Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Council

TUESDAY, 23 JULY 1918

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

lE± Pnpnlar ]>',itiativ, Et~., Bill. [l'OG~CIL.] Incom. Ta;<:, Et--., Bill.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

TLESDAY, 23 JnY, 1918.

Tlw PRESIDE);T (Hon. \Y. Hamilton) took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

PAPER. The following paper was laid on the table,

and ordered to be printGd. Regulation dated 18th Jul.;, 1918, under

the Public Curator Act of 1915.

POPULAR I~ITL\TIVE AJ';'D REFERE~­D"Cl\1 BILL.

AMEND~IEKTS :!\lOVED BEFORE THIRD READING. The SECRE'rARY FOlt l\1IKES (Hon.

A J. JonPs): I beg to move-That the Bill be now read a third time.

HoN. E. \V. H. FO\VLES: There are two slight errors in clause 9 (now 10) which it is proper to correct at this stag<>. The title .. Principal Electoral Registrar" occurs twice in that clause, whereas the title of the of!icer, according to the Elections Act, is " Prin­cipal Electoral Officer." I. therefore, move the omission on line 56, page 5, of the word "'Registrar,"' with a view to inserting the wo1·d '' Officer.''

Amendment agreed to. HoN. E. \Y. H. FOWLES: I beg to move

the omission on line 6, page 6, of the word " Regi,trar," with a view to inserting the word '' Oflicf>r."

Amendment agreed to. HoK. P. J. LEAHY: There is a slight

errm· in clause 23 (now 24), which, I think, must be a printer's error. I move the omis­sion, on line 45, of the \Yord ",-vhatovor," with a view to inserting the word " whatso­CYor."

Amendment "greed to.

THIRD READING. The SECRETARY FOR MI::\'ES: I beg

to move-That the Bill be now read a third time.

Question put and passed.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: I beg to move-Tha.t the Bill do now pass.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: It may be as well to put on record that this is the third time that such a Bill has been before the Council. On tlw first occ:1sion, some years ago, the Council changed it into a Six o'Clock Closing Bill, and the Government refused to accept that Bill. On the second occasion the Council inserted the essentiallY demo­cratic principles of the recall, and of giving the people the control of the purse. For rf:'asons best known to themseh-es. the Government declined to accept either of those democratic principle·. This is the third occasion, and the Bill has been made bv the Council more democratic than it was \vhen i! r-1me to this Chamber. I trust that, with these few final touches, the Bill will be a. ceptable to the Government, and that thev will give the p0ople the chance of voting upon certain questions which have been too long delayed in the intere1>ts of the State.

The SECRETARY FOR Mil\'ES: It mav be just as well to place on record the fact tha't this Bill has been amended in Committee

[llr'n. A. J. Jones.

in such a wav that it seriouslv interferes with the inteiltion of the Go,:ernment to gi vc the people an opportuniy of ta]<:ing a. roferendurn on yery n1any v1tal questions, and interferes verv seriouslv with the inten­tion of the Gove1:nment to' givo the people the opportunity of initiating legislation. It rnav also br_• as well to place on record at thiS stage that, under certain clau~es in the Bill as it came from the Assembly, the people would have po\vcr to take a r''fcrcnd um on the 6 o'clock closing question. or on liqno1· reform or ou anv other re-form that the:, d~sired. "

Hon. E. \Y. rr. FOWLES: ::'\o amendment was made in that claltoe at all.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : It may lw as well to place on record that the Hon. :\fr. Fawkes, by endeavouring to insert an amendment in that particular clause, would have interfered very seriously \\ith giving the people the opportunity of taking the ver:• iirst referendum und<'r the Bill on the ques­tion of 6 o'clock closing.

Hon. E. \V. H. F'OWLE'·: ~o anwndniPnt was made in that clause at all.

The SECRETARY FOR MI~ES: The amendment the hon. gentleman tried to insert would have prevented the Government using the petition that is a!r, a.dy in their hands as the 1nachinerY for taki11g that referendun1. ~

Question put and passed. The Bill was ordered to be r•!turnccl to the

.A.sEc\mbly by Ines·>·age in the usual fonn.

I::-.JCOME TAX ACT AlVIE::'\D:YlE~T BILL. 110T!ON FOR (".JNSIDERATJON IX CO}D!ITTEE OF

ASSEMBLY'S MESS \GE.

On the Order of the Day being called for thn consideration in Committee of the Legis­lati\·e Assembly's mes-agc of 17th July,

The SECRETARY FOR :'\11::-.!ES f-aid: I beg to move-That the President do now leave the- chair.

HoK. A. G. C. HA WTHOR~: I would suggest to th0 :'\Iinister th.d the considera­tion of the Assembly's mpssage on this most important Bill should be ddPrred for a clay or two. The A,--embly's nvosage is of a most i1nportant character, and raisPs again the constitutional question of the respective rights of the two Chambers. It furth0r states that the Government have conL back ,\·ith a mandate from the people to carry this Bill, amongst other·c. \V e should have time to con',ider the whole qu0stion. and to for­mulate the reasons which it will be neces-· sary for us to send back to the As'·embly in 1·emitting the Bill again to th~m.

Hon. T. XEYITT: You have had fiye duys to consider the mcssagf:'.

Ho:>~. A. G. 0. HAWTHORN: I antici­pate that it is not at all likely that the Council will agree to the suggestions made by the Lower House. Und<'r those circum­stances, the Minister might be well adviseLi if he would agree to an adjournment of the consideration of the mPssage till Thursday. Without going into the whole question now, there is no doubt that the message raises one of the greatest questions that can be raised in this Chamber-the qu0stion of our right to touch a money Bill in any way.

Hon. T. NEVITT: It wants settling. HoN. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: As the hon.

member says, it wants settling. I consider

Income Tax Act [23 JmY.] Amendment Bill. 1125

it hac; never been settled vet. Allusion ha·' lwen made at different tirr:es to the decision of the Privv Council. Manv of us consider that that is" bT no means the last word on tlw subject-that it is not a fmal decision, bet a use it was 110t given on a proper case in which both sides had the opportunity of being propu+ represented. Hon. members v;ill not~ th.at the second reason given by the Legr~latrve A<.M·mblv for disagreement with onr amendments reads as follows:-

" BecatHc it is the undoubted right of the Legislative Assembly to determine the amount. rate, limit, duration, mode of. :~sc.ssment, levy, collection, appro­pnatwn, or management of the taxes necessary to be raised for the carrying on of His :Majesty's Government, which cannot be interfered with bv the Legis-1atiYe Council." L

I do not suppose the Assembly could have gone more broadly into the question and raised more points in one reason thar{ thev h·. ve raised in that paragraph. The pos1-tion h? s practically brought about a crisie '~' c see it characterised in the papers as a deadlock ootwcRn the two House·•. and we s00 rt also stated that, as the result of our c1Plibc·rations, there may be brought about a state of affairs which may quite alter the >-tatus of the Council. The qu0otion as to it•· tota·l abolition may again be raised. Sc~.t>i.ng. th: in;portance of these question;., I thmK 1t 1s nght that the Minister. should ~iYe us full time to formulate our reasons. and to pr~sent our case in the wav it should be prc,ented to the people of Queensland. I. therpfore, suggt•··t to the Minister that he· ·hould agree to the adjournment of the matter till Thursday next.

Hoo;. P. J. LEAHY: The Hon. Mr. Haw­thorn has touched upon the es,ential thino-s that it is necessary to refer to in connectign •-.:ith this matter. There are important prin­ctples mvolved-not only the constitutional matter, but other matters of o-reat import­.anee. \Ye have all been very busv since we received the message from the Assemblv and ~ good many of us have been suffering 'from mfluenza. I have been, and I think the 1'.1 iuister ha·· also boon, a sufferer from that >ulment. " A fellow feeling makes us wond­t·on' kind," and I hope I have the sympathv of the hon. gentleman, as he has mine r nder all these circumstances I think th~ ~Iinister >• ould be well advi~ed if he did not deal wi~h this matter to-day, or with the SuccessiOn and Probate Dut'ies Acts Amendment Bill. but deferred them both till Thursday, t do not know how the C'l:amber will deal with the message re­c~n·c·cl from the Assen:bly. We may possibly gn·e way on some pomts and not give wav on other', but there is one thing we can .a_ll a,gTee abou~, an_d that is, that the ques­tion 1s of sufficrent Importance to receive the very fulkst consideration. I can assure the l\Iinister that there is no desire whatever to hamper him in the slightest degree in the ('c·ncluct of busine"s. '

Hon. R. SuM~ER: Your own Press have to:cl you that you are wrong.

Hoo;. P. J. LEAHY: I do not know what th~ hon. mPmber means bv " vour own Press." If the hon. member" me,;:ns papers that belong to me. he is wrong. Hon. mem­bers, ho\\·ever, do not take their instruetions

from the Pre'ls. \V e are here to exercise an iEdependent judgment, and to act in accord­ance with our conscientious convictions. The hon. member may have been referring to the Hon. :Ylr. PPrel's paper. I have not read that journal lately, and so cannot say what it has contained. But I ·do not want to con­tinue the -discussion. I can only suggest again to the Minister that it is only reason­able that this matter should be postponed. It is a matter of the highest importance, and it would be a great mistake if, through want of consideration, it were not dealt with i'1 the manner in which it ought to be dealt with.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: I think it will be remembered that when we sat on Thursday last--

The PRESIDENT : Order ! I should like to inform the Hom<e that the hon. gentleman has already spoken. Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. gentleman be allowed to reply?

HoxoGRABLE ::Y1EMBF:RS: Hear, hear!

The SEORE'fARY FOR MINES: I think it will be remembered that when the House sat on Thursday last a message was received from the Legislative Assembly, and that I moYed that the mt•;oage be taken into con­sideration forthwith. Hon. gentlemen oppo­site then pointed out that the question was a very important one, as I think we all recognise>. I certainly recognised that imme­diately, and postponed the consideration of the message nntil to-day, and I think hon. gentlemen should be quite prepared to go on v:ith it now.

Hon. P. J. LEAI!Y: Look at" the four or five of u· who have got influenza since then.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: There are some on our side also who have influenza.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: That is an a-dditional reaeon for postponing the consideration of this important matter.

The SECRETARY FOR :i\.1INES: I had a telephone message to-day informing me that C'C'rt;J,in members on this side are not able to attend. However. influenza is not m v chief concern. 'V hat I am suffering from is· worry as to how we are to get through the business-sheet.

Hon. E. '"~· H. FowLES · There is plenty to g·o on 'vi th.

The SECRETARY FOR ::YH-:'\ES: I feel it is my duty to prde:.t againct members altering the business-sheet in this way, as it i.; yery inconwnient for me to pick up business at any stage. \Ye have several impoi·tant Bills, the second readings of which have not vot been taken, and there are others which are under consi·dcration. I n1ade an ,1rranr;en1ent with hon. n1embers la<;tt week to close .. each sitting this week at 6 o'clock.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHOR:>r: It is to be hoped that is a good omen for the future.

'l'hc SECRETARY FOR MINES: Pro­bablv it is. I do not know ihat we could go on with any other business if this matter is postponed. 'Vhy do hon. members wish to postpone the consideration of this mc:tsure? The reasons given are very flimsy. As a matter of fact, if hon. gentlemen arc seeking time to search for au.thoritics in support of

Hon. A. J. Jones.]

1126 Income Tax Act [COUNCIL.] Amc,!dment Bill.

their action, thev will probably want longer than a week-po.ssibly a month-to find such authoritiC's.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: You ought to give us full opportunitv; we do not desire to waste time. •

The SECRETARY FOR :1IINES: I am catisfied that. no matter how long members m a: h we, they will find some difficulty in finding any authority in support of their action with regard to these taxation Bills. But my object in rising is to prote't against altering the business-sheet, not onlv on this OCC'asion, but on manv other occasions. I presume that hon. gentlemen will expect me tn go on with the \Y ages Bill, or to move the second reading of the Land Act Amendment Bill.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: There is the Valuation ol Land Bill, which has _been partly dis­eussed alreadv, and that IS the next item on the bnsine'ss-sheet.

The SECRETARY FOR :MIXES: I snp­po~e that my protest will be of little avail, as hon. gent!Pmel) haye a majority in the Hous0, and we must do what the majority dictate. But if hon. gentlemen do alter the b~sine,s-shcPt_ this afternoc:n, I hope they mll go on wrth th(' ValuatiOn of Land Bill. The) might indicate to me here and now if they aro prepared to go on with that Bill until 6 o'C'lock this afternoon.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: Ye , that is all right.

The SECRETARY FOR 1\'l:INES: The usual practice is for the GoYernment repre­sentative to arrange the business-sheet and I think that ·is a proper practice. It m~st be admitbcd that at all times I have been will­ing to meet the c<:mvenience of hon. member• opposite in alt<:-ring the busines,-sheet. Some­times I haye done so at personal inconYeni­ence, but I feel very -disappointed that we are not able to deal here and now with this very important question.

lion. P .. J. LK-UIY: \Ye are disappointed, too.

Th" SECRETARY FOR ;\!IL'\ES: It is no use prolonging the agony. This question has got to be fought out. and probably a day or two will not make any difference. But hon. gentlemen might giYe some f!lrther argument why we should postpone the consideration of the 1nes, age.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWL~S: I ~an supply t ht: further argument that rs reqmred by the h_on. gentleman. There can be no legisla­tioH passed for Queensland without co-opera­tiOn between the two Houses and if the Government driYe us to comide; one Bill and then another Bill, and then another Bill thev may driye us into a position which the GO\·ernmcnt themselYcs will regret.

The Sr::REJ'ARY FOR ::UrxEs: Is that a threat?

Hox. E. W. H. FO\VLES: \Vhich the Government themseh·e, will regret.

Hon. H. C. J ONES : How do you mean?

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: I mean that the taxation measures of the Government are in a very confused condition at the pre­sent lime. The Succession and Probate Duties Acts Amendment Bill which is one of those taxation measure~, cont<J.ins so many unfortunate and wrong clauses, so

[Hon . .A. J. Jones.

many blemishes, that I feel sure that 99 per cent. of the amendments which han• been circulated in my name will have the support of hon. members on the other side. If the Governnwnt drive us into passing a measure that is full of blemishes, or rejecting that measure, I would not be a prophet ~1nd say what would occur in the Council. The Coun­cil are not to be driven into passing a mea­sure which hon. members know is unj llSt. and will simply make millionair('s out of la,v;ven:,.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : If yon are going !o take up that attitude, the'n I sny you are not going to drive us. l\1inoritie'3 haYe their rights.

HoN. E \V. IL FOWLES: Quite apart from any question of a deadlock between the two Houses, there are matters which require serious consideration. There are clause::: in the Stamp Act Amendment Bill and the Suc­cession and Probat,c_ Duties Acts Amendm,cnt Bill whi~h are of such a character thut, if we are forc<cd to pass them without amend­ment, the GoYcrmnent themselves will ha ne to bring in an !lmending Bill within a month to cure the blemishes. We do not want that. What is the good of multiplying legislation., Surely, thr· right thing is a spirit of :·e.aSOli­ablenese between the two Housh, and I am suggesting uothing 1nore than to 1nakc a

\Yorka ble, dec0 nt Bill of each one [4 p.m.] of these new taxation measures.

Tho people know that taxation will co'ne fair!:: heavy and pinch everybody in th~ cotnlnunitv.

Hon. P. J. LE~HY: Not everybody: it '"ill not pinch a lot of them.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : If vou <Ire going to ht:tve a discussion on the 'taxation pro:1osals, '-"'-' \vill discuss them.

Hox. E \V. H. FOWLES: We do not want to be drawn off on to that. I am _just ;:avino- that the Government, bv being· reaso~ahle, and dealing with this :i-Iouse in a spirit of compromise, would gain 90 per cenl. of what thev want under thece Bills, <~.nd the deadlock· between the two Houses would vanish.

Hon. G. PAGE-HAXIFY: There is not much con1pro1nise in this House ch1in1ing· rights that it has not got.

Ho!i'. E. W. H. FOWLES: That i" purely a matter of opinion. The whole of the wis­dom of the world tloes not resi-de in the ho11. gentleman.

Hon. R. 8c:l!NER: There is not a sin<! le thing you have given 'yay on-you get thP whole hog

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: I gaye way on clau;e 10 o: the Popular Initiatin• and Heferendum Bill; that upsets the hell. gentleman's statement. If the Minister looks at the m"iiter from a non-party standpoint l1e will see that the quickest wav of getting the m<,asurc 0'1 to the statute-book "·ill !ce by postponing this cl iscussion for two or three days.

HoN. T. ::'{EVITT: I cannot understand why the hou. gentleman who has just re­sumed his seat ~nvs "r$sonable time," On Thursday last the l\1inister was prepated to take the me~':age, from the Assembly "forthwith." An hon. gentleman on the opposite Lide asked for a further extensim,

Income Tax Act [23 JULY._] Anundmcnt Bill. 1127

of time until to-day-that was five davec­which th9 Minister granted, in order that hon. membm·s might prepare themselves !:or this discu,o.ion. The Minister. has to run' his dcpm·tment, and do oth<'r work and if lw is prcpured to take this business' to-da:.. hem. membors upposite ought to be willing "to <lis­cuss it. This is admittedly a very important question, but that is all the more reason why hon. gentlemen during the last five da ,·s should havo made themselves conversant with the question and been prepared to discuss it to-day. ThG Hon. Mr. Fowles said that, i£ the Govf'rnment \Yould agree to a confer­pnce, they mio;ht ,:;et 90 p<'r cent. of what they wer<l asking for in the taxation ]11'0.

posals. A Government worth their salt will not acc,ept from the Opposition 90 per cent of tho taxation ]Jroposals which they intro­duce: they will acc<>pt nothing less t'han lOO pel~ cent.

Hon. A. G. C HAWTHOR>;: Thev wolllrl get £500,000 our of it, eyen >vith om; amend­ments.

HO;>i. T. XEVITT: It is not a question cf your amendments. If the Government arc worth th~ir salt, thev will not allow this Chamber to mutilate" taxation proposals in <my shape or form. The 'Minister arranged the bu8iness orr the lust sitting dav, and. :: ., no exception was taken to it, e'verv ban­member should have come prepared 'to c!is­cu ·. s the business.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: There is plenty of other bus.in~c_·,s.

Ho:;. T. XEVITT: It is not a question of other business. T:1i' is not the first time this sessirm lh:tt the Opposition have a'ked for a different anangen1ent of the busint~~s than that mo.de by the ::Minister.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: That is done every session.

Ho:-~. T. XEVITT: On one or two ocea­bions the Minister has had to get up to move the secon-d •·eadin.r of a Bill when he was not prepared. Ho'n. gentlemen should pro­test at th'~ tune the business-sheet is beinn; arr:mged, so that the :Minister can arran,·e the busirv'·''· accordingly: but to come f .lr­ward and say they are not prepared after five days' time to diocuss the business is not a reasonal.le thing.

Hon. P. .J. LEAHY: But then it is of unumal :mportance.

Ho:;. F T. BRE'\l''J'KALL: It is not the first time I have known this subject to be discu•sed in t.hic; Chamber. There has alwavs been very E1uch lho same disagree1nent of opinion, the same unwillingness to conce:lc anything. and it ahYays ends as this is lik~lv to end, in nothing whatever being settled. I reme1nbcr onP oc('asion-the great occasinn -\Yhcn J-h_e sa111e question 'vas sent to the Privy Council for decision; but the judg· 1nent \vhich can1e back to us has never g·i n:l1 satisfacti0n to this day.

The SECRETARY FOR :VIr:;ES: Not to thie Council.

HoN. F. T. BRENTNALL: The judgment has never been satisfactory, because it was never complete. One of the wise,•t and most careful men I have known in this Chamber was the late Sir Augustus Charles Gregory, who was clear-sighted, calm in his judgment, and deliberate in his actions and speech. and I have hearci him say that the case was

never fully and fairly presented to the Privy Council. It wae presented in a partisan manner, as this mighc be.

Hon. E. \V. H. FOWLES: It was an Appro­priation Bill, anyhow.

The SECRETARY I• l R :\}INES : }: ou ha Ye w1t produc0d that ex parte statement.

Hon. E. W. H. FOWLES: It is puplished in " 1--Iansard," of last session.

HoN. F. T. BRENTNALL: \Ye haYe been having oundry opinion·· expressed, and no doubt Bome ferYPnt protests and sen·'iblc ,ug­g-e,tions have been made. Orr another occa­sion we had this subject before the Chamber. when the late Sir Arthur Palmer occupied the position of President of the Council. 'I'he mescage of disagreement came back from another place, the same as \Ye have it in th<::se mocicrn and more enlightenei! tirncs, nnd 'vc could not come to a decision. At last, I rememl,er, a:; if I saw him before my eyes now, Sir Arthur Palmer holding up thr• Bill and saying, " The other Houze dis­agrees to this Bill, and will not adopt it becat~«e it allege:c, that this Chamber hae nothing whateYer to do with money Bill.• and has no right to make an amendment in them. I have my own opinion about that, and I belieye that this House has full right to make anv amendment it thinks fit in ?.

money Bill;" but, as it has pleaee.d thn Go \"('rl111lent to go on a preYious oc.casion tq London and g;t the Gpinion of the Privy Council, and that opinion was not distinctly aud ·dr~idcdly in fa,-our of tlw right of the Counril, \\ e han~ to l-et it go." r:rhose ar,.. two actual inci-dc·nts which DC'< 11rred in this Chamber in connection with thio YHY •.am<> subje•ot in previous years. I thir;k the rt•que:;t which l1as been addresse-d to tho :Ylinister cannot be regarded as an unreason~ able requc~t. It was as much a f'Urprise tfl me~ as it wa"S tG hin1, but it struck n1e that i[ a little more time is wanted, whether it bn to hunt up authoritie>::t or opinions. or to con3ult vrith son1cbody who is pPrhaps \Vi~Pr than \VD .arc ourselves, the 1-. ... )quest shon1d have b('Ql1 nH:·t consi.dcrately and courtPously It would be then lc·ss likely to proYoke ill­ft?eling between the t1~to side~. in this Chant-· ll<cr.

Tlw SEcRETARY FOR MINES: Do yon want to consuit with the Premier?

Ho,;. F. '1'. BRENTNALL: At tlw tim•e I am speaking of, there were not t\YO di;;­tinct parties in this Hou,,e, unless you could crdl th0 pastoralistq' section one party and the anti-nastoralists' S{>Qtion the other party. Tho,.e werP the only two partie, then. if they were parties, but nobody recognised partisan­,·hip then It was never dreamed of. It was a deliberate opinion of some Ycr~- astuh gentlemen. I am bound to say that t_his House was right in the stand it was takmg up. It was opposed by the presPnt Chief Justice of the Commonwealth High Court, and it was he who prepared the ea,,_. for the PriYy Council. l just state the fact'. T haYe no opinion one way or the other on them myseif, and I do not profes'· to be luwver ellcugh to take a very spnrial interest in the matter; but that waq the opmron <>xpressed to me by ~ne hon. gentleman anti another, and the opmron of the then Pre sident himself, speaking from the rla1s and >aving what I have mentioned. If there nre other opinions which can be obtained which wiJI help to settle this qw.>sto"u· 1

Hon. F. T. Brentnall.}

1128 Valuation o.f [COD~CIL.] Land Bill.

think tlw ::\iinister will bo acting wi,ely If hE• will yield the point, and let further time be giY{ln for con· idC::ration.

0uc•stim,-Thut the President do now lean• the chair (El a ~c. lL .J. J one.~'s rrwtion)-put and ncgntived.

LA:\'D TAX AC'l' A::\IE::-iDME:\''1' BILL.

:\1EilSAGll FRO~r AssE~IBLY, Xo. 1.

The PRE8IDEXT announced the rert•ii)l from thi' A·,ombly o£ the following mes-SJ.,gc :-

" ::\Ir. President,-,, The LegislatiYe Assembly haYing had

undt-r con~;ideration th0 aJnend1nenb of the Lq:;is!ative Council· in the Land 'I'ax Ac·t Amf'ndrncnt Bill, beg now to inti­mate that they-

•· Di(-.agre,..~ to the ainenclmcnL".

. .: rrha l'f- ;!.,<:lOllS ~vhich WCl'O gi ·:en in the m<"•scg·c· of the LoQ"islative Asscmblv d 17th July, 1918. fo~r disagreeing to. the amc•ndnwn'3 made by tho LogislatiYP Council in the Inevme Tax Act Amoncl­mont Bill obtain in like manner to tlu amen.:lments made bv that Chamber in this Bill. ·

"The LogislatiYe Assemblv trust that thcsc rea~on•, will be sufficie;It to induc·• the L<•g·ielatiYe Council not to persist m their amcudmenh.

" \V. McComrACK, "SpE'aker.

"Lr·,,i3lative llssPmblv Chamber. Bri,I:Jane, 18th July, 1918."

On the !itotion of the SECRETARY FOR :\liXES. the consideration of the A··,emblv'> Ines~atte in Co1n1nith.'2 wa& 1nade an OrdEir ·of the» Day for Thursday next.

VALUATIOK OF LAND BILL.

SECOXD READING-RESCMPTION OF DEBATE.

HoN. G. S. CURTIS: The Minister, when moving the second reading of the Bill, stated that it was brought in as the result of an agreement come to by the Premiers of the various Statf)s sitting in conference some time since, and the hon. gentleman seemed to attach great importance to that fact. To tny mind that is not conclusive proof that this is a desirable thing, because I feel persuad<;d that in all probability the idea was suggested to the Premiers by the permanent officials in the States, who prefer the centralisation of all power and authoritv in the capital citi~s. We know the bureau­cratic spirit is strong in officials. They rlearlv ion' centralisation and uniformitv and !t is their desire to focus the Yalu~:. tion of land buoiness and other business appertaining to it in the capital cities of the country. This is certainly not a measure of decentralisation, but the very opposite. For that reason it requires the very closest attention, more especially when we bear in mind that the objective of the Government of this State with respect to freeho1d land is nationalisation, and that the method bv which thev wish to secure this end is to con­fiscate the' land by means of taxation. Their object is to force up the value of freehold land as much as possible, which means in­creased taxation. I cannot conc<jive that this

[l:on. F. T. Brentnall.

Bill is going to be of any bem·fit to the country at large. It means the creation of another Sl;ate department, presided over by a high-salaried officer, with a number of peripatetic Yaluers working under him and travelling all about the country.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: The valuations will be used for all purposes.

HoN. G. S. CURTIS: I understand that io claimed for the Bill, but the valuations made b3 the local authorities can be used in the same way. '.rhere may be anomalies here and there, but, taking them as a whole, the valuaticns of the local authorities are sub­stantially correct, and they can be used for all the purposes mentioned by the. Minister. The ,-aluers to be appointed under the Bill will lack the local knowledge of the dif­ferent descriptions and qualities of land.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : Sometime•s that is a disadvantage in enabling you to arrive ar the cnrroct value .

Hox. G. S. CURTIS: That is one of the g-reat advantagEs in connection with !or:>! authorities-that their valuers have the !oral knowledge which these valuers who are to be appointed by the Government cannot pas· siblv have. The present svstcm is working ver~· well, and it appears· to me that this

ill be a retrograde step. When th'" late Sir Thomas I\1cilwraith many years ago pac,sed the first Local Government Act, it was a great boon to Queensland. I do not know how the busine" of the country could have been carried on but for the decentralisa­tion brought about by the passage of that splendid measure. This Bill proposes to take aw;,v from the local authorities the work of 'ah{ing the land in their respective areas, and I think that would be a very undesir­able and retrograde step, and certainly not <.1nducive to the best interests of the country as a whole. The Minister laid great stress npon th;:> necessity for what he called uni­formih in connection with land valuations. If it can be shown that uniformity is un­attainable under this Bill, it seems to me that the whole thing falls to the ground, and that the Bill should not secure the approval of the Go unci!. So far as the syst()m of land Yaluations is concerned. we already haYe uniformitv, since all local authorities w01·k under the same Act of Parliament. Cniformitv of valuation, it is clear, is abso­lutely unattainable, and therefore there is no valid reaBon why we should pas·, the mea­sure. In a State of such vast area as Queensland, with such a great diversity of climate, conditions, and quality of land, uniformitv of values is impossible of attain­ment. A block of land in the vicinity of Brisbane is very much more valuable, by reason of i•; close proximity to a large city like Brisbane, than a block of the same size and of the same class of land near a smaller centre of population like Maryborough or Bundabcrg. It i' clear, therefore, that uni­fonr,itv of valuation is absolutely unattain­ahl., 1;nder this or anv other measure. I have had considerable experience of the local anthoritiPs in the Rockhampton district, and I know that their valuers are always on the alert, and watch all sales of land that take place in the different districts. When they notice that there is anv change in value. whether by reason of a· higher price bein_g obtained or· a lesser price, they regulate their v:Lluations accordingly. Now, what better guide to the value of land can you havE'

[23 JULY.] Lu.d Bi'l. ll2D

than , ales of land bv auction? That is· the real test of what laiid will bring, after due publicity has been given to the sale, and the land is disposed of by public competi­tion. That is the system under which the local authorities throughout the State hav8 been working all th~ time, and I cannot con­eei,-c of anything better. Certainly, it iJ far better than having a number peripatetic valuers travelling about the country trying to find out by making inquiries here and thPrc what the value of a piece of land is. Whac po-ssible benefit can the country derive from the pa,c.ing of this measure? It is likely to result in the forcing up of the nllue-, of bnd to a large extent, thereby creating fictitious values. The valuers will be appointed by the Government. The Min­ister said the other dav that officials in s~·mpathy with the policy 'of the Govt)rnment arc mnch more acceptable to the Government than officials who are not in sympathy with their views. \V e may presume from that that the valuers who will be appointed by the Governm•'nt will be men who the Government knm~- C\re in sympathy with their policy, and th~ valuers will c.msider it their duty to place high valu"' on the land throughout the State, knowing that it will bring in a larg•'r revenue to thcir friends the Go­vernment. So far from b~ing a benefit, I think that ,.-ill be a distinct disadvantage to the countrv. It is not to the interests of the country't·hat the unfortunate owners of the land should be obliged to pay a larger amount of taxation than they are paying at tlJP present time. when already it is to a large extent confiscatory, especially in the caw of unimnrovable land-land which cun nci thcr bL· sold nor leased nor put to any use. The l'reasnrer said, when introducing the Bill in lhe other HouJe. th~t there were five ,-aluers travelling about the country, and I think he said that theY had made sonw 5.000 , aluation-, in a little over a Year. If that is so, then this is going to be a trcm• ndously costly job.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : Land is valued bv a bout four diff0rent parties now, instead of by one.

Ho:\. G. S. Cl'HTIS: I have had somto Pxr·('l'icn!~~ as a la.::1d valuer. Five or six years ago I made something like 5,000 valua­tions for the Rockhampton City Council in a bout three months.

The SECRETARY FOR MEES : Did you bring a bout any app~als?

J-Inx. G. S. Cl:RTIS: There were appeals. YN, e.ceording to the Treasurer, it has taken fiye valuers O\'er tweh·e months to make about 5.000 nluations. If that is so, it ;, goinp- to be a tromendomly long and costly :iob. -and I doubt very much whether it will be worth the moneY it c-osts. At present. c-ourt-; of "ppcaJ arc presided OYer by the lora] police rnagistrates, and that system work..; Yf'ry ~:tli~factorily. It is proposld by the Bill to Hbolish that svstem and to appoint a District Court j~1dge to hear appeals. I think that will cause a tre­utendou" a"'llount of inconycnience to the ,,\nwrs of property. If they have to travel long distanc-~ s to attend the court, it will lw nnteh 1nore troubleson1e and more costly than attenL:ing a court presided over by the local ndic · magi-h·ate, and in all proba­bilitv the-y will not appeal rather than be c--ubjC'ctecl to t·hc anno; ancc and trouble of app<'aliLg to a District Court. judge, who canr.ot t1·.1 el all over the country hearing

appeals. 'l'Le proposed system will be much less convenient than the present one. That i '• a verv serious obj cction to the Bill. If the Bill is ·passed, i~. means more cxr>ense; it means more pollbcal patronage; It mean& mere centralisation in Brisbane; it means more ta.xation; and it mc-:tns a depreciation in hnd valiws. I haYe shmYn that it cam·ot po~ ~ibly bring about unlfonnity in v~~lua­tiom, and that it will not improve upon the s•·stem of valuation laid down by the Local Authorities Act. This measure will increase land value.- artificialh- and will increas•i taxation and that will be a distinct dis-

' ad,-antage to the country. The [4. 01 p.m.] ,-aluations . of _local aut~1oriti:'

are, I 1nainta1n2 approxrmate1y con·ed takill'' them as a whole. and they ar~ av~ilable ~to the Federal authorities for lalll1 taxation purposes and to the State authorities for land taxatiDn. succes'"ion c!utifs, and any other impositions there may be. Therefore this measure is unnecessary. It is a retrograde step, because it takes away the power of Yaluation from the local aut~o­riti< '· who have rendered such great ser·nce t.~. the countrv ever since the passing of the Divisional Boards Act by Si1· Thomas J\Icilwraith manv veare ago. 'rhe valuers appointed by the ·Government under this nwa ure woul-d simply try to carry out the object of the GovernmE'nt, and that object i ~ to force up y;Jluc.. ~ antl get rnore revenue. I hope the Bill will not pass its second re.td­ing. but that it will be rcjecte<;], l:Jecause it i., ab <>lut~ lv unneces:;;.al'Y· If 1t Is passed, it wiil be rif no ben<'fit to the country. On the contrary, it will be disadvantageous to th•' whole Stde. If the measure pass<'s its secc,nd reading and goe•, into Comm!ttee, then there are certain amendments wh1rh I c-hould like to se" made in it. For instance. if there is anv decrease in the value of one property belonging to a particular owner. that dccre.J.sc in valuc should be de-ducted fror11 anv increnwnt in Yalue- in other pro­pertic' belonging to the eame proprietor. It is unjust for the Government to take a way part of the increment in the value of one v•rr-d of land and leave the owner to bear th• decrease•! value in other pieces of land. If tlwre ha J been depreciation in valur in on" or more properties, then the owner should b0 able to deduct that loss from any incre­mr·r.t in ,-alue in connection with other land th~t mav be in his poese'·'lion. The Minister s'-lid the~ other day that the Government were anxious to see land put to its proper use. Is not the taxation of land a very foolish way of trying to get l_and put to its proper use in a new countrv hke Queensland, where over 90 per cent. of the land is not ~lienate~? To put the bur-den upon. land IS to dis­courage 'ettlement and to mcrease the over· population of our citib. The <;;ovE'rnme'!t practically acknowledgE' that thmr obJ ec~ '' the confiscation of freehold land by taxatwn. I contend that no Government is- justifie-d in confiscating yested interests, where those vested intPrests have been acquired legally. If the Go,.-crnmcnt want to do away with fre-ehold, they should either compen ·•ate the frecholdcr by acquiring- his property ho!'ostly and paying for it, _instead of confisc:1tlng. 1t gradually by taxation, or th~y should !)lve him the option of ehanging h1" freehold mto leasehold. in which case all land taxation ehould be ,]ann awav with-with the c~cf'p~ tion, perhaps. of wh:'lt is necessary for local goYernment-as the Government should not be in the position of rpceiving rents for

Hon. G:. S. Curti8.]

1130 Valuation of [COUNCIL.] Land Bilt.

leaseholds and at the same time taxing those leaseholds. That would be an unreasonable and ridiculous thing. I hope the Bill will not pass its second reading; but, if it does I trust that sume useful amendments will b~ introduced in Committee.

HoN. R. SUMNER: I think this Bill should be paesed by the House, and in rising to support its seconci reading I must say that I cannot understand the attitude of hon. members who oppose the measure, especially those who are supposed to repre­sent the landowners, because the Bill will make things easier for the landowners. The idea of the m<oasnr(l is to bring about uni­formity in valuation, not only in Queens­land, but right throughout Australia, if possible. At the Premiers' Conference in 1917, the following resolution was passed-

" That this conference reaffirms the desirability of uniform- valuation for Commonwealth and State purposes being adopted as early as practicable, and that the neceGsary legislative or administra­tive steps in that direction be taken by the States." ·

Ar the conference of Commonwealth and State taxation officers, held at Melbourne March, 1917, the following resolution wa~ unanirr1ously agreed to :--

" That in the opinion of this confer­enc9 a land valuation department should be established in each State for the pur­pose of uniformly determining land values for Commonwealth and State pur­poses."

This is not a measure to increas~ taxation; 1! IS a nwttsure to save duplication in valua­tion work. The greatest question discussed at the Premiers' conference .held recentlv was the question of overlapping in varim;s departJ?entfl, and t~e means to be adopted to arnve at a umform arrangement with regard to industrial matters, taxation matters and othe1· matte!'s. With regard to th~ valuation of land, hon. members know that officer,, differ in their estimates very fre­quently. One man may come along and say that the value of land is so and so, and another man may come along and give a very different valuation. I admit chat you have to depend a great deal upon the officers who make the valuations. But men have different ideas as to the value of land and they are not always guided by the in~truc­tions laid down for their guidance. Local authority valuers are instructed to he guided by the sale of land in the neighbourhood. but that instruction is not always carriQd out. and sometimes when the valuer does endeavour to carry it out the result is not always fair and just to the landowner. This measure is introduced in order to secure some uniformity-some uniform ba,·is for the 'aluation of land for all purposes. In im­posing State taxation you want land values; the local authorities require land values; in the resumption of land you require land values; and in the imposition of death duties yon require land valu(ls. You may send out different men to value the same piece of !an~ for those ~everal purposes, and their valuatwns may differ very materially. Let mE' give you an illustratiOn. A man whom I know bought a freehold, and paid £230 for it. It was a farm. He cleared it, planted fruit trees in it, and built a house on it; and it was valued for local authority purposes at £660 unimproved value. Another valuer came along. and valued the land at £1,070 unimproved value. The man died,

[Hon. G. 8. Curtis.

and then it was valued again for succ~ssion and prohate duties, and the valuer in that case estimated its value at £800. If this Bill is passed, it will tend to simplicitv and uniformity in valuation, and it will save a lot of expf!nse to taxpayers and the public generally. Anyhow, it will mean a saving to the local authorities, and will do a way with the present erratic methods of valnation.

Hon. P . .J. LEAHY: How do you account for the fact that every local authoritv is opposed to this Bill? .,

HoN. R. SUMNER: I suppose thE'y want to kE'ep their own valuations. I hav" served about fourteen years on local authorities in Queensland, and I know that some local authorities go in for high rates and low valuations, and thac other local authorities go in for high valuations and low rates.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: What did you go in for?

HoN. R. SUMNER: Never mind what I went in for. I have had some ~xperience in the matter, and I know that is how local authorities are worked. You have onlv to· take one side of a street and compare" the values of land on that side for reeidential purpos~s, and then take the values put upon land on the other side of the street for similar purposes, and you will find that there is a very great difference between the two sets of valuations. Those differences should not exi~t. and if a measure of this kind is placed on the statute-book it will prevent such discrepancies in valuat,ions. Under this Bill each local authority would be sent a list of valuations every three years, and th"y would levv their rates on the basis of those valuations: Personally, I think the appeal provided for might be made simpler. The method of valuation proposed in this m~a­sure haor-:"' been in vogue in ='Jew Zealand for a great many years, and it has worked well there. The New South Vi'ales Act is prac­ticallv based on the New Zealand Act. and this ·Bill also is practically based un the New Zealand Act.

Hon. P . .J. LEAHY: This Bill is not iden­tical with that Act.

Ho:-;. R SU::\INER: It is practically l>asl'<l on the ~m,· Zealand Act. So far as the J11'H:cti.ce of a ur:tiforrn Yaluation is C'oncern(1 L it has bnen in vogue in ::~ evv Ze.aland, ?.nd th<H .,~et is the basis which will he adopted throughout the Commonwealth. It will not disturb the valuations of the local authorities.

Hon. A G. C. l-IAWTHORX: Of course, it wilL

HoN. R. SUMNER: It will not disturb the valuati(Jns of the local authorities very materiall,7-I mean i11 regard to the loc.1! authoritir-s in Inining and agricultural areas. which are outside the scope of the BilL I ;,upnort the Bill because it will enable th.~ san1e machinery to be used for ali purposeo. I do not think it will increase hnd values one iota. H will save monev, in that it will establish one uniform valuation for ail the purposes I ha,·c mentioned-for State taxa­tion. local nuthorities, !and resumption. and death duties. Ir:: the face of the desire to arriYf' at some uniform valuation-he.causn land taxatio11, both State and Federal. and probate and succes•ion duties, both Stat<' and Federal, have come to staY. and land resumptions are te.king place day by cl a,, and we knov; ,,·hat the local authoritv taxa­tion is-I honestly think that this Bill ought to be passed It is not a party mE'asure ~t all. The Ccmmonw~&lth Premiers who 'llet

Vaiuattcn of [23 JULY.} Land Bill. 1131

in Syd?ley want a uniform valuation, which will simplify matters right throughout Aus­tralia. There is a spirit of antagonism, I am ~Sorry to fay, again::t aaything that ls done by a Labour Governme:>t. The oppo­sition to !hf' measure in this House is purely because it cmmates from a Labour Gm-ern­ment. That is my honest opinion. If t!:tis Bill had come from another Governmc<Jt. and had been agreed to by a Premiers' cor.­ferC>nce, hon. gcntleme11 opposite vvould have swallowec) it

Hon. P. J. LE:UlY: How do you expbiu the fact that we have passed 90 per cent. of the Bills sent up to us? Ho~. R. SUM~ER: This is not a Bill

tending to increase taxation. It will ~ave a lot of LlOuble and expense, and bring about unifor!nity. I hope that the Bill vvill not only pass in QncRnsland, hut in ever:v State of the Commonwealth, so that we shall have uniformity throughout Australia. Ho~. A H. P ARNELL : I am not in

favour of this Bill. It has been before the Couneil on a preYious ocrasion \vhen \Ye

we'Jt fully into it. The local authorities who are h gTeat faetor in local gov-ernnwnt in Qu?enslar.d, are not in favour of this Bill, and it is "ot in the bc"'t intere~ts of Queens­land that we should pass it. In the Bill tlwre is no definition of what constitutes an occupier, "hereas under the Local Authori­ties Act the occupier is liable for rates Neithe.t is there any 1nention of his being served with a v-aluation notice, unless hP comes under clause 18. and it then devolves upon the local authorities to furnish a list of such C'C("",lpiers as are lial1le for the rates

Hon. R. SuMNER: That is outside thP scope of this Bill.

HoN. A. H. PARNELL: No. it cor"es right within the scope of this Bill.

Hon R. SUMXER: H they get the v-alua­tion, they can still send it to the occupiers if tl•ey like. Ho~. A. H PARNELL: Under the Lout!

Aut:1oritieB Act ail occupiers, as well as owners, have the right to appeal against their '•1luationc

Hon. T. ~EYITT: They have a right to appeal under this Bill.

HoN. A. H. PAR:\IELL: I will point out the clifference in the appeals. Clause 8 of the Bill deais -.vith valuation rolls, and what thev shall contain. Thev must be alnha­betical, and giv-e the several properties m~·ned by each individual in a district, thus nulli­fying the "· ard system and the voters' rolls on which electiom take place annu>il.ly. Under <•:o.us0 26, ihe valuation set out in the Bill must be taken by the local a nthori­ties for th•J basis of taxation, but the valn.'r· ger.eral will only value what land he pleases. Clauses 32 and 33 state that only the valua­tions made bv the valuer-gene1·al shall be us0J by a t axmg authority. If the Trea­snrer's staternent ]::; in accordance with the spirit of the Bill, local authorities will have to retain their valuers. What benefit are the loca.r nuthoriticc, going to get out of this Bill if they have to retain their valuers?

Hon. T. NEVITT: I maintain that thev will not have to retain their valuers "

HoN. A. H. PAR:"'"ELL: I maintain +hat they will. Brisbane pays its valuer, I think, £400 a venr, and Rockham1)ton pays its valuer £250.

Hon. T NEVITT: To do three months' work?

Ho~. A. H. PARXELL: Ko; they do not clo it in thee months

Hon. 'T. ~EVITT: The Hon. Mr. Curtis said he did it in three months.

Hox. A. H. PARKELL: I was there when the Hon. Mr. Curtis rev-ised the valuations of the city, ancl he did it in three months, but it is the duty of the valuer appointed by the council to attend every land sale.

Hon. T. NEVITT: His statement ;vas that he value,d them at £80,000.

Hox. A. H. PARNELL: The valuer £01· the city has to be employed.

Hon. R. Su:YI~ER: A good many of the valuations in local authorities are very erratic.

HoN. A. H. P ARNELL: Where I find them erratic is where a local valuer has made a valuation, and the council not being satisfiecl with it, it has appointed another valuer, ancl he has general'y been pretty erratic, because he has alwa~s put on a hiO'her value. I have alwavs noticed that, even°if the Government sends' out a valuator, up goe'" the valuation. You can only _expect that as a natural course, because tf you send a valuer out he thinks that he has to do something for his money, and the valua­tions go up.

Hon. G. PAGE-HAXIFY: That is good fol' the lanclowner.

HON. A. H. P ARNELL: Again, it is neces­,arv to be able to tell at a moment's notice whcJ the owners or the occupiers are of various properties, perhaps for the purpose of serving notices on them to abate nms­ance:s, fill up their lands. put through. sec­tional sewers make structural altNatJons, and numberl~ss other works which come within the scope of a loc:al authorit;·. and from the form of roll this will be well nigh impossible. At the present time lo_cal autho­rities arrange their assessments ':' proper order into streets and wards, whiCh serve their requirements admirably in all resp~c~s. There is no doubt that local authonhes always require this information. Hon. ger;t)e­men who have served on local authontH s know that names have to be entered up.

Hon. G. PAGE-HANIFY: They will have to keep their rate books just the same.

Ho~. A. H. P ARNELL: It i" not going h be anv advantao-e to appoint a valuer, and as I go on I will po_int. this Olft: Ag!'-in, in the case of large butldmgs, cl!v!dcd mto offices and let to separate occupiers. the local authority, in accordance with the Act uncler which it works, has to assess each occupier; but the valuer-general Will only make a valuatiun of the land on wh1ch the building stands, and the local !'-uthority will then have to make the allocatiOn and serve the occupiers with valuation notices. l:nder the Local Authorities Act a clemand eannot be made for rates unless the occupier is sen-c,d with a valuation as well as a rate notice. It is, therefore, evi·dent that there will be no saving to the local authority. As a matter of fact. it will only tencl to cause complication, additional labour, trouble. anrl inC'onvenience.

Hon. T. NEVITT: The owner is liable for that.

HoN. A. H. P ARNELL: If this Bill is passed. it will also necessitate amendments in the Local Authorities Act of all .the sections dealing with valuations and ratmg. '\Ve are going to have another burden put

Hon. A. H. Parnell.]

1132 ra'uatio' of [COUNCIL.] Land Bi:l.

on w us. \Ye have a large number of noticc•s to m,.ke out now, and this is going to m:>kc another notice neccssarv, and an-0' her expense is going to be put on to the c•culpi<"r or owner of land.

Hon. G. PAGE-HANIFY: You can only do it oncr.

HoN. A. H. PAR='JELL: There are other nwq,urcs which will follow. No doubt, lab'r on "e are goil_lg to get a Hospital Bill, and that exnense Will be put on to the land­owners. It 1s foreshadowed in another plar·c--

The PRESIDENT: Order! lioN. A. H. P ARKELL: It is fore·

shadowed that we are going to have a Marsupial Bill, which is to be general, and will also put taxation on the landowners.

The PRESIDENT: Order ! Hol-l. A. H. PARNELL: Then, again, to

appeal under this Bill we have to go to a District Court. I wanted to make an appeal the other clay myself in the city of Bris­bane in regard to property I am connected with. When I came to inquire what an a pp ea 1 would cost, I found that it would cost me anything from £500 to £1,000 to make an appeal before a District Court judge. ns foreshadowed in this Bill. At the present time, a property-owner can go before the P('licc magistrate and conduct his o'vn case without the cost of a single shilling.

I-I0n. T. ::"iEVITT: You can under this Bill.

Ho:<:. A. H. PARNELL: Kot when you go into the District Court.

Hon. T. NEviTT: Yes; you c,,_n conduct your ov. n en. se there.

Ho:<:. A. H. P ARNELL: I am verv doubt­ful about it. I am only pointing out what it would have cost me if I went into the Distrid Court.

Hon. T. NEVITT: It would not be possibleo in a complicated civil case, but under this Bill you could conduct vour own case.

Ho>r. A. H. PAR='JELL: It has been pointed out by one hon. member that local authorities do not care about increasing their valuations, and that they would rather :;n­crH!'e the rates, but I have been connected with local authorities for' twenty-five years, and have never found that. I have alwaYs found the local authorities put up the val~e a· high as what you can obtain for your land at a mle. It is the same now in the city of Brisbane. I cloubt-I am sorry to have to say it-whether there is any lancl­ownE>r in the citv of Brisbane who could get the value which is placed on his land at tlw pre;ent time.

Hon. G. PAGE-HANIFY: Verv few are 1villing to sr ll at the council's v,;luation.

HoN. A. H. PARNELL: I wish I could sell. Another thing which has been pointed out is that there is always a tendency to increasE' the rates. That is not borne out bv the experience of the citv of Brisbane. A.t the ]a,t council meeting· a rPcommcnclation 1Yas made to increase thP value of all city propnties. At a time like this, when the Stah• Treasurers are tneeting in conferencE· and e~onomy is being preached to them, why should a Bill like this be brought forward • Thi:< Bill is not going to pay for itself. It has not paid for itself in New Zealand, which is a smaller State than Queensland, and better managed.

Hon. R. su~INER: It has worked very 'Well there.

[Hon. A. H. Parnell.

HoN. A. H. PARNELL: New Zealand is better managed so far as the taxation of land is concerned. In New Zealand it costs £42,000 to run the ·department, and the revenue collected towards it was £24,000, so there is a clear loss nearly of £20,000 there.

Hon. T. NEVITT: Did you verify those figures?

Hox. A. H. PAR='JELL: I gathered them from another place, and they were not dis­puted there. It will cost far more in Queens­land to carry out this procedure. If this Bill is pas,ecl, I feel certain that, whc·n the ,-aluer-general is appointed and he sends out his staff to make a valuation in Queens­land, he will bP surprised so far as the valuations are concerned.

Hon. R. St:1r~ER: vVhv are vou afraid of the Bill? · ·

HoN .• \. H. PARC'ELL: I am not afraid of the Bill at all, but I believe it is g-oing to impc~e a greater burden and more 13:hour in 11reparing returns on tho property~ovvner. \Ye haYc heard a groat deal of talk about the unearned increment in connection with free-

hold land, and of how the value [5 p.m.J of !ann has increased bv rea,on

of public expenditure, and so on. .i~1~:· \Yi~h to ref0r to one or two properties

to ,)lOw how little such talk is justified. I haYe hel'C an aclYertisernent from the •· CovrL·r" offering a freehold property for priYate mle. The aclverti·.<:>ment says that th,· nrop0riy is a g-reat bargain, that it is 4 miles from a well-known railway station, by good road, and contains 1,600 acres of land. on 1<hich is erected--

"A fine dwPlling, eolevPn rooms, two verandas, man's room, \vorkshop, seven cowbails (cement floors), three-stall stable, forage-room. piggeries, dairy (cmnent floor), cart-shed, etc.; ,cJiviclecl into eight paddocks, 50 acn> under cultivation, large orchard, 2 chains of waterhoks running through the propertv, price, in­cluding improvements, 18s. 6cl. per acre."

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: Qffpr it to the Govern-

Hon. A. H. WHITTINGHA}I: You are not lnspecting it yourself?

HoN. A. H. P ARNELL: I did think of in­specting it, but I was afraid of the land tax.

Hon. R. SDINER: You try and buv an ordinary cottage about Brisbane, and see what :· ou will ha vc to pay for it.

HoN. A. H. PARXELL: I a,clmit that, if you want to buy a cottage and a small allot­ment in Brisbane, vou will find such proper­ties are very scarc'e and very clear, because the~· are not afff'ctecl by the land tax. But .iust look at city properties. As I have shown before. there are some of them not giving a return of 2 per cent.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: Some of them are not m . kino: 1 per cent. Thc'c' will be making nothing presently.

Hox. A H. PAR:"i'ELL: Then, I can insvnce another property containing 1,000 acres. It was purchrtsed something lilw thirty .'ears ago from the Government for 15s. per acre. Since tben, a railway has been built right through the centre of the pro­perty; you can get water within 15 feet or 20 feet of the sm·fucc, and it is well grassed. You can obtain that property for lls. 6cl. prr acrP.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: I know men who have land who will give it away for nothing. I ha >e somr· myself.

Valuation of (23 JULY.] La:!d Bill.

Ho::;. A. H. PAR~ELL: I believe it is coming to that. Practically, land will have no value soon. It will come down until 1t will have no seliing value at all, and, as a result, the taxation will have to go up. I will only quote. another property. I have been through tins land myself. It is well gmssed and well watered, fit for growing sugar-cane. and the Government are about to put a railway through the centre of it. It was sold to a Cabinet Minister something like thirty-five years ago, and he paid the Crown 15". an acre for it. According to the advertisement in the " Courier," it is-

" ::\ear to railway and central sugar­mill. All these farms were picked and Relected before survey forty years ago, and arc now for sale at ]e,q than cost. including the improvements; 1.120 to 2,800 acre blocks at 25s. to 30s. per acre. Good prices are now given for sugar­cane, ,"tack, and fire·wood, atsuring a good incorne." '-

Hon. G. S. Oc:RTIS: The taxes reduce the value of the land.

HoN. A. H. P ARNELL: That is the caso in conneetion with this property. I hope the Bill will be passed out on the second reading.

Hox. A. G. 0. HAWTHORN: I do not know that it is necessary to sav ven much more on the Bill. Certainlv, one carlnot sav anything on the merits 'of the measme. because it has not got any. The Hon. ::Yir. Sumner said that it was not a taxation Dill, but it is going to assist very m.aterially in raising revenue for the Government.

Hon. G. PA'lE-HANTFY: It is going to mab' the ta,xation more Pquitable.

Ho;,:. A. G. C. IL'\ \YTHORX: If v:e hav" a valuer-general and a big staff appointHl at high sa!aric's, they are going to do some­thing fo_i_~ their li\·ing, anrl the~v are g-oing !o put up valuations generally. The~' are going to du all in their power to justif.\- th<'it· 0xistcnee by providing inc:rcased revPllUL for the Government.

Hon. \Y. R. CRA~Il'TON: The Hon. ~,Ir. Parnell says the Bill is going to dccreo.S<c value•,

Hox. A. G·. C. HA\VTHORX: It ma1" decrease the eelling value of land. hut it is not going to d<'creasl' the value of land £w taxation purposes, and that is where the landowner . is going to be hit every tin, e. Already th1s scsswn we have pas.scd a Land Tax Bill. and, if we paRS this Bill, we shall be pmctically e-nabling the Government to impos0 :1 land ·Uper tax. The Bill is going to create a JWW department, which will require a large number of valuers and other officials, and that ·,,·ill involve a considerable cxpenditnre. And all this is going to be in additior: to the p1·esent local authoritv valua-tions. "

The Sr:CRETARY FOR ::\1.INES: Xo; the local authorities will accept this valuation.

HoN. \.. G. C. HA W'I'HORX: Tlwv will not accept it. '

The NECR~T.\l!Y FOR Mr~ms: 'l'hev will have to accept it. "

Ho". A. G. 0. HA WTHOR:t\: TheY will not accept it. They are perfectly entitied to have the-h.· own va1uer"3.

Hon. G. PAGJ;-HANIFY: The ratepayers will soon EGG about that.

HoN. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: The rate­payers will not accept this. They will insist

upon 1naking their own valnations. They >Yant to fix· their own Yaluarir"J' for their own purpo'e"·· ami \o fix the rates at. such P fi; ure as .,-ill enable them to ra1 thn reYenue thev require. It has been said that 1 he Dill ha;, be~n brought in in purouanc"C of an agn::enH:'nt cnrne to at r;nference ~Jf Premiers \V,,lJ, the only State m A1Ftrn!Ia that has yet p~ssed the measr~re is Xew South \Yale,, whc·re it has bC'en m force for two or· thrL'C year,-. The r.csult has been that the exp0nsc of making the '.Juations is enormous. The Hon. l\1r. Parnell ~•ated that the denortment cmt about £42,000 per an­num, and tlw !"·· eipts are only about £24,000.

Hon. T. ::"i'EYITT: He spoke of New Zea­land.

HoN. A. G. 0. HAW'rHOR=": \Yell, those figures were quotud in the other Cha:nber '" appcying to ::\ew South \Val0s.

Hon. R. Smn:ER: In New Zealand they arc ')l'epared to lose £20,000 a ;"ear in order to s~w £100,COO by dispensing with other valuations.

Hox. A. G. C. HA\VTHOR::\: I am smo the hon. member is absolutely wrong there. Xo other State in the Con11nom;·ealth but ::\' cw South\\" ales has thought fit to bring in the Bill. They have seen the inadvioability of it and the' cxpel1f'f' and the' difficult:: in carry, ing- out the work. and they haw evidently decided not to introduce it. 1\lenticn has been ma-de of appealo. I think that the pro­r-osed appeal conr' is entirely wrong. A District Comt j ud(!c is to constitute the , ourt of appeal, and there is to be no appeal from him. That i· net 1warly a•~ good as the svstem in foree at the present time, under' which th0 loL ,, l police magistratPs con, s•itute the courts of app"1L and a ratppayer who fe0le him""lf aggriev0d can go to the local court and have hi,' vRluation either amended o1· r:onfinned at yery little ex11en~c aud jn n ver~v sirnph: rnanner.

Hon. R. SmtxER: 'f'he lccal authorities practica1l:v 1nake: thenBclves the appeal courts now.

HoN. A. G. C. HA \YTHOR::\': Th0y do not. There is a propNly constituted ap]wal court consisting of the police magishate for the district, and in that court the majority of the ratepayers haYc C'Onsidf'rab~e con­fidence.

Hon. G. PAGE-HA::-<JFY: They have con­fidPnce enough to stop out of it.

Hox. A. G. C. HA W'l'HORX: They go to the court >vith confidence. and they know that thev ate not going to be mulct in heavy CCSts as thcv will be under tJri,, bcCLlUS~ therd is no doubt that the cost of an appLal to '1 Dish·i-::i· fJourt ju,dg·e \Yill be very cun­siderable, >tnd the judge h:,s the po,. c·r to give heavy co:-:ts again'-'t appE-llant~.

Hon. G. S. CunTrs: It will he a Y' ry oppressive thing for property-own(ln,,

Hox. A. G. C. HA WTHORX: It will b• very oppressive. The advantage of the pre­sent svstem is that the ch•rk of the loeal author1tv knows everv foot of his area as a rule. · H ,-, is cognis,"nt of all land transac­t.ions that are going on; he generally attend" all land sales in the district. and he knows everything about !and ya]ues. ~4-s a ru!P, he is the most rompet' nt authonty upon the subject. and hie valuations are satisfactory to tho' ratepayers. In :t\ew Zealand they have a court of appeal of two or three nwm­bers. ThPy haYe a legal man presiding, and

Hon . .A. G. C. Hawthorn.]

1134 Valuation of [COu~CIL.] Land Bill.

the local authorities ha Ye a representative on Ow appeal court. There is no proyision for that here The judge of the District Conn is the sole member of the court and from his decision there is ab,olutel~ no a;1pcal. A good deal has been said on the mbjc·~t-, ,md I think that it has been shown conclusively that it is not desirable to pas-; tlw Bill. I dr,_ nor think there is a single nwmber on thrs Side who has spoken in favom of the Bill. The Hon. Mr. Sumne,~ sa:,] tha' we are opposing it simplv because i1 ha' been introduced by the present Go­vernmec t. That is a ridiculous thing to eay.

Hon. T. NEVITT: There is nothino- ridic-ulous about it. "

Hox. A. G C. HAvVTHORX: We han• pa-,··ed nearly 100 Bills introduced bv the pre,<•nt Govt•rnnwnt in the last four se~sionR. }lnny of them 1\'C amended, but a consider­able number y,e r•a"ed with hardlv anv arnC'ndtncnts. 'r:1'~~C we amended "':e jrr;. proved. e' has been shown b,- the sub­sequent working of tl,c Acts and bv the -acceptance of thoeP amendments bv the· other Chamber, so that th<• hon. member's asser­tion ab~olutely goes by the board.

Hon. R. Su;u:-..r:R: It r> not a party mea-sure.

Hox. A. G. C. HAVv"THORK: We are not making. it a party measure. 'We say that it is not a desirable measure to pass at the present rim~. \Ye say that it is going to !ncre":se the !:mrdens on the people, that it IS gorng to rncrease the difficulties of the n;an on _the land. ,and that it is going to do hm1 an lllJ ury. v\ e also say that it is going to cause the expenditur'l of a large amount ?f money without conferring any correspond­Ing benefit. If hon. members opposite can show us where any bPnefit can accrue from passing the Bill. I shall be very pleased to lrsten to tht>m; but up to the present not one of tl;lem has shown us that it can be com­pared with the present system of valuations under the Local Authorities Act. I know none of the local authorities desire it. Thev think that it is absolutely unnecessarv and that it will prove oppressive. 'l'hey ar;;'quite sati~fied to. go on as they arc at present, havmg their own valuers, tht>ir own valua­tions, and their own courts of appeal; and und<:r those circumstances we shall be doing wrong by inflicting a Bill of this kind upon the gent>ral taxpayers of Queensland. (Hear, hear!)

Hox. T. ~EVITT: I do not understand why hon. members on the other side are opposing this measure. If their statements <:ould be borne out by facts, I would be with them, but I am of opinion that the Bill will have the opposite effect to what hon. mem­bers opposite have stated.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: You are per­fec:ly entitled to your opinion.

Hox. T. ~EVITT: Every hon. member has a right to his own opinion, and to give cxpresc;ion to that opinion if he feels in­dined. Before proceeding with my argu­ments in favour of the Bill, I wish to reply to one or two remarks made bv other hon. memllPrs. The Hon. Mr. Curtis said that h0 had made 5,000 valuations. in three months for the> City of Rockhampton. If he worked eight hours per day for three months and made 5.000 valuations during that period, liP would have to work seven davs a week. and do one valuation every eight minutes, without allowing any tim'l for meals. That

[Hon. A. G. G. HavJthorn.

shows the amount of time and attention the hon. gentleman devoted to the valuation of those properties. Can any man sit in his office and make a valuation of a property a~ it should be made?

Hon. E. W. H. FOWLES : A lot of proper­tiE',; are uniform.

Hox. T. NEVITT: The Hon. Mr. Parnell said that he was mayor of Rockhampton at the time, and I understood the hon. gen­tleman to say that the council were paying a valuer independent o£ the Hon. Mr. Curtis.

Hon. G. S. OuRTIS: It was a sp~cial valua­tion that was made by me.

Hox. T. KEVITT: And ;ou made your Yaluation at the rate of one every eight minutes. There was not much of the skill of a valuer exercised in that work. The Hon. Mr. Parncll stated that his obj"ction to this measure was that the appeal court would be a District Court judge. The hon. gentleman further said that he had taken legal advice as to what would be the cost to bring an appeal case b~fore the District Court, and he was told that it would be anything from £500 to £1,000. Does the hon. gentleman, as a reasonable individual, think it will cost from £500 to £1,000 to take an appeal case to the District Court? There is no reason in that argument. Any ordinary person could take his own cas() into a valuation court and conduct it himself, and it would then cost him nothing beyond hie; own time. Therefore, the argument of the hon. gentleman is valueless. The Hon. Mr. Hawthorn argued that this Bill would have a tend~ncy to increase land values. The Hon. Mr. Parnen and the Hon. Mr. Curtis, on the other hand, said that it would have a tendencv to decrease land values; and all those three "gentl~men are going to oppose the Bill. Then we are told that the local authorities will not accept the valuer­general's values. If hon. memb<;Jrs will turn to clause 25, they will find that it reads as follows:-

" This part shall appl;· to the follow­ing rating or taxing authorities only:­

A local authority; The M"tropolitan Water Supply and

Sewerage Board; The Registrar of Titles and his depu­

ties; The Stamp Commisc,ioners; The Commissioner of Taxes."

Hon. membus will observe that the clause sa vs it "shall apply" to· those different atithorities. Therefore, if this Bill is passed, the local authorities will have no power to go beyond that provision. It is said that the iocal authoritv's clerk is the best man to value properties in the local authority area. I know one local authority which, during the la't ten years, has ha·d seven o~ eigJ:t shire clerks, not on<;l of whom had hved m t-he district prior to his appointment The district comprises several thousands of square mileB. What could be the shire clerk's knowledge of the values of land in a dis­trict like that? The clerk was appointed three months before he started valuing, and prior to that he had never been within miles and miles of the properties which he had to value.

Hon. A, G. C. HAWTHORN: That rs an e'l:ceptional case.

Hox. T. KEVITT: It is not an excep­tional case in country districts. Hon. members

Valuation of [23 JULY.) Land Bill. 1135

generally speak from a city standpoint, but Briebane is not Queensland. In such a caoc> as that a valuer-general would be an excel]P.nt thing for the local authority. The Commissioner oJ the Savings Bank "may" also accept the valuations of the valuer-general. At the present time different local authorities have each th<Jir own valuer. When this Bill is passed we shall have one valuer-general, and his valuations will have to be accepted by all authorities. How then is the passing of this measure going to in­er~ase the expense of valuation? Surely there muet be a reduction in the expenditure on valnations.

Hon. A. H. PARNELL: It means another return and another fee.

Hm:. T. NEVITT: It will mean a return and a fee; but do they not have to pay their v,, luers now? How many fees are paid bv tlw citv of Brisbane? I do not know what f~e' th" Government are going to charge for valuations under this Bill, but I guarantee that after the measure has been in operation for wme little time, and the office and staff ha Ye been organised, there will be a reduc­tion ;n the expense. It cannot possibly be othnrwisP. To show that the Bill is framed on soulld, just, and equitable linF•, I may point out that the valuer-general will be placcrl in a position similar to that of a judg~. so that he will be able to exercise thr_· powers given him under the Bill with­out fear or favour towards the Government m· anybody else.

Hon. F. 1'. BRENTNALL: He will be afraid to do it.

Hox. T. NEVI'fT: Are our judges at the prPH'nt time afrai·d to do their duty?

Hon. F. 'I'. BRENTNALL: Some of them are. Hox. T. NEVITT: If I held that opinion.

I woulrl table a motion in this Chamber and deal with such a judge in a proper manner. M" umtention is that the Government are ciiicere in their desire with regard to this nwa,urP. The Federal Government are pre­parPcl to accept valuations made by the ,-altwr-general. Alreadv the New South \YalP> Parliament have passed a similar Bill. The Hon. :Mr. Hawthorn said it would cost a con,iderable amount of monev to start a valuer·g(·neral's office, and he quoted certain figm·es to support his argument; but those figures do not apply to New South \Vale'; they apply to New Zealand. We have not yet got figures to show what the cost is in Kew South \Yales. I contend that when the Trca surers of the different States-Treasurers holding varied political opinions-meet in confr'rence and express the opinion that it is advisable to pass a measure of this kind, tliere must be something in the measure. If I remember rightly, one of the objections raised against ·the measure is that the valuer­g<'neral may make one valuation of land and then not make another valuation for a considerable. timP. The Bill is very emphatic oa that pomt, and provides that he must make a valt1ation every three years, at least, and me. re frequently if necessary.

Hon. A. H. PARNELL' As often as he likes.

Ilox. T. NEVITT: Not as often as he likco, but as often as he is called upon. If anybocl:-· takes exception to his valuation, the valuer-general can make a fresh valua­tion on payment of a small fee by the objector. The Hon. Mr. Parnell also touched upon the rights of occupiers. The hon. gentleman. knows perfectly well. that local

authorities are thoroughly protected, because the owner of land is responsible for the rate~.

Hon. A. H. PARXELL: There is not one local authority in Queensland that wants this Bill.

HoN. T. ::\'EVITT: For the simple reason that the men who constitute the local autho­rities of Queensland are landowners, and are not prepared to see a fair and reasonable valuation put on the land. \Vhat is the franchise upon which the members of local authorities are elected? Is it a democratic franchise'

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: Yes. HoN. T. NEVITT: I ha ye no doubt that

the hon. gentleman will claim that it is a democratic franchise.

Hon. E. W. H. FOWLES: Don't the alder­men pay on the same rate as other people pay?

HoN. T. NEVITT: Yes; they pay on the same rate as other people pay. Land has got only one value, no matter what it is used for. It cannot have one value for a local autho­rity, another value for the :Metropolitan \Vater Supply and Sewerage B?al'd, another value for the Registrar of T1tles, another value for the Stamp Commissioner, and another ,-alue for the Commisisoner of Taxes. Land has onlv one value, and that should be its true vaJue. That is what this Bill aims at getting. Pass this measure, and the local authorities will then be able to collect their taxec on the true value of the land. If land is valued at its proper value, every­body will pay fair and equal taxation, and nobndv will be robbed at the expense of another. The Treasurer mentioned one local authority in Queensland in which all the land in a particular area of the local authority was valued at the uniform value of £6 per acre. Is that fair or right'! Some people in. that district had their land valued at con­siderablv less than its real value, while others had their land valued at considerablv more than its real value. The result of 'such a valuation is that one man is paying more rates than he should pay. while another is paying less than he should pay. Where is the equity, reason, or justice· in that? The object of this Bill is to ensure that every man shall pay his fair proportion.

Hon. E. W. H. FOWLES: It is a suit that fits nobody.

Hox. T. NEVITT: That is simply because it does not suit the pockets of anyone. Con­sider the case of station properties. Some station properties include a considerable area of freehold. The majority of those properties are valued at 10s. per acre. In the case of leasehold properties the value is from one­tenth ·of a penny upwards per acre. They take twenty years at one-tenth of a penn~­that is 2rl. per acre as the value of that pro­perty. Other properties which have been resumed on the same run are valued at as high as 6d. per acre. It works out that free­hold property is being taxed at less than leasehold property.

Hon. A. H. PARNELL: I maintain that no man can pay 6d. per acre, year in and year out, on a grazing farm.

HoN. •r. NEVITT: 'They have done it and have made a good deal of money during the last t<m vears.

Hon. A. I-I. PARXELI.: 'l'hey may for a few years, but year in and year out they cannot pay it.

Hon. T. Nev·itt.]

ll"' j__l_.)J T7aZuatian of [COUNCIL.] Lctnd Bill.

HoK. T. XEYITT: Experience teaches that foe the last ten year" in land selection a gcod many of the properties that have been )laying 6d. per acre have made a great deal of n1oney.

Hon. A. H. PARXELL : There are very few l''·'·ying 6d. per acre.

HoN. 'l'. XEVITT: A few of them, and those who are not paying i~ could do so. Luring the past few years there has not been a more successful enterprise throughout Australia than woolraising.

Hon. A. H. PARKELL: I will agree with you th ,t it has been an exceptional time.

HoN. T. XEVITT: I do not wish to detain the Council any longer. I have a few more facts which I should like to bring forward, hut it has been agreed that we should get the second reading through before 6 o'clock; therefore, I shall content mYself with defer­ring any further remarks I have to make to the Committee stage.

HoN. T. M. HALL: I do not want to let this Bill go through without making a few remarks upon it. Having for some consider­able time been a local authority represen­tative. chairman of the local shire council, and also an alderman of the cit,- of Brisbane, I daim to have some knowledge of the effect •,, hi eh such legislation as this will have upon iocal authorities. There seems to be an ignorance on the part of hon. gentlemen c ]lposite in '.ome cas~s of the real effect which this legislation will have upon local authorities. A district which is under the control of euburban or countrv local authori­ties has the n1eans of a;;;certarning the value of land closer at hand than any organisation formed in the citY of Brisbane for the control of it could possibly have. I take it that, if this Bill b~comes law, there wiil be an army of lfmd valuers appointed to spread them­s<'lves throughout Queensland and ascertain bY guesswork. inquiry, or hy some other means. the value of the land in thfLt locality, and that will be the fixed price; whereas. under existing conditions it is the duty of ;,['ire clerks, and in the case of munici­palities, the dutv of a valuator appointed for that purpose, to take note of every sale which takPs place in the district and raise thA rating value of the particular lots affected by it. That requires ver:.- close ""utiny, and could never be performed by a man who was travelling from place to place. It is customarv in the Sherv, uod shire, in -,dlich I liH> as soon a·· a land transaction takes place,' for the dcrk immediately to make inquiries as to the price paid for the land. and he even goes to the Real Property Office to search for the prices paid for the land. and land contiguous to it, under similar conditions. is raised in price according to the sde price of the adjoining land. The ultimate effect of this legislation will be that th<' properties which arc valued at a certain price to-da_,., and are producing revenue. will ultimatelv have their capital value so reduced that they will be unsaleable at any price. \Y c have instanc<:'s at the present time in Brisbane that, with the added taxation. Federal and State-·-

Hon. R. SnrNER: :-;-ot on account of this Bill.

HoN. T. M. HALL: Xot on account of this Bill, but this is another straw on the camel's hack.

Hon. G. PAGE-HANIFY: The poor camel!

[Hon. T. Nevitt.

HoN. T M. HALL: Yes, and that reminds me-I do not like to make allusion~ which ma::· appear to be harsh, because I give p··oplc ihc credit of being honest in their int<mtions-but it seems, after what we have heard_ from certain quarters, that the objec­h ve m new at the present time bv those ruling 9uc<:noland is ultimately to "destroy <Fn1enh1p m land and compel it to fall back into the hands of the State.

Hon. G. PAGE-HA.'<IFY: You do not think that?

Hm:. T. M. HALL: I do, because that has bc~n exprl ssed in this House. One hon. member of this House. when I made such an allusion as that, sa-i-d, "Have vou only just found that out?" and I replied. " Xo, I haYe kno1vn it for some time." He said, " \V ell. you are pretty slow in finding it out." That \Vas the- Hon. lY!r. Riordan. who. is not here this afternoon. If that is the object which the Government have in view, thcv wili soon have the whole of the lands iu "Queensland back into the hands of the StatP. f"lld the only persons who occupy them will be those who aro not able to make a living out of anything. and I do not know how th<:'y will make a living unlef's the Government are prepared to keev them.

There are a number of men ,vho deYote th<'m•,ch-cs h local authoritv work. and are able to control the district 'over ,, hi eh ihey preside much more efficiently th:m ,,n official sent frorr: Brisbane to make the"' >aluations.

Hon. R. StDJ:\ER: Some of them <>mploy paid officials.

Hox. T. M. HALL: Yes. they du: they knon· their own business best. If it were set out in the Bill that there should bP a central power, such as is suggested here, and that that central power should utilise the services of persons in certain local anthori­tie··, to m<tke valuations, there would be some scn:JE' in it, but I takr it a stall v:ill be appointed under the Bill to cover the \\-hole of the State. There would be more to be said for it if it \Vere under the control of !hP. Federal Government, and evervbodv had to be bound by the valuation. • '

Hon. R. St:1!XER: You would hav<' to alter ihc Constitution.

HoN. T. :\1. HALL: Ye-s: bnt the State is tinkeeing with its own Constitution so much that bv the time the" have finished it will lead to disaste1·. •

Hon. G. PAGE-HANIFY: Are you a unifica­tionist?

HoN. T. M. HALL: I am not a nnificrr­tionist by conviction) but I an1 by cxpPrit•ncc~

Hon. G. PAGE-HANIFY: Come over here.

HoN. T. M. HALL: No; I cannot s\vallow all vou advance. I might be <tble to sv ullow som-e of vour planks, but not all of them. I have come to the conclusion that it is better to deal with one burglar with his hands in your pockets than with half a dozen. (Laughter.) For this reason, and for othc1· reasons which are fully illustrated in what has taken place in the legislation we have had presented to us this session-that this is a continuation of Bills on which we have already expressed our opinion, and have definitelv decided that they are not favonr­able to· the best interests. of Queensland­we are at a great disadvantage, so far as this State is concerned, in that we have had

Valuatiot! 0] Land Bill. [:23 JVLY.] Death of Jir. C. H. B~1zacott. 1137

to deal ·with measures which have been fullv discussed before in all their details, and, after mature consideration, they have been amended or cast out. \Ve are now con­fronted with a whole range of these BilH one after the other thrown back at our head<, with all sorts of threats of what is going to ha pp en to us if they arc not passed.

Hon. G. PAGE-HAXIFY: The people d1-

dor ,ed the policy of the Government at the election.

Box. T. M. HALL: I do not care two­pence for the cledion. The election had nothing whatever to do with the· details of particular Bills. If the Government wanted a definite expression of opinion on any par­ticular question, they had the opportunity of doing it hy referendum at the last elec­tion. Because a Government are returned at a gen\_)ral election, it does not necp:sarily follow that any specific measure in their policy is accepLtbk to all or to anY larrre proportion of the peoj)le. That crv 'is de~d long ago. It. i, most unfortunate" ·that we should be call.;d upon to discuss over and over again Bills to which we have alrt·adv given frank and fair consideration in th;, lnst Parliament.

Hon. R. Sl!);INER: You may have an opinion, but you are not the fmal arbite1'. You arc not the peG pie of Queensland.

Ho;,r. T. Jlil. HALL: I am not the final arbiter, and I do not expcc:t to be, I expect to hoJ.cl my own opinions, <J.nd I am ready to stand by them. When you talk about the people of Queensland, tho people of Quet'n,. land are a V<'r.' conglomerate mas,. \Ve have, as Carlyle said, people made up of fools and others, chiefly fools.

Hon. R. ScliiNER: Thev have onh· one me-thod of cxpre·,·ing their" opinion. and th·.t is by ballot. ·

Ho:c-r. T. M. HALL: In my opinion. a good proportion of them are not fit to ex­press themselves-only those who have an intelligent undc·rstanding of the que··tion being dealt \Yith. \Ve have education in Qneemlund suf!kient to enlighten any man'> mind so as to unde1st.mcl the conditions. but there aP others \vho are on the elc·ctoral roll to-day who are neither fit b' their lives, their intelligence, nor an:~thing ~elsr to haYe <l vote.

Hon. H. S1;)IXER: Ar" they the upper clas:·,f'~ or tho loVH'r cb.s~,f_.:i?

Hox. T. M. HALL: I know no class except an horw•t m~n; I do not care what his poli­tics or religion are, provi·ded he lives in an upright way. 'l'hc hon. gentkman is mak­ing me digress from the subject altogether. I was referring to the fact that the bringing forward again of th.-se mc<~sures which wc, have already dealt with does not give the Council a fair shmr. My opinion, after several ytars' experience in local authorit,Y work, is that the best thing to do with this Bill is to cast it out on the second reading So far as I am concerned, I am prepared to do so.

Hon. G. S. CuRTIS: Hear, hear!

HoN. T. M. HALL: It is time the Go vernmcnt began to rca.lise that constantl~­hringing- measures forward here after they have already received great C'lnsidera· tion by the Council is only casting a reflection upon our intelligence on a pre· vious occe.sion. I am not going to alter my

1918-4 A

Yote on !his occasion from that which I gave on the last occasion. I shall vote agaimt the second reading of the Bill.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: I beg· t<> move the adjournment of the debate.

Qtwstion put and passed.

Tho rf'sumption of the debate Y as made an 0l'der of the Day for to-morrow.

DEATH OF :\IR. c;, II. BUZACOT'L

LETTEH m· SYMPATHY.

The SECRETARY FOR MIKES: Bdmc tho Council adjourns I would Ek to >a} that, since 've l1.st 1net, I very 1nnch rf'gret that one has pas ·ed a\vay in the person of the lute ::\Ir. Charles Hardie Buzacott. \Yho was for wme vears an Executive Councillor of thi·. State, and a very prominent member o£ this Council from 1879 to 1882, and again from 1[9.1 to 1001. The late :Mr. Buzacott belonged to one of the olde,.t pioneering fan1ihc-::, and for a nu1nber of years he repre•.-0ntcd Rockhampton in the Assembly. I undn,tand that he joined Sir Thomas ::\lcilwraith's ~\Iini.-try as Postmaster-General, with a seat in this Chamber. Hi' name is ,·.;criated with Queendand politic'. and with Ye!"; manY Bills introdueed in thiB Council and no''' on the statute-book. The dcceasNl gcnt]e_'_I)all resigll('d his ceat in thi:" Cht!. nber, l think. in the year 1901, e<ncl for the last year., of his life he has not been associated actiYely with politics. He died at tlw ripe age of eightc·-threr 0 eau. There are many hon. gentlernen in this IIouse who WH'e :rnf~re intimatt'l:· associated with the deDeased gt'ntle· man thrrn I was. I met him a few times. But, \Yhile we Carmot bring baek the de:td, 'H' owe a duty to the memor0· of the de· ceased g-entleman and to his relativei'. It nay be ·Ome little consolation to rhrm in this hour of tlwir trouble to know th'tt this IIousc. with which ~\fr. Buzacott was for so wr, 11Y yLars associat"d, is not likel;T t; forget his n1cnory, ar,d that. \..Ye extend our dt_ope::.t s:crnpathy to them. I would. ther<'fore, ask that the Pn .. ,ident. on behalf of the C·>uucil. '11~ a lcttel· to the faHtily of th~ de-ceased

rent]cnan, cxpre' ing the sy1npcthy nf th? Council with them in their :.rtd bercaYenwnt.

I~oxorn.\BLI~ ::.\1E'_l1ERS: I--Ic':Jr, hear:

liox. G. S. CL'R'fiS: one who knew the late :1Ir. Buztu dt for nearly fifty years, I wa; very pleased indeed to hear the re­mark· made by the }iinister, and I would like to ,'cmfirrn all that the hon. g<>ntleman has did. :\h. Buzacott v. as at;,c of the able .t public men we have had in Queens­land, both tu a journalist and a' a politician and statcc.man. (B 0ar, hear !) I suppose he may Le cailcd one of the pioneers of journal­ish! m this State. He (''tablished a comider­able nurnbrr of ne\YSpapers in the country. I rc,,ollect. when he was first returned to the other Chamber as member for Rockhanr]lton. He '.ms regarded by the people of Rock­h,·, mpton as one of their ablest reprc,enta­tiYcs. \Vhen he was a member d Sir Thomas ::\1cilwraith',; i\1inistry he drafted the Divisional Boards Bill, which wns subse­quently pas,ed by that Ministry. I have rea­~on to believe that Sir Thomas ::\Icihnaith, Sir Arthu.r Palmer, and other leaders of the partv held :Mr. Buzacott in vcr0· high e L e'Y! hoth for his ability as a parliamen­torian and as a draftsman. The DiYisional

Hon. G. S. Curtis.]

1138 Death oJ Mr. C. H. Buzacott. [COUNCIL.] Adjournment.

Boanh Bill, which w~s mainly drafted by him, is acknowledged to haw• conferred verv great benefits on Qu.Penslac11d. I an1 ver~~ pleased that the l'dinistcr has referred to ::Ylr. Buzacott in the terms he has. I was very 'orry ind~ed to hear of his death, hut I am proud to think that he died enjoying the "'teem of all those with whom he came in contact Juring his long ('aroPr.

HoxorR \BLE ME}IBERS: Hear. hear!

Hox. E. W. H. FO\VLES: \Vc do wPll to h(Jnour thp men1orv of :::uch a C'itizeu as the late }Ir. Buzacoti Hi' sterling public 'Yorth i~ knov.·n outside of Queensland, a~ \Yell as to the majority of citizens here. I had tlw priYileg., of being associat<>d with him wlwn lw wa•·; editor of the '· Dailv }Ia.il." Th ·t journal was fonndBcl bv bin!. and I had the honour of beiwr associate editor \Yith him for three or foura vears and of knowing the type of mind and the' t;:pe of c·Jtiun that he was. He had a wonder.­fnlly \Yell-stored mind. It was almc-<t like a libran. His financial lPadcrs. both in the '' ConriN.'' and, later, in the "Daily :Yiail." had an Australian reputation. His work. both insi<k and Dutside of Parliament will llyP. ~Ie. 'vas open to criticism, bu't his h1gh prmclple was acknowleclged in all quar­t<'ro. I have read verv manv columns of what hP \Yl'ote. and I do not ;emember anv harsh or ungentlemanly words that he eve'r used, He '>.·as a gentleman in all his Pre-s wntmg alHl in all his public dealings. I eannot forget the quiet touch of humour that he had. although one would hardly haYe !'XJl<'<'tNl to find it. It was like a vein of g<_Jlrl in n mountain of quartz. He told me lnmsdf that his life was despaired of when he was three years of age. and at the age of SPYPlll'Y-nin.:· he said to me, " I feel pr0th· \\Cll o:et." He told me that, when he wa's fort,. ypars old, his life wa'· refused by one o.f thP JifP offices, who I'cfw<Pd to accept the l'l' k be• .. wse the doctor \nmld not certifv that he \vonld live for a vear. And yet he Jiycd to lw eighty-three· year> of age.'

Hon. R. Sv3INER: Thev did not know the spirit behincl it. ·

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: They did not know that. He had an unquenchable spirit. I re;nember his suffering acutely from neu­ralgHt for a week and then he had an operation, and he 'was writing leaders the day after the operation was performed. I remember his sitting in his editorial chair at 1 o'clnck in the morning waiting for news of the death of King Edward to come throu~h, so that the leacler which he had written clays before might appear in due course. I do not know that there is anv Australiap journalist possessed of the cour­age. clarmg:, fortitude, and persistenc~ that ~e ehow.e.d In establishing the " Daily Mail" m the midst of a thousand difficulties. That was his latest journalistic child. and he saw it on t.he I·oad to what we hope will he prosp_ent;:. EYeryone knows how belov'"d he was m his own home, what an affectionate husbanc1 and father he was, and I feel sure this little ti'ibute to his memory this after­noon will come as a consolation to all who bore his name and who remember what a kir1d husband and father he was. We hope that men of his class-men who can do their public duty up to their eightieth vear and over-will not pass away from Qu'eensland, hut that we shall have that fin<; public spirit still among our citizens in this Queen State.

Ho1';'0VRABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear !

[Hon. (]. 8. Curtis.

Hm;. W. F. TAYLOR: As one who knew the late Mr. Buzi1rott for a great number of years, I would like to say a word or two. I first made the acquaintance of the de­c~e-sed gentleman in 1870 when I went to C'krmont to practise. At that time there was a very violent contest going on between the townspeople of Clermont and the squatters. The townspeopl<; wanted to get some more land in order to run their horses and cows, nnd so on, and the squatters stoutly objected to anY concession being made in that direc­tion. ·Mr. Buzacott foug-ht very hard for the townspeople. In the fight he was assist~d by my prBdE'c<·ssor, the late Dr. Benson, and bv Mr. Kellv Cusack, the late warden at Ra,:cnswood. Those three wei·e the leaders of the democratic party of those days, or rather the anti-squatting party, and thev fought very hard indeed. At that time Mr. Buz"acott was the proprietor of the " Peak Downs Telegram." During a flood, shortly before I went to Clermont, he had the mis­fortune to have all his type swept away, and he himself very nearly lost his life, having to climb a tree at the back of his office and remain in the fork of that tree all night until the flood subsided. When I v. ent to Clcrmont shortlv afterwards I was .~hown a part of a sheet with which Mr. Buzacott had tied himself to the fork of the tree. He and I became friendlv almost at once, and that friendship has continued up till now. His career was a very remarkable one. WhPn he left Clermont he became the proprietor of th0 Rockhampton " Bulletin." From Rockhampton he came to Brisban'", and vPrv soon establi~hed himself in the " Com·ie~·" as the leading journalist of the State. I knew him verv intimatelv, and hacl the greatest possible" n;speet for him. \Ye were very fast friends for forty-eight years. and until he went to reside per­manently at Stanthorpe, I frequently saw him, and I acted as his medical adviser. 9f late vears he suffered grPatly from neuralgia, and how he managed to maintain himself in health sufficiently to carry on his editorial work and his writing I r'"ally do not. know. her:tuse at times he suffered very severely indeed. I am sure that his death has been a happv release to him. bqe:tuse he never was able t~ ge" anything like permanent relief from the agony he suffered from this neu­ralgia. 1 am sure we all appreciate the work he has done in Queensland. He was one of tlH' old landmarks of the Shl.te, and I am <1nite certain that the future historians of Queensland will giv<;! him a very prominent place.

Hmro"L"RABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

The PRESIDE::\'"T: I shall see that the wi;;h of th<:> Council is carried out, and that a letter of svmpathv is forwarded to the deceased gentleman's · relativ~s.

HoxouRABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear !

AD.JOURNMENT.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: I beg to move-That the Council do now adjourn. Tlw first bm;,,~ss to-morrow will be resnmp. tion of the debate on the Valuation of Land Bill, to be followed by the second reading of the Land Act Amendment Bill (Xo. 2), and the Wages Bill in Committee.

Question put and passed.

The Council adjourne-d at four minutes to 6 o'clock p.m.