to thr- Aso;cmbly's proposed further amt~ndment, namely~

" Omit all words on lines 59 to 43, in­clu·-.ive, and insert in li•:u thereof the following words :-

the emplov<'r has notified in writing to the "·orke\· prior to or at the time of cmplovment that payment by cheque, draft, ~or order in his cas0 iB tho us,ual mode of pavment, and if the cheque, draft, or order tendered in payment in­cludes such amount of exchange as will ensure to the worker payment in full

Hon. W. Hamilton. J

!\UO Wages Bill. [COUNCIL.] Wages Bill.

of wages at the place where such pay­ment is tendered: and subject as here­inaJter provided all payments so made after such notification shall for the purposes of this part be as valid as if n1adc in n1oney."

Hox. T. J. O'SHEA: The amendment made bv the Council was a straightforward business:like, honest proposition. For some unexplained reason, in another place it was resented and a cumbersome, unworkable,

' and, to his mind, silly substitute [7.30 p.m.] was offered. He could not, for

the life of him, see why anybody should object. tD be paid by chequ~ at . a place where cheques were usually given m payment of wa'St .. He v0ntured to say that there w<ere hundreds of 'tations in Queensland that never h:td anv money on them at all; evenbod,Y wa.<• paid by cheque or order. He "did not wish to inconvenience a fair­m;nderl or honest employee. and the amend­ment went so far as to allow that, if the payment by cheque was not the usual method, the employee could still insist on receiving cash. People in the city need not give chequ•'S to their employees, because they could get cash next door, but in the North and West a man might have to send 200 or 300 miles to get a few notes or sovereigns to satisfy a disgruntl<>d employee who was just leaving his position. It offered to such an employee an opportunity of inconveniencing to an enormous extent his employer, and making him run the risk of being hauled before the police court and fined for not keeping cash in his pocket or safe to meet the whims and eccentricities of a disgruntled individual who wished to inconvenience him. The reasons for the amendment were given previously. and the most forcible was that in outlying district·" men CDu]d not keep bank notes in large quantities, as they would be liable to the risk of fire and flood. They all knew that gold had becomf' practically ex­tinct as an article of exchange. Nobody ran any risk by taking a cheque, because pro­vision was made in the Bill bv which the employee could not only be recompensed but could also punish his employer.

How. T. 11. HALL: The Hon. Mr. O'Shea had overlooked the fact that sometimes in the far distant \Ve-t men allowed their wages to accumulate to the amount of £40 or £50 or even £100, and it would be far safer for a man to receive a cheqne. payable to order, than to go about with his pockets stuffed with not·'· If he lost the· chequ<e he could get another from the bod, providrd the original was not pre .. e"tcd at the bank, whereas he might l(•e the notes when crossing a flooded river or at the hands of thirves.

The SECRETARY FOR MIKES: One of the chief re.•sons for the clause as it origi­nalh- stood was that in manv in:•.tances men had' been paid by valueJro,s 'cheques. They did not know whether they were good until they got to the bank, perhaps, lOO mile·· a\vay.

Hox. P. J. LEAI-IY: In the case the Min­ister had rdorred to, the emplovoe who did not get c1 ·h for his cheque h'ad just the same remedy a·, if he had never re-ceived the cheque.

Hon. T. J. O'SHF.\: :il.1ore, because he can penalise the employer.

Hox. P. J. LEAHY: He would also have to pay the amount due and expense'. \Vith the exception of some very few financially

[He-n. W. Hamilton.

weak indiYiduals, he did not think any em­ployers in the country issued valueless cheques. Value.Jesc chegl!es were more usuallv issued m the citJe'. where they could "be prc··ented at the bank the same day or next dav. On<' serious drawback he saw to the compromise offered by the Assembly w:<•· that payment by cheque was Dnlv valid provided that the employer had not~fiod the worker in writing prior to, or at the time of, employment that such was hi3 usual method of paying. An employer did not alw~tys engage a man in his ofli."''· Sometimes it was out at some out-stat10n or on the run or through a labour agent in town, but' any notice would be no good even if it were given no'Ct day. He did not think the compromise sugge·,ted by the Assembly met the necessities of the casf> as well as the amendment of the Council, which gave ample security to both employer and employee. Thne was something in the point about exchange on cheques, but not much. Ho did not know whether it was alwav< adde-d. Probably in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred the cheque was drawn on the bank in the nearest town. In very few instances wPrc thev drawn on Brisbane OI"

elsewhere. unless they chC'·C to give way for the purpose of humouring the other place, he did not see why they should accept the compromise.

HoN. B. F AHEY: In 1872 he went to the· Gulf of Carpentaria. He was there two and a-half vears, and during that time he did not think he ever saw any other medium of ex­ehange than the orders issued by the ~ormr,n­ton branch of the Townsville firm of Clifton and ~'l.plin. So convenient were they that even: time he paid himself his salary in notes from reyenue, as he w :ts authorised i'o do, he handed them to Clifton and Aplin, in N ormanton, got their order upon the Towns­ville hoiFe. and. held it until such time as he· "as advised bv his banker in Townsville that that amou'nt was pai·d in to his credit. He would support the amendment as it stood ..

Qucv.tion put and negatived.

HoN. T. J. O'SHEA moved-" That the Committee insist on their·

amendment in clause 25 (now 23), and dis­agree to the amendment proposed by the Legislative Assembly for the reasons previously given, and for the further reason that the sugge•-ted method of giYing rwtice on engagement Would ]:le impracticable and would lead to dis­putes and litigation."

Question put and passed.

Clause 28-" Consent of worker no de­fence"-

The SECRETARY FOR MINES moved­" That the Committee do not further

insist on the omission of clause 28." HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES suggested that

they might meet the Ass'.mbly by retaining the claucP provided the Assembly would agree to tl{e omission of thf' words " avail in allv vvav" before the words '" as an answer­or 'defence" and the insertion in lieu thereof of the wo;·ds " in itself be sufficient." The clausB as passed by the Assembly was obviously unfair but the suggesk·d amend­ment would make it eminently fair.

IIox. P. J. LEAHY thought it was saf<>r to omit the clause. He was afraid that the suggested amendment would not meet the

Wages Bill. [8 FEBRUARY.] Income Tax AQt, Etc., Bill. 3111

case of the employee who got goods from his employer and then refused to pay for them.

Hon. E. vV. H. FOWLES: The amendment he suggested would allow other evidence to be giv,en.

Hon T. J. O'SHEA: Once the worker con­sents there is no contract.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I think it is wiser to omit the clause for the reasons pre­viously given-namely, that the clause was useless and unnecessary.

Question put and negatived. [8 p.m.]

HoN. P. J. LEAHY moved-

" T'hat the Committee further insist on their amendment in clause 28, for the rcasJns alread,y given, and for the further reawn thut the fact that the worker consented to it should be re­ceived as evidence."

Quosticn put and passed.

On clause 29 (now 26)-" 'i'h,"os pcz,rt not to apply in certain cases"-

The SECRET.\RY FOR MIXES mm·ed-

" That the Committee do not furthBr insict on their amendments in clause 29 lnow 26), page 9, lines 3 and 4, and line 15.''

HoN. E. W. H. FOvVLES: Ho regarded that as a vital amendment, as it was abso­lutely necessary in country districts.

Question put and negutived.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY moved-

" Tlw.t the CommittE'o further ins:st on thPir amendments in clause 9 for the l'Qascns previou.sl V cri Vt.."ll and for the further rca~on tliat :-, thcv' aro not no'\v incmhistent with clauses "18 and 19."

Question put and passed.

On clause 30 (now 27)-" 1Vorkcrs not enter­ing ir>to scn ice according to agncmrnt, ab.-;entinv tlunnstlvcs, etc."-

The SECRETARY FOR llliXES moved-

" That the Committe' do not further insi;:_,t on their an1enrhnent in clause 30 (now 27), page 10, line 3, and ao-ree to the substitution of the word 'fi~·e' for the "'\Vord 'three,' on line 4."

Question put and passed.

The Coum:il resumed. The TE1IPORARY CFIIID!A': reportrc·d thet the Committee had further insi 'ted on somP of their amend­mNlli', ]>'r] not iibisted on another, and had a'6rr"d to the Assemblv's further amend­n1cnt. Tho report was a~lopted.

MESSAGE TO ASSE:'.IBLY. 1\"o. 2.

The Bill was ordt>red to be returned to the As~! 11111ly with the following n1essage :-

" :\1r. Speaker,-

" The Legislative Counril hnYing had under consideration the me•sage of the

Legislative Assembly, of date 6th February. relative to the \\"ages Bill, heg now to intimate that they-

,, Further insist on their ,amendn1ent in clause 25 (now 23), and disagree to the amendment proposed by thD Legislative Assembly for reasons preYiou,l,' given, and for the further reason that the sug­geeoted method of notice on engagement would be impradicabl<e, and would lead to disputes and litigation.

'' Further in si ')t on the ornis~ion of clause 28 for the reasons already given, and for the further reason that the fact that the worker consented should be recPived a:>1 evidence.

" Further insi: t on their amendments in dause 29 (now 26), page 9. lines 3 and 4, and Iin8 15, for the reason pre­viom.ly given, and for the further reason t!Htt thev are not now inconsictent with clause 18 and 19; and

" Do not furth·· r insist on their amend­ment in clause 30 (now 27). page 10, line 3, and ag-ree to the substitution of the word 'five' for the word 'three.' on line 4. off<ercrl h:~ the Legislative Assembly.

"\Y. F. TAYLOR, "PrB;iding Chairman.

" Legislative Council Ch<tmber, '·Brisbane, 8th February, 1917."

I~C011E TAX ACT A:MKNDME::\'T BILL.

CoxsiDERAliON lN Cmn!Hl'EE OF AssE:\IBLY's MESSAGE, Xo. 2.

(Hon. TV. St, ph ens in the chair.)

Clause 2-" A.mfndment of section 7"­

The SECRETARY FOR MIXES moved­.. That thB Com,nittee do not further

insl~t on their funenchncnts in clau"'e 2."

There \•:ere really only b\ o amendments in the BilL but thoy we1·e vrctty well the whole Bill. Tlwv had the etlcct of depriving the GoYernH!er~t of alrnr-;t hvelVl\ rnonth "' rev-enue i1ndt·:· thP llll'a..)urc us it ~"'a~ <l_::igin~lly intro­duce'd. The reason why it was brvught tor­ward wa, that the Treasurer, on nnking up his Estimate,:, found that, through va.rious eau~--"· tht re w~s lik -'ly t"J ue a ~ho:'tage. He had nwde provision for paying out £100.000 to a>· ist return' d soldicre, and he found that there w'" likeh to be a deficit of £150,000. It was his du'ty, as it was the dut'" oi anv Treasurer. to trv to 111ake both ends mBe':, 'hccause the countr; .. had to pay its \Hl,l' During· the last two ) caro the' St<ttc hn d been in the throes of a drought. The rail" cty carni1~gs had fallen off by nearly £500,0~0. and tL•' war and other thmgs had also caused a rcduC'tion in revenur) and it ,yas neccssarv for the Treasurer to make pro­posals to counterbalance them. Of course, he •vas a::·are that the Bill had been to a free confcrcnc" of both Houses, and he did not suppc~~:> that anything he could say would a Iter the views of hon. members.

Ho:-;. G. S. C'CHTIS: He thought the Committee would be well advised in adher­ing to their amendments. He spoke strongly against the Bill on the second reading, as he considered it absolutelv unjustifiable and ven• unfair that the comriaratively few per· sons on whom this increased burden should

Hon. G. S. Curtis.]

Ul2 Income Tax Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

be placed should have to bear the principal expense of running the country. Further reflection merely <:onvinced him of the cor­rectness of the opinion he then formed, and he had set out his reasons under several different heads, which he would read, hop­ing that they would commend themselves to the Committee-

" 1. Because they are the result of a policy of extravagance at a time when the war and the dislocation of the busi­ne '" or the country and the heavy Federal wur taxation made manifest the need of economy and careful finance.

" 2. Because the\ violate in a n1ost flagrant 1nanncr" sound den1ocratic principles. by placing pcnver to in1po.se taxco and to expend the l»Oncv in the hands main1y of those who contribute nothing toward:3 thc1n, th~1 rc~y enabling them to put their hands into other peop~c' pockets and thul:l viol(tting·, in tlL• words ci that gceat policic:tl econo­mist, John Stu-art ~1ill, 'a grcnt funda­mental princirllc oi free Go\ ernnwnt; a seYcr.:_'nLu of the po 'I <_'r of control frorn the interest in its beneficial exercise.'

"3. Because they wi]] fall with oppres­sive weight upon people of moderate incom£s at a time when their incomes (tre diminishing, causing then1 serious difficulty in making both 'nds meet.

" 4. Because it is a great injustice that the small number of persons (compared with the number of electors and the whole population) who will have to pay this tax should be called upon to find all the money for a wasteful, spendthrift Government, lc,aving t·he gre,J.t rnass oi. the people (about 97 per ccont.) absolutely frep from any contribution whatever, either direct or indirect.

" 5. Bec-ause such a ruthless policv is not only politically unfair, but rrmst also discourage thrift and industry and saving, and therefore will be vc'ry 'detri­mental to the be't interests of the State."

He found on looking into the statistic, that out of 680,446 persops in Queensland the whole of the burden of the income tfix fell upon 20.437. Of those, 1,363 only paid on income from property a ···lm of £46,855, whilst 19,074 person' contributed ±:308,295 in tax on incomPs obtained by )Wroonal exer­tion. He rc'garded that last form or taxation as onf' of the m.o:··t obnoxious anJ unfair in the tYo:·ld. It \Vas .a tax on -a n1an's brain and muscle. In other words, onlv about 3 per cent. bore the burden of income tax, leavi:>g the whole of the rest of tlw popula­tion absolutelv free. In order to fortify his position he h.:i/1 taken the trouble to look up the grea.t English economist and philosopher, Jolln Stuart ~,lill, fro·n ,,~hose P'··~u.v on "The Ext<>nsion of the Suffra~e," he \vould read a paragr.oph which wa,; di:·ectly •applicable-

" It jg also important that th0 Assem­bly which vot0s the taxes. either general or local, should be elected exrlusiye]v bv those who pay som~cthing towards, th'e taxes impmed. Those who pay no taxe~, disposing by their votes of other people's moncv, have E'Yerv tnotlve t0 be L~vi~h and rion" to econoiniso. As far as tnon~y matters are concerned, anv power of vot­ing possessed by them is' a ,·iolation of

[Hon. G. S. Curtis.

the fundamental principle of free govern­ment: a severance of the power of con­trol from the interest in it, beneficial exercise. It amounts t<J allowing them to put their hands into other people's po~kets for any purpose which they think fit to call a public one; which in some of the great towns of the United St<ites is known to have produced a scc1Je of local taxation onerous beyond example, and wholly borne by the wealthier claHes. That representation f:lwuld be co-extPn)ive 'vith taxation, not ·"to~1ping sho~t of it. but also no~ going 1)eyond it. is in aceord·tnc> · ':1th tho t h,: nr--:- of Pritish inst-;tutlon;. But to rl'con,cilc thiF. fiS a <',Jndition annexe-d to the H'prPsfntation, with univer·~:tlit:v. it is c- -.ential. as it is on rnany other ncc{;unts dc"irable, that taxa+ion, in a Yisible shure, should dccocend to the poorest c] a~s."

Tlw SECRETARY FOR ::\II:'\ES rose to a noi:1t uf llrd0r. The hon. mctnbcr "\Vas g,Jl!lh t}'t c~u."il ihc \VholC' .arnbit of tl~e, B_ill IYh,],,t th a·nendment dealt only w1l" 1ts retl'OSj)C'C'tive opr-l'ations. rrh(':v "\VPl'(' in C:nn­n1ittef·, and not co::,.:dde:-ing the second read­ing of the Bill.

Hox. G. S. CeRTIS: He thought he was ach·ancing· verv substantial rea<ons why the Committee should adhere to their amend­ments.

Tlw TE~IPORARY CHAIRMA::i': I woukl like the hon. member to confine his retnarks 'vithin reason. I do not wish to int2rrupt his argument, but I think he knows what the amendment is <1s well as I -do. This is not tlw. second reading of the Bill.

Ho!(. G. S. CDRTIS: It \vas monstrously unfair that 97 per cent. of the population should c,,cape all taxation and contribute nothing, ·directly or indirectly, t~ the ccvenues of tlw State. They contnbuted sonwthino·, cntainlv, towards the Federal Tr asui·y ~-through 'the Customs. It as a ''oetrine well established throm;hout the Briti,h Empire since the relwll'on of the Amei·ican colonies th-at there should be no taxation without representation, and he be­lieved that the converse wae con"ct. The corollarv 1HlS that there should bo no repre­sentation without taxation, and with that principlE> John Stuart l\Iill had exnressed his <Wloemcnt. On the second rcadi'lg of the Bill he quoted an :mthoritv who was looked nnon a:;; one of tho grcatCst in Engla.,_d at the prc <cnt time. Mr. Harold Cox, who mid that. if the people were c'1llcd upon to make furt!Pr contributions to the income hx, then the he,eie of tax>tion should be extended to include thcl vrage-carning classes.

The SECREnRY FOR MIXES: They contri­bute very larg·ely.

Hox. G. S. C1JRTIS: Thev made no Yisible -rlircct contribution to the revemu, in 0urensbnd or anv of the Shte'•. They ~ade an indir0ct c~ntribution to the Federal TrPaeur.v through the Customs, which was not yj_,iblc nor so great that thf'y were semib!e of it. The onlv protection tho·,e 20.000 persons who coi:ttributed all the mon0~~ had again-t spoliation and con­fiscation bv such a Government as they had in po":cr at present was the Legislative Council. Thev were anxious to abolic-h that Chamber so tbat there would be no check or

Income Tax Act (8 FEBRUARY.] Amendment Bill. 3113

hindrance on th~ir policy, and he noticed that the Treasurer, in replying to a dop";ta­tion from the unemployc>d, blamed the 8oun­~il for not pa -sing the Bill and so prevent­ing him finding work for the unemployed. That was a most audatJiou•:. and extraordi­nary statement. The only inference to be ·d.ra.Wn vvas that, \t hcnever tht're \vas a num­ber of nn!'mployed, thr Government would be justified in increasing taxation on the few in

<Jrdcr to find employ•.1ent. That was politically wrong ar:_d econoJ.nically unsound, and it vras most outragC'ous to ::;uggt1 St surh a thing.

No politic d f'\'onomist rould be [8.3-J p.m.] fi"•otrd in mppor'" of - •1ch a doc-

trine. lt inlicatecl that the Go­Ycrrnnent wPre D{)t inf!uc-n, f:d bv bound eco­nomic principle,, but olmplv by' a dc..ire to :::ccur0 r:nor.t•v lT\ aHv nH'1n~ hatever to placate thP p'oopl'o whc) placed and kept them in pu-we'r. ·

The TE:NIPOR.\RY CHAIR:VI.\X: I would point out to tho hon. member that the ·qw stion before the Committee is whether the Bi;l shall be rctrospectjvo in its opera­tion~s er not.

HoN. G. S. CeRTIS: If the Bill were passed as it came to them from the Assembly it wnuld be PX post facto legislation, which '"a' an exceedingly objectionable thing. The -constitt1tion of the rnite-d States of Americt expressly prohrbited it. The fact that the Bill wa, retroepectiye in its operations was -one very Ptrong reason why they should adhere to thoit· amendment. The able and enlightened men who framed the Americ1n ·Constitutiun know very well what they were about when they prohibited rctrosp~ctive legislation. They were not pandering to u:tra-radiealiem or to democracy, and the safeguard, they inserted in the Comtitution were oue nason for the enite-d States of Amerien being the great and powerful nation thev were tu-c1av. The local authoritiee of -Queensland unanimously objected to the pro­posal to mbotitute the parliamentan fran­·chise for the present local goYcrnment fran­·chiso.

Tho TEMPOR.\RY CH .. \IR1IA~: I would call the attention of the hon. member to the fact that the only qLwstion before the ·Committee is the retrospective clause,

Hox. G. S. CURTIS: For reasons he had ·alrea-dy given, he held they would be W<'ll ad,·iscd in ~dhoring to their amendment,;, and perhaps in throwing out tho whole Bill. 'They had a con,titutional right to do that, and every justiflcatioo· for a·dopting such a ('Oursc. The GoYernnH?nt knew very wc1l, from the attitude taken nn bv the Couneil last yenr, that if any further· taxation pro­po~a], "·ere mbmittPd to the CounciL in all prob1bility th"' would be rejected. A simi­lar situation rro:::p in ·victoria in 1895, when Sir Georgc Turner v, as Treac::.urer. The Council rf'ject0d his pr0po8als to increase taxatjon, but Sir Gc0rge Turner. a" a '--en­siblP man. rec0~ni~ea tlie right of the Coun­cil b reject financi~l m~asuros, and pro­ccc-de·cl to recon~idcr his Estimates and made proYisinn for extinguishing the deficiency by son1e other means.

Hox. .\. H. P ARNELL: The financial vcar closPCl on 30th .June last "·ith a revenue surplus oi £34,7f':;, so that there should have been no ncce•sity for imposing additional :taxation. He strongly object.rcl to the Bill,

on the ground that the Federal Government had to filLx"\·f;C tho '~ ar. By the end of J u:ne the war debt of the Commonwealth 'vould amount to £146,000,000, and the end of the war was not yet in sight. They should con­serve their finances in every way possible for the purpo"e of carrying on the war. The Queen•land Goyernment ha-cl to find little or no money for \Var purpose~. The Bri::-banc Chamber of Comm<·rcc, tlH' other clay, en­tered a strong protest against the burcll'n of taxation that W.::d now hPing impose·d on the peopl<'. and similar protc-ts had bc••n en­tered bv the Chrrmb" rs of Commerce of Rock­h::vnnt ;ll and rJ\.nYL._"";ilk. ~, fur frcrn there beiug a large ntL.~.lber cf rich people in QUi!Cns\ancJ, he found that, OUt OI <'Yery 1QQ people in tho State. there were only two who had inc·omes of more than £500 per annum. At the fr<'<' conference on the Bill the manugcui for the Council urged that all the mo1.c-Y they cnuld saYC shou:d go to the Federal UoYcrnmeni., bllC'ausc thev rnust in1-pose incn:a H._d taxaticn to carry On the vvar.

QLwstjun put and ucgatiyr,d.

HoN. E. \Y. H. l"'\\T:ES moYcd-That the Comn1ittct~ insjst on their aint_'nchnents in clause 2 for tho reason" already giyen, and for the further r~ason that there Is no pro­Yision in the Bill s<lfeguar·ding the present position of litigant' who haYe already ap­pealed against their assessments.

QuP,tion put and pa;.--.cd.

Clanse 3-" SuzNrtux "-

The SECRETARY FOR :Yli="E:::l mm-e-el­That the Committc•e do not further in,-ist on their amendment in clause 3.

Hoc-r. E. W. H. FO\YLES: An almost identical Bill was befor•' the Y ictoria Par­liament a week or two a""' and the follow­ing paragraph app(>.arcd in a Southern paper in rcfcreneP thcrpto:-

"Further consideration ·was giYcn by the Sbte Cabinet ,.,esterday to the quc-.o­tion of a-djusting the fmance', but no deciFion was reached with a view of overcomin~ the difficulty caused by the Legislative Council's rejection of the Super Income Tnx Bill and Stamp Bill. ThC'30 were estimatc•d to produce a re,·enue o£ £22E-,OOO. The next me·'ting will bP -devoted chicfl v to the considera­tion of a financial policv. The opinion w ,., expre·dPrl at one time that if pres­Slll'f' wcr" brought on the Council it might agr~e to pa•'" taxation propoeals duting n short surnm.cr sc"'sion. but the Cabinet hac, not entertained that idc"l. ~1ini~ters arc in rC'CC'·'", and at prc"'·0nt nrC' in no hurrv to n1cet Parlianv:nt. 'rho C> binPt ha; .dLlcidcd to rcdu('-e ex­pcnditurP a" n1uch a ... is thonght prac­ticable;, and the propr,c-d payn1C'nt of £143.000 off the accumulated rcn'nue dcfit it may b::-· dPferrr·d."

The Government of Queen<bnd might follow the excellent example of thP Victorian Go­vernment and shorten soil. The deficit next .June would probably be in the region of £500,000.

The SECRETARY FOR MIXES : Then you will have to tako your share of the blame.

HoN. K W. H. FO'\VLES: At the out­side, the Bill would only produce £160.000. He thought it was the duty of some hon.

Hon. E. W. H. p,l(uze,.]

3114 Income Tax Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

member oo protest against three or four statements that ha~ been made in the public Press. A deputatiOn of teachers waited on the Secretary for Public Instruction to ask for their long-deferred and hard-earned in­?reasls. cr:he Minister-not perhaps speak­mg fo1· himself, but for those who were tutoring him in the matter-said that those mcrea,es would have been given if the Council had passed the supertax measure.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: That is what they tell everybody who asks them for money.

. HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Those deferred mcreases had been held back from the teachers for the last two years.

The SECRETARY FOR MixES : And for how long before that?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: The Govern­ment had had an opportunitv for the last t~vo years of paying . t)1e teachers a living wage, and, after waitmg two years thev nmt screened themselves behind th~ poo'r excuse that the -Council had not pa"sed the supertax Bill in January, 1917.

The SECRETARY FOR JY1IxES : You know very well. that this Government paid the auto­matic mereases to public servants that the late Government refused to pay, although they had good seasons and a large surplus revenue.

Ho:-<. E. W. H. ~OWLES: The present \lo:ernment onlv pa1d those increases to a limited extent.

Ho~. P. J. LEAHY: And they increased taxation by £1,000,000.

Ho:-<. E. W. H. FOWLES: A deputation o,f unemployed waited on members of the Government the other day. There were 1Q,OOO unemployed at the present time in J\~w South Wales, and it would be a bad thmg for the Government of this State to breed unemployment. TJ:>ey were doing it a3 hard as. they could, but It would be no good attemptmg to saddle the responsibility for unemployment on the Council. The Govern­ment had been given every penny they had asked for up to the pr-es.cnt time. h was not the Council who were calling a halt so much as the country. A deputation waited on the Treasurer to ask ~or more money for the unemployed, and agam the Council were blame?, although they had not thrown out the Bill. They had not thrown it out yet. Shll, that was the excuse given. The sur­veyors >mited on the Government and asked for mcreased pay. Again the same excuse was given,_ although the Bill was not then fimshed with: They gave that anqver to every deputatiOn that waited on them. Now, they came to the real reason for the Bill and _h, would read the Assembly's excuse; as giVen on. the 13th December, 1916, in a mr:;sage winch they sent to the Council, whiCh 11 as as follows-

." That the amendmente, if _accepted, V\ ould have the effect of depriving the Treasury durmg the current financial year of additional revenue estimated at £160,000, which is needed by the Govern­men_t to help the maimed and wounded so!d1~rs and to assist the soldiers' repa­triation scheme.''

That was stated in December 1916 and on

[Hon. E. W. H. Fowl~s. '

6th January of this year Mr. Hughes told them that the whole of the bill would be footed by the Federal Parliament.

The SECRETARY FOR MixES : This is in addi­tion to what Mr. Hughes is going to give. We are giving something additional to the soldi-ers.

HoN. E. W H. FOWLES: Absolutely all tho expendit·ure in connection with 'the repatriation scheme was going to be under­taken by the Federal Government, so that that reason for the Assembly introducing the Bill fell to the ground. They had another reason, which was an afterthought, and a merry one. It was as follows-

" A portion of this money is needed also to meet the increases in salary pro­vided on this year's Estimates for the lower paid public servants."

That was the sole reason why they were in-· sisting upon the measure. Reference had been made to the resolutions passed by the Bundaberg Chamber of Commm-ce and the Brisbane Chamber of Commerce, and a number of telegrams had been received in connection with the matter. He had one· from the Townsville Chamber of Commerce, reading as follows:-

"This chamber strongly supports. Bundaberg protest increased State taxa­tion. Behalf this chamber please oppose· Income Tax Bill."

They had the fact that in Western Australia they nearly went the same way ·that Queens­land did with regard to finance. The Go­vernment found themselves hopelE>ssly in­volved there, and practically they found they were having deficits of £150,000 a year on State enterprises, and now Mr. \Vilson was putting them up to auction. He would like to call attention to the remarks made at the annual meeting of the Australian JY!(ercantile Land and Finance Company, Limited. held in London on 30th November. The chairman referred a.t ,,ome length to the actual taxatirm now before the Queensland Parliament, and· his rpmarks would show how undue taxation in this part of the world was immediately felt on the othc·r side, where they wished at the present time to keep their credit good. Summarisnd in a few words, the chairman's remarks WC're as follows:-

" The past01·al industry, he stated, had' been, and is, the backbone of Australia's prosperity, and all who had the welfare of the Commonwealth at heart had re­'Sretted the trend of legislation, which· had bePn conspicuously adverse during recent 0 ear ~ot only had the incidence of taxation been unfair to the pastoralist, but oy,preesive conditions had been P'tab­lished by legislation in regard to wages, hours of work, etc. Restrictions had been placed on the passage of stock from one Rbtc to another, while in Queensland existing contracts for the lease of Go­vernment lands were threatened with attack. The result was that the con­fidence of investors had been shaken, and the flow of capital checked. It was pointed out that men would not risk the-ir industrv and their monev in attempts to i~prove the productivity of the country when the results of their

Income Tax Act, Etc., Bill. [8 FEBRUARY.] Adfournment. 311&

labour and enterprise might be con­fiscated by taxation or commandeered to suit some political cry."

He would give one actual instance of the effect of the present taxation in connection with a Queen street property bringing in £1,100 gross per year. The actual assess­ments were as follows:-

£ 8. d. "Rt1'ltP lancl tn~ paid May,

~916 ... ... ... 223 5 5 State land tax paid No-

vember, 1916 ... ... 214 13 4 StatA land tax paid Xo­

vembcr, 1916, being a supertax, the estimated value of the improve­ments being less than 25 per cent. of thn esti-mated value of the free­hold land ...

State income tax paid April, 1916

Federal income tax paid March, 1916

Federal land tax paid June, 1916

Estimated fire insurance, twelve months ...

Maintenance (estimated), twelve months ... ...

Estimated municipal and water board rates and taxes

55 18 11

33 8 10

25 18 9

80 17 9

39 0 0

28 0 0

121 0 0

£822 3 0"

That left the owner a return of onlv £278. That was not a fanciful case. He would give one other C3Se in which the income was approximately £700. The assessments were as follows:-

£ s. d. £ s. d. "Fedm·al land

tax 17 0 5 State land tax 104 12 6 State land tax 104 12 6

209 5 0 City Council 146 19 8 Metropolitan

\Vater and Sel\-erage Board 30 0 0

£403 5 1"

They were now asked to pass more taxa­tion at a time "-hr'1 the Federal Parliament wanted every pound they could get to prose­cute the war. The time had come when the Council should second the crv waged in the country, that it as high time the headlong < :1recr of t''<:lravaganc0 on the part of the Governm<mt should cease, and that a halt should be crierl. in regard to taxation.

Question put and negatived.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES moved-,, That the Committee further insist on

their amendment in clause 3. for the re,1sons already given, and for the further roa ,on that. in the face of the heavv Federal taxation wcessitated by the cir­cumstances of the war at present existing this ('ouncil views with alarm the eve~ increasing State Government taxation,

which will inevitably result in increased unemployment and industrial stagna­tion.''

Question put and passed.

Clause 4-" Amendment of section 13 "-

The SECRETARY FOR MIXES moved­" That the Committee do not further

insist on their amendment in clause 4." Question put and negatived.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES moved-" That the Committee further insist

on their amendment in clause 4, for the reasons already given."

Question put and passed. The Council resumed. The TEMPORARY

CHAIR}!AN reported that the Committee had further insisted on their amendments in. the Bill; and the report was adopted.

::\IEssAGE To A;:~E:I!BLY, No. 3. [9 p.m.] The Bill was ordered to be returned to

the As''.cmbly with the following m<'%age:-" l\cir, Speaker,-

" The Legislative Council having had under consideration the me;~sage of the Legislative Assembly, of datB 22nd December last, relative to the Income Tax Act Amendment Bill, beg now to intimate that they-

" Further insist on their amendments in clause 2 for the reasons already given, and for the further reason that there is no provision in the Bill safeguarding the present position of litigant;, who· have already appe.aled against their assessments.

" Further insist on their amendment in clause 3 for the reasons already given, and for the further reac;on that in the face of the heavy Federal taxation neces­sihted bv the circumstances of the war­at presmit existing, this Council views with alarm th~ ever-increasing State· Government taxation, which will inevit­ablY result in increased unemployment and industrial stagnation.

" Further insist on their amendment in clause 4 for the reason already given.

" w. F. TAYLOR, " Prcsidinq- Chairman.

"Legislative Council Chamber, "Brisbane, 8th February, 1917."

ADJOUR::--J:.\1ENT.

The SECRETARY FOR MI'i\'ES: I beg to move-That this Council do now adjourn. The fir,t b'1sincss to-morrow will be the motion for the adoption of the report of the Select Committee on the Mount Molloy Rail­'' av Bill, to be followed by the consideration of the Ac,sembly's medages on the Regulation of Sugar Cane Prices Act Amendment Bill. the Rabbic Act Amendment Bill, the Mining for Coal and 1\lineral Oil Act Amendment Bill, and the Meatworks Bill.

Question put and passed. The Council adjourned at four minutes­

past 9 o'clock.

Hon. W. Hamilton.}