First published in 2004 by: Western Australian Parliamentary History Project Publications

The Parliament of Western Australia Parliament House, Perth.

© Western Australian Parliament 2004-10-07

This book is copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission. Enquiries should be made to the publisher.

Phillips, Harry C. J. (Harry Charles John), 1943-. Speakers and presidents of the Western Australian

Parliament.

Bibliography. Includes index. ISBN 1 920830 41 3.

1. Western Australia. Parliament. Legislative Assembly -Speaker - Biography. 2. Western Australia. Parliament. Legislative Council - Presiding officer - Biography. 3. Legislative bodies - Western Australia - History. 4. Legislators - Western Australia - Biography. 5. Western Australia - Politics and government. I. Western Australia.

Parliament. IL Title.

328.9410762

Parliamentary History Advisory Committee Membership Professor David Black, Chairman; Hon. Fred Riebeling, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly; Hon. John Cowdell MLC, President of the Legislative Council;

Professor Geoffrey Bolton; Hon. George Cash MLC; Dr Harry Phillips; Ms Margaret Quirk MLA; Mr Laurie Marquet; Mr Peter McHugh (Secretary)

Designer: Hollice Rundle and Associates Visual Communications 6 Carob Court, O'Connor, Western Australia, 6163

The Hon. Sir Harold SEDDON ===------~-==~

President: 26 November 1946 to 21 May 1954

f jf'arold Sedd~n shared with ~is predece~sor, Jame~ Cornell, a long period of ~f-~ =-~ representation of a Goldfields' provmce, leadmg also to the status of

JL -fl~ 'Father of the House', as well as beginning his political activities as a Labor Party man. Like Cornell he became a Nationalist after the Labor conscription split of 1917, although the move to the non-Labor side of politics took place before his election to the Legislative Council. His presidency was terminated by a loss at the polls in the 1954 Legislative Council elections, making him the first to suffer such a fate whilst holding the high office of President. As Gore (1975, p. 114), in his thesis on the Legislative Council, designated 1930 to 1950 'the high water mark of conservatism', it was during Seddon's term as President that the conservative ascendancy was under serious challenge. The continuation of war-time rent controls was an explosive issue, with some Liberals in the Legislative Council seeking to 'cut its [rent control] ugly throat from ear to ear' (LC, 13 April 1954, pp. 121, 145-150; Layman, 1991, pp. 167-177). The Conference of Managers, provided for in the Standing Orders, was often invoked during his term as President. When the 1954 Council elections took place, after more than a year of resistance to the new Labor Government led by Bert Hawke, the Liberal Party suffered a serious reverse with the ageing Seddon one of the casualties. In fact, it was the closest, to that point, that Labor had ever come to having a majority in the Legislative Council.

Earlier in his parliamentary career Seddon had been a vocal critic of the quest for secession. He spoke strongly against the eventual conduct of the 1933 secession referendum. At the very least, he argued, it would be prudent to delay the referendum until after the 1933 election as the likely victory of a new Labor Party Government would alter the dynamics of the situation (LC, 15 December 1932, p. 2478). Seddon feared that a referendum would seriously damage the relationship between the State and Federal tiers of government. While he conceded that federation had brought some economic woes to Western Australia, partly because of inappropriate policies such as tariff protection rather than free trade, he stated, 'we recognise that the national ideal has become stronger and stronger, and today there is a deep sense of pride amongst the citizens of the Commonwealth of being members of the Federal Union'. In fact, Sedd9n was confident 'that when the secession issue was placed before the people of Western Australia the federal sentiment will be proved to be stronger than all the arguments that have been advanced by secessionists' (LC, 15 December 1932, p. 2477). Then, after the

Eighth President of the Legislative Council Chronological order of election to the Legislative Council No. 125 (Nationalist, Liberal from 1945)

MLC North-East Province, 1922 - 21 May 1954 President of the Legislative Council, 26 November - 21 May 1954 Chairman, Main Roads Board Select Committee Father of the House, 1950-1954

PAGE 58

T H H D S l l ,\ 0 L D E D 0

referendum indicated strong support for secession, Seddon was annoyed with both the appointment and personnel of a committee formed to prepare an address to the British Government. As Seddon complained:

Another place [ the Legislative Assembly] has the effrontery to ask this House to agree to pass over to this outside committee a matter that is the most momentous that has passed through Parliament since the establishment of the Commonwealth. The suggestion is to pass it on to two unsophisticated ignoramuses in Constitutional law - Mr Watson and Mr Dudley - two died-in-the wool partisans [in a six-man committee], calmly and dispassionately to set out the case for secession for submission to the highest tribunal in the British Empire - His Majesty the King and the Imperial Parliament (LC, 20 September 1933, p. 983).

Interestingly, Seddon also made some observations about how a weakness in the federation had been created. In his view, 'when the Federal Constitution was framed, and the bicameral system was introduced, we gave equality of representation to the wrong House'. As finance was controlled by the House of Representatives, with the Senate only having a veto power, it has meant that the stronger States control the purse strings. What should have happened was a federation with one house of Parliament, in which equal representation was given to all States (LC, 15 December 1932, p. 2479). Seddon appreciated that a reconstruction of the Constitution was unlikely and he also realised that he was not going to be able to thwart the secession referendum. However, Seddon was able to gain the passage of an amendment to ensure that the referendum results be published in district or electorate form so that it was possible to ascertain the patterns of support for secession (LC, 15 December 1932, p. 2488). When this took place, it provided Seddon with a motive to move a motion to include a representative from the electorates which voted 'no' iri the referendum in the committee charged to prepare the case for secession (LC, 20 September 1933, p. 981).

During his service Seddon gave long and considered speeches in the Legislative Council, at one stage recording his reservations about Presiding Officers ruling against members reading prepared statements to the House (LC, 15 December 1932, p. 2476). In fact, when Seddon was elected as President it was complained that the Chamber had 'lost a very able debater from the floor of the House' (LC, 12 August 1958, p. 15). Seddon strongly believed in the merits of the market, stating in the depths of the Great Depression, 'had only freedom of trade been allowed to take its natural course, we should not have had the tremendous swing that has taken place in prices'. Seddon added that another way of overcoming difficulties was 'to inculcate in our people principles of self-help and self reliance' which had been pushed to the background in the last 20 years of legislative efforts (LC, 22 September 1932, p. 765). Seddon was supportive, however, of better worker's compensation for men suffering from miners' phthisis (LC, 22 September 1932, p. 761), and was prepared to support the arbitration system of wage determination. However, he was critical of the attitudes sometimes adopted by labour unions which, he believed, should have been subject to the application of penal provisions for causing continual stoppages and disturbances rather than adopting more co-operative attitudes (LC, 22 September 1932, p. 768).

PAGE 59

Interestingly, Seddon was well ahead of his time in promoting a national superannuation scheme rather than a continuation of the system of old-age pensions (LC, 22 September 1932, p. 768). Later he spoke in favour of a Members of Parliament Fund Bill, which came before the Legislative Council in late 1941. The Bill's main object was to provide some compensation for members when, for whatever reason, they lost their parliamentary seat. Said Seddon, in the depths of World War II:

As to any contingencies that may arise, such as the abolition of State Parliaments, we can take those hurdles when we reach them. If the Japanese or the Germans win this wa1; I leave it to the imagination of members to decide what our position would be. We ought to give the scheme a trial; and, whatever our sins of commission, they will fall upon posterity and will only be a drop in the ocean compared with the other sins that will be passed on to them (LC, 12 December 1941, p. 2685).

Of course, as a money Bill, such an initiative had to be introduced in the Legislative Assembly. Not unexpectedly, though, President Seddon had to rule on the vexed question of money Bills. In 1952, during the passage of the Stamp Act Amendment Bill, Seddon contended:

This House cannot amend a tax Act. It can amend, and has on occasion amended, an assessment Act. It is very important, because this House must have the power to take any action it desires on assessment Acts. Of the two measures which have been brought before us tonight, one is simply a taxing measure and it [is] one that we cannot amend; we must accept or reject it. The Bill under discussion now may be defined as an assessment measure ... I contend that this Bill comes within the 'relative purposes' for which the Stamp Act has provided. The Stamp Act and this measure are simply the machinery whereby the winning bets tax is to be imposed. For that reason I give my ruling that the Bill is in order (LC, 11 December 1952, p. 2904).

However, a senior Labor member, Gilbert Fraser, soon to become 'Father of the House', who had heard many of the money rulings since 1928, felt impelled to move dissent (which was defeated) from the President's ruling. He declared:

I cannot understand many parts of the ruling. How is it possible to link up a tax as being a 'relative purpose' under the provisions of the Stamp Act is beyond me. I shall not go into the pros and cons of the debate prior to your delivering your ruling, Mr President, except to say that the Minister for Agriculture was stretching the thing a long way when he tried to link up betting tickets with a winning bets tax (LC, 11 December 1952, p. 2904).

. ., Another conundrum which came before Harold Seddon (Sir Harold from 1951) was the need to give a ruling on 'sub judice' during a debate in 194 7 on the Government Railways Act Amendment. 'Sub judice' means under judicial consideration but not yet decided, and therefore not to be commented upon. Charles Latham (a future President, from 1958 to 1960) raised a point of order as to whether the Bill was properly before the House inasmuch as, at present, a Royal Commission was inquiring into all the activities of the Railway Department. In response Sedddon said:

The Commission is entitled to conduct its investigations within the terms of reference to the fullest extent of its powers and to bring in a report in

PAGE 60

! 1 I 1

accordance with those terms. It was appointed to examine, inquire into, and report upon the management etc. of the Midland Junction Railway Workshops and the supply of local coal to the government railways generally. The Royal Commission in this case is not a court of law. I point out that my decision is supported by the action of Mr Speaker in another place. I rule that the Bill is in order (LC, 3 December 1947, pp. 2346-2347).

Some notice was given to Seddon before the point of order on sub judice. This co-operation from the same side of the political fence was appreciated. In the final year of his office he was grouped with the 'conservative old men' who as members

£,

of the Upper House frequently blocked the legislation of the newly elected Hawke Labor government of 1953. This probably contributed to his electoral defeat in 1954, which forced Seddon into involuntary retirement at nearly 73 years of age. Harold Seddon was born, on 6 March 1881, at Openshaw, Ardwick, in Lancaster County, England. His father, William Seddon, was a railway clerk and uncle of Harold Wilson, twice Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, while his mother was Elizabeth Ann Davy. Harold Seddon was educated at the Varna Street School and Deansgate Secondary School in Manchester before studying electrical engineering at Manchester Technical Institute. After an apprenticeship with the Great Central Railway in England he arrived in Western Australia in 1901, settling in the Goldfields at Southern Cross, with a Western Australian Government Railways position as an electrical engineer. Seddon was married, on 6 January 1932, at 51 years of age, to Winifred Jean Dunstan, and they had two sons and two daughters. He died on 25 February 1958 at the Kalgoorlie Hospital and was cremated at Karrakatta for burial in the Congregationist section. As a subsequent President, Sir Lesley Diver, indicated '[he] was not in the best of health ... members wondered how long he would remain with us but, like the proverbial creaking door, he held on for some years'. Significantly, though, it was added, Sir Harold [Seddon] was a 'wise' and 'tolerant' person (Diver, 1988, p.127).

PAGE 61