ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

occasions the present Postmaster-General dared me to bring the Bill before the House

Mr. WEBSTER. And now he is embracing Mr. Sandford.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Yes, and Mr. Sandford is embracing him.

Mr. REID. He is a very good man. Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Every individual who will do as the Prime Minister tells him is good, and every man who will not do so is bad. Those who have known the right honorable gentleman very long are used to his statements, and will pay no attention to his slimy remarks. I have already referred to the two principal questions which were touched upon by the Minister of Trade and Customs last evening. I have no doubt that the arrangement by the alliance in regard to preferential trade will be loyally adhered to.

Mr. MCLEAN.-To "discuss" it?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Yes, but not to discuss it in an antagonistic manner. I hope that the Government will soon have an opportunity of seeing that the party, which is so much distrusted by them, are as bonorable as are any members of this House. I am satisfied that the alliance will give effect to the arrangement which has been arrived at better than will the coalition opposite carry on any alliance.

He

Mr. REID. Which way is the honorable member going to vote-in favour of a or b? Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Last night the Minister of Trade and Customs, in attacking the protectionists who occupy seats in this corner, called them by some nasty names. He said that they were " seceders." need not have done so, seeing that it was the other party which seceded after they had entered into a definite compact in caucus to refuse any coalition with the right honorable member for East Sydnev. Then the honorable gentleman referred to the plank of Tariff revision, which appears in the alliance programme, and to the notice of motion for the appointment of a Royal Commission given by the honorable and learned member for Indi. I have noticed that, in speaking at Ballarat on Monday night, the Prime Minister declared that he is quite prepared to sanction the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the working of the Tariff. But what sort of a Commission does he suggest? A Commission to unearth every item in the Tariff or any matter out of it? Mr. REID. Certainly not. The Commission would only hear complaints.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-The right honorable gentleman knows perfectly well that the work of such a Commission could not be concluded in less than several years. Mr. REID.-Nonsense.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.—It is a fact, and that is why the right honorable gentleman is willing to sanction the appointment of a Commission.

Mr. ISAACS. And "anxious" to do so. Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Yes. Such a Commission would be of no value so long as he occupied the Treasury benches. He is not prepared to agree to the appointment of a Commission to deal with urgent matters in the Tariff.

Mr. REID. Mention the list which the honorable member has ready, with a view to excluding other industries from consideration?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-A list could easily be supplied to the Prime Minister, but he does not require anything of the kind. He merely wishes to play a game of bluff. During the course of his remarks the Minister of Trade and Customs stated that in my election campaign I declared in favour of fiscal peace.

Mr. REID. If the honorable member will deny that statement, he will deny anything.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-My statement was that I favoured fiscal peace; but when the practical working of the Act shows where anomalies exist, then action must be taken.

Mr. MCLEAN.-The honorable member is reported as having said that he was favourable to fiscal peace during the operation of the Braddon section of the Constitution.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-The Minister is quite wrong in taking that literally. Mr. JOSEPH COOK. The newspapers published that statement.

[ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

the notice of motion which has been partly discussed-by the honorable member for Bourke. Whilst these appear upon the business-paper, I cannot possibly allow the detailed discussion of any matter which relates to either of them. Therefore, while incidental reference may be made to these points, and while I am very anxious to allow the utmost liberty that I can, I must ask honorable members to defer the detailed discussion of any matter which may be included in them, or in any other notice of motion.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I think that J may crave the indulgence of the House in this matter, because I wish to refer to a question upon which I have been attacked. Some references have been made to speeches of mine, and I was dealing with what have been alleged to be quotations from what I said, and with the action of the present Prime Minister during the campaign.

Mr. SPEAKER.-I have already allowed incidental references of considerable length, and any such as that to which the honorable member for Hume now refers I should certainly allow. I was afraid lest he was beginning to discuss the question in its broader issues, and to do what the Standing Orders absolutely prohibit, namely, anticipate debate on motions, notices of which appear on the business-paper. I admit that it is unfortunate that there should be three or four notices of motion on the paper, which considerably limit the scope of the debate; but I am bound to administer the Standing Orders as they are. I shall not unduly restrict any honorable member, and the honorable member for Hume is perfectly entitled, as is every other honorable member, to reply to any allegations made by previous speakers.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-The present Prime Minister, during the elections, was fighting me in my own electorate on the fiscal question, and trying to raise it in every possible way. Amongst the other statements which he made, the right honorable gentleman said that if he could get a majority, he would repeal the present

Tariff absolutely.

Mr. REID. That is not correct; it is near enough though.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-It was in reply

to such statements that I said I was not in

favour of re-opening the Tariff. There had been a statement made about the desirability of fiscal peace.

Mr. REID.-A statement! It was the policy of the honorable gentleman's leader.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-But that was only to continue until anomalies were found in the Tariff. I maintain that it is not ripping up the whole Tariff to deal with anomalies of so serious a character as those which have been discovered, and which, at the present time, are destroying industries in some parts of Australia, and causing the dismissal of a large number of men.

Mr. KELLY. Did they only begin to destrov those industries within the last few months?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-The honorable member for Wentworth does not know anything about it, and he ought not to interrupt. I shall not, at this stage, deal further with the Tariff, but I shall probably have occasion to deal with it at another

time. The Minister of Trade and Customs went on to question, and, I am sorry to say, to misinterpret remarks made by the honorable member for Darling, on the subject of land resumption. I should like to know whether the honorable gentleman is in favour of land resumption. Last night, at first, he said that he was, and then that I believe that the same diffihe was not. culty exists in all the States, but I know New South Wales better than any of the other States, and I say that the only thing which will tend to relieve the congestion of population in the cities and distribute it over the country is land resumption. With that object, I believe that it is necessary to resume a portion of the alienated lands in New South Wales.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-What can we do in that matter?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-The matter has been referred to in connexion with Socialism. In my own electorate, there are some twelve large stations. I do not in any way blame those who have secured them, nor would I take their land from them without paying more than its value; but I say that, in the interests of the people of Australia, there must be considerable resumptions in all the States.

The Minister of

Trade and Customs last night said that he was in favour of land resumption, and the division and sale of the lands resumed.

I

wish to know of what use it will be to

resume land and then sell it with a title and

conditions which will not prevent its being again included in large holdings.

Mr. MCLEAN.-What would the honorable gentleman do with it? Would he make the State the landlord?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I should give a title to it, but I should impose such conditions that it could never go back into large holdings again.

Mr. REID. There could be no objection to that at all.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-There is no reason why we should sell the land outright again after resuming it, when we might get a rent from it sufficient to pay interest on borrowed money, and thus obviate any incubus upon the taxpayer resulting from the resumption. The question is is one of very great great importance, but I should not advocate the resumption of any land if it were to be sold again under conditions which would permit of its reverting to large holdings such as we have at the present time. We have the LegislaWe have the Legislatures of some of the States telling the people that there is any quantity of land open for selection; but the land referred to is very often but arid plains, and it is a criminal thing to send men with wives and families on to such land, without giving them an area sufficient to live upon, because it means giving them over to ruin, starvation, and death. The land resumption question is of the first importance, and there can be no doubt that a great portion of alienated land, in districts blessed with

a good rainfall and fit for cultivation, will

of

have to be resumed, and converted from sheep-walks into agricultural farms sufficient area to keep a family. According to the statements of the Minister of Trade and Customs last night,

the land when resumed should be sold to farmers, and if that course is pursued we may rest assured that it will again go back into large estates.

Sir JOHN FORREST.-The honorable gen

tleman did not say that it should be sold without conditions of improvement.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Of what use are conditions of improvement as a means of preventing the land going back into large estates?

Mr. MCLEAN. I have helped to subdivide a great many estates, and in no solitary instance has any subdivided block since been included in a large estate.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I am not prepared to contradict the honorable gentleman with respect to a matter affecting his own district. But I know what has happened in New South Wales. I know that men, who first of all took up land along the Murray and Murrumbidgee Rivers, sold nearly the whole of their selections, and to-day are to

be found at Coonamble, Walgett, and on the Namoi, with areas of from 10,000 to 20.000 acres, whilst the land which they took up first has gone back to the large

Owners.

Mr. WATSON.-That has happened in tens of thousands of instances.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-It has happened in thousands of instances.

Mr. MCLEAN.-Not where the full value of the land has been paid for under closer settlement conditions.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I am in favour of land resumption by the Government, because the Government is in a better position than are private individuals to offer good terms to intending settlers. To cut land up and charge a big price to a man desiring to obtain it, is but to put a millstone round his neck, which will keep him in poverty for ever. The Government could charge a small deposit and rent, and give a long lease, perhaps of ninety-nine years, or sell with certain restrictions, and settlers taking up land under those conditions could hope to live happily on it. This is why I am in favour of land resumption by the Government, instead of the cutting up of land by private syndicates, as has been done recently on the Richmond River. The honor

able member for Richmond knows that it would be better for the people who have gone into dairy farming on the three large estates recently subdivided on the Richsumed the land, and had then dealt with mond River, if the Government had resettlers. I am connecting this question with the question of Socialism. I am aware that honorable members sitting in this corby the States. ner are favorable to the resumption of land I have in my own electorate twelve or fourteen estates, containing something like 1,000,000 acres of as good land as may be found anywhere for agricultural purposes, and some of which might very well be resumed. When honorable members opposite accuse the Labour Party of Socialism, I ask them to say whether this proposal for land resumption is not Socialism in its purest and most simple form.

Mr. MCLEAN.-There is not a trace of Socialism in it; it is a purely business mat

ter.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Is there any Socialism in the Government holding the railways of the country?

Mr. MCLEAN.-No.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Or in the Government owning and controlling the tramways of the country?

Mr. McLEAN.-No.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I shall show the honorable gentleman that there is. The tramways in the city of Melbourne and suburbs are owned and controlled by a private company. The tramway system in Sydney, I am glad to say, is owned and controlled by the Government, and in that city the public can travel for twothirds of the fare charged on the tramways in the city and suburbs of Melbourne. Honorable members opposite will say that there is no Socialism in this matter, though the whole of the people secure the benefit of a fare decreased by one-third, the difference, in the case of the Melbourne tramway system, going to the shareholders' profit. That shows the difference between the two systems. Honorable members can find no loop-hole by which to escape from that comparison.

Mr. CONROY.-The honorable gentleman is making a mistake.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I am making no mistake. The honorable and learned member knows that by buying tickets he can go from here to Spencer-street for 1d., whilst he can go from Circular Quay to the Redfern Railway Station for id. on the Sydney system.

Mr. WATSON.-Twice as far.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-It is nearly twice as far. The same difference extends throughout the tram system.

Sir JOHN FORREST.-The city of Melbourne will get the tramways back free.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Yes, when they are worn out. I say, further, that the Melbourne tram system is not to be compared with the electric system of Syd. ney. I am sorry that the Minister of Trade and Customs is leaving the Chamber It is evident that he does not like what I am saying on the subject of Socialism. All these proposals to which I have referred are forms of Socialism, and I am in favour of the application of the principle in every case where it can be reasonably and justly applied. I think that it is very much better, in the interests of the people of Australia, that the railways and tramways should be in the hands of the State.

Mr. FULLER. Was not the honorable gentleman in favour of selling the Sydney tramways?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I was, before I cut my political eye-teeth. The honorable and learned member has perhaps not cut his yet.

Mr. FULLER.-It does not suit the honorable gentleman to cut certain of his teeth at the present time.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I honestly confess that when I first entered Parliament, I was in favour of selling the tramways. I had had no experience then of the administration of Government.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-Was not the honorable gentleman Minister of Works at the time?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-No, I was not. I have had considerable experience during many years since. I have tried to consider the matter reasonably, and my conclusion is that in certain matters, though not in everything, it is better in the interests of the people for the Government to have control.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-Do we not all say

that?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I do not think so. I do not think that the right honorable member for Swan, the honorable member for Gippsland, or the Conservative honorable member for Kooyong say that. If they do say that, I should like to understand why they speak against such State Socialism as I have described. Applications by farmers for assistance for roads and bridges, and subsidies for their various industries, are but forms of Socialism.

Mr. SKENE. There is no analogy what

ever.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-What would the honorable member call such assistance?

Mr. KELLY.-What benefits the farmers benefits the whole community, because the farmers are producers.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Matters of the kind I have referred to benefit the whole community also. Honorable members need not be afraid that I am in favour of the Socialism as applied to the unit, or in favour of anything in the direction of the redistribution of wealth. I may say that I was yesterday told by a lady that the Labour Party is in favour of the redistribution of wealth once or twice a year; and honorable members will probably recollect that a statement to the same effect was recently made by a speaker at one of the Womens' League meetings.

Mr. KENNEDY.-The honorable gentleman and I would get a little then.

not. ago,

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-No, we should I remember that at one time, years there was some talk of Socialism in Sydney, and a member of the State Parliament, named Eckford. at the time was very much in favour of the redistribution of wealth. He had £1,000, and when some one told him that a careful calculation showed that his share would be about £69, he said, "No more redistribution for me." That would be the feeling in my case. With Socialism, as affecting the individual, I am not in accord; but I am in favour of the application of the principle to matters affecting the community generally. I wish to know what honorable members object to in the seven

was going to refer to the tobacco monopoly. Personally, I do not know enough about the workings of that monopoly to give an opinion on the subject; but I know that behind it is one of the largest financial "rings" in the world, and that it has spread its octopus-like grasp all over this Continent, so that now it controls the whole of the tobacco trade of Australia. I am informed that there are only three tobacconists' shops in Melbourne where one can buy certain brands of tobacco and cigars, and that the public have to pay nearly twice as much for tobacco now as had to be paid before the trust was formed. Mr. KELLY.-Nonsense.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-A letter of de

items which appear in this Federal labour nial is published this morning which is programme, about which so much has been said. Does any one object to the maintenance of a White Australia?

Mr. HUME COOK.-Yes; the honorable

and learned member for Parkes.

Mr. TUDOR.—And the honorable member

for Robertson.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.--Does any one object to compulsory arbitration?

Mr. HUME COOK.-Yes; all the wreckers of the Conciliation and Arbitration Bill.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Does any one object to old-age pensions?

really no denial at all.

Mr. KELLY.-A meeting of retailers was held in Sydney which unanimously protested against statements such as that which the honorable member is now repeating.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-The writer of the letetr to which I refer admits that the tobacconists have raised their prices, and he says that they did so because formerly they were selling too cheaply. That is not a satisfactory reason to give, and, no doubt, if a Royal Commission is appointed, it will

Mr. TUDOR.-Yes; all on the other side be proved that there is a great deal of of the Chamber.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-Does any one object to a volunteer defence force, or to the restriction of public borrowing? I know that the right honorable member for Swan objects to any stringent alteration of the navigation laws; but the majority of honorable members, and the country, are in favour of navigation legislation. Let me add another word about Socialism. Suppose that the immense American Morgan trust, which bought up so many steam-ship lines, had purchased all the steamers trading to Australia, and had raised freights to the injury of the producers and others in this Continent, would honorable members have said that the Government was not justified in stepping in and running a line of steamers with a view to destroying the trust, or of bringing down freights?

Mr. KELLY. That trust destroyed itself. Mr. G. B. EDWARDS.-Would the Government also be justified in establishing a tobacco factory?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I am glad to believe that there is one honorable member on the Government side of the House who appreciates something like reason.

I

truth in the statements which I am making. If the tobacco monopoly is injurious to the people of Australia, action should be taken by the Government, either by the introduction of an anti-trust Bill or by the Government taking control. I am not prepared to say what step should be taken, but it would certainly be a proper, right, and just thing for the Government to consider the matter.

Mr. G. B. EDWARDS.-Does the honorable member also advocate the establishment of Government breweries?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I have given one or two instances in which I think the nationalization of monopolies should not If it were proposed to be objected to. proceed to extremes, and to introduce indi

vidualistic Socialism or anarchism, I am not there.

Sir JOHN FORREST.-What is the honorable member trying to prove?

Sir WILLIAM LYNE.-I am proving that those who have railed so much against the Labour Party, because of what they call their socialistic principles, forget what the word means in its true sense, and do not know what they are talking about.

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »