Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Council

WEDNESDAY, 16 OCTOBER 1918

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Personal- Explanaticn. [16 OCTOBER.] Constitution Act, Etc., Bill. 3153

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

WEDNESDAY 16 OCTOBER, 1918.

The PRESIDENT (Hon. W. Hamilto:nl took the ch1'ir at half-past 3 o'clock.

PAPERS.

The following papers were laid on the table, and ordered to be printed:-

Report of Royal Commis,:ion on pro­posed railway extension from Jliiul­gowie to Thornton.

Railwa.y Commissioner's report on the proposed extension of the Boyne Valley Railway from Many Peaks to New Cannindah.

COKSTIT"CTIOK _'\.CT AMENDMENT" BILL.

SECOND READING-RESUMPTION OF DEBATE.

Ho!\. R. Sl'::'vll'\ER: It is not my intention to speak at any great length dn this Bill, because I understand the position. I assume that the Bill will be rejected, and I under­stand the position will be put in a concrete form to every elector--

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: Ca.n you tell us what the question will be?

Ho!\. R. S"C::'v1NER: I suppose the question will be, " For or against the abolition of the Council." I think we shall get a more intclligent vote, and that the people will have an opportunity ty that method of under­standing the situation. . I suppose it will be put as strongly aC\ possibl<e from both sides.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: Are we to par­ticipate in that £12,000, or is it all for your side?

HoN. R. S"CMNER: I dare say the hon. gent;eman will have an opportunity of dis­cussing that later on. I do not think anyone will dispute the fact that the real govern­ment of Queensland is not being carried on by the elected representatives of tho people, but by persons who do not represent the people.

Hon. B. F AHEY: By the Trades Hall.

HoN. R. S"CMNER: I a.m alluding to parliamentary government-not to the Trades Hall. I do not think that anyone can dispute the fact that the Government of Queensland is not being carried on by the elected repre­sentatives of the people. but by penons who do not represent the people-that is, this Chamber.

Hon. A. GmsoN: No. Hon. A. A. DAVEY: How has it been

carried on in the Assembly for the last four years?

Ho:'i. R. SUMNER: I have obiected to this state of affairs all the time. i: can go back to years ago, though the state of affairs was not. then so bad as it is now. Except for a verv short period, until the last Parliament, we did not have a Government in power representing the real democracy-the people.

Hon. E. W. H. FOWLES : A Government that will not give the people liquor reform.

Hon. R. Sumner.]

3154 Constitution Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

HoN. R. SUMNER: Since the Labour Government came into power and en­deavoured to put on the statute-book the planks that they have advocated for so many years, the;, h&ve found this Chamber obstructing them at every step in their path.

Hon. E. W. H. FOWLES: You will not accept the people's verdict of last year.

Hox. R. Sl:J\INER: ·The abolition of 'ec<md Chambers is not a new thing.

lion. E. IV. H. FoWLES: No; thev have a single-Chamber Government in Bulgaria.

I-Io::-r. R. SU::'v1NER: As long as I can remember, efforts have been made in the old ccuntry either to minimise the power of the serond Chamber or to abolish that Chamber, because the people have always recognised that it is a relic which has been handed down from the old system of the King or Council government, to stop the peopl<; from getting laws put on the statute­book for their own good. Many hon. mem­bers will remember the time when the crv of the Gladstone Administration was fo"r the abolition of the House of Larch. I think it was Lord Roseberry who was the author of tho cry : " The House of Lords must be either nwnded or ended." In Queensland, a for'mer Premier, Dr. Kidston, practically issued the same challenge to this Chamher. He said that if this House were not ended it should have its wings clipped, and he endeavoured to clip them by passing the Parliamentary Bills Referendum Act. But he did not succeed. The Hon. Mr. Haw­thorn was a member of the Government that introduced that measure. After the Parlia­ment had been in sc,<ion for less than six months it found this Chamber mutilating sueh small Government measures as the Fac­tories and Shops Bill and the Wages Boards Bill, which had for their object the getting of some measure of justice for the people. The Premier eould not get sufficient men in this Chamber to carry his measures, and he resigned, and an election was foreed on the country, notwithstanding the big majority sitting. behind him at the time. The Premier then passed the Parliamentary Bills Referen­dum Act, and it was believed that the wings of this Council had been effectually clipped, but evidentlY that view was not correct.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWT:f!ORN: Ther<' was no qtwotion of abolition then.

HoN. R. SU::\1NER: Many things have been said, and many things could be said, on the subject. It ic stated that there is no analogy between the position here and the po·ition in the old eonntry. There is· cer­tainly this analogy. that in both countries there is an Upper Chamber. The powers of the House 'of Lords ha.ve been curtailed to a very great extent. They have been cur­tailed almost to the point of impotency by the provision of the Parliament Act.

Hon. A. A. DA VEY : \V e have a better Act here.

HoN. R. SUMNER: If a Bill similar to the Parliament Act of Great Britain were passed by the Asembly, do hon. members opposite think there would be any means of getting it through this Chamber?

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: It is not neces­Earv. You have a much better Act in the Pa~liamentary Bills Referendum Act of 1908.

Hox. R. SUMNER: In Great Britain tbev have found it nece·sary to curtail the pm~'ers of the second Chamber to such an

[Hon. R, Sumner.

extent as to make it almost impossible for them to defy the House of Commons for any considerable ti,ne. I would just like to read a quotation from an article on " The Development and Growth of the British Constitution" by the Right Honourable Sir William Anson, M.P.-

" There is nothing in our Constitution which cannot be altered by Act of Parlia­ment. Until 1911 an ~\.et of Parliament required the assent of King, Lords, and Commons. For more than 200 years the a'"ent of the Crown has been given as a 1natter of course to n1easures approved by both Houses. Under the conditions of the Parliament Act that assent may now be demanded for a measure which the House of Lords has not approved.

."Legislative sovereignty, therefore, with the power to change our institutions at will is transferred to the Commons."

Hon. G. S. CuRTIS : That was only a tem­porary measure.

HoN. R. SUMNER: It was not a tem­porary mea,ure, and It is still on the statute­book. That is what was done in Great Britain, and yet here in Queensland we find members of the Council claiming similar or greater powers than those posses.<ed by the popular branch of the Legislatm·e. Even Mini<ters in the British Parliament find that the curtailment of the powers of the House of Lords under the Parliament Act is not sufficient, and that they are still hampered in their efforts to pass popular legislation. Mr. Lloyd Gcorge, Spt'aking in 1913, said-

" Democracy is in greato1· peril than for generations past. There is a deliber­ate conspiracy on foot to thwart and overthrow democratic government. We are fightim: the last desperate effort to restore the ~grip of class aseendanc.-,. The recent action of the House of Lords ha.; m.:tde the abolition of the House of Lords essential."

Mr. Lloyd George said that in spite of the existence of the Parliament Act.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: What has that to do with us?

HoN. R. SUMNER: I am speaking about the general principle of the abolition of a second Chamber, 1md I say that even in Great Britain the second Chamber has been found so great a menace to orlemonracy that, notwith.;tanding the Parliamc:nt Act of 1911, which is a very stringent measure, and practically makes it impossible for any mea­sure to be -delayed very long by the House of Lords, the abolition of the House of Lords is bSential. This Chamber is worse than an hereditarv Chamber. Jt is a nominee Cham­ber. and "if every Government had the right to nominate a sufficient number of members to carry their measures we can see what an absurc1Itv would result. If we on this side of the House were in a majority now, and another Government got into power, we should practicallv carry out the same policy as membf'rs are" now pursuing on the other side of the House. This Chamber has not only asserte-d its right to mutilate and reje!"t ordinar~~ mp1,;;:ures, but has 0ven a~s·~rted, 1n a me:::sng" f'Cnt to the A . .sspmblv. itf5 right to anwnd money Bills. In 1767, Pitt said-

" The tax<>s are a voluntarv g-rant and gift of the Commons alone. The concur­rence of the Peers and the Crown in the

(J onstitution Act [16 OCTOBER.] Amend.iient Bill. 3155

tax is only necessary to clothe it with a form of law. The gift and the grant is in the Commons alone."

.Some time ago the Hon. Dr. Marks asked why do Bills come hete if we have no right to amend them'! Money Bills only come here for our concurrence in order to give them a. form of law, and this Chamber has no right to amend them, nor has any other ··econd Chamber in the British Empire a right to amend money Bills.

HoN. C. F. MARKS: I rise to a point of <:rder. The hon. gentleman has misquoted

hat I said. \Vhat I .•aid vc cJS: \Vhat is the use of taking a Bill into Committee if we have no right to amend it 1

Ho~. R. Sli::'11KER: I accept the hon. gentleman's explanation. In 1907 Mr. Bal­four said-

" We all know that the power of the House of Lords is still further limited by the fact that it cannot touch money Bm«, which, if it could deal with, would bring the wbolo machinery of the country to a standstill."

The men I have quoted are men of high .authority and great experience. Yet we find men in the Legislative Council of Queensland asserting that this Chamber has not only power to amend or reject ordinary Bills, but :has also power to amend money Bil!s.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHOR)l: \Vc have a written Constitution, and that makes a difference.

Hox. R. SL"::\1::\ER: In 1909, :Hr. As·juith ~aid-

·' \Ve are told that there is a pos­sibilib that thP House of LoHh, ••hether by n1Utila+ion or rejection. may set aside the proYision >Yhi~h the House of Com­mons has made for the fnancial neces­sities of the State. Talk of revolutions ! Thi' would be, indeed, th" most formid­able and the most fundamental since the days of the Long Parliament. I assert with confidence that there is no rule more deeply ingrained in our Con­"titution-more solemnlv hallowed­Inorc plainly sanctio:;Jed,~ alike by the tra.d[tions of the past and by the r2quirc­ments of to -clay, than that, in matters of fmancc, the Commons, the repre­sentativ<'s of the people, ha.-e an ab­solute. an unquestionable, and a decisive yoic~."

I consider that, whate.-cr may be the powers •of this Chamber as it exi,ts to-da.----Dven if it has the full, power v hich memb•••·s opposite cl.a;m-it has no right to mutilat• 01' anwnd money Bills, or any other Bills upon which the electors ha.-e once pro­nounced an opinion. I could give lengthy quotations from political leaders in the British Hou>.· of C.Jmmons, showing that the House of Lords, having r;ot the de cisio:1 of the ]Woplc. have no right to mutihte or reject such Bills.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORX: \Vh:v c\oes that not gm·ern the abolition of this House, see­ing that tho question has be.;n put before thE' country. and decided ag-ainst the Go­vermnent by a. majm·it:;- of 63.000?

Hoes. R. SU::'II~ER: Political leaders in the British House of Commons sav that when a Bill ha" once been before the !'lec­tors, as some of the Bills which have been Tejected by this Council this session have

been before the electors, the House of Lords should pass that Bill. If the second Cham­ber does not do that, you make government impossible; parliamentary government will become a farce and legislation will be im­possible. A nominee Chamber carried out in its entirety would be a perfect absurdity, because eYcry Government would have the right to nominate a sufficient number of members to carry their measures, and what would be the natural corollary of that'! It .,, ould be that each Government would ap­point a sufficient number of members to carry their mca,sures, and that would be reducing parliamentary government to an absurdity. I should like to read this quota­tion from Lord Hugh Cecil, who, writing of the Constitution of Canada, c.::tid-

" The members of the Senate being all of them men of adnmc·.,d vears, Yacancies were frequent, and it vi.·<i:s not long bcdore n Liberal majority-not less Rubsenient to the LibeJ·al AdminiJtra­tion than the former Conservative majority had been to its predccP,•sor­was L'stablishcr! in the Senat8. A similar procc'ss has now begun with. the new Con·ervatiye Government. This sub­sen·ience is caused by a svstcm of nomination which places overwhelming influence in the hand·, of the Govern­nlent."

The natural corollary of the nominee sTstem is that the second chamber should recognise the rights of the elective Chamber after the members of that Chamber go before the elector;;.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: Thev need not go until they are ready. •

Hox. R. 8F:\1N'ER: They must go every th1 ~e year".

Hon. A. G. C. HA'fTHORX: They need not go CYery three years; they may alter that if they choose.

Hox. R SU::HNER : I believe in shorter Parliamenb than we have at present, be­cause I hold that it is nece,sary for the people to have control of Parliament. I am very sorry thai; the Popular Initiative and Referendum Bill was not carried, because I look upon that measure as a check upon unparliamentary government.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: Whv did not the Go­Yernment accept our amendments? They vvcre good an1endments.

Ho;,;. R. SV::VE\ER: I believe that the operation of that measure would be bene­ficial to the countrv. I have latelv been reading that book o'f l\Ir. Gerard'», ~ntitled "Fa('e to F<-tCC 1.:rith thf~ Kaiser," in 'vhich he reviews the Constitution of Swit?:erland, nnd in which he points out that the referen­dum in Switzerland has alwa,·s operated conservatively, and has always been a check upon politicians who wanted to g-o too far. It may be that politicians want to bring in legislation which is ahead of the peoplo before the people require that le;o;islation, and in such a case the Initiative and Refer­endum would act as a chedc -I wish now to quote• one or two other authorities on this subject. The Hon. Mr. Denham, in 1911, said-

" 'l'he simple facts were that large vested interests were wielded with im­mense power in the Legislative Council."

Hon. P. ,J. LEAHY: That is not so to-day.

Hon. R. Snmner·.l

3156 Constitution Act [COUNCIL.] Amendmmt Bill.

HoN. R. SUMNER: That was the opinion of the Hon. Mr. Denham, and not of the Hon. 'I'. J. Ryan or any other member of the Labour party. I remember reading some tune ago an article in the " Brisbane Courier'; with reference to the power exer­cised by this Chamber. So far I hav<J not been able to put my hand upon the axtract, but I hope to be able to do so before the d<'bate closes, as the article refencd to the great VE'ltcd interests in connection with the squatting industry which were at mne time represented in this Chamber. "The Telegraph," in an m·ticle published in 1906, said-

" It is becoming plainer that Legisla­tive Councils are factors that must be eliminated from the simplified problem of State Government."

After expressing such an opinion, I think ·n· ma:v clrrim the support of " 'I'hc Tele­graph" in the coming campaign with regard to the abolition of the Council. Tht> Hon. Mr. Brentnall has had a long connection with "The Telegraph," and I think we can also r~asonably claim his support in the coming campaign. I shall now read a quota­tion from the :Melbourne "Age," which is one of the most conservative p:tpers in ~\us­trali:t.

Hon. P. J. LEJRY: It is the greatest dem.o­cr:.tic paper in Australia.

HoN. R. SUM:'\ER: '\Vriting in 191() it said-

" The Consen-atives have turned their faces from the Federation towards the Statco. Their reasons are clear: The Lcgi dative Councils of the States offer a protection to a Tor:- which he cannot find in the broader political atmosphere of the Commonwealth."

There, io my mind. you have the whole secret of this dosperat• attempt to retain second-Chamber go1·ernment iR connection with om States in Australia They will alwa~-s be Tory Chambers until 'ou can get a Government to persurtde the Gm-crnor to nominate suflkicnt members to outvote thf'm. I think the "Age" puts the matter in "" nutshell. The Opp,osition do not troubl"', in the other Chamber, to discuss a Bill or oppose it. Their attitude is, "Send it up to our friends in the Legislative Council. They will look after it. and see there is nothing in it that is going to work against our interests." Practicallv, Bills are neglected in the other Chamber because thev know they have their friends here. "

Hon. E. W. H. FowLES: They have the guillotine there.

HoN. R. SUM:'\ER: Manv other authori­ties can be quoted. Even som'e of the authori­ties quoted ye,terda:, by thP Hon. 1Ir. Curtis were for the abolition of the second Chamber. Take John Stuart Mill. In his latter clan he was a convert to socialism. '

Hon. P. J. LEARY: Not your socialism­a different brand altogether.

HoN. R. SUMNER: You do not know what our socialism is :vet. Aft0r all, the question must rest with the people, and I am prepared to let the people decide. If the people want a Tory Government in for all time, l<'t them hav<> one. But once a demo­cratic Government. representing the geeat masses of tho JWOple. are give•l the reins of office, thcv should have some opportunity of putting their laws on the statute-book. It has been said there was a 62,000 majority

[Hon. R. Sumner.

against the abolition on the last occa"ion. While I admit that the majority was a strong one, there m,ay have been causes which led up to it which may not operate next time. I did not think that the time was opportune for taking a vote. The Federal election was taking place; the "'Win-the­war" Government were prrcctieally in the ascendency. 'fhe Bi!I itself was in a state of chaos; nobody knew ,whether this House could be abolished. '\Ye do not know vet, even if the people favour the proposal. The same constitutional qur"tions will operate; but there will be an indication of what the people think on the matter. The form of tho ballot-paper on the last occasion was mislPading. I know that t'm or three members of m:v bmily made a blunder and voted the wrong way.

Hon. A. A. DA YEY : Did they vote for the Council's abolition?

HoN. R. SUM:'\ER": Thev intended to do so. but thev made a blunder and voted the other way." '\Yhen the vote is taken on the next oc•_asion, I believe we shall ha vc a different result. Since the last referendum was taken the people have had a greater experience of a. Labour Government and have had rrn opportunit:v of realising som.e of the bmtefih of the k:;islation that is heing passed. I think the.\- will resent the aclion of thi, Council in throwing out some of the Bills that have been sent up here. The general election taken in ihe early part of this year provf'd that thP ,people have confidence in the Government and are pre­pared to allow them to carr:v out their mea­sure;;. I am prepared to leave the whole question to the people, and whatever the people say, I think hon. member' ought to be prepared to abide by. I feel sure the decision ill be in favour of abolition. I hope there will be no more obstructive tactics, if such is the case, to prevent the Bill being placed on the statute-book. This is not a personal matter with me. I oppose this Chamber because I do not b01iove in the bir:tmeral system. As long as the s:vstem is in existence, we shall have to put up with it. I find fault with nobody in th<' House, but I o bj 0ct to the system. I will quote the concluding remarks of a speech delin•red in this Chamber b,v the Hon. A. Hinchcliffe, an hon. member who has been in touch with democracy the whoh' of his life and who has had a large experience". not onl:v of the politic:tl, but of thP industrial life. It appears in "Hansard" No. 124, of 1916-17-

" I am not blaming hon. members. I merely seek to clxpose the fallacy that this is a non-part::" Chamber, and that it is strongly prejudiced against the party that is now in office. I am in favour of this Bill, as I c tid when it was before us last year. I do not blame thP Council for the r<'i oction of Bills. and I do not support tbis measure because, of that. I am opposPd to the bicameral sv,tem for thP rc;;son that I think it is out of step ,,.ith the spirit of the times, fl11U

hw, long- since failed to justifv its Pxist­enro. ·we clin~ to it because it is an old tradition, and hec1nse in all British­~peaking corY',lnunities there is n, senti­mNl'"e 1 veneration for old institutions. \Vhatever excuse there was manv vear;,

.ago for its existf'nre-and I belie,~e there were good reasons for the establishmE'nt of " second Chnmber-there are none now. For instance, I believe that in Queensland prior to 1238 they had five-

Constitution Act [16 OCTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 3157

yearly Parliaments. \Ve have now much n,oro freouent appeals to the electorate, and to sav that a Government can ride roughshod" over the rights of the people, if this Chamber is wiped out, is to say that no G Jvc1·nmcnt has any regard for its 1e,ponsibilities. I do not believe it. I believe that tlw bc~t check on the actions of anv Government is the fact that it is forced to go to the people at lr_ P -t once every three yE<trs."

'.fhe remarks he make' express my con­;-iction. I feel confident that when the matte1· goes to the people the abolition will be carried by an overwhelming majority.

Box. P. J. LEAHY: Nobody else seems <1ispo"'d to continue the debate at this juncture. I intend to make a very brief speech indeed, and, as far a;. po9sible, to a.void those generalities which have very little bearinc on the question and which have been indulged in b:-;· the Hon. ;\~Ir. Sumner and others on his side. I would .like to put the question this way: I would first h,· do·.,-n this as a principle-that either an in• i itution or a man might be judged by the work clone. I would ask for nothing better than to have this Legiclative Council judged by the people on the work which this Legis­latiYe Council has done. I do not want to go back into ancient history about the House of Lord'·, as the Hon. Mr. Bedford did the other day, or something that might have happened twent:- or thirty ,-cars .a e-o in this or '·JlllC otlwr Chamber. This Chamber. r.; con,tituted ai· the present time, claims to be quite up to date; m1cl. as one of the mem­bers of thi · Cham!,. ·r, I elaim to be reason­ably up to date. I want this Chamber to be judged-as it will be by the people-upon '\•.:hat it has clone in re 1_',-•nt 'ears. Now, wh .1t has this House d0ne since the pre,ent Government ea me into office? \V e havP been told frequently that before thi·• present GoYermn.•nt nme into office this Cha.mber req-i,"tered 'vhateYC'l~ preYious Gover~ments sent up. As a matter of fact, that Is not true. but I shall confine m:; .>elf to what this Chamber has done since the present Goyern­ment came into office. For the period that theY were in office prior to the referendum in May, l917-a period of about two years­we pa:- ed somethin<?: like sixty-eight measures. The GoYernment, right up to the present time. have bE'm biking to the people on platform and through the Press, and telling them what democratic :end beneficent legis­lation has become law. Everybody knowe that not one of those Bills could have become law without the ~onsent of this Council. It is quite evident tha.t, in passing those sixty­eight Bills, this Council were not acting as obstructionists.

Hon. R. BEn.-mm: You vourself said vou did not understand the \Vo'rkers' Compensa­tion Act.

Hm:. P. J. LEAHY: I said nothing of the sort.

Hon. R. BEDFORD: One of your side did.

Hox. P. J. LEAHY: There is no side here; it is every man for himself, and all in the intermts of the countr:.-. Admitting that there has been beneficent legislation passed, it could not have been paeJecl without the will of the members of the C'ouncil. Those things that we did not pass were not unrea­sonably opposed by this Chrrmber. In fact, I think wo hrrve acted upon this principle right through-that whenever a Bill was wholly

good-on the rare occasions when there was such a Bill-we passed that with the greatc,t possible despatch; and whenever there were bad elements in the Bill we honestly en­deavoured to eliminate those provisions and put in their place good provisions. Any person who is not blinded by prejudice, partisanship, and that party &pirit which is rampant at the pruent time, both inside and outside Parliament, would recognise that in nearly all the Bills-if not all of them­the amendments that this Council made have tended to the improvement of the Bills and to the smoother working of their provisions.

Hon. R. BEDFORD: Nonsense. You killed the State Enterpl'isc' Bill.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I am willing to take that State Enterprise,; Bill in support of my argument; because, as a matter of fact, ,., hm that Bill left this Cha.mber it was a much more ;vorkable measure than when it was introduced.

Hon. R. BEDFORD: You say so .

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: Ought not the Hon. Mr. Bedford to kno" that political control throup:hout Australia has alwa} s been a failure? Does not he know what took plac-e in Xcw South \Vales, South Australia, and other placcJ where they haYe taken on State c•nterprises? Does not he know, on the oviden<:n "'iven before the Sel0d Committ<1e laf.t ;·par.b that. in moct of the cnterprises carried o'n by the State Government they w,•re losing money? Ought not he to know that the onh- wav in which to make those things sw· 'e:sful 'is ~o run then; a~ n<;arly as po"ible on the hnes on whlCh busmess n1cn run their busine;,.es?

Hon. R. BEDFORD: Does the Commissioner make the railways pay?

IIo:\. l'. J·. LEAI-IY: The Commissioner did for the twel.-e months prior to the precent GoYernment coming into office. For the t';·el.-e mouths eLrling 30th June. 1915, during ten months of whic l, the !.ate Go.-er~· m.ent were in r, nver, th0se ra1l•yays 1;a1d interc;.t and \vorking expenses. Ever since the present GoYPrnment came into po":er. with their persistent endea;-ours to brn;.g political con_trol to bear upon the qommls­sioncr. not\nthstandmg tho mcrc~.sc .m fares and freights in the country drstncts, the railways have been gett.ing worse and wm:se, until, at the present tnne, they are losmg nearlv £1,001;,000 annuallY.

Hon. R. BEDI'ORD : The men are not svveated, anyhow. They \.Vere under your regime.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I do not want to go through the whole list of Bills that this Chamber has pa>oed or :1-mended. I content myself with repeating this stakment-that not ono of those Bills could have been passed without the consent of this Chamber; and wherever a Bill was lost it was because there was something inherently bad in the Bill, or because the " other place" unreason· ablv refused the o,ensible and moderate am~nclments we phoed in them.

Hon. W. J. RIORDAN: It was against the .-ested interests that you represent.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: We hear something about vested interests. The Hon. Mr. Sum· ner also said something about vested interests. We, on the other si-de, where I sit-we must pay " side" for the sake of

Hon. P .. T. Leahy.]

3158 Constitution Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

conveniencc~do not represent vested in­terests. How many hon. members are there here who stand for vested interests?

Hon. E. H. PuRNELL : The whole lot of you.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: Well, take myself a,; an instance. What does the hon. gentle­men . think I stand for? I am not a pas· torahst. I do not represent any monopoly company. Everything I possess in the world I represent by myself without any control from other people. I am just as inde· pendent. of the pastoralists, or of tramway compames, or of any other companies as any hon. gentleman opposite.

Hon. R. BEDFORD: Is that whv you are so strongly against State insurance and so strongly for private insurance? That was the reoult of your actions.

HoN. P. ;1. LEAHY: I am not against State imurance. It cannot be said that mv actions in this Chamber have at any time ~nen in the direction of assisting vested mtercsts. The same can be said of every hon. mGmber on this side. vV e are animated by only one desire, and that is to do what we think best for the best interests of the country.

_Hon. ~- BEDFORD : Subject to your uncon­scious bws.

HoN. P. J. :LEAHY: It i~ quite possible that even the hon. gentleman is not free from that. He probably possesses it to a very much greater degree than we do. I ~ant to scotch the idea at once that there Is anything on this side of the Chamber ~hat stands for vested interests. If vested u::terp,t,, are attacked unfairlv-if this Go­vernrne'!t try to rob them of something they are entitled to-then hon. members in this Chamber would fail in their duty if the"l" did not protect those vested interests, just as they would protect the intere•,ts of "the poorest person in the community.

Hon. W. J. RroRDAN: You tried to elimi­nate preference of unionists from the Indus­trial Arbitration Act.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: If there is one thing that I have done since I came into this Cham­ber of which I feel more proud than of another, it is the part I took in attempting to de~troy preference, because I claim that pre­ference should not be given to any man or any class. This Chamber did not intend to grant preferencf>, but unfortunately there was no appeal from the Arbitration Court on that question. That is not anything that I have reason to be ashamed of. It is something rather that I have reason to be proud of. H?n. members opposite do not stand for fair play. They stand for preference for their friends.

Hon. H. C. JOXES: \Ve don't take any notice of what you say.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I would not expect th~ hon. gentleman to take notice of any­thmg: opposed . to his own political views. But 1 f a man IS to do useful political work, he should not have the narrow mind that the h~n. meml:_>er I:as. He should have an open mmd, w]uch IS prepared to receive fach a_nd consider arguments, as we do on this s1de. I re:r_nember last year when the Hon. Mr. CourtiCe gave some arguments about the sugar question, as the hon. member had a knowledge of the subject that I do not

[Hon. P. J. Leahy.

possess, his arguments impressed me so much that on one occasion I voted with him. Does that indicate that we have not got free minds on this side? Has .any hon. member on the other side ever voted with hon. members on this side?

Hon. R. BEDFORD : You onlv show that you had a free mind on that· day. There should be a statue put up to that day.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I am not in the habit of changing my mind without reason. I am reasonably consistent-much more so than the hon. gentleman.

Hon. R. BEDFORD again interjected.

The PRESIDE~T: Order ! I must ask the Hon. Mr. Bedford not to interrupt the Hon. Mr. Leahy.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I was not going to· devote any attention to the Hon. Mr. Bed­ford, but, as he is rather persistent in inter­j eating, I think I may refer to some parts of his speech. I have read the whole of that speech carefully-I cannot say with pleasure.

Hon. R. BEDFORD : Pleasure is very foreign to you, I admit.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I think I enjoy life as much as most hon. members. Certainly I do not "look upon the wine when it is red." Still, I take a drink occasionally. I smoke­I suppose, on th<> principle that a man must have some redeeming vice. I may say that, after reading the whole thirteen columns of " Hansard" that were taken up by the Hon. Mr. Bedford's speech, I did not find one argument that could be considered as a justi­fication for abolishing this Chamber. The hon. gentleman dipped into the archives of the p:1st. He told us wmething of "·hat happened hundreds of years ago.

Hon. R. BEDFORD : Plato and Aristotle are not of yesterday.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: No; but they have no particular bearing on the position to-day in Queensland. The hon. gentleman told us something about the House of Lords fifty or a hundred years ago. But there is very little comparison between the House of Lords and this Chamber, bec.mse the House of Lords is an hereditarv Chamber. The father may be an excellent· man, but the con may be a fool ; and, even if he is a fool, he has a seat in the House of Lords. I do not intend to justify the House of Lord·,. I do not intend to justify any House where a seat is passe cl on from father to son. If any of the hon. gentleman's arguments did apply with some degree of force to the House of Lords, they do not apply to a Chamber like this. whose members are appointed for life, and where the conditione are different.

Hon. R. BEDFORD: They are on all-fours, because both <.re going for abolition.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: It is all very well for the hon. gentleman to assume the role of a prophet, although I may say he does not look at all like a prophet. I might remind him of some lines b0 an Au ·tralian poet. where he described the modern prophet, and you would "]most imagine that he had taken thr Hon. Mr. BPdford as his model. Refer­ring to a man who was " both sleek and fat,'' ho said-

" Ephraim, is it fleoh or spirit You must strive to save?"

One statement the hon. member made was that the veto on the legislation brought in

Constitution Act [16 OCTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 3159

bv the Government rests with hon. members in this Chamber. Now, I say, and it is impossible for anyone to contradict me, that all we on this side can do is to delay l<'gis­lation, because, under the Parli&mentary Bills Referendum Act of 1908, any Bill that we reject twice can be put to the people within a few months, if the Government choose to submit it to them; so that we have no final veto at all. All we can do is to delay, and delay very often is a good thing, because it gives the people an oppor­tunity of exercisir,g their sound second judg­ment on the matter, and probably of coming to a bdtDr and wiser conclusion than they would if thev had given their decision in moments of passion or excitement.

Hon. W. R. CRAMPTON : The Government could not submit all the measures you have mutilated or rejected. to the people.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: There is not any occasion to refer every measure to the people. Have I not pointed out that in two years we have passed sixty-eight Bills?

Hon. \V. R. CRBIPTON: You sEoy you sent back sixty-eight measures in a mutilated condition.

HoN. P .. J. LEAHY: The hon. gentleman is entirely wrong. Those Bills became law. After we had passed those Bills and done various other things the Government took a referendum, and the people were so e.~tisfied with our action during those two years that they gave us the lEorgest majority ever given to any party in Que,msland. What did that triumphant endorsement mean? It meant that the people said to us: "You have done well in the past. Contin1.1e to do the same in the future."

Hon. R. BEDFORD : You are a great trans­lator.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I say we recPived a mandate from the people in May, 1917, to pursue the same policy of wise amendment and occasional rejection that we had been carrying on for the two years before that referendum took place. It <·annat be disputed that the people endorsed our action. Now, I put this question to hon members: Have we since that referendum took pl,;,ce in May, 1917, departed from the line of action we had been pursuing for the previous two years? I say we have not; and, if we have, then is it not logical to assume that we still posse.-' the confidence of the people, inasmuch as we an3 doing just what \Ve were doing during the two years on which the people pronounced judgment?

Hon. R. BEDFORD: Prove it by resigning en bloc.

Hon 'L'. M. HALL: That is what we want you to do.

Hox. P. J. LEAHY: Most of us on this side take politin seriously. \V e do not come into t'lis Chamber to remain here for a brief period until we see a chance of getting a seat in the Ar-sembly with £300 a year, and then resigning our seat on the promise that we shall be reappointed if we are defeated.

Hon. R. BeDFORD: You would not get any promis0 like that. The people who appointed you are dead.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: The hon. gentleman said in his speech-and this is very important -in fact, I was rather astonished to find

anything so wise emanating from the hon. gentleman-

" In everv m&n there is a sense of oppression·_:the desire to oppress when strong enough. It is human nature."

\Vhat is true of a man is equally true of a party, r,nd more so when it becomes a ques­tion of tyranny. According to the hon. gen:lcman, in every man there is this desire to oppress. Is there not a stronger desire on the part of a body of men like the hon. member's friends, driven by outside organi­sniion', to attempt to oppress other people? And 'is not that the stronge•·t reason why ther<' should be another Chamber-to prevent the hon. gentleman's friends from carrying out this natural desire to oppr~· s other people?

Hon. R. BEDFORD : Do you say we are driven by outside organiFations?

HoN. P .. J. LEAHY: Of course, I do. Hon. R. BEDfORD : That is untrue. The PRESIDENT: Order!

HoN. R. BEDFORD: I rise to a point of order. I would like to know if the hon. gentleman and hon. memb0rs opposite are in order in continually saying that we are driven by outside organisations?

The PRESIDENT: The hon. gentleman '' ould not be in ordt r in making such a sktement. The same accusations come from both sides at times. It is distinctlv out or order to sa.:v that any hon. member is driven by outside organisations.

HoN. P. ,J. LEAHY: I do not know that I said that. What I had in my mind was that the Government were driven by this outside organisation.

Hon. R. BEDFORD : You said we were.

Ho~, P. ,J. LEAHY: Well, I was speak­ing generally.

Hon. '1'. M. HALL (to Hon. Mr. Bedford) : You said :vou came hero plod!J·ed to abolish tht, Council. Who told ;;-ou to abolish it?

Thr, PH.ESIDE-:'\T: OrdGr !

Ho~. P. J. LRAHY: I repeat that the present Government are driven by an outside organisation, but they Me not members of this Chamber. Tho hon. member <)vidently desires to get me off the track, because he knowJ I am on sound ground; but m'. point is that there is a large party of men banded together who hav<; even a f!"reater desire to opprt '" than is the case with a single man; and. if we had not " second Ch,mber and Wf' had that kind of party in power with this desire to oppress, which, according to the hon. gentlemrrn, is so natuml, then what is f!"Oing to happen to the minority in the country?

Hon. R. BEDFORD : They are corrected every three years by the people.

He;. P. J. LEAHY: Lots of things could be done in three years. Then af!"a!ll, what evidence have we got that, if there were onlv 01 o Chamber, the pe0ple would be given an oppornmity of passing judgment on the Government every three years? I shall come to that presently. The Hon. Mr. Bedford in this statement of his has given one of the strongest reasons why there should be a second Chamber, and thd is to pr<;vent an autocratic exercise of power by any d~minant party and to protect the rights of minoritieq, Then agam, the hon. gentleman

Hon. P. J. Leahy.l

3160 r'onstitution Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

said-" All legiB!utir,n must be class legisla­tion." \V ell, IS that not another argument for a second C:kn:nber--f.o prevent sach claF' legislation from gc•ing- too far·: If I had anything to do with conducting a campaign to put the case for tlw •·<Jntinuanee of th" Council before the clccL:Jr>, I do net know that I could do better tlmn q1wte the hon. gentleman's speech. I asked him by inter­jection, when he was spcJ-king, ,vhether he int~nded to take part in the c~mpaign, and he said "Yes," and I replied, "In that case the Council nwst certainly win." The hon. gentleman further said that he and his friends reprc,ontcJ 35 per cent of the people of Austra.Iia. If that is so, how does it happen that they had onlc• a majority of 5 Dcr cPnt. or 6 per cent. of those who voted in- ;\I arch last?

I shall give just one more quotation. The hon. gentleman s<tys that here privilege is fighting for mon~y. Does any hon. gentle­

man on this 'ide of the House [4.30 p.m.] value mOiJey more highly than

the Hon. Mr. Bedford? Is not making money a worthy object, and would not making money 11lease the hon. gentle­man as much as it would please anyone eJ,c? This Chmnbor does not consider money h,;gs for one moment in its discharge of it~ pul:lic dutiP,;.

Hon. E. B. PL"RNELL: \Ve have watched you for the last twenty year~ ; we know you.

HoN. P .. J. LEAHY: I hav., not been in this Cham bcr for twenty years.

Hon. E. B. Pt:R:<:EL!,: Your class, I mean.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I cnuld go on at some further length if I chose, quoting from the hon. gentle111an',... speech, but al! his stde­menb are equally absurd, and further quota­tion is unnec<;ssary. From the quotations I have. giYen, hon. gentlen1en can form their own conclusions. The hon. gentleman, how­ever, had a good word to say for this Legis­lative Council. He said he pref0rred it to the Legislative Council of Victoria, and that is some compliment to this Chamber. Are we singular in Queensland in having two Chambers? Does not the hon. gentleman Imm: that ev0ry Sbto in Australia, as well as Tasmania ·and New 7.:caland, has two Oh"mbers, and that th<: Federal Parliament consists of two Cham hors? Two of those Chambers are elective, and the others are nominee \hambcr,. Doo'' not the hon. gentleman concede tha+ the nominee Cham­bers arc quih 'k good as the elective Chambers? \Vould the hon. gentleman wipe out every second Chamber in existence?

Hon. R. BEDFORD : Yes

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: Let us consider what th<:> answer of the hon. gentleman means. The hon. gentleman practically condemns the people of every civilised country in the worl-d who have two Chambers. They must he• wronc--, her ~use the Hon. ;\Ir. Bedford says ;;:o.

Hon. R. BEDFORD : The people of England are iping out th" House of Lords; that is in the Liberal programme.

Ho:<:. P. J. LEAHY: If they are going to do that, it is only with the view of substi­tuting something else. 'When we find that a certain system is univerBal amongst civi­lised neople, surely we must come to the con­olusion that there is something to be sai-d in favour of that system. I think it was the great Mr. Gladet<:me who sai-d that Jt is a

[Hon. P. J. Leahy.

mi .. tako to break too much fr,Jm the paot. The Hon. Mr. Bedford and his friends woul-d break from; the past, and hreak up everything. I v,onder they do not emigrate to Russia, where they would have an opportunity of putting their views into operation. If we look at America, the greatec·t democracy in the world, we iind that every one of the States in that countrv has a 'econd Chamber. Memberq opposite ,~-ould destroy ali those second Chambers. The Fe-deral Govemment of America has also two Houses. If we take Can~tda, which is a place that the hon. gentle­man a •1d his friends rof<•r to in support of their contention--

Hen. R. BEDFORD : Do you defend the Commonwealth Senate, which is a duplicate of the House of Representatives?

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I am not dealing with !hat particular question just now. We aro frequently told that in several of the Canadian States or Provinces there is no second Chamber. Th.1t ir; what may be described as a lie which is part a truth, and a great poet once aid th•'li'-

., A lie which is part a truth is ever the blackc ,t of lies."

Hon. R. BEDFORD: "What poet said that?

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: I think it was Lorx:l Tenm iOn who said that, but probably the hon. gent1oman has not read hirn, as he is so high ckl's. Some of the Cnna,di.cn States have two Houses, and in the two or three Canadian Provinces where there are not two Housh the Federal Government exercise a veto over the State Ler;islation. and acts as n second Hou,c, so th'1t pcadicnlly ,·very StMo in Canada has a second Chamber. Take uny other country you like, and what do you find? Take Fro.nce, which hr.s a long and noble history behind it. There may hava been one brief period in the past when they did not have a secon<l Chamber, but nearly all the time thev have had a second Chamber, and they do n;t think of doing a>~ay with thoir second Chamber. The Hon. Mr. Bed­ford, I suppose, knows what is the late-st and newest Constitution in the world.

An HOKOURABLE ME}fBER: Mexico.

Ho~. P. J. LEAHY: No; I should say there is no operative Constitution at all m l\Icxico.

An HONOURABLE ME}!BER: Yes, there is, and a very good one, too.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: It does not work very v:ell, an: how. If hon. members oppo­site and their friends could do away with the Upper House in .'l.ustralia, I chould expect to see in Austwlia the condition of things which has existed in Mexico for the last five or six vr·ars. The late't Constitu­tion in the world, though it has not for cer­tain reasons yet been put into operation, is Le ConstituLon of "The Home• Rule Parliament for Ireland." It would have been put into oneration before now but for the war, and I~ sincerely trust that it will soon come into operation. '.rhat Constitution pro:vides for two Houses, and the second Chamber is not an elective Chamber. The Irish people and the Irish party wanted t---o Houses. and does thC' hon. gentle'n"n mean to tell me that the Irish people "re nnprog-rc sive e.nd do not know ,,-hat i-' good for them, or that th<>y must come to the hon. ~rentl0rnan for '' dvice? The Irish people love lihcrtv as dearlv as any people in the world, and· have bled and

C'on~titution Act [16 OCTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 3161

fought for it. They desire to have a second {,hamber, practically the same kind of second Chamber as that which exists in Queensland to-day.

Hon. R. BEDFORD: Thev have had no form of government for 700 years, and they are prepared to take any.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: The bun. gentleman is talking nonsense. The party led by John Redmond, who, unfortunately, is now dead, could have had a one-Chamber Parlia.ment inFtead of a two-Chamber Parliament, but they "ould not accept a one-Chambc·r Legis­lature. They had their choice, and they took the two-Chambm· Legislature. The Irish people «re willing to aceept that, thouo-h a certain section of the people in Ulster have OD)Josed horn•' rule, not because the:ll objed to two Chambers, but because they are opposed to <my form of a Constitution for Ireland. The l'onstitution is ono favoured by tlw Briti-ch Government and approved bv the lat:• Mr. John Redmond and his f;·iends. There is no question that the people 'vrnt this form of Upper House. and have a bul'!lin:>; desire to get their Parlia­mf'nt as soon as the;\~ can.

Hon. \V. ,J. RrmmAx: Ycm are libelling tlw Ird1 people in saying that.

HoK. P. J. LE'I.HY: I am not libelling tho Iri-:h pPople. I say the people know what they want a great dcal better than the hocL gentleman, and thev want a two­{'hambu- Legielature. I should like to m. ntion a f0w of the things that would be nry lik<>ly to happen to this countrv if hon. gentlemen opposite and their friC>,ds had undi,puted ~ontrol ovnr a one-Chamber Pr.rliamcnt.

Hon. R. BeDFORD: Is this pro~Jhecy?

Hox. P. J. LEAHY: It is not prophecy, but 1t '" clam r•.-asonmg. I do not know "hether +he hon. gentleman ever studied Euclid. I should imagin<' th,t he ha, not, beral'sr Euclid demonsnrate;; one of the finc··t S' ,b·ms of reasoning in the world. 'J1h0 :infc~rcnr" which I propo_~c to dr,nv i"' one whir 1

l .anyonC' can dravv jnst as clearly a-; you can dra\v a conclusion .fron1 ~oln"­thing taid down in Euclid. First of all th-re might be no Auditor-General. Per: l'ap- there might be an Auditor-Gencl'al, bnt th8rO would bo no Audit,or-Gcnercd rHpon_,iblc to both Houses of Parliament. He would be the mere creature of the partY managn·s. Do hon. gentlemen suppose that in that case we should get the trenchant criticisms of s0n1.e of the "wild-rat" sche.rnes of the Government that we haYe in the reports of the present Auditor-General? Nothing of the kind. Again, though we have n_ow a. ve~:;· capable hench of judges, whose mtegnty 1s absolutely above eusnirion. in the cour. e of time we might have ·judges who would be responsible to their ma-.ters. '\Ve should go ba~k to something like ·Nhat hap­pened in the times of Charles and other kings, ' hen judg-es were the mere creatures of the Crown. The District Court judges and the La.nd Court judges would not have the pro­tection of two Hous?s of Parliament. and it. would be possibl" to bring prepo.urc to bear Uf.8n thorn, and I have no doubt that if a Labour Government were in power. and it suited them to do ·--o, thev w mld bring- preo;sur<' to be'lr upon the' judges. Another thing I should like to remind hon. members about is the possibilitv of the repudiation of contracts made' by the

Government. vVe know that repudiation is in the air in certain parte- of Australia at the pr:·•·nt time. Some attempts have been mad•' at repudiation in this Chamber, and many of the frie-nds outside of hon. gentle­men opposite have b;en talking of repudiat­ing the publi:: debt. As long as there is a second Chamber in Queen.•land thr· public debt cannot be repudiated. nut if there were no second Chamber here, "'h&t would thC'l'e be to pr·event hon. gentlemen from bringing in a Bill Baying that all such things are hereb:: abolished? :\'one of th·· se things can take place as long as the public enjoy the protection of this Chamber. A great many Labour men-I sp•-ak of genuine Labour men with re •spect, but I am rei er­ring nov;~ to 1nen \.vho Ina·,quera.de as Labour n1en-ha\~e quite a"'· much selfishnc'>s as tbo average 1nan. r:I'h0y want all the ITlOtlCY they can get in the "ay of salary or in any other wa'.. In ""ew South \Vales Rome three years n <J~O members of the Assen1bly "\\·ere r.- ·:eiving £300 a \ear. r~rhc Labour Go-vPrn­ment hen in power. supported by the or ;anisations outside, brought in a Bill to increase member.;' salaries to £50<') per annum. The Legislative Council, a nominee Chamber, threw out that measure. In the course of tin1e yac.Jncies occurred in the Council, and the Labour Government were cntitlPd in hvo or three Yf~ar·, to norninah~ onou::;h mcn1bcrs to giv·e" them a majority in the IIous(l. As soon f'S th<',"' got th·,t majority in the 'Upper Houce, they eent up the Bill incroasin~ the ;,a]aries of memb.rs of th<> LP!.dslative Asscmb!v to £f(\0 a vcar, and the }3ill vras pa'·ded, 8.nd n1crnbcrS ~ao no\v ge1-ting £500 per annum.

An Ho:>OURABLE MnrBER: Do you think t:."t is too much?

Hox. P. J. LEI..HY: I thi11k £300 is not enough for some men. and that £,30 a :>·ear would be too much for others. nut the point I wish to m:1kc is that there would be absold:J, no limit to the Blarie, which members' of the Assembly might fix for them;,olves. if thoro ,,_-a< onh- one Chamb<>r. lni'tc·ld of havirg sevcuty-b\O n1:'n1ber;{ me .t of whor1 dr,,w £300 a "·ear, with civht :\Iinicters "'ho are paid £1.000 a ~-car, we --hould prohabk have seven] more 1\lini:;­ters, each drawin'T £2,000 a .vcar. and the nwmbc1 drawing from £800 to £1,000 per ;,rmum. Then, again, there are one or two inst:Llh.'ns in bygone history in vvhich mem­bers actually propcJccd-and, I think, in one c:,se acted upon the suggestion-h increase th•, life of the Parliament. Hon. gentle­men opposite talk about three years. If there were on!- " single Chamber, what i, to stop them increasing its duration to fLvc : "-.:ar~. or twcnt::;: years, or eYcn longer? These thing·, can never happen while there is another Chamber constituted as this i.. I do not wonder that hon. gentlemen opposite are aga'inst a second Chamber when it is the only thing that stands between them and the opportunity of becoming rich beyond the dreams of aYarice. If the people wru-e cYer fooli·'h enough to abolish this Chamber, ancl the other Chamber became firmly en­trenched, the only way in which you could remove it ,,·ould be bv a revolution. History is full of instances of countrih where there y "s only one Chamber, or where there was collusion bdween the two Chambers, and members remained in office longer than they ought, and they had to be shifted by revolution. History repeats itself, and, probably, some day, if we have a single

Hon. P. J. Leal<Y-1

31G3 C'onstitution Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

Ch.1mber here with these hon. gentlemen in f C\\"('1'. tile only reinedy .wi1l be .1'0 L€-'~ort tc the extreme stop cf using physical force t0 dislodge them from their entrenchments. \Vc are people of law and order, who believe in doing things reasonably.

Hon. E. B. P-cRKELL: Would you lead the revolution?

Hon. R. BEDFORD: From the rear.

Hox. P. J. LEAHY: I would not be prepared to say all revolutions are wrong. There have been some in the history of the world that were right. I believe that a revolution under these circumstances would. be a just revolution, and I would be glad to participate in it. I take it for granted that ther€' is a sufficient number of intelligent members in this House to defeat this Bill on the second reading ; that is how I am going to vote. It will come before the people in due course. If this Bill is put honestly before the people, if the people are not told lies from the Press, the platform, and in otho- wa.ye, I am convinced that the people will fLgain give a large majority in favour of this Chamber.

Hon. E. B. PFRNELL: It was not put honestly last time.

Hox. P. J. LEAHY: Yes, it was. There is always a danger that more or leso un­scrupulous men-I am not referring to hon. members herf'; I would be out of order in doing so-will make use of public money, and so ~listort and misrepresent things in putting it to the public that the honest and unbiassed judgment of the public may be swayed. Only in the likelihood of such a thin'\ being done do I think there is any possibility of the people reversing their judgment. However, I have sufficient con­fidence in the intelligence of the electors to believe that they will se0 through the mis­statements and the sophistry of the Hon. Mr. Bt•dford and some of his friends, and, if the case is put befor,o them honestly and fairly, I am confident that they will again give a. vote which will be a triumphant vindication and approval of the action of this Council.

Hox. H. LLEWEL YN: I wish to support the Bill now before the Council. I have my own particular reasons for believing in the abolition of this Council. Long before I came to this rountry-thirty-one years ago­I "·as a. believer in the abolition of the House of LmJs. Certain things have con­spired since I came to this counti'y to justify my position at the present time in regard to the abolition of this Chamber. In 1895 this Council rejected the Early Closing Bill.

Hon. E. \V. H. FoWLES: This Government would not face it last session.

Ho". H. LLEWEL YN: I will give the remarks of the Hon. Mr. Gray with regard to the Early Closing Bill. They appear at page 1420, volume 74, of " Ha,ncard" for 1895, and road-

" I agree with the last speaker that there has been so much said for and a,nimt the Bill that there is little left to be added. I may say, however, that if the Bill becomes law it "·ill hamper trade in all the side -treets, it will depre­ciqte property, and it will create friction bclweon employer and employee. In Brisbane at the present moment many of the shopkeepers are dependent to a

[Hon. P. J. Leahy.

very large extent on the trade after 6· o'clock in the evening, and we all know that in many cases . it takes them ~ll their time to pay their way. If the Bill were put in force it would have the effect of closing many of those shops, an4 c~m­sequent upon that would be depreciatiOn of property. As regards the friction between employers and employees, I think the Government have had enough labour troubles during their term of office, and I am surprised at their intr?­during a Bill which can only result m creating a friction which had far better· be avoided."

Through the persistence of those men who were agitating for the betterment of the· conditions of the employees, eventually . an Early Closing Bill was passed. I thmk hon. members on the other side of the House will realise that the Early Closing Bill was a very good BilL This Chamber has always objected to a wider local. gow'rnmen~ fran­chise. I listened very patiently last mght t.o· what the Hon. Mr. Davey had to say. His one text was " government by the people and for tbe people." Yd the hon. gentlem:m would reject a measure where the franchise \Yas extended to embrace adult suffrage for local government elections. I ~hink t.he administration of our local govermng bodws 1vill be far better if voting were the same as for the Commonwealth and State Parlia­ments. All the arguments now being used against the broadening of the local govern­ment franchise were used bv the Conserva­tives years ago in regard to. the parlian;en­tary franchise. It is not many years si;rce the people had very little sa;v in the malm;g­·and unmaking of Parliaments. Even m England at the present time the franc~ise is a farce. It has been said tha.t the Liberals in the old countrv have adopted a plank providing for the· abolition of the Upper House. 1 do not see very much in it, because the Labour party at home are p_ushing ~he Liberals fonvard. The more Radical sectwn has been advocating the abolition of the House of Lords for the last fifty ye.ars. Now the Liberals have ta.ken it up because of the great democratic effort put forward by the Labour party. I will read what Michael Davitt said about the House of Lords. In his "Leaves from a Pri"on Diary," published in 1885, volume ii., page 146. he says-

" For unsidcr the Constitution of the British Parliament. There is, to begin with. the House of Peer.~, concern!ng­which it is not necessarv to sav anythmg further than that it probably captains more bigots, ignoramnscs, profh.ga~es, and good-for-nanghts than any Similar acscm blv in the civilised world. These poor Peers haYe been reared in the amaz­ing delusion that thev are the salt of the earth, and conscious, as many of them must be, of how savourless tl_rey arc, what can we expect them t'? thmk of the miserable creatures who, m rela­tion to t.hem, are mt>rely the earth? But what is the use of talking about this uttrrlv ,,-orthle~s, meaningless anachronism.? }la:. one not RS well ~'xpect to make a silk purse out of a .. ow's car as hope to obtain the co­operation of this assembly in thP enact­ment of anv real reform? Indeed, take it altogetl1er. is it pos~iblo for the human mind to conceive a more thoroughly and e'!'h.austively st.upi? i~sti­tution? Its etup1d1ty as an mstrtution,

Constitution Act [16 OCTOBER.] 3163

however, does not mean that all its members are stupid. Many of the Peers, indeed. arc men of exceptional gifts and splendid attainments. Man for man, perhaps, of those who take active part in the business of government, the Peers have not the worst of it. Unhappily, thee·" men, who are better than the institution, are its bulwark. And thev are astute enough to know that there i's scarcely any institution, short of the Crown, which is more secure than the House of Lords. It is in the presence of these exceptional men, therefore, that the obstructive power of the House of Peers chiefly consists. X ext, ther0 is the fact that nearly 200 Peers are direc!ly inhcrc,ted in the army and navy; while nearly, if not quite all, the Peers are indirectly interest0d in these ser­vices. Then it seems that sixtv Peers are ase>ociated with as many as ll4 railways, as chairmen of directors. while manv more are deep!~ interectecl not only as chairmen of directors. but as share­holders, in many hundreds of great com­rrlcrcial entorprlses. ''

There are three points I have alwavs believed in. I have always been a strOilg supporter of a land tax on unimproved land values. the extension of the adult suffrage franchise to local govc>rnments, and th,, abolition of the House of Lordo. Yesterdav, in the '• Dailv Mail." there was a para­graph roferring to the new members who had been nominated to this House bv the present Government; and it was ,stated that some of them wcTe halting between two opinions in rpgard to the abolition of the Fpper House. I wish to say that I am not one of those. I believe that this House should be abolic•.hed, because it is a brake on all pr'!grcssive legislation, and anything of a radw1! nature coming from the othel' House to this House, I believe, to eome extent, is mutilated, so that it has not the effect it otherwise would have.

Hon. E. W. H. FowLES: Would vou ride in a motor-cctr without. a brake? '

Ho:-~. H. LLEWELYN: :'>Jo, I would nob. The Council is a br,ke on all progressive legislation, and the time has come when it i·· not necessary or essential to the pro­gress of OLlr 8tate. I think it is an encum­brance on the State. Every constituenC.'' now, before> electing a member, tests him ill many ways. He is an intelligent person, he knows what he has to do, and he does it. \Vhen seventy-two members can produce a Bill, that is sufficient for that Bill to become law. There are men of cverv shade of thought in the House. The time has com0 whori all Upper Houses must be abolished, end WB will bo like the Bulgarians. who have only one House. Although they have been our enemies, that is not a rea:-::on for saying that cerbin of the principles they have adopted are not rig-ht. The sooner this Hom;e is abolishBd, the better it will be for democracy in Queensland and Australia.

The Hon. Mr. Bedford has referred to the Commonwealth. Evervone knows that at one particular election the Labour party got every seat in the Senate in Queensland.

There was not one Liberal re­[5 p.m.] turned. So what is the use of

these two Houses when there are parties? 'They meet together and discuss the various questions. A Bill passes the Lower House and then it is sent to the Senate. What is the use of that? It is all

a party measure, and the party would not do anything detrimental to its representa­tives in the other House. The same thing: would occur if you had an elective House here. I think one House is best, and pro­gressive legislation will certainly make great st.rides when we have one House.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : I do not pro­pose to delay the House very long with regard to the measure now before us. One could wish that it could be discussed without any reference to such pet phrases a' "vested interests" or "bloated capitalists," or "the will of the people."

Hon. R. SUliiNER: You don't like that, do you?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Those who. have nothing else in their heads but pet phrases, which stand for nothing, are en­titled to use them. They suit very well the street corner, but they are not suitable for an a<sembly of business men. Queensland is getting tired of being governed by camouflage.

Hon. W. J. RroRDAN : Governed by the Upper House!

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Queensland is getting sick of government of that kind.

Hon. \V. J. RIORDAN: Yes, very sick of this House!

Hon. G. PAGE-HANIFY: Don't you think the second Uhamber lends itself to that?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Not to camou­flage at all. \Ve are quite prepared to trust the common sense of the people on all matters. I trusted them on 5th May of last year, and I am not going to insult the people of Queensland, like hon. gentlemen opposite, by saying that they did not under­stand the voting paper. 'I'hey quite under­stood what they were voting about, and they gave a majority of 60,000 in favour of this .tlouse; and, when the matter goes before them ·again, the intelligent people of Queens­land will have further arguments and stronger arguments for retaining this Council rather than handing over the Government to the tyranny of a star chamber. I do not intend to indulge in any phrases about " re­actionary old Tories"-hon. gentlemen who say thor are reactionary old Tories at the present time ought to be medically examined.· As a matter of fact, men like the late lamented Lord Forrest were as far removc:x:l from the Tories of other countries as th& poles are wide apart.

Hon. H. LLEWELY~: Sir Gcorge Reid represented the most ConsPrvative seat in England.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: Quite so; but Sir George Rcid was not a Tory. And Lord Forrest was not a Tory. They were Empirte-builders, and the people recognised them as great master minds of the Empire. The \'Otb of the people are. quite sound, and thev know where thev are voting; and there ha\:0 been enough reasons' in the legislation of the present se"'ion to cause any intelligent voter who happened to vote by mistake fol' the abolition of this House on the last occa­sion, to change his mind. If you point a telescope at the political horizon of thEY world to-day you will find it is not a matter so much of republics, or kings, or anything like that which makes for good government. It is a matter of finding out the middle way to progres,. \Ve do not v. ant democracy to

Hon. E. W. H. Fowlr::s.]

[COL'l\CIL.] Amendment Bill.

be crucified between two thieves. That is what democracy is suffering from m many '"otmtries at the present time.

Hon. T. :VI. HALL: \\'hat-thieves !

Hox. E. W. I-I. FOWLES: We want to avoid the extremists on both sides. This .Council 'tand. for the steadying of legisla­tion. \Ye have no extremists here, and the people have every possible pov.'er 110'' that we ha 1 e th0 Parliamentary Bills Referendum "\et of 19C' . Neither the other House nor this House can withstand the will of the peopl?. If the other House had an atom of courau· inst0ad of their weak-kneed political tyranny. and, if they stood up to what they say. they conld havE" put half-a-dozen B1lls which have been rejecte.d by this Chamber to the people. But they were afraid to put one, bee an -e thev saw the attitude of this f'ounc:J "as absolute!:; endorsed. I wish we could roncluct thiJ debate without "Ran­surd'' or the Pros·, or even the rPpresenta­tivc,, of the Trade, Hall being pre•,ent, so that e cery member-shall I say on both sid -might be absolutely free to express his Dpinions.

Hou. \Y. J. RIORD.\X: Then vou are not free? "

IIox. E. \Y. H. FO\VLES: I am absolutely unfcttcrC'd. and for what it is worth I will expres•; my opinion-that, if the quec,tion of the abolition of this Chamber were put before th~ people of Quecmsland with no other alternative they would vote strong!:" in favour of the retention of this House. I think that is the best interpretation of the wish of the p~o;ll<'. On the other hand, if you put the qm 'it ion before them : " Shall we continue to appoint members to this House on exactlv the same basis a·' at the pre"'nt tin1e rm~l P"-Y them nothing?" I am of the opinion that a majority of the people of Queensland-pcrhaps a small majorit0·-will ,·ate for some reform in the method of appointment.

Hon. G. S. CuRTIS: Some alteration. It mi"ht not be rcfnrm at all.

HoN. E. vV. H. FOWLES: Some altera­tions-perhaps by a-dopting the New Zealand six years, !hP Victorian six years, and the South Australian six years.

ThP SECRETARY FOR MIXES: On what fran­ohise?

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: I have the franchise he,·e for eve>r.J St~e in Australia.

Hon. T. ::\EVI1T: The Minieter wants to know •shat franchisp you sugg<>o.t?

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLJ<~S: 1 will cut it short. Tbo hon. gentleman must trust me to cgive what is fair.

Hon. E. B. PuRN>:LL: Give the beet.

HoN. E \V. H. I"OWLES: In New South \<Vales th0 member'.hip is e.bont seventy-two, but mile' not bo lees than tw~nty-one. The ·qualific:ation for membership is male adult, natural born, or nat.ur~Jisod British subject; the period for which electe-d or nominated is for life; the allowance> for rnc"nbers, none

Hon. E. B. PURNELL: There has to be somethin')' else, has there not?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: No.

Hon. E. B. PURNELL: No other qualifica­tion 1

HoN. E. \V. H. FOWLES: No .qualification id in another place.

[Hon. E. W. H. Fowlt.s.

The other I"- Vietoria

the nwmbcrship is thirty-four. 'l'he qualifica­tion for :cnomber,hip mu;t be a m·de nahual­born or naturalised British subjoct of thf> age of thirty ye<>rs •}!' upwards, if poesc;sed of a freehold property of an annw11 vame oc at lcaht £5C for one year previous t(} e.le,,tion, and, in th~ case of naturalised subjects, tf a r, •irlcnt of the State for ten yea.rs. The qualification for the franchise is an adult British subject of either sex, if either the owner .,f a frc•ehold of the anual value of £10, or of a leasehold vroperty rated at £15, or -t graduatD> of a British "University, matnculated. students of the MelhourtP Uni­YPrsitv qtva1ifL/-~,J lE:J:al ~d:d n1edical ;Jracti~ tione1.' rninj<;:terB 0£ roligiDn, cert.ifieated echoolmastcr,, and naval and military officer·. :\' atnra li,.·d subject'·· mnst be of thrco vca1.3' ~t1.ncli:J.g, and mu::.t have re;;;.idP~J in the' State for tw0!ve monthe. That latter pt'oYi2ion is especially . necesE~rlr;.- , in these time·,, In South :\lL~trahf1 tht: men1 J'rs n1u::.:t be rnalr natur:ll-born or na\uraliaed British ·-ubjects (u) if of the age of twenty y<·ars or UP\\"lrrlF. ur.d ih) if rcoident in the State for thrt'c years. The- ~ranc11ise there is for adult Britisl1 Bubj ec-ts of (oither sex wlw a re Pith or 1r1) owncn of freehold o!' the valuu of D50, (IJ) owrr~rs of a lea.s•,hold of an annual value of £20 ,vith at least tlEee :.·cm·s to ~-un o_r containing the right of rcmcha~e. (c) mhahl­tanh or occupiers of a. dv."C!lmg-hous<>, (d) regi~tered pro·prietors of a tn"~,Yn lease on wllich there are imDl'OY8nwnts to t~:e \'alue of C~t least £50. ThOlt is a pretty ·;-,_de frcm­chise. The claim·ants for the franclll"e n1t!~t baY<' lived at 1eH3t :oi:c 'Ponth-, in Sc.':.!t~1 Au?­tralia. l'hc- object of a1J these co11dywm IS

th~"~t orPr'-' ch'ctor n:.ust be a man ,y,th sorne stake or ~intnre~t in th0 countr;.~ ot}ter than breathing the fl-u' air "-hicl, other (lP<'ple haYG 'nadc free for hin ..

Hon. E. B Pum:;,.LL: Good gracious ! Breathing the free air the t other people have made flee for him!

Ho!-!. E. W. H. FOWLE8: H is the British who haY<' made this atmoqphcre fre'l for him.

Hon. A. A. DAI'EY: Th",t is fr<;P gas. not free oir.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: This H?~"" will always stand for loyalty to the Bnt1sh Empire. ·

Hon. \V J. RroEDA"': You "·ou!t~ tax the atmospher<' if you could.

Hox. E. W. I-J. FOWLF.S: We could not tax the hot air here. Du+ enough of that. In \Vestern Austra.lia, which had ."' Latour ,Gon:--rn1nent for s1x years, and .!n .'v-.I~h, under Premier Scadilen, the Lcgl,]ah.ve Cumcil c0uld have been alte;·ed, t.he franch1se is a•dult Bntish subjects of either ·,ex who have. resided iu the Shtc for six mo>1thR, and \vho eithei' (a) own a fr,:ehold estate to the valuo of £50, ib) occupy a hm;s<e or own lemehold property rated .at £11. (c) own to1.\'ll leas('S or licenses. to the Ya~ue of not ]c.,s than £10 per annum, or (d) e.re on the dcetoral liot of a municipctlity or ro'ld board distric~ in resp et of !ne>per~y of +~e;11 anr~ual value of £17. That '' a w1dr: qualLicab_on. In Tasmania they have a. small f;,anchlse, where th8 votD' mus~ c;ithe;· poeeess frrPhold lo the annual value of £10, or le.:tseho!r: to the v-1lue of £30 or must helonl,!' tc; some 5'pe-dal cla"·"· such :as Jcgal 1nen, lYlf''lli~:J.l rr1en. and others in a mic.cellancons class. Now we come to the tenure. In :,Yew Sou+h \Vales it is for life; in Queensland, for life ; Victoria,

Gons:tituti H Act [16 OCTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 3165

six years; South Australia, six years; 'V0sterr1 Australia, six years; Tasmania, six years; and New Zealand. seven years.

Hon. G. S. CURTIS: Elective Chambers?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : Elective Chcm­bers for EWe>ry one except New South \Yales.

• The pay given to member~ o£ the (Tpper Housu is as follows :-New South Wales, nothing; Victorift, 'nothing; Quecn:,la~1d, nothing; South Australia, £200 per annum; Western Australia, £300 per annum; Tas­mania. £200 per annum: and, I think, in ::-.Jew Zooland, £240 per annum.

The. SF.CRETARY FOR :,1INES: How mcreh do yo•~ suggest for here?

HoN. E. W. H. FO\YLES: 'l'he alterna­tive put before us by the preeent Government is a bl<tnk. In fact, they even go 'O far in this Bill .as to wipe out section 9 of the Con­stitution Act, and actually rob the ,:reople of Queensland of the chance of having an elec­tive Chamber. Section 9 is to be repealed. Soction 9 give' the people of Queensland the choice between a nominative and an elective Chamber. This .Bill uctuallv denies the people of Queensland the chance of ever having- an ol0ctive Chamber. That one thing oug-ht to condemn this Bill. The Bill not only s8eks to abolish this Hou·:e, but seeks to prd·cnt Queensland from having an elec­tive Upper House. We have the instancB of G1·eece, where they did away with the Upper House but in a verv short timE> thev were back again, appointiirg .a Council in '1911.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : I do not believe in an elective Upper House.

HoN. K W. H. FOWLES: This Govern­ment havo not offered the pnople of Q'wens­land a single alternative. Sure]:;· ihey are not so depleted of ideas as that. If they want suggE>stions--

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : Read clause 3 of tho Bill.

Hon. G. S. Cc:RTIS: Thev want unbridled power.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : There are a number of w.tys in which thev could secure adequate representation. Thev could give the franchise to all adults over thirtv years nf age. Or, considering the wastag~ of child life in these times, we might give the fran· chisc to married people and all adults over thirtc··

Hon. W. J. RIORDAN: \\'hy over thirty?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Because a man sometimes gets to forty befor<: he gets much sense. A man is either a fool or a doctor at forty. At all events, all the brains in the world arc not wr"pped up in the brigade of t,wcnty-onc. The Government offer no alternative whatever to the abolition of the Cc,uncil. They do not offer any suggestion With r-:spect to an elective C1ramber. ·what eould be easier than to suggest that the Council should consist. say, of fifty-one mem­btrs, seventeen of them retiring every three years, th'l members to be elected. or nom­inat"··d, ~or nine years? 'That would a.nsure cor.t.inuance; it would ensure progre;;: it would ensure a stream of new blood coming into the Chamber every three y<;ars; and it would ensure cautious legislation, so that th0re would be no volcanoes or topsy-turvy­clom in the history of our State. Or, to take

another alternative, thE) Government might have said, " 'I' he Council shall consist of fifty members, and the vacancies shall be flled up in June of each year by the mem­Lers of the cl~cted House, in proportion. to the number of Government and Opposition mLmbers in that House'' If that were the case, and twelve members were to be appointed next June, the Government would appoint eight and the Opposition would appoint four. That '\vonld ()nsure the repre­-sc·l!tation in this Chamber of all classe« in tl;e community at each appvinbnent. vVhen hon. gentlemen op .. Josite were appointed, they "ere• supposed to ·rcp"esent one class in th<;:< community. I am a hater of the policy of ·SC>tting cla~q against class. because \Ve are all one class. \Ye ar:· all in the same boat, and those who rock the boat run the risk af simpl:;. drow:-:ing the others.

Hon. \\' .. }. RIORDAN: You are rocking the boat.

Ho~. E. W. H. FOWLES: :c\ot at all. I am trving to keep it steady. This is the st<•adyine; House so far as .the steering of the ship of i:ltate is concerned. \Vhat I have iu•.t suggc:lted would ensure the proportional i·cpre··-cntation of all parts of the corr,munity, s0 that we would not have a batch of men sent here all of one political <•Jlour. or all of one particular creed \Ve would have svery inhrest represented. The Govern­n,ent could also 'ay, " Vi. e will divide the St.ate into thre" parts-:c\orth, Centre, and Sm;th. We shall give t-en membE'rc to the Kc.rth, fifteen to th<; Centre, and twenty-five to the South. That will give us a Hou,e of fift3 members." The members could be l'lc·cted for thrPe years. But the Govern­me-nt do none of these things. They simply come along with a policv of "Destroy r Deetrov r Destroy !"-nothing but destruc­tion. ·rheir proposal is similar to the Bol­sh<·vik systc·m of overthro'' ing everythmg, anr! they forget that a child can _set fire to "' palace, but it takes an arohrtect or a builder to re-erect it. If there >vas any constructive state,manohip at all in the Go· wmmcnt. they ould not bring in a Bill such as this. In the face of the overwhc>lm­inr- vote of thl' peopie of last year. they w;uJ.d say, "\VE' will bring in a Bill _re­tair,ing th<; two Houses, and by so . do!ng hunour the vote of thP people, but brmgmg i,1 at the same time what we consider to be c<·rtain salutarv reforms ., They do not do that. They si'mply bring. in a submari:'-e, and nothing else. Ther<; IS no constructr ve c.tate,mam;hip whatever in this proposal of th0 Government. I am quite, convinced th";t, if the question goes to a referendum agam -and a lot of water will run under the bridge before it doc••-Qucensland will play snfety. The people are not going to get on th" top of a bolting horse. without having a bridle. They are not gomg to hand over the reins of Qu0ensland to an unbridled Gcvcrnment, ·wher(' a n1ajority of one may settle the destinies of the wholQ State.

Hon. L. McDOXALD : How can you hand c> er the reins to an unbridled Government? (Laughter.)

Hox. R W. H. FOWLES: ::1-Iy hon. friend knows cxactlv what I mean-to an lmcurbed Government-we may put it that way. The people will vote for common­sense gov-ernment. and they will play safety. I do ' not wish to touch on any of the

Hon. E. W. 11. Fowles.]

3166 Constitution Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

<Constitutional issues. I do not wish to touch -on the decisio" of the Priv:y Council. I do not wish to scour the .,-hole worl-d and all th., u'nturies, -,s the Hon. Mr. Bedford did. Hr· nlmost went back to Noah's Ark in order to g-et some illustrations against the Upper House. I am not going to be so foolish as to compare this Council with the House of Lords. \Ybat sr·nsG is there in attempting to saddle upon this Council whatever in­; Hshc< .; may have bren perpetrated by the House of Lords 400 years ago? The:.- have nothing to do with us. Everyone knows the diff,~njnce het .v<:>en this Council and the H<>use of Lords. \V e know the House of Lord-s is hereditary; we knmY they have an unwritten Con,titution; we know they have nc;t got a pqrJiamenta.ry Bills Rderendum Act there. \Ve know there ano vital differ­ences between this Chamber and the House of Lords. If, how.~ver, we ask ourselye .. what rpally is i.he be:,t form of Government, the reply is to be found in the het that the prac­tice• of th2 whole civilised world is to raH> two Houses of Legislatm·e; and we may take it that the practic~ of the whole civilised world is pretty correct. Even the asmte Japanese, right next to us, have get their bCCOnd Chambe•· of about 350 members. Our >eJliC's, the French, have a sqcond Chamber. \Ye carried complimentary bouqnets to them the other dav when they were here, and now }wn. membei·s oppoeite wot1ld s~ek to de~ry them because they have a sc•cond Chamber.

Hon. E. B. ·i'uRNELL: \Ve have not said anything against them.

HoN. L '.Y. H. FOWLES: Xo, except- by infPrring that thev are foDls for ha,-ing a 'Second f 1 ha~nber. ~ Ev-er•t one of our allies h1s a sN·cnd Chamber.' \Ve have to turn to a countrv like Bulgaria to find a single Chamber. Even the Dominion of Canada, to which the Premier went for illustrations, has two Houses in the Dominion Parlia­ment. J know vC'ry well th>tt the Canaclian provinces have onlv one House. and thE' reason is yerv obviou ~. In A.ustralia the States handed over certain powers to the Federal Parliament and retained all their <Other powers for them,elves. The British Xorth A.nH.'ric-an "\c;t-which is the Con­stitution ~\et of the Dominion of Canada­ga ve sovereign rights to the Dominion Parliament, and left just a fmv things to the provincial Legislatu-res.

Hon. 'T. ~EVITT: And what are sovereign rights after all?

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: We are find­ing out what soyereign rights are at the pr-esent time. This war has shown u~ what •o creign right•· arc. Soverc'gn rights to­dav mean such things as thr: \\'ar Precau­tions Act. Sovereign rights mean the over­riding of every individual right in tho interests of the welfare, peace, and c:ocd government of the Commonwealth.

Hon. T. NEVITT: \Ve have all that here.

Ho~;. K W. H. FOWLES: We ha Ye noth­ing to do with the Customs, nothing to do with defence, nothing to do with shipping.

Hon. T. :\EVITT: That is all Fedceral.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: Well, I am talking of ('uhmsland.

Hon. E. H. Pt:RNELL: That is all the more reason wh~ this Council should be aboliohed.

[Hon. E. W. H. Fowles.

HoN. K W. H. FOWLES: Would the hon. member abolish the Governor ?

Hon. T. :\EVI'fT: That is another ques­tion.

HoN. E". W. H. FOWLES : It is another question, but what is the reply?

Hon. T. NEVITT : We will reply to that when the question ari -cs.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: talking to the hon. gentleman, hon. member sitting behind him. would he abohsh the Governor?

I am not but to the

I ask him

Hon. E. B. Pt:RNELL: C'erlainlv not-not at the pre,ent time. It ma.; come' about one of these days.

Hox. E. W. H FOWLES: Xot at the r-r-escnt time? I ·do not think the hon. gentleman vvoulod (J.re to associate hin1self with the " cut-the-painter" party at the pre­,,ent time. \Ve depend for our night's rest on the British nayy, and the hon. gentle­man knowc very well that it would be abso­lute folly for us to talk about cutting the painter.

Hon. E. B. PURNELL : \Vho is talking about cutting the painter?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: This is the first stage in the revolutionary road.

Hon. L. McDoNALD : This Char;nber does not own the British navv. \Ye could have a British navy without· this Home being here.

HoN. K \V. H. FOWLES : This is the first st-ep to cutting the vainter and to throwing off the salutary checks, and to up· setting the delicate balance of r;;ovcrnn1eut.

Hon. E. B. I't:RXELL: In ~car opinion.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Ye·-, in my opinion. Let me seek to J;rove it. Sup­jJosing there was only one House of Parlia­ment here--

lion. E. R Pt:RNI:LL: You <c c:m to think we have no opinion.

Ho:-;. E. W. H. FOWLES: r: we had only a one-House Parliament to-day, the salarie.s of mPmbers of that House would be raised to £500. This is the onlv House that can possibly hold up a warning finger to the people of Queensland.

Hon. \Y. J. RIORDAN: You reckon they are not going to get the £500, do you?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: No; but we will discuss that later on when thD oc<'asion ari-ses.

Hon. W. J. RIORDA:-i: \Yhy di-d you 1nention it?

HoN. E. \Y. H. FOWLES : If the hon. g2ntlmnan wants fivo n1inutc'3 on that, I v:ill give it to him; but the quGstion is not before us.

Hon. E. B. PuRNELL: I'ut it in pamphlet form, ar,-d put it to the people.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : With regard to giving members of the A"'lemblv .£500 per annum, I quite believe that a salary of £300 is too small for a membnr of the Assembly, whose hand is in his pocket for very many purposes in theca patriotic days.

Constitution Act [16 OcTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 3167

:So far a3 I am concerned, I shoul.d s.1y £100 -e-xtra is not too nlttch. That is n1y O\\'ll

individual opinion. A man has to pay his fJeetion C:';:pcn.~.: ,,, ; he has to give a guinea here. there, and everywhere; and probably scmB hon. 1nen1bcrs give away the whole o£ their parliamentary salaries in one form· or another, and ha, e nothing l"ft but free speech and free air to live ur•on unle" the:· have money laid b,· as a nest egg. I should think they arc quito worth another £lOO a year. But, if I were givin'i them that. I woul·d bring in a Bill to repeal section 4 nf the Constitution Act Amendment .\et of 1896, and do the thing in a fair and open manner, and I would go to the people and fay, "\Vo >\ 1nt another £100 each in thes·e ·da.\·s of high living."

Hon. E. B. PDRKELL: \Vhat about going to the Arbitration Court? (Laughter.)

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Perhaps thev might go out on strike. (Renewed laughter.) However, I am only expres;oing my own private opinion on the matter. It has not been thrashed out in anv caucuB at all. (Laughter.) •

Hon. iY. J. RIDRDAN: Thev would be called a lot of criminals if they went out ·OD strike.

Hor-;:. E. W. H. FOWLES: Eut I certainlv V\ould not attempt to increase their salaries to £500 b~· a. subterfuge.

The PRESIDE:\T: Order!

Hor-;:. E. \Y. H. FOWLES: But, to return to the question of what a one-House Parliament uight do. They would have unbridled oppor­i:unities to play ducks a.nd drakes with ·the finance... In the first place, would thev lay thE> Auditor-General's report on the 'r-able of the House at all?

Hon. A. G. C. Ho\WTHORN: There would bo no Auditor-General then.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: :\o. there •crould be no Auditor-General then. It 1t would be ct case of "Off with hie he;<d," as in "_\lice in V\-onderland," and it would take the whole of the Criminal Im·estigation Branch to find out anything about the finances of the r:ounky, and then thev would give it up in ciespair.

Hon. A. A. DAVEY: There would be no Criminal Investigation Branch either.

HoN. E. \V. H. FOWLES: That is quite probable. I doubt the seriousness of the Government in bringing in this Bill, because ther.' n1u:;;t be some seriousness in thr_ ranks nf the Government. There cannot be a body -of forty-eight men without having some l'L•siduurn of con~mon 'Sense and cau.J:ion; hnt. wlwn thcv seck to overthrow the judiciary, when the}· sock to appoint temperamentally fittr'd judges, when they seek to corrupt the Y" ry fountain of jus[! CB when they thre:,ten 1;!w judges with certainly very strange letters fer.d message" in the Press-the stranvcst thnt have 0\'er emanated from any Depart­rr:cnt of ,T usticc-they are striking at the very foundations of democracy itself. For cen­turies we hav>l been carefully building up an independent, incorruptible, and absolutely impartial Lranch, before whom man, no matter what he is, can get decent justice. :\ow the Governm<:nt propose something which will enable them absolutely to

undermine the bench. \\'hat would be the first thing thev \, ould do if there were no second Chamber 'to control them? 'rhev would pack their own bench, and people would lm ~ricd by packed juric~. If I ,ve~c charged .":ith an:' offence, bemg of a different pohtJcal cc,lour from them. I would be convicted and '" swing" for it. \Yhether I \Vas guilty or not. This Hou:e .stands for justice to every Inan, \von;an, and child in Queewiancl. There was never a frc•cr place in the whole world than Quechsland, where anv man can 'get on a soap~Lox any day or~ night and say anythino· he ,,·ishcs. This House stands for freedom for the individuaL for a fair and ft·oc' run for every individual in the Si ate.

Hon. K B. PcRKELL: So does the Legis­lative Assembly.

Hox. E. W. I-I. FO'\YLES: I have stood :: a candirlate for the Lower House, ancl I know the atmosphere which provai!s at election meetings. I know that candidates must be v<'rv careful wha.t thev sa\'. If tlus House were· aboli,;hcrl, there \~oul.i be noth­ing to prevent the Gov(•rnment sacking any man in the public service. Hon. members o;.posite may oay that the: Government wr~ulcl 11ot stoop so !en. do\vn as to do such a thmg. hut my an:, .wr to that is that there would he nothing to prtvent them doing it. ThPre would be nothing to prevent them sacking Commissioners. If the Savings Bank Com­missioner would not lend the Government. £500 000 on the " nod," the Government would probabh- say. "All righ", we will get another Comm'issioner who will do what we wish." This House sta.nds between the people and revolution.

Hon. E. B. PcRNELL: Absolute nonsense.

Hox. E. W. H. FO\VLES : That is the sane. sensible ,·i~w of mar,y people at the pre·-ent time, and }\iinisters know it right '··ell. Can ;my hon. gentleman opposite tell me which rules in certain circles to-day, the .cmtralian \Vorkers' Union or the I.\Y.iY.? \Yhich of those two organi;mtions is pulling stronge~t at the oar in certain circles? The women of Queensland are decidedly !n f;-vour of retaining th•,· Legislative Council. They ar8 not going to allow their chiklrcn t 1 be roLbed of decent government by I h<)

present Government. They have an intuitive sense that the retention of the Council means safety for their children, and they know that the Council is the only Hou~e of the two Houses now existing which proposed a measure for !iqG•Jr reform, which is so dear to every woman in QueC'nsland. \\'e intro­duced a Bill to provide for the 6 o'clock dosing of hotels, passed it, and sent it down to the other Chambei', and the Government of the day simply dodged it, though they know that the will oi the people is in fa vonr of liquor reform. I am sure that 150,000 women voters would vote for liquor reform at the precent time. and yet we have in !JGWer a Government who prat< about carry­ing out the will of the people. There is not "" hon. gentleman oppositP who does not know that, if liquor reform wore placed bdore the people to-day, it would be canied Lv an overwhelming majority, and yet the (iqvcrnnwnt dodgod 'the rtuestion. They would rather undercut thoir brother publican and sell cheap beer. iYhat would he tho next thing the Government would do? Afraid of facing their masters. the pooplL', thev would immediat~lv extend the term of Parliament. ;:\othiJ1g 'would be eacior. A

Hon. E. W. H. Fowlee.J

3168 Constitutio,, Act [COL~~\ClL.] Amendment Bill.

small Bill could br brought in, and the dura­tion of Parliament extended for seven years, and for those seven years the Government could do anything they liked-turn a heaven into earth, or an;;-thin·:· else. (Laughter.\ Hon. m0mberc. may laugh. We laughed at the idea of a tram strike, but it u:m" upon us like a thunderclap. \V e mav laugh at the idea of a rebellion taking place in Queens­land; bnt, if we hav(l only one Chamber, it rw:y comP upon us ljko a streak of lightning. The very provisions of the Bill itsdL glance nt thPm in just a cursory rn,anner. impreF'"-, me with the id<'a that the measure is simply lromrht forward at the end of the prc~ent session in order to divert the attention of rho turbulent >-upportc,rs of tlw Governmem from more ilnportant InattE'rs. Everybod:v knowB that towards the end of tb!' ses,ion members gd roy;d·· and restlces, fmd my impneosion is that this Bill is introduced by the Government to take av av the attention of their mpporters from other matters. If tber" wHe a '1:V real bu,ine"s in the Bill, 'muld this House be a, ked to adjourn this week? If there were any serious intention on thG part of the Government in bringing forward the measure and making an attack upon this House, would thev aok this Honse to adjourn 9 If thov wanted to carrv out t.he will of the people, as they say, would they not ~it da,,T and night to carrv their Ineasure.­inst<:ad of hois!ing revolutionary flags and s~ngiD({ revolutionary song, in other parts of tlw Commonwealth-or instead of g-oing to England or to the '\orth for a jaunP \Yhat do they care about " the will of the people" ? Thr will of the people for them is to get £500 a :. oar 9 '.Vhat would be f,o,icr, if this Chamber wor() abolished, than for the' Government of the da~· to grind the faces of ihP poor vdth f~XC'(:ssiYe taxation and then reach the summit of their ambition bv dsing millionaires? ·

Hon. E. B. Pc:RNELL: That could not pos­sibly be done under a Labour Government.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: What is the first thing thev do? Thf'y have hardly had time to recoYer their breath from the last election, or to pay their election expenses,. when they come here and propose an illegal grant of £200 each to members of the Legislative Assembly.

Th" PRESIDENT: I must ask the hon. member not to anticipate a discussion on legislation that may come before the Cham­ber. There is at pr0sent no legislation before this House propo"ing to increase the salaries of members of the Assembly,

HoN. K W. H. FOWLES: I shall con­nect what I wish to say with the subject before the Couneil by pointing out that, if this House were abolishe·d, there would be nothing to prevent the Gov0rnment impo,ing enormous and crushing taxation on the people. Does not the Minister know that evel'Y tax that is imposed eventually filters through to the masses of the people?

Hon. E. B. PURNELL: And that is what we arc going to prevent.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: You cannot prevent it. So long as a man needs clothes tu wrap round himself and food to eat he has to pay the taxation, and the more taxa­tion you impose the more taxation will filter through ultimately to the great body of the

[Hon. E. W. H. Fowles.

people. Everybody knows that. If you put on 0•ctra taxation on tickets for admission to picturo shows, the proprietor of the show makes his patrons pay it.

Hon. L PEREL: Because vou won't be sensible and send men to gaol ·for passing on their rc•.ponsibility. Gaol the scoundrels who are doing that, and you will stop it.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : If a person wants to buv a ticket for admission to a picture show-; let him pay the entertainment tax. There is nothing wrong in that. But, as I have already said, all taxation must ultimately filter through to the masses of the community, so that ultimately eYery man, woman, and c·hild in the community has to bear the taxation. What does it matter to the present Government how the people are taxed, so long as their own pockets ar6' bulging out, so long as th<•:7 J?et mine.; and shares in mines, so long as by hard work for two or three sessions in Parliament thev can live ea·ily and comfortably for the res't of their lives' The time has arrived when we should have more men of the type of Dave Bo"man, who would •acrifice himself for the common weaL The present Govern­ment seem to have lost their moral punch.

Hon. \V. J. RIORDAN: You opposed Dave Bowman on Dne occasion.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: And on that occasion I think I voted for him and he voted for me. That was the arrangement.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : I think you should withdraw that statement.

I-Im;. E. W. H. FOWLES: I do not mean that the Government are immoral, but I mean that they have lost their ethical punch.

Th<' SECRETARY FOR MINES: I rise to a point of orcler. Is the hon. gentleman in order in .oe1ying that this Government are getting mines and shares in mines? I have a right to ask that those words be with­drawn, because I am Secretary for Mines, and they may be taken as some reflection upon myself,

The PRESIDENT: I must ask the hon. gentleman to withdraw the imputation con­tained in his words. An hon. memb<>r is not in order in making imputations, and I ask the hon. gentleman to withdraw those words.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: I absolutely withdraw any imputation of such motive,, I was deecribing what might happen if there v,as only one House of Parliament. vVe do not know what is happening now. We did not know about the Government chiselling the Federal Government out of £19,000 until the Auditor-General brought his electric lamp­to bear on the subject. It is a scandal all over Queensland to-day that the report of the Auditor-General Dn State enterprises has not yet been put before this House. Yicmbers of Parliament are asked to pass a Bill sanctioning State enterprises, which are­an experiment, and, though we have State enterprises being carried on by the Govern­ment at the present time, we have no report upon their operations. And that is the sort of thing which foreBhadows what would ha pp en on a ten thousandfold larger scale if we had no >-econd House of Parliament. Fortunately, Queensland has a second House

Constitution Act [16 OcTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 3I6G

now ; but, if we had only one House, we might have 'I'ammanyism running recklessly abroad in Queensland. \Ve have signs of it at the present time. It is all verv well to say that the people would stop that kind of thing at the next election, and that, when they had the opportunity of re-electing the Parliament, we should get back to sane goYernment; but it must be remembered that only once in three years ha.-c the people an opportunity to elect a Parliament. I do not propo''e to refer to tho wild and reckless speech made by the Hon. 1fr. Bedford. \Ve have all read that little pamphlet by Mor­ri',On David~on on the House of Lords. We read it when we were in our teens. It is rNlly a bit out of date at the present tim<', and you can get it anywhere for 6d. Th0 pamphlet is full of inaccuracies and glaring blunders, and it goes back two (t nturies to got illustrat;ons of \\hat has been ,done by the House of Lords. But we may treat with a little more respect the rcmar::s made by the Hon. lVIr. Sumner. lie sa.id that if the Gonrnment ''ere sent here with a certain policy, and they wishe-d to carr 0 out that policy, they would have to swan1p this Council; and every suc-cessive Govprnment on the other side \Yould have to swamp th<, Council. So vou would have a sort of pendulum swing, 'and this Chamber would graduallv become a, House of a few hundred m0mbers. There are several checks against that. :No Governor would perpetrate such a piece of folly; he would be looking for a recall by the next cable if he did anything like that. Another thing is that when the people send back a Government, they do not, as we all know. endorse every article upo!l the menu. Thi Government was cent back, a.s wa- so exccllentlv pointed out by the Hon. J\Ir. Curtis, part.ly on the no-con­scription issue. That was used very astutely. At the previous election the Government were returned on the eh ea p food cry-some little catchword like that. Ao a matter of fact, the Government are not sent back in order to carry out every word of their promises on the platform. The people of Queensland sent back this Government because they said, " \V e will giv0 them a second trial, at any rate; we 'I· ill seD what they can do." The great middle class of Qt1eensland would rather walk upon the safe, middle road of pro,cperity, but they say, "\Ve will give them a sr'cond cha.nce." That is why they are here.

Hon. E. B. PURXELL: \Ye settle a plat­form, and follow it.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: What about the Sinking Fund? What about no borrow­ing, when you are looking around for £5,000,000?

Hon. T. ::\"EVITT: You supported the sus­pension of the Sinking Fund.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Yes, because that is businesslike. 'What about the exemp­tion of small estates under the Sm·oe,sion and Probate Duties Act?

The SECRETARY FOR :MIXES : \V(' are raising the exemption; that is an instalment of the platform.

Ho;;. E. W. H. FOWLES: The return of the present Government does not show at all that the people endorse everv item. It shows that, generally, they were' in ,upport

1918-9 H

of the principle of giving this Government a further term of office, to see whether they could not redeem themselves. They have done it iu even other State; and the people, after six vears', ha Ye said: "\Ve have had enough." 'M,v pity is for the general body of tlw people who, it seems, have to be governed by either one extreme or _the other. The attitude of the Government w1th regard to the vat<• last vear on the quBstion of the abolition of this C~ouncil is a vastly different attitude from that whi<-h they have adopted upon tlwir own return. \Yhen it comes to the elections thev sav: "Look how the people return<>d us" ; and they throw scorn on every argument against that. vVhen it comes to honouring and respecting the decision of the peopiB on the question of th~ abolition of tl';e Council, they talk very differently. It 1s win, tie, or wrangle with them then. \Vh>;t if the vote is taken ne'<t year; and what If a form of lunacv went over the whole State and the Yote ~was carried for abolition? \Yould this Government resign? No. But what if the people stood by their ~uns and did what W<' all in our hearts beheve they will do-vote for the retention of the second Hou,ce? \Vill the Government then resign?

An HONOURABLE MEMBER; For what reason?

Hox. E. W. H. FO\VLES: 'l'hey have made this the most vital plank in their platform. It is the only thing on which they ha.\e taken a referendum.

Hon. T. NEVITT: Thev will abide by the will of the people. "

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Why have a second referendum?

Hon. T. NEVITT; For various reasons. which I will give if I get up to speak.

HoN. E. W. H. FO\VLES: Will the repre­sentative of the GovBrnment give a pledge that the Goyernment will resign if thes· are beaten next year?

Hon. E. B. PLTRNELL: There 1s no necessity to resign.

Hox. E. W. H. FO\VLES: Why not?

Hon. E. B. PURXELL : If the people want this second Chamber, they can have it.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: Evidently the GoYernment want the win, tie, or wrangle proposition, and they want another " test match." But even if the "test match" went in favour of the Government, it would be only one "test match" on each side, and they should haYe a third to decide it. It looks as if government by camouflage was the only resource and the only trump card. of this present Government. \Vhy not deal with the hundred and one presoing questions which are before the people at the present time?

Hon. E. B. Pt'RNELL: Because you will not permit them.

HoN. E. W. H. FO\VLES: This House hcs never turned do>m any measure within reason which has been brought in. ~'dl the humanitarian legislation of the last century has passed through this House.

Hon. \V. J. RIORDAN: That is camouflage.

Ho;;. E. W. H. FOWLES: ~o, that is absolutely true. The Wages Bill-if I were

Hem. R. W. H. Fowles.]

3170 Succession, Etc., Bill. [COUNCIL.] Metropolitan Water, Etc., Bill.

permitted to refer to it-aJso was more humanitarian when it left this House. I feei sure that, if we regard the Bill as a Rerious propoeition by this present Govern­ment-and it is hardly possible to regard it ae such-we shall vote it out entirely. Prob­ably the best way would be to give reasons why this House rejects the measure-if it does reject it, and I say it is in duty bound to reje{'t it in the interests of the people of Queensla.nd-becausc we are not here merely for momentary, temporary legislation, but are the custodians of a Constitution that has been in existence and has done excellent work for fift,- years, and we ought to hand on to om· mccessors that Constitution unimpaired; improved, if possible, but not mutilated or rut.hlcs·sly destroyed, as is prop<Csed by the prcoent Bill. I feel mre that if a secret ballot were taken of the members of the Gm·ernment at the present time upon this Bill, the Government themselves would be ·only too willing to turn down what is the most astute and colossal piece of camouflage that has ever come from the Government.

HoK. A. G. C. HA \'iTTHORN: I beg to move the adjournment of the debate.

The SECRETARY FOR ::\HNES: I hope some arra.ngement will be made for a definite time at which to take a vote on this question. I adrnit it i, a ver~t important question, and there is no de•·ire on the part of the Govern­ment to take any snap vote on it. (Hear, hear !) I think the prop<>r thing would be to arrange a timP \Yhen a. yote might be taken, and I rise to malw that suggestion.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: Suppo .. ing you get a vote before 6 o'clock to-morrow?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: I think \YC should got a vote to-morrow before tea.

Question put and passed.

The r('eumption of the debate was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

SUCCESSION AND PROBATE DUTIES AC'fS AMENDMEKT BILL.

MESSAGE "RO\I AssE~lJlLY AGREEING TO FREE

CONFERENCE.

Tbe PRESIDENT annonnced the receipt from the Aesembly of the fo!lowing n1e'-sage :-

" ::Y1r. PrE>>ldent,-" The Lc<5islativc Assembly having

rec ivr:d the rnessagp of the Legislative Counpil, of this day's date. asking for a free conferenc' on the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the SucceSBion and Probate Dutie' Acts Am~ndment Bill, beg now to intir.tate that they-

" Agree to such conference, and have appointed the Hon. T. J. Ryan and the Hon. E. G. Theodore to be managers for th<J Legislative Assembly thereat, and name 11.5 p.m as the hour for hold­ing .such eonfPrence.

" \V. .McComiACK, " Speaker.

" Legislative A._ssetnbiy Chamber, "Brisbane, 15th October, 1918."

~Ihn. E. W. H. Po1.rles.

STAMP ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

l'dESSAGE FRmr AssniBLY AGREEING To FREE CoNFERE::;rCE

The PRESIDEXT announced the receipt from the A£sembly of the following n1es5age :-

":Mr. President,-" The Legislative A;;sembly havmg

receiv<;d the message oE the Legislative Council, of this day's date, asking for a free conference on the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Stamp Act Amendment Bill, .beg now to intimate that they-

,, Agree to buch conference, a!ld have appointed the Hon. T. J. Uyan and the Hon. E. G. Th.eodore to rw managers for th<J Legislative Assembly thereat; and nam0 11.5 p.rn as the hour for hold­ing such conference.

" vV. McOom!ACKjl! "Speaker.

" Legislative Assembly Chamber. " Brisbane, 15th October, 1918."

I'OPULAR INITIATIVE AND REFEREN­DUM BILL.

MESSAGE FROM ASSEMBLY DECLARING BILL "LosT."

The PRESIDE:r'\T announced the receipt from the Assembly of the following message:-

"Mr. President,-" The Lcgidative Assembly having

had under consideration the message of the Legislative Council, of this day's date, further insisting upon their amend­ments in the Popular IEitiative and Re­ferendum Bill, to which amendments the Legislativ<: Asserr,bly have alrpady dis­agreed, beg now to intimate that, the Legislative A,,.,c,mbly being unable to concur in the said amendments, the Bill, ir, the t.'rms of the Parliamentary Bills R~ferendnm Act of 1908, is now lost.

"W. MoCoRMACK. "SpeakN.

"Legislative Assembly Chamber, "Brisbane, 15th October, 1918."

METROPOLITAN AND IPSWICH WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE ACTS A:YIE:0l'DMENT BILL.

CoM~IITTEE.

(Hon. W. F. Taylor in the chm'r.) On clause 1-" Short title and construction

of Act"-HoN. T. M. HALL moved the omiesion of

lines 6 to 15, inclusive, reading-" In the title of the Metropolitan

\Vater Supply and Sewerage Act of 1909 the v ords ' and its suburb& are re­p,aled and the wor.cls ' and of the City of Ipswich and their environs' are in­serted in liw thereof.

" In the ,hart title of the lastmentioned Act and in the short title of the Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Act Amendment Act of 1915 and in the cell "ctiYc short title of the said lastmentioned Acts, after the word

l'iletropolitan Water Supply [16 OCTOBER.] and Scu·erage, Etc., Bill. 3171

'Metropolitan' the words 'and Ipsv.ich' are inserteJ."

'The obj~ct of the amendment was to place 'the Metropolitan \Vater Supply and Sewer­ag8 Act of 1908 in the eame position as it was to-day, without adding to ib responsi­biEties or its area. It had been contended that its <extension to a wider area would not "''ist in placing it on a better footing than it was to-day. Indeed, it would increasf' its responsibilities and give further opportuni­ties for bad administration and wasteful expenditure which, at present, was receiving public attention in th<l daih· Pres'>. For th. t reason it was considered that, until ·the Board had ehown 'om<,; aptitude in the management of its affairs in- it~< present re­stricted 1.rea, it wonid be an unwise thing to r·xtcnd its opercttions to a wid~r area. It might be contender{ that it was desirccbie that Ir,wich sho,Jlci be serveci with a water supply from '\fount Crosby, or the other som·ces from which the cit.' of Brisbane was supplie,. and that this Bill would afford an .pportunity of that being done; but if

sr·emed to him that nothing had tra.nspired in cc:mncctinn -,,·ith th0 cit:v of Ipswich which <lnnanded frnm the Lo'l'ie<latur<' anything in thP nature of , change in the supply of wa1er there. On thr;: eontra1·y, a petition had been pr.•sentcd to the Council from the IHmioipal council 'Of Ipswich, prote,,ting e •> 'linst being dra!'"ooned into a Bili of this dHc-ription, frnm which they would get no immediate b<enefit. but would have to wait a nonsi·derable time for any ruults, and. in the meantime, be eubjcct to the maladminis­t,.ation of tlw central board in Brisbane and ·the taxation that would necessarilv follow from thQ bad 1:1anagement. of which there \Vas so 1nnch E:vid(~llCP at pr~.ent. He \Vas speaking at le::gth on this amendment, be­cause his rem'lrks would apply to the other Bmcndmonts which were placed in his hands to move. This weasnre •.•:ould add to the r< ·.nomibilitics of a board which had alreadv rrc;,·ed itoelf inefficient, and the presmt time waB- inopportune for bringing such a rneasure in. That it would ultimately be necessary to {'nL1 rgc the ar-.=.>n of the '\Vater c:.nd s~~\rerage Board was '1UitC' clear) but there scqn~d to be no n•,.oon whv the Government should bring forward thcs"c alterations at the present 1l1u unlc.} i: ''LdJ nc/~ded to get that ever­lasting panac:'a for all ills which the com­munity scem<·d to be subjected to, of r.ro­-;-iding ;wople with vokc. If that was the < :1iof object cf tl·e Bill, thC'n the other pC'l'tions of the moa,;nre would be rendered inoperative. He was quite sure that hon. 1nt·n1bei~s with 'vhcm1 he- "\Vas associated were­Hot prcpar('d, at the IJrcent tirno~ to grant the franchice reekl0ssly to irresponsible persons. His remarks in connection with this 11.mendmcnt r<;ally applied to all the cbuses in which he proposed to movr­:·mendmcnts.

The SECRETARY FOR ::\H?\ES: During the debate on the eecond reading some excep­tion w:,.s taken by hon. gentlemen to his speech when moving the second reading.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: Or lack of it. The SECRETARY FOR MIKES: Or lack

of it. His re,ason for not speaking at length and explaining the principles of the Bill. on that occasion, wa' because it had not had any opposition in the Assembly.

Hon. T. M. HALL: Did you not expect any ·opposition to the Bill here?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: He might have expected some slight amend­ments regarding the franchise. He did not expect that the Council, as a~ present co;>­stituted would pass the franchise mcluded m the Bill· he know that, if they would not do it in :a Local Authorities Bill, they would not do it in this Bill. But he did not think there was anv objection to the Bill itself, and he would be surprised if the Council amended the Bill in any way as a means of destroying it. He was quite well aware that ther'e would probably be some amend­ment made in the franchise. While he would object to that he quite expected it.

Hon. T. M. HALL: What would be the financial aspect of this Bill as applied to Ipp1·ich? What effect would it have on the ratepayers? Have you any information in regard to that?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: No, but he was explaining his attitude on the econd reading, as otherwise it might appear

to th o people of Ipswich and the representa­tives of Ipswich that he had failed to give information on the oecond reading. Ilc had intend~d to ask the Council to go into Com­rnittc•' and pass the Bill. straight away with the slight amendments which he anticipated. He could not understand the action of the Council if they decided to throw the Bill out. The pPople of Ipswich want<:>d it. The Ip~·.1·ich City Council, it was true, presented a petition to the Council, and they .ehould probably have debated the peti­tion. But a referendum of the people of Ipswich was not taken on this particular question.

Pon. T. M. HALL: Has any protest been entered by meetings or anything of that kind?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: No; but here half-a-dozen councillor' had presented a petition protesting against the Bill. While they VI ere elected to the positions they held, they had not properly yoicAd the views of the peoplP of Ipswich. He would like to quote from the " Queensland Timoe " of Wednesday, 25th September. That was not a Labour paper. I-Ie was quoting a little bit against the Government, but not against the Bill. It sai·d-

" Regarding our CIVIC affairs, the greatest step now being taken, or about to be taken, is in respect to the water supply. The scheme for the amalgama­tion of the Ipswich area with the metropolitan .~rea has met with some oppo<.Jtlon--

They referred to the Opposition here, he presumed.

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: No; the Bill was not i ntroduc~d here then.

The SECRETARY FOR MI:NES: " but that, perhBps, is due more to dis­trust of the party which is attempting to make the c-hange, than to disbelief in the broad principle of the scheme. vVhatever comes out of the proposal, Ipswich must get a better and greater sup,pl:v than it has now, and our mem­bers in Parliament should not tolerate any sng[.':estion of further temporising. Ipswich must certainly be included in the ~fount Edwards scheme, when it is

Hon. A. J. ,Tones.]

3172 Metropolitan Water Supply [COUNCIL.] and Sewerage, Etc., Bill.

established, but the present need for in­creasing the supply of water is urgent, and for that reason no time should be lost in getting the city connected with a greater source of sunply, pending the < arrying into effect' of the Mount Edwards scheme. If this is not done without ·delay, under the proposed amal­gamation, then the opponents of the scheme are certainly justified in the action thev have taken to defeat it. Whatr ver · is done, every precaution should be taken to see that the best interests of the ratepayers of the city are ,. afeguarded."

i Hear, hear).

Hon. P .. J. LEAHY: That is not necessarily in favour o£ this Bill.

Hon. T. .J. O'SHEA: When do vou think the Mount Edwards scheme will materialise?

The SECRETARY FOR MI~ES: The passage of the Bill would be the first step towards it.

I-Ioa. T. J. O'SHF..A: Certainlv uot. The Minister in charge of the Bill in the other House "aid it would not materi1t!isc for twenty yoan.

The SECRETARY FOR MI~ES: This was a big scheme, and why shollld Ipswich not be inc:uded in ;t?

Hon. T. M. HALL: Do the people of Ipswich a si< for it?

The SECRE'rARY .FOR MINES: The representatives of Ipswich m the other Chamber-Mr. Cooper .and 11r. Giedson-­wpported the Bill, and took the full responsi-

bility of doing so. The Hon. Mr. [7.30 p.m.] Sumner mentioned in his second

reading speech that if e. referen­dum were taken ir. Ipswich and district on the questicn of their inclusion under the Bill, it would be carried by about ten to one.

Hon. T. M. H \LL: We would agree tn their inclusion if that were the case.

The SECRETARY FOR :\liNES: It would bo a pity if th2 Bill were amended in such a way as to cut Tpswich out of the scheme If that were done, he was .afraid the Bill would be declared "lost," and then Ipswich would not have an opportunity of coming into the scheme. The only opposition to the inclusion of Ipswich came from a few aldermen who had not toke11 the trouble to gttug~ the feeling of the ratep<tyers of Ipsw10h. It was not necessary to debate every clause, becaust.' most of the amend­ments were consequential on the ono now under discm•ion. Thev could dic,cuss the question of the franchi~c later; but, what­ever ,, as done, he urged the c.)mmittee to accept the dause as it stood, and include Ipswich in the ochmne.

Hox. T. M. HALL: It w ts very unfortu­mltc th<lt thev had not rec0ived anv informa­tion from those wl:.o desirerl Ipswich to be included in thP schemE'. If, as -..he. Minister said, the general feeling in lps'vich as opposed to the amendmcmt, then i:: was a pity that those who lwld that view had not taken the opportunity of exprcs·,ing it. All he knew was what was stated in the pet.ition that was presented by the City Council of Ipswich, who ought to he best ablG to gauge th0 feelings of the people '".'hmTJ. they repre­sented as aldermen. He ndmitted that a

[Hon_ cL J_ Jones.

fortnight ago .a gentleman who Tesided in Ipswich expressed a different opinion to t_he­aldermen, and he (Mr. Hall) said to him that, if that were the case, the people should hold a meeting and ask to be included in the scheme, because the Legislative Council would be guided by the oxpres'oion of opinion. of thoee concerned. He had h1•ard notlnng further on the subject, so that the only evidence thev had was contained in the peti­tion from tlw Ccty Counc·il. Ho earncstl:­desired to ~ive effect t'J the wishec; of the majority ofthe people who were lik0ly to be affectE'd, and no pE'rsonal influence had been brought to bPar upon him by anyone. If the opponents of the amendment represented any large section of the community, loE' would be quite prepared to withdraw his amilndment. He was sorry something could not be done to delav the passage oi the Bill if there was any desire on the part of the people of Ipswich to be included in the Bill.

HoN. T. J. O'SHEA: The Minister seemed to imply that hon. member, were attempting to deprive the people of Ipswich of th<> oppor­tunity oE coming iilto the Mount Edw1.rds scheme. He for one had no ,uch r!osire. If the :Mount Edwards ;,rhemc evermatena~i.,e-d, and it was what it V'as l't presented to be, and they could find tlw money tn carry it out, the people of Ipswich wonld j·1mp at the chance of con1in~; in. But for tifteon or twentv yearB, a11d per hrt ~J~ Iongm~ J thl'3re 'va17 no possible hope of getting a water supply from Mount Edw,·rds, and why should Ipswich be handicapped and compelled to become a sort of harne<cle on Bri1b11ne for all that time when all that the people of Ipqvdch desired was to be Jet alone. He W<O.S a p.-reat believer in the "let alone" princinle, allow­ing a man to manage his own afi<1irs in his own wav. If Ipswich want"d to he omitted until the Mount Edwartls scheme 'n<t•·orialised that could be done. and when the scheme did materialise thev could pass a sm{!il Bin of four dam,cs i~ half an hour, and bring Ipswich unrler ~t. In the .meantime tl;ey should let Jp,wich ma~>age Its own affarrs. Jt seemed to him that [pswich was being n'ed as a stalking·-hor•.e. The mam object of ~he Bill was to put out a feeler in the direchon of substitding the parliamentary mll f.or. the ratepavers' roll. He tl:>ought th•' ~1mrste1· almost' told the truth when he c:1id that he did not expect that principle to be ngr8ed to. In fact he tnou~ht the hon. gentlmnan was a bc1ie~··r in the "tlworv that h0 "·ho naid the piper should c'lll the tune. and that the people who paid th2 water rates ond other ~ontributions should he the people who should sav how tho monPy should be expended. •

The SECRETARY FOR 1VfrNEg: Does not every­one who buys food and elothes help tn pay the rates?

Hox. T. J. O'SHR \: He >''~' not guing; to givE': the Dmnain " doo:;l::iPr" and the ":sun­do-\YDCl'" the rig·ht to !:'a:;t bo 1Y tlle rnoney contributed bv Bris~ant~ or Ips\vich 'vater­ratepayer_, sho\ti.ci be t'Xl)~nded.

The SECRETARY FOR MIXER: Don't you b0lieve that evcr~v person who eat~ food and· ·wears clothes helps to :v~y the rates?

HoN. T. J. O'SHJ<]A: No. Even if the a'T1endment werP a!!reed to. the bond would still have the nower to Q"O on with the Mount Ec!Y:ards scheme to the c·xtent of making-

jV£ etropolitan Water Supply [16 OCTOBER.] and Sewerage, Etc., Bill. 3173

preliminary inve·-,tigations, 'spying out; the territory, and ascertaining what land should be rc~unwd, and, as soon a~ the money was available the scheme could mat8riaiise, and the necessary legislation be pas1ed in half an hour. Under the pre,ent propos<>l the people ·of Ipswich would be given two members on a board of eight or nine members, ail the Dthers representing the 'lletropolitan areas. Was that fair representation to people who asked to be allowed to conduct tneir own affairs until Brisbane was readv to take them in as a partner in the Mount Edwards scheme?

The SECRETARY FOR MJNES: The scheme Ehould extend over the whole area to be ·supplied with water.

Hox. T. J. O'SI-IEA: There was nothing to prevent it extending over the whole aroa to-day. Ipswich now had a water supply which the )H'Ople there reg.:trded as ootter and cheaper than anything thm· were likely to get uq,der the Bill. If th<'V <"Juld get the loan th" vvere promist-'d for pumping pur­poses, they could incr·' a5c the :::up!)ly at very much les- expe:·•e than if mains were laid to Ipswich from :Mount Cro5b'c, Mount Crmbv was nndPr flood mark: and tho Jpsv~·iCh \YUt( i. nlpply 1,\as not unitrr flood mark. Furt!JP>' than that. it was permanent, good. and chf>a-p, and it was quite eufficient for the requirements of Ip,wich if they ha-d the machinery th< _v wanted and the funds tt• enable thmn to lav additional mains. If a man said to him: '" Don't stick your nose into m:r affairs; lot Ino manage ITD~ own businr.ss in my o\vn ·way," he thought it would he a ~Toss impertinence for him to intrude upon that man. The ::\lount E-dwards •·.chcme might never materialisP but why ·~hould they fasten Ipcwieh 011 to Brisbane, when Ipswich alr~ady had a better and cheaper wat0r snppl" than 'Aould be giv('n them under this Rill? Bring Ip ich in when they were ready to . ur,ply the people with water from M{)unt Edwards, but not before. It wonld cost at least £60,GJO to bring water from ::\lount Crmby to Ipswich.

Hon. G. PAGE-HAXIFY: And the alterna­tive scheme will cost £200,000.

Hox. T. J. O'SHE~~-: He was not awarr• of that. Ho took his information from the petition which had been prcsr nted to the Council.

Hon. \V. II. DEoiAIC\'E: They tried to get up a rwtition from the ratepa_,•em. and the:· could g<•t only eighty signatnn s in the whole town.

HoN. T. J. O'SHEA: He was inclined to .accept the opinion of the members of the city counciL who were the repreqentativ<es of the ratepayers.

Hon. \V. H. DEMAINE: They had a man going round for a month, an-d the:: could not get ,ignaturcs to their potition.

Ho:-~. T. J. O'SHEA: He did not believe the Cih Council would make statements which vvere untrue, or ·,;·hich the ratepaye~s could Lke exception to, and until he ha-d better evidence h0 was pt·epared to accept tbe evi.dutc<l in the petition received from the city council. It was an impertinence on the part of Brisbane to intrude on the Ipswich people, who were looking after their own affaint

Hon. G. PAGE·HANIFY: It is not Brisbane; i': is Parliament that is intruding.

HoN. T. J. O'SHEA: This proposal emanated from the Brisbane Water Supply Board oftice.

'Ihe SECRETARY FOR MINES : I thought yon wore going to say from the Trades Hall. (Laughter.)

HoN. T. J. O'SHEA: He thought the Bill was introduced because the Trades Hall had lost control o[ the B'risban8 Water Supply Board. The main object of the mea­sure wa" to air the proposal to amend the franchise. He thought the amendment was one which should be adopted by the Com­mittee.

HoN. A. GIBSON: Among other m<:m­bers, he had received an invttation to visit the Mount Crmby water supply. The in·,·ita­tion came to him late on Saturday night. but he ddermined that, if possible, he woul-d get to Mount Crosby on Monday morning, &s, though he had been there many years before, he wanted to see what wa-s going on at the pr,'sent time. When he wont up in the train he did not know -.,·hat was .,,anted, but when he arrived et ::\1ount Crosbv he met part of the m<>mbers of the Ips,dch Citv Council and part of the members of the lpsw;ch Chamber of Commence, as well ns a number of other t;entle•nen who were .-erv ,,axious to lav their views with regard to "this scheme before members of the Council. Th< ;·e were present two members from the Ipswich council, one revrosenting each ~ide of the question. Though it was a job for an old man like him to travel through the vnllcys and climb hills hundreds of feet hig-h, he er,docvonred to do it, and went up 420 feet in order that he might see as much as possiblP of th0 watPr supply works. He listened to the statements made to him bv the gentlemen representing the Ipswich Cit,v Council and the gentlemen re­)H',·-;enting the Chamber of Commerce, and moved abeut the place and saw all that was to be seen. As they went over the riYcr he noticed that there was not much water at that particular point, but higher up, whore thev were pumping water, he found that the~e was a con,iderable reservoir, which he understood was 90 feet deep. He did not remember how they propoBcd to get that water into Ip·.wich, but he was t-old that, rf thcv o-ot water from :Mount Ed·,c·ards, they wo{ild" have to bring it 50 miles in order to get it into Ipswich. He knew something about such matters, and he believed it would cost a good bit of monry to get that water to the town-probably £200,000 or £300.0QO. Mr. ::\1anchester, the president of the I3ns­bano \Vatf'r Supplv Boa!'d, tvld tho gentle­men present that there was sufficient wat<>r at Mount Crosby to meet all the require­ments of Ipswich. He said, without any hesitation that, if, as they said. it was

possible to supply water for [8 p.m.] ye;<rs, without any neces6ity for

spending £100,000, and at no vrea.t cost, it should be done. He felt that there was a class of people in Ipswich who wanted to get the water for nothing. The feP!in;:; of a great many people was that whoeyer was supplied with the water should ehare in the cost. If it could be done, they should give Ipswich their water and wait for a better time to bring the water down from Mount Edwards and irrig-ate the people's properti<.'s and supply the whole of their needs.

H 01J. A. Gibson. J

3174 Metropolitan Water S:tpply [COUNCIL.] and Sewerage, Etc., Bi!l.

HoN. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: He was rather surprised that the Minister had not taken the trouble to give some detailed contradiction to the petition which had been put. in by the maym· and aldennen of Ip,wich. It had been before the Chamber sufficiently long to enab].-. the Government, if they were interested in getting the Bill through, to have obtained a contradiction of thE• assertions mad'l bv the Ipswich City CounciL They had not dam• so. and he .thought that until they did something in that direction that Chamber ought to post­pone the consideration of the Bill. He looked upon it as an unfair proceeding for cne local authority to ]ay hold of another local authoritv without the consent of the btter. They "had no proof of any kind as to what was the inauguration of the scheme -·-whether it came -from the people of Tr.·'Wich, or was a selfish move by the Bris­lJ:me \Vater Supply and SewNage Board. TheJ had very stron'i as"ertions made by the· mayor of Ipswich, who said that the scheme, as at present outlined, would not do them any good; i< was not going to bring Mount Edwards water to them, and until the "atPl- was brought from Mount Edwards their position would not be improved. Further than that, they said that. until the water was brought from Mount Edward·:, the intervening places between Ipswich and Brisbane would not be benefited-that there would not be sufficient water to supplv them. They also said that they would be perfectly satisfied with th(· present water supply, pro­v;dod they got a loan of £40,000. which would c>nable them to make their -.vater supply perfectly safe and secure; that, if this scheme went on. it would probably cost £60.000. and that it would mean a lot of

. rdiculation, and it would take fifteen months to complete. According to the petition, the scheme was not going to benefit Ipswich at the pre•,,nt time. It had been ,aid that whPn the 11!Iount Edwards scheme matured would '"' the time to bring- Ipswich in. Then, h8 under,toccl from the City Council, they would be perfectly s:J.tisfi<'d to come in, becausil they would be assured of a very much better supply of water than under the proposed conditions of the Bill. Thev also said that. if a dam was put acroS3 'the river below :!\rount Crosbv. it would ensure a verv much increas(d suppl: for Brisbo.ne. Thev had hPen told for a long time that. if the I~ri.;bane \Yater Suppl: and Sewerage Bo>1rd obtained the control of Cabbage-tree C: eek and the dam the~; put up thNe, th~ control of Mount Crosb•. and the Gold Creek and Enoggera reservoirs, there would be an ample water supply for Brisbane for many years to come. If that was the case. why eould they not be. satisfied without going to the greater expense of bring-in5~ in a local authority to assist in paying their f!,,bts-which local authoritv '''as not desir­ous of coming in? Until the" petition was con­tradicted. thev mmt take it that th0 local o nthority rep;·csentod the bulk of opinion in Ipswich. Under all the circumstances. th" Minister should get a report from th~ v\'atr,r Supply and Sewerag-e Board contro­verting in some way the contents of that petiti?n. . U_nti_l that 'Yas done, they were not Justified m treatmg the petition as worthless, but they were entitled to attach a. very great deal 1f importance to a peti­twn from a body like the Ipswich City Council.

[Hon. A. G. G_. Hawthorn.

The SECRE'rARY FOR l\H='JES: He wall' vndcr the impressi<•n that hon. gentlemen would have been sufficienth- convit•ced when lw quoted the report from" the " Queensland' 'Ti1nes"-a paper iargely circulating in Ipswich.

Hon. T. M. HALI.: It is only one man's opinion-the opinion of the man who writes it.

The SECRETARY FOR MI"<ES: It might be one man's opinion. All he was concerned about was endeavouring- to see that the will of the people should -be given cifect to.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: That is wha.t ''· e are here for.

Hon. T. M. HALL: We have only the will of the people or.. one side.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : It appeared to him the Committee would accept the Bill, including Ipswich, if they were sure that the majority of the people of Ip·wich wanted it.

Hon. T. M. HALL: That is the position.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: The bon. gentleman could take that assuranc.• from the Government.

Hon. A. G. C. HA WTHOR!'f : Backed up by v:hat evidence?

The SECRET_\RY FOR MI='JES: Backed llj1 by the represeJr'atives of the people in IcJswich.

Hon. T. M. HALL: Two men.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: :'\'!:en who represented the people of Ipswich.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: vVho will swallow the· Bill holus bolus if they get the franchisc .

The SECRETARY FOR MI2'i"TcS: That was not so. The " Queensland TiPles" gav·: an opinion better expressing the will of the people of Ipswich in that case than the City Council.

Hon. E. W. H. FowLES: Is that an editorial?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: Yes. The people's representatives of Ipswich in the other House had supported the Bill. They had gauged the feeling of the people of Ipswich on the matter.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: Is the Ipswich water supply as bad as Brisbane's?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: There was a he .tted discussion in the City Council when it w1s decided to present a petition to Parliament, and it was carried by seven votes to foll,r ; therefore some of the repre­sentatives of the Citv Council were in favour of Ipswich being ilwluded.

Hon. T. M. HALL: Why did not they have their views repreqented to this Chamber? That is all we want to know.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: Pro­bably if they had anticipated that there would have been any serious opposition to Ipswich being included in the Bill thPy would haYe taken the precaution of having a referendum on the matter.

Hon. T. l\'I. HALL: I have heard it dis­cu•scd for the la't four weeks going up in the train every day.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: They could not get behind the fact that a vast

Metropolitan Water Supply '[16 OCTOBER.] and Sen·erage, Etc., Bill. 3175

majority of the people were in favour of the proposal. The Hon. Mr. Gibson had formed that opinion, and so ·had the Hon. Mr. Sumner. The Hon. Mr. Sumner said that no less than twelve to one would vote in favour of including Ipswich in the BilL It was to"o late to follow the suggestion of the Hon. Mr. Hawthorn, because they knew very well .that the session would close at the end of the week or the beginning of next week, and there was n<J opportunity of getting a vote taken of the people of Ipswich on the matter. He did not know that they had the necessary machinery for taking a vote. The Ipswich supply was practically exhausted, and they all knew that they were in a very bad way. Ao a matter of fact, the engineer reported that he would not be further responsible for the future supply so far as Ipswich was concerned.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: That is not the fault· of the supply, but of the machinery.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: The Hon. Mr. O'Shea said that, if Ipswich was not included, they proposed to spend some­thing over £100,000 on another scheme, and they coqld come in later. That would be duplicating the work. \Vhv not include Ipswich in the scheme now? He had all the reports thPre by the engineers and experts, and they were favourable. He had the report of the City Council, which had expressed its willingness to eome into the Mount Edwards scheme.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: Yes, of course, when you are r<>ady.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: Well. do it now.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: This is not the lVlount 1<..<1war<1s scneme. The plan snows that.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: The Mount Edwards scheme may never materialise.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: For the life of him, he could not see why Ipswich should be excluded from the BilL Why duplicate the work?

Hon. T. M. HALL: Are they coming in voluntarily, or are they being dragooned in?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: The fact was that the water supply of Ipswich was practically exhausted, and the engineer would not be responsible for the future supply. The hon. gentleman said he woultl force the people of Ipswich and the rate­payers generally to engage in an under­taking that would cost something over £100.000. and the work would need to be duplicated. He had not anticipated any opposition to the Bill, otherwise ou the second reading he would have given fuller infor­mation. He had the material but he did not think it was necessary to give it. There had been no good reason given to that Chamber why Ipswich should be excluded from the scheme. The petition, with all due respect to the City Council. did not express the will of the people of Ipswich. The will oi the people o[ Ipswich was bPtter ex­prc<sed by their parliamentary represellta­tiv.es in the other House than by the City Council's petition to that Chamber.

.. 'l.n HoNOcRABLF ME~BER : Did the parlia­mentary representatives take a vote or a referendum, or how did they know?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: They kr:e':" thei: business. They were §very d":y m1xmg w1th the people, and it was theu

dl(ty to represent the people of Ipswich. They were well able to do that, and, no doubt, they were expressing the will of the people. If there were a majority of twelve to one against Ipswich coming into the scheme it would haye been made known to the representatives, who would have voiced that opinion in the oth<>r Chamber. He hoped the Council would be reasonable. He knew that hon. members opposite were doubt­ful as to which way they should vote. If tht'Y knew, as the Government knew, that a majority of the people of Ipswich wanted to come under the Bill--

Hon. P. J. LF\HY: \Ye have no proof of that.

Hon. T. M. HALL: Have you any com­munication from them?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: Why not accept the assurance of the Government? It was the Government's funeral if they were doing anything- against the will of the majority of the people.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: The City Council ought to know better than you do.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: They do not.

Hon. T .• J. O'SHEA: I think you knew very little aboqt this yesterday.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: The hon. gentlema.n said that he (Mr. Jones) had not made a long speech.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: I asked you some questions you could not answer, and you stopped.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: As he interjected a little while ago, he thought +h..-....,. h..,..-:1 ... n+ Qnn1o fl11£H<tlnn.::: to thfl hon. ger{tleman from that side of the House that he would rather not have had put to him.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: I was answering them, but the President stopped me.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: He hoped the amendment would not be carried, as it would wreck the Bill. The Bill was of no use without the inclusion of Ipswich.

HoN. T. J. O'SHEA: If the people of Ipswich wanted the Bill, he was prepared to give it to them; but his present impresslou was that thev did not want it. 'fhe Ministe, said that he. knew more about the wants of Ipswich in regard to water supply than the municipal councillors of Ipswich. He was prepared to be!ieYe that the councillors in Ipswich knew more about those requirements than the Minister did.

The SECRETARY FOR MIXE:S : I spoke of the BilL They know more about the backyards of Ip.swich than I do.

Hox. T. J. O'SHEA: He thought the councillors knew more about the Bill than the Minister did two days ago. Hr was quite convinced that the hon. gentleman took no interest in the matter whatever until he began to read the speech which was put into his hands on the second reading. \Vhen he asked the Minister a question he could not answer him. and immediately sat down with­out even cvncluding his speech in the usual fashion. Now he told them th:lt he knew more about the requirements of Ipswich and ih water supply than the municipal coun­cillors of Ipswich did. This was a matter of great irr.portance to the city of Ipswich. He had no intHest in the matter one way or the other. He did not own any land in Ipswich and had no rates to pay there, but

Hon. T. J. O'Shea.J

31/G Metro;J:Jfitan Water Supply [COU:::fCIL.] and Sewerage, Etc., Bill.

he was impressed with the ·.tatements in the petition.

Hon. T. M. HALL : There is no evidence to the contrary.

Hox. T. J. O'SHEA: He was quite willing to delav the matter, as the Hon. Mr. Haw­thorn suggested, and get evidence.

The SECRETiRY FOR :MIXES: Until when?

Ho"'. T. J. O'SHEA: As long as the Mini~tcr liked. The Minister owed an apology to the Council for rushing the Bill in in the last days of the session, and expect­ing them to put it through without com­ment, when a petition against it was pre­sen,cd by the water ratepavers and municipal ratepayers of Ipswich. This was the sort of Bill that should have been introduced in the early days of the session, when they were sitting da v after da v with nothing to do. Thcv' were now ex))octed to shovel this mea'surc through in the last week of the Sf•cion. On the evidence before him, he could not do otherwise than vote against the inclusion of Ipswich. The Minister thought that it was the dutv of hon. members to pass "''ery Bill which h{. introduced en bloc, and his army b_hind him seemed to be of the same opinion. If that were the universal opinion of the Chamber, there would be no use in sittii1g there a.t all.

Hon. R. sv~TXER: \Yill you pa•·S it with a proviso that if a referendum of the peoplP of Ip wich "'lpports it you will agree with it.

Hox. T. J. O'SHEA: If a referendum of the water ratepayers of Ipswich supported it h<• 'vould, a" they had a right to say whether this scheme should be placed on them or not.

\n IIoxOl'RABLE ME1IBEH: 'What about the people who want the water and cannot get it?

HoK. T. ,J. O'SHE_.,: The people who want• d the "a tor and could not get it could not be supplied by the :\Iount Ed\\ ards scheme for the next twenty years. The people> who wanted the water, and were ,-ithin reasonable distance of it, could got it fmm the schenw which the Ipswich water cuthority had in hand, if they got the loan of £42,000 which they required for that pur­pose. That loan would "upply Ipswich from a place that "as above flood mark with wat,r, and would cover all the requirements for tho n,>xt t_hirt:;· } cears. The sch<'me from Mount Crosby, which was not so good. would cost £60,000 at least, and, perhaps, £80,000. and if the Mount Edwards scheme materialised, that money would be lost. The money which the municipal council of Ipswich now proposed to ~xpend was largely in con­nection with machinery and mains. The Minister said they could not get a sufficient supply. Gi ,-e them the machinery and the mains they wanted.

Hon. R. SUMXER: The machinery is there. Ho~. T .• J. O'SHEA: They had got to lay

a mam from Mount Crosby, which would cost £60,000, before they could supply the wn tor. 'I'he" would get a better and a cheape;· supply by the scheme proposed by the municipal council of Ipswich within fif­teen months. He was a keen advocate for eJmndanc<: of good, pure water. The lj)<lwich water supnly w .JS better even than the Bris­bane water supply. The water they got. in Brisbane for h:o or three dave a week was more often like sewagP than ,;,ater, yet they v. ere told that it was better than the Ipswich

[Hon. T. J. O'Shea.

st pply. Ipswich should be left to look after it>elf until th~.y got the Mount Edwards schf'me, and, ets •oon ·as they got that, they would gl:tdly 0ome in.

Ho". G. PAGE-HANIFY: It seemed to !;;m an extraordinary thing that the Council should attach so much weight to a petition from an outside body.

Hon. T. M. HALL : There is no other petition.

HoN. G. PAGE-HANIFY: The proper "'~Y for peopl'l to convey· their representa­tions to Parlia;nent -.•.-"s throng-h th'l repre­scnta ti ve for the district, and in this case thE rc·presentativc was strongly in favour of lbe Bill.

Hc.n. T. M. HALL: Can he show that he lcpreF'"}nts anybodJ?

Hox. G. P _\GE-HANIFY: Hro was the elected !:'Cpresent Ltivo of Ips,vich, and, as sncl:. was sensitivcc to the opinions of the pc·ople, otnd wa.3 not going to press for any­thing that was opposed to the \V!Shes '?f the "'" ;orit-· of th<• neople. It would be nskmg his' nolltical life to do so. After all, the retitlon only represented eight aldermen.

Hon. T. M. HALL: Thf're is no opposition to it.

Hox. G. PAGE-HANIFY: Bec1•.use no­Lcdy thought it worth while. Th.e oth.c;r pPqJle, apparently, h,u1 confidence In their i't~presentative ln Parliament. I-Ie \vas Bur­prisc·d to lwar the athtck made upon the Metropolitan \Vater and Sewerage Board and the Brisban'" water. He had been drinking the Brisbane water for the last thirtv-f\vo ve:ms, and it was good, pure ,- 1tcr, and.' if the people of Ipswich got no W')rse water. the' would do vt~ry well. It seo.,.,_ed to be a habit in diffe,·cnt cities to declaim againEJt the "\vator supply. He re­D10nlbered years ago in l\felbourne it ·\vas a poprilar thi!'g to deelaim against t.he, Yan Yean reservOir, the 'vater from ,,hich was I'''ettv bad in regt<rd to the smell. Far from the ·petition representing the per,pl{) of Ip.·wich, ,uch representative men a" :\h. H. S. Gribb, and M,:. ,J. G. Cribb, "-ho was pi'<esident of the Ipswich Chamber of C,:;m­rnt•rco. strongly frrvoured this ~ch"me. They were in favour of the BJ!l. with the excep­tion of the franchise cluuse, and it could not be expected that they would favour that. He could understand the Committee amend­ing the franchicc, but to cut ou.t Ipswich and ,,Jl other places along the lme from the br::wfit of a pnro water supply within ::" rea­sonable time. was a very improper thmg to rlo ,,pan the. rqprosentations which hrvd b~en made. He .,, as told that the IpswiCJ:l en~ineer had officiallv informed his council th~t- hcc would not be responsible for the safetv of Ipswich in case of fire, with the r-r<>scnt wa:<;r supply.

Hon. •r J. O'SEEA: ·with the present rnachinery.

HoN. G. P AGE-HANIFY: The Hon. Mr. O'Shea had spoken of laying the ':Vater. from 1\Immt Crosby to Ipswich 1y a p1 pc lme at a cost of £60,000, and said that would be ,. .. , tcd some da7 when the Mount Edwards schemQ was brou"ght into nso. He (Mr. Page­Hc.nify) did not, think it would be wasted. The Bill provided for a very much enlarged ,,, ater area, not only including: Ipswich, J;mt cvc11 big are:l.R around I!risbane, whiCh wanted water. The populatiOn would gl'OW in those places, and an increased supply would be required. There would be an

1l1etropolitan Water Supply [Hi OCTOBER.] and Sewe1·ag·e, Etc., Hill. 3177

alternativ<> supply of water, and, in the .svent of chor~~gc in one place, the other Hipply could be used. On the other hand, thr> echeme which the Ipswich water authority wanted to go in for, he was told, would involve an expenditure of from £150,000 to £200,000.

That information was given to him by one of the Ipswich representatives in the <:>ther Chamber, who knew what he was talking about. The people of Ipswich wanted

to be included in the scheme, and [8.30 p.m.] there were many other places

outside Ipswich whose claims for a "at er suppiy in the immediate future were invoived in the Bill. He hoped the Hon. Mr. Hall would withdraw his amendment. He knew it was brought forward in good faith and on the strength of the petition that had been presented by the Ipswich City Council, but he did not think hon. members :ohould be guided so readily by such docu­ments. The proper channel for communica­tion with Parliament was through the repre­sentativf'e uf the district concerned. Mr. Cooper, >vho represented a part of Ipswich, would not have given him the information he had unle,; it was absolutely correct. The Hon. ~.lr. Sumner had given them some figures showing that it VI as to the financial benefit of the water ratepayers of Ipswich that they should be included in the Bill, and he was sure the information would not have bec·n v.ivcn unless it was accurate. He hoped the Bill would not be destroyed, as it would be if the amendrr,ents were carried, because the: would spoil the purpose of the Bill, which was to arrange for an economical 1.'ater supply for a very big area. Of course he would like to see the franchise altered, Lut he rccogni,ed that was not at all likely. Hon. members opposite were not going to agree to the franchise proposed in the Bill, but, with amendmc tts in that direction and ':nne minor amcndnwnts, it would still be a good Bill so long a' the.·: did not interfere with the area to be supplied.

Hox. R. SU:Yl~ER hoped the amendment wouJ.d not be· prr~sc·d, because it practically meant the destruction of the Bill. He asked Mr. Cribb what the people of Ipswich de­"ired in the matter, and Mr. Cribb assured him that the people would vote for their inclusion under the Bill by twelve to one.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: That was the Mount Edwards scheme.

HoN. R. SUMNER: No, the Mount Urosby scheme. The Mount Edwards scheme was not likely to eventuate for years to come. That would be a big scherr,e, but the present scheme was that of the Mount Crosby supply. The present Ipswich water supply was in­adequate, as it only supplied a few people. Mr. Cribb and ::\1r. Bishop _could not get enough water at the present time to have a bath, and the great mass of workers around Ipswich had no water laid on at all. Mount Crosby was within a few miles of Ipswich, and even without extra pumping machinery they could pump 24,000,000 gallons per day. Even if there should be an extraordinarily severe drought lasting for twelve months they had the Cabbage Tree Creek supply to fall back upon. The water there could be pumped into the river, and then the pumps at Mount Crosby could deal with it. Hon. members opposite said that by spending a few thousands of pounds on the present Ipswich supply they would have sufficient to supply Ipswich, but his information was that

they would have to build a reservoir, which would cost from £200,000 to £250,000, when the reservoir already built at Mount Crosby, which was almost as near as the present Ip:cwich water supply, would supply all the requirements of Ipswich. In his opinion it would be a criminal thing for any Treasurer to grant any further loan to the Ipswich people to be expended in connection with their present supply when there was more than sufficient water already available at :;\iount Urosby.

Hox. K W. H. FOWLES : It would be at least fifteen rr,onths b<'fore either scheme could be completed, and he woul-d suggest that the :Ylinister should add a proviso to the clause making provision for a poll of the ratepayers in the Ipswich district to be take: uot late1' than the municipal elections in February next. If a majority of the ratepa:-ors were in favour of the inclusion of Ipswich under the Bill, then the Bill could immediately come into effect. If the majority were a(\ainst it, then the Act would not ;'pp!: to Ipswich.

Hon. G. P AGE-HANIFY : \Vho would vote­the water ratepayers or the municipal rate­payers?

Ho:,. E. \V. H. FO\VLES: The ratepayers. If tlw ratepayers anted the sche-me, let th0m have it. Ho would suggest postponing the clam·· if the l\Iini.;tcr were prepared to accPpt such an amendment as he had out­lined, which could be properly drafted and ,ubmittt'd the following day.

Hox. T. ::\1. HALL: The sugg·estion made b: the Hon. Mr. Fowles commended itself t~ him. He had no interest whatever in the mdtcr beyond the fact that the only repr<! .eni .tions that had been rr,ade in con­nocti,,n ,,-ith the matter had been against the inclucion of Ipswich. If it were dis­covered that it was the desire of the Ipswich people to be included in the ocheme by all means let them come under it. If the sug­gestion made by the Hon. Mr. Fowles would nwet the case he was prepared to accept it anl withdraw his amendment.

The SECRETARY FOR :vii~ES: The mggestion made by the Hon. ::\1r. Fov-ks was better than carrying the amendment. He wculd like to have th<l Bill carried as it came from the Assemblv, J.ecause he was convinced that the people of J pswich de~ired tc come under the ech0me. The sugg·estion of the Hon. Mr. Fowks seemed to be a. "ay out of the difficulty. Be was loth to think that hon. gentlemen wished to pro­Yent Ipswich coming under the scheme if the people of Ipswich wanted to be in­cluded-(Hear. hcar !)-and it ooemE'd to ~ a fair thing to gh·e the people of Ipswich an opportunity of oxprr~eing their wishes in the matter. He had not had time to consulc the Premier or anv of the ether \1inisters, but the suggo~tion certainl.v a.ppealed to hiJ?, and he hoped hon. mem~rs would aocept 1t.

Hon. 'I'. ::\1. HALL : If it i accepted, we can put the Bill through in twenty minutes to-morro\v.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: He would suggest, however, that the poll should he taken in November, and that they should ha Ye tho :,a me franchise as for the Metro­politan \Vater Supply and Sewerage Board, which gave occupiers as well as householders a vote.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: Is there a eepa.rate water ratepayers' roli for Ipswich?

Hon . .A. J. Jones.]

3178 Metropolitan Water, Etc., Bill. [COUNCIL.] Adjournment.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES : He did not know. but he could find out in a very short time.

Hon. E. W. H. FowLES: Will any election be taking place before the end of the year, so that the cost may be minimised?

'l'he SECRETARY FOR MINES: He found, on inquiry, that there was no separate water ratepayers' roll for Ipswich. The populatwn of Ipswich was wmething like 22, OCO, and only 11,000 people were sup­plie•d with water, which showed the con­dition of Ipswich so far as a water supply was concerned. If a poll were not taken till February, it would delay the machinery of the Bill for some considerable time and h<' belieycd it would be quite conveni~nt to tr,ke the poll at the end of November.

Hon. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: \Ye are quite agreeable to that.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: He thought, however, that they should give all occupiers a vote, even although they were not wat1 r ratepayers at the pre€ent time. The poll might be taken on the household iranchisc.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: On the municipal mtcpayers' mll.

The SECRETARY FOR ~1INES: He would much prder it to be taken on a householders' roll, which mr.~nt much the same thing, because the househo1der paid the rates.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: Can you get such a roll?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: I think so.

Hon. \V. STEPHEl'<S: Lots of water rak­payers pay rates on vacant land.

The SECRE'L\.R Y FOR MINES : He thought it would be a fair thing to take the poll on the householder franchise, although It was not as broad as the franchise in con­nection with the :Vletropolitan \Vater Supply and Sewerage Board.

Hon .. E'. W. H. FoWLES: There would be n dday in preparing the roll. You had better take it on the municipal voters' rolL

The SECRETARY FOR ::VIINES: That was a very restricted franchise, and many people who were not now supplied with water but would come under the scheme of the Bill would be deprived of a vote under that franchise. Ho was not asking for an a·dult franchise. though, perhaps, he should ?o so. If the hon. members opposite wished It, they could take the poll on the pulia­mentary roll. (Laught·er.)

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: That would not be fair.

The SECRJ<~TARY FOR :\liNES: Well, he would not argue the point ; but surely hon. members would agree to taking the poll on the householders' roll.

Hon. A. G C. HAWTHORN: You would want a now roll prepared.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: There is no such thing as a householdorb' rolL

The SECRETARY FOR l\1INE:o: Well if it proved to be impraeticabl0 they could amend the Bill afterwards. '

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: \Vould not the muni­cipal voters' roll be a good barometer?

The SECRETARY FOR :YHNES: Then hon. gentlemen opposite would have the 1;tlvan~ago, because it was a voi-y restricted iranch1se. A great many people who paid

[Hon. A. J. Jones.

the rates in the shape o: rent would not be­included in that roll.

Hen. A. G. C. HAWTHORN: 'I'he repre­sent:.ttive of Ipswich could possibly tell you how. many ratepayer•, were on the roll, and that would be a fair criterion of the number that would vote.

The SECRETARY FOR ::YIIXES: He hoped that. if the amendment suggested by the Hon. Mr. Fowles were mserted in the Bill, the poll would be taken in November. · Hon. T. M. HALL: What do you propose to do now-to move the Chairman out of the chair and deal with the matter to-morrow?

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: If hon. gentlemen opposite would submit an amend­ment confining the franchise to the rate­payers on the roll, hon. members on that side would not oppose the amendment.

Hon. T. M. HALL: All the amendments circulated in my name are incidental to the one I '.;a vo mon'd, and I think they should be postponed until it is ascertained whether the Committee will consent to the proposed prOVISO.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: He c~uld inform the Committee that it would be convenient to take a poll in ?\ovember.

Hon. T. J. O'SHEA: You will have a general election in FebruarJ under the Local Authoritie& Act. \Vhy incur the expense of two polls? ·

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: To give time for further consideration of the matter, he thought it would be wise to postpone the rest of the Bill until the following day. He therefore moved-That the Chairman leave the chair, report progrccs, and ask leave to sit again.

The Council resumed. The CHAIR~fAN re­ported progress; and the Committee obtained leaYc to sit again to-morrow.

ADJOUR::\"~1ENT.

The SECRETARY FOR MINES: In Yiew of the situation which has arisen in connection with the Metropolitan and Ipswich \Vater Supply and Sewerage Acts Amendment Bill, and on the understanding that a vote will be taken on the Constitution Act Amend­ment Bill early to-morrow, I would suggest that we should now adjourn. It seems to m() that it will be nnwise to go on with the \Yakr and Se\verage Bill while an impor­tant amend,ment is pending, and if we adjourn now I shall be given an opportunity of consl!lting with the leader of the Govern­ment. The first business to-morrow will be the notice of motion standing in mv name with reference to the adoption of the report of the Standing Orders Committee recom­mending certain amendments in the Code·

, of Standing Rules and Orders. That report, wili b., i,smd early to-monow morning. The next business will be the consideration of tLP Assembly's message with regard to the Succe,sion and Probate Duties Acts Amend­ment Bill, and their message with reference to the Stamp Act Amendment Bill. After that we shall take the second reading of the• Constitution Act Amendment Bill, and then the other business in the order in which it appears on the paper. I moyc-

" That the Council do now adjourn.'' Question put and pa·;ced.

The Council adjourned at seven minutes to 9 o'clock p.m.