Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 4 SEPTEMBER 1902

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

478 Questions. [ASSEMBLY.] Elections Ads Amendment Bill.

The TREASURER replied- ! have no objection to the collectron of any money owing to the Treasury. RAILWAY ADVERTISEMENTS. Mr. LESINA asked the Secretary for Rail­ ways- l. Vl'hat is the total value to the State of the adver­ tisements so far accepted since the appointment of }fr. John Ure }le~ aught as advertising manager to that department r 2. 1Vhat proportion of the total is due to contracts made with ~fessrs. Gm·don and Gotch, his late em­ ployers? The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAY& (Hon. J. Leahy, B"lloo) replied- ! cannot give the definite information asked for,_ seeing ther~ is no time stated and the gentleman named is out collecting now ; but I can give it up to the 30th June last, lip to that date the answer to the first question is £1,168; and to the second question~ £860 4s, 9d, HARBOcR BOARD BILL FOR CAIRNS. HoN. A. S. COvVLEY (Herbert), for. Mr. Lyons, asked the Treasurer- Is i.t the intention of the Government to introduce a Harbour Board Bill for Cairns at an early date? The TREASURER replied­ Yes. ELECTIONS ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. SECOND READING-RESUMPTION OF DEBATE. * Mr. BLAIR (Ipswich): I had not originally intended to speak on this Bill, but a remark made in the Cbamber that a "conspiracy of silence., seemed to prevail on a certain side determined me to offer my opinion on the measure in order that I should not afterwardE be twitted with having remained silent. Objec­ tion seems to have been taken that the preamble of this Bill is worded in such a way as to lead THURSDAY, 4 SEP'l'EMBER, 1902. hon. members to believe that the framer of it desired to follow in the wake of federal legisla­ tion. I have no desire to follow legislation that does not make for the well-being and pros­ The SPEAKER (Hon. Arthur Morgan, Warwick) perity of the State, but inasmuch as a preamble· took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock. is in its nature rather an explanatory than ::tn integral portion of a Bill, I think an argu­ ment of that kind ought not to have weight, PAPER. more especially when it simply savours of those The following paper was laid on the table :­ imperfections or lack of perfectne;;s in detail Return to an Order made by the House showing alluded to by the Secretary for Agriculture and the amount paid fur advertising in certain news­ the Home Secretary, which can be left to be papers at Charters Towers. settled in committee. A promise was made in the Governor's Speech to the effect that we should have a measure of this kind. I am glad that that promise was included, and I hope that QuESTIONS. measure will be introduced in the <'Vent of this STAl\IP DUTY ON VVAGES RECEIP'rS. being thrown out. But, although a promise of that kind was made, we are not entitled for Mr. COOPER (Mitchcll) asked the Trea­ that reason alone to refuse to discuss this Bill. surer·- Now, what I propose to deal with more par­ 1. Is it a. fact that, contr:uy to the Act, casual ticularly is the extension of the franchise hands in the employ of the Government have been to women. [The HOME SECRETARY : Includ­ pa:_, lug stamp duty on their wages receipts? ing blackfellows.] Probably the hon. gentleman 2. U so, have steps been taken to refund the amount paid, and to prevent further charges in this way? is speaking for himself. [The HoniE SECRE· TARY: No, for the Bill.] That is a matter The TREASURER (Hon. T. B. Cribb, of detail which can be amended in com­ Ipswich) replied- mittee. It may be a question whether women should embark in the maelstrom of politics. It ! am not aware of any stamp dut:y having been collected from men in the employ of the Government has been Fair! by Bryce, in his admirable book on contrary to the Act, the American Commonwealth, that a measure of this kind, extending the franchise to women, deadens and roughens the innate sweetness of NIONEY OWING TO 'l'HE TREASURY. their lives which go to make us respect them. Mr. LESIN A ( Clcrmont) asked the Treasurer­ Although it may have a tendency to unsex them What objection has he to the collection of a certain and encroach on the privileges of men in the sum of money owing to the Treasury by an Assyrian sphere of politics, surely when we consider the named Lahood 1-' work they d0 in our hospitals, our infirmaries, Elections Acts [4 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill. ourshopo, and so on, it i.,atleast debatable whether that they are entitled to a voice in the affairs of they should not have extended to them, as a matter the country. vVe know that in the efforts of the of right, the privilege of having a voice in making States to get abreast of the time.•, endeavours the laws by which they are governed. It was have been made to pass legislation of this kind. once aeserted that a measure of this kind had a Victoria endeavoured fonr times to do so-in tendency to lower women in social position. I 1898 189jl, 1900, and 1901-and each time combat that statement. I think it has the it was blocked by the Legisbtive Council. effect of elevating them, by giving them a Ta";mania made a similar endeavour, and it was privilege which undoubtedly should be theirs, blocked by the Legisl>ttive Council; but in New and also that it will have a tendency towatds ~ealand we find that it passed. Adult suffrage elevating, ennobling, and purifying political life. exists there. It was passed in 18[)3. In South One objection has been that it vitally affects the it was passed in 1S!J4, and in \V estern position of relative representation. That is Australia in 1899, and I think it has passed in undoubtedly a serious objection, but after look­ New South \Vales. Queen"bnd has a popnla­ ing into it carefully I conclude it is one which tion of about 503,000; the adult males number really might be made to any proposed amendment 157,000, and the adult females 104,000. On the in our electoral law. It is really a matter roll there are about 105.000 men. and there are which is unavoidable in its sequence that 104,383 females without a vote. I am aware of a matter of this kind should perhaps unsettle the old quotation- the electoral system under which we live; but 'rhe .best of all we do and are. surely that in itself-especiaily when in com­ Just God forgive. · mittee it c:m be ajusted-is no reason why a measure of this kind should not pass. Further, But many of us are not ashamed to stand up and a more vital point seems to be the difference m say that the best of what we do and are i.< very ofcen type bet we en men and women, which is a social due to the influence of women. Their intinence distinction differing from the powers of man goes largely to sweeten, ennoble, and purify the which are more variative; but even that is not sum total of that inexplicable thing called "life;'' a consideration which should preclude us from and I think history pomts the finger of reproach giving them a share in political representation. at us that we have lived to such a date without It is a matter which deserves the gre ttest con­ giving them political emaricipation. [Honour­ sideration; but where the franchise has been able members: Hear, htar !] granted in municipal matters to women we have The SECRETARY FOE RAILWAYS: The been shown that the ill-effects have not been such question before the House is one wh;ch we have as to jmtify us in refusing to consider the exten­ bad brought up in the same al stract manner on sion of that franchise to parliamentary elections. former occasions. The osten,ible purpose of this Further, it seems, according to the rppouents Bill, as laid down by the hon. member who intro­ of this measure, that granting or conceding such a duced it, is to extend the franchise. The term privilege as the franchise will injuriously modify "extension of the franchise" is som8what rela.ti ve, the relations of life. It is said that woman's and we should be go;·erned to a large extent in sphere is the home; that there she has ample considering this matter by what has been d,me in opportunity for ex:ercising a beneficent influence. other places. The hon. member, as far as I know, That may be true. She may possibly in that did not give any instances of what they do in other sphere of life soften the asperities of her bus­ places, but we have had some figures from the band, if he has asperities, and ennoble and guide h'Jn. member for Bowen and other h<•ll. mem­ the ambitions of her children. Undoubtedly bers, which were gro~t-ly inaccurate; and it is that is a splendid work for women; bnt surely, if rnainly for the purpost> of ..;etting theHe figures right we look at it in the converse view, she has also thati rise to speak, The hou. member for Ipswich the power of softening the asperities and guiding delivered Ml excellent sp• ech on the desirableness the ambitions of legislators or ameliorating the of 0xtending the franchise to women ; but I conditions of humanity were she given a voice thought that was a foregone conclusion. It is a in the making of our laws. It is said she thing I have advocated ever since I have been in will encroach upon man's prerogative, but I am this House; it is a plank in the platform of the not conscious that man, with all his oppor­ Government; and it is generally admitted by the tunitic-;, has done ttnytbing so wonderful that other side, too, though in the Bill introduced by would entitle him to say to women, "Yon must the leader on that side some years ago, Mr. remain outside the pale of politic,," It is also GJa,sey, the principle was absent. [J'vlr. JACK­ said that this has really a tendency to shift the SON: l:::l()me on your own side are op!JO:-;ed tu it.] burden of the man upon the woman ; but that, I Members on our side are not ti•"l down by the think, may be dismissed as unworthy of serious Trade' Hall, like hon. membero opposite. I said consideration. It has also been argued that if "the Government," and I was perfectly accurate the franchise is granted a large number of in saying that was the view of the Govern­ women will not exercise it ; but there is nothing ment. [An honourable member: The Govern­ in that, because a large number of men who ment backs down sometimes.] This is not a already enjoy the privilege of the franchise do back-down GovPrnment. It is a progrc·ssive not exerciBe it. Therefore the question is : Government, and we will force this principle of Is it politic ally right or wrong to extend giving the franchise to women on the other the franchise to women? ::'\ ow, surely if side of the House, notwithstanding the fact that we consider their capacity, we are bound it was absent from the Bill introduced by to admit-we know it from eminent writers their leader some years ago. However, I am and historically-that they have ability suffi­ glad they are going to advocate it. lf a thing is cient to deal with the questions of the day ; good in public legislation, it does not matter that their intelligence is of a su1ficiently high where we get assistance fron1 so long as it is order to, at any rate, enahle them to give a vote honest assistance. The hon. member who and decide who shall represent them. We had introduced this Bill made a very short speech in a measure the other night a section which im­ the other evening, and I think that was rather wise posed taxation upon them. Is it therefore right of him, because in the propositions he laid down with the one band to impose taxation, and with there were some matters which he c«uld not the other to deny representation? Surely that have dealt with at length without getting into is a cogent argnment why we should grant repre­ some difficulty. But there was no nece"'ity for sentation? \Vhy should they not be granted the the hon. member to hurry himself on that right to vote upon the laws by which they are occasion, and I think he might have taken time governed? I think I have said enough to show to explain what he meant by the Bill. He said 480 Elections .Acts [ASSEMBLY.J .Amendment Bill. he was prepared to go step by step. I thought said that we should admit them. They have that WBS the policy of this side-the cautious 14,000 Chinese in Victoria, and there is not a sine. As Tennyson said- single one of them prohibited from getting on to Step by step we gained a freedom, known to Europe, the electoral roll. Nor are such persons pro­ known to all; hibited from getting on the roll in that great Step by stel_) we rose to greatness- through the country-the republic of the world-from which tonguesters we may fall. the hon. member comes. The fifteenth amend­ I congratulate the Labour party on going step ment of the Constitution settled that point, and by step for once-makinf( sure of one ste]J before provided that a man should not be debarred they take the second. We are blamed on this hy his race or colour from becoming a citizen side because we do not rush into all sorts of pro· of the State and ca"ting his vote. I have blematicallegislation simply because it has been not expressed an opinion as to whether it is tried or proposed in other places-and even if it right or wrong, but I say that if we are to bas been proved useless or ruinous in other places. bring our laws into harmony with those of the I am not going to rush into legislation of that other States of the Commonwealth, we shall kind or into anything else that does not present have to give them the rights of citizenship once itself to my mind as something it would be wise to they have been admitted as citizens. Compare introduce here. Regardingthis Bill, the hon. mem­ the number of electors on the roll in ber for Bowen said there were 15 per cent. of the with the number of electors on the roll in the people of Queensland on the electoral roll. [Mr. other States of Australia, and see where the KE~NA: Of the adult males.] Considering that comparison lands you. The acting leader of the 17 per cent. of them voted at the last general elec­ Opposition says that our franchise is less exten· tion, it is strange that there are only 15 per cent. sive than it is in any of the other States. I say of them on the roll. In making an estimate of this it is more extensive. In Queensland, deducting kind, I think it is proper that we should know from the total population-503,2()G-the 30,305 exactly where we are. There are something like persons that our law prohibits from becoming 502,000 people in QueenRland according to the last electors of the country, we have a population of census. There are 30,000 of them disfranchised 472,951, and 22·95 per cent. of those are on the by !t';si,lation which this Chamber passed some electoral roll. [Mr. KmsTON : What about the time ago, and which is included in the Bill 10,000 plural votes? Are they included?] I shall introduced by the acting leader of the Opposi­ come to that presently. In New South \Vales tion. In no other colony in Australia that 1 am there are 25'47 per cent. on the roll, in Victoria aware of is there any restriction with regard 23'37, and in South Australia, where they have to the franchise with respect to any man universal suffrage, 41'47. In Tasmania, which of any race or colour, provided he becomes a I may say has got one of the most liberal elec­ naturalised citizen of the State, with the single toral laws in Australia-it is almost a transcript exception of the Northern Territory of South of the South Australian Act-they have 22'72 Australia; and in South Australia proper the per cent. of the population on the roll. The hon. restriction does not exiet. I am aware that the member for Rockhampton asked me if I included principle is contained in the Bill introduc~d the 10,000 plural voters there are in Queenaland. in the Federal Parliament at the instance of I challenge the hon. member to prove that there the Labour members; but it does not exist in is anything like that number of plural voters in State legislation in any colony of Australia or Queensland. [Mr. KrnsTON: I never estimated New Zealand. Hr.n. members first take our them at 10,000; I said 5,000, but you interjected population as fi02,000, and then they proceed, 10,000.] I did not say there were 10,000, but after di,franchising 30,000 of male adults, to base that somebody said there were 10,000. \Ve their calculation, and include the 30,000 they have only one mea-ns of estimating the number have prevented from having a right to vote. of plural voters in the State, and I believe that That is an extraordinary mode of calculation. is a fairly accurate means of arriving at a con­ If we make a lJalcnlation of persons on the clusion. I think it wili be conceded that it is in roll in Queeneland, we shall find that they the city of , Toowong, Enoggera, the compare remarkably well-that it is better V alley, Too m bul, and those other electorates than in any other State in Australia. I have which form what is known as the federal not risen to make that statement without division of Brisbane, that this plural vote being in a po.,ition to prove it. I predominates under ordinary circumstances, [4 p.m.] know that hon. members opposite and returns Government supporters. \Vhen will dispute anything; but l made we had the abolition of the plural vote out these figures and submitted them to the at the federal election two years ago, and had Registrar-General m order that I might be quite one man one vote, the result was exactly the certain that they were correct, and the figures I same. In the seven electorates which compose am now about to submit to the House have the the federal division of Brisbane there are about name of the Regi,trar-General at the bottom of 11,500 voters on the roll. That includes the them. Of course there are a very large number plural votes. It is a very extraordinary thing of persons in Queensland who are not on the roll; that about the same percen tagp of those voters- but if you disfranchise 30,000 of them, how are 52 or 53 per cent.-polled exactly the same as they you going to get on with your argument about did in all the other electorates of the State. We extending the franchise? If we are to bring our had very little over two-thirds of the polling at electoral laws into conformity with those of the federal election that we have at ordinary the other States of Australia, we shall have State elections. The " antdeds" did not to advance in the direction of saying that vote at all, and another section of the community if a man is adruitted as a citizen under did not know what they were voting for. the laws of the country, we have no right I confess that I begin te> doubt whether afterwards to deprive him of the rights of citizen­ I did myself on that matter. (Laughter.) ship. 'We have no right to admit them as citi­ In those five electorates, as nearly as I can cal­ zens unless we are prepared to give them the culate, they polled about 5,800 vote,. Mr. rights and privileges of citizens. These people Macdonald-Paterson got 2,300 or 2,400, Mr. are being naturalised in the other St~tes Buzacott. got 1,600, and the Labour man got of Australia more than they are in Queens­ about 1,900. Notwithstanding that this was on the land ; and if we are reasonable men we basis of one man one vote, the percentage was as shall not admit men to citizenship, and then high as was polled all over the rest of Queens­ deny therr. the rights of citizenship. [Mr. HARD­ land ; so that, if only 53 per cent. was polled ACRE: \Ve ought not to admit them. I have not instead of the 79 or 80 per cent. which is polled at Elections Acts [4 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment. Bill. 481 ordinary elections, the most you will get for toral laws of this State. [Mr. LESINA : The plural votes will be 1,700 or 1,800 in thie elec­ figures in the census returns show that 32,000 per­ torate. I wr.uld like to know where the hon. sons who are eligible to vote are off the rolls.] I member estnblishes even 5,000. [:\fr. KIDSTON : will come to that directly. I am not saying that That is no evidence at all of the number.] It is there are not a great many people who are not on the-highest of all evidence-statistical evidence. the rolls. Of course there are ; but in that It show8 that, when we abolished plural respect we are only in the same position as every voting, these electorates remained exactly as other State in Australia. Thousands of persons they were, and that here, where the pro­ come here from New South Wales and the other portion of plural Yotes is larger than it i~ in States by reason of our superior conditions and any ot,her part of (..lueensland, the proportion of the higher wages that rule here. Thr·y go home electors who voted bore the same proportion to again to help their poor rel:-J,tions, not remain­ the general voting of Queensland that it always ing long enough to get their names on the bore. I depart from this f,,r a moment, and rolls, and then they return the next year. return to the percentage of the populations of Does not the hon. member follow my argument, the various States who ar.l en the rolls. It is that if his contention is right, and we have so not a quF-;tion, however, of how n1any are on many whu are not on the roll, and yet we have the rolls, but of how mo.ny of those persons who a far higher record of voting than the other are on the rnlls cast their vote~_~ in deterrninin;; States. there must be a still larger number in the the policy of the country. You may have as other States who are not on the roll? We are many names as y.-,u like on the rolls, bnt they ahe>td of them, notwithstanding the obstacles may not be in the country a.t all. \Vhat wR hon. members opposite speak abour, I now want is the real living voters. They are what follow on with Sr,uth Australia. In South determines the political views of the country. Australia only 2i'i per cent. of the populatioro Let us see lvnv Queensland compares with votecl, and that must be divided by two, as the other States with regard to the efficient it is a State which has adult suffrcq:;e. [Mr. vote-the vote which puts us here. So that this KmsTON: South Australia is better off in that. shall be ;:cbsolutely accurate, it is c;:clcnlated respect than we are.] That may be so, and I not on the whole number of voters in Queens­ prefaced my remarks by faying that I am as land, because there are sometimes electorates in anxious as any hon. member to g-ive the franchise which there is no contest, and which would to the women of the country. _\nd if we had it, destroy the whole symmetry and proportion of the figures wnuld j11st about work out the same; the thing. If there are nineteen electorates con­ we should still have more people un the roll in tested out nf twenty, you must. only take the proportion to the population, having re£{ard percenbge of electors who vote in the contested al wa:vo; to voted in con­ \V e have a larger proportion of male adults in tested electorates at the last electirm" in Queens­ (..lueenslanrl thnn they have in :South Australia.] land was 7:'\·iJS per cent. At the previous And we have aho a larger proportion of children election the proportion was 79·13 per cent.­ attending the State schools tiMn they have in remarkably near-which would give an a-:e.rage any other State in Australia, and a larger pro­ for the two of about 79 per cent. In Xew portlOn of women too. I dare say also we have South \VcJes 63·91 per cent. of the elec­ a larger proportion of people who do not under­ tors voted at the elections; so that, if you stand politics. In South Australin the per­ take 63·91 per cent. of the 23 per cent. of centagR for males and females is 25·02, which, the electors who are :m the rolls, and com­ dividvd by two, gives 12·G. There are a larger pare them with 7D per cent. of the 22·05 number of men on the roll than of women-some per cent. who are on the rolls in Qneen<­ 82,000 men and 68,000 women ; ;;o that the lattd, you will find a far larger pr"r'orti 'n division would be about 111, per cent. of female of people voted in Queen,Jand. In Vict rria electors and 13~ per cent. of rn>

have a right to know from him what standard Government has been kept in power for years he sets up beyond his own bald assertion. past by the party hon. members oppout? After all, the elector's right a man can go before a magistrate question we have to c'msider is not that some­ and make a declaration that he is entitled to an body wants or does not want a particular system, elector's right, and can have it sent to the nearest but whether that sy 'tern tak0s us to our objective p,lliee office or the nearest post office, and then point. In New South ·wales they have no he has to go there personai!y and apply for means, as we have, of purging their rolls except his elector's right, and sign the butt, which once in every three years. A man can be goes back to the original office. So they have objected to at the first revision court, but once to make two declarations of signatures as com­ on the roll he remains there for three years ; and pared to one in l,\ueensland. And even after I have seen lots of N e.w S•mth Wales people in a man bas got his elector's right, the right Qlleens)and in possession of their elector's rights, by itself ;., of no good to him. At the next some of those s:tme people being on the roll in revision court the registrar forms a list some­ Queensland. \V ell, at the election in New South what similar to what is done here, except that \Vales held in 189-i, just after the new roll was the butt of the elector's right there takes the formed, there was a remarkably largepercentageof place of the claim here. vVhen that is sent to the electors who polled-about 80 per cent. ·what the revision court, objections can be lodged in was the reason of that? Because there were not on exactly the same way as objections are lodged the rolls just at tbat time a multitude of people to a claim here ; and they do not get the same who had gone off to other States or districts; but advertising there that they do here. There is a you will sec the remarkable falling off that took notice in the papers that there is a list hanging place at the next election, the reason being that at such a place, and people can look at it. If although, as hon. members contend, there were that was done here it would be treason. If there is 25 per cent. of the population on the roll, yet any objection lodged, or if there is no objection, it was a stuffed roll. They were not there ; and the tribunal decides that a man has the quali­ there were not as many bontt fide electors on the fication stated, the name is placed ou the roll of roll as there are in Queensland. Ooghlan says electors. Y on can have all the electors' rights in that at the first election under the new system the country, and if your name is not on the roll, in 1894, 204,240 votes were recorded, the electors the elector's right is of no value whatever to you. numbering 298,817, and that number included It is easier to get on the roll here than in New 43,015 persons who were in possession of electors' South \Vales. A man can come here from Eng­ rights and who could not be found. Yet they were land, and after he has been six months here, he included in the 2ii·47 per cent. of the population can be put on the roll; but he must be twelve who were on the electoral roll which hon. mem­ months in New South \Vales before he can do it. bers on the other side seem so proud of. He may be a qualified voter here in eight months, Coghlan further says that the poll represJnted but it would take double that time in New South 80"37 per cent. of effective votes-by far the Wales. In which country, I ask, does the greater lar!:(est percentage of vote<, recorded at a general liberality of the franchise exist? If the hon. election in New South ·wales. At the next member for Barcoo, or "ny other hon. member, e]roti"n under the new Act there were 153,000 disputes what I have said, I have the whole of vote' polled out of a total of 252,000, and dedud­ the echednles here, and any hon. member is at ing 14,000 names of persons who c•mld not be liberty to peruse them. Now let me come to found, there were G4·66 per cent. who voted. At South Australia, which is presided over by the next elec'ion the numbers fell to 56 ·41 per Mr. Kingston-or was. And let me say at cent., and Coghlan says- once that they have a very crude form­ This shows a marked decline from the average of the notbing like our Act with respect to conveni­ two preceding elections, and it is difficult to offer ~m ence-what is called the Electoral Code, Act. adequate explanation for this falling off in public They codified their electoral laws in 1896. interest. \Vh2.t position are they in with regard to the I think that show~ that the calculations of bon. electoral law there? ln Queensland there may members orposite are fictitious, because the be twenty or thirty polling-places in an elec­ men are not on the roll. [Mr. KERR : In torate. I think there are twenty-seven in the Queensland thA men are here, and we cannot get electorate I have the honour to represent, and a them on the roll.] Very well, I will deal with man can vote ab any one of those twenty-seven that. I think the hon. member who introduced polling-places. But in South Australia the Act the Bill said he would confine himself to three and the form of claim show distinctly that you po;nts, and the main point was that it was must state the particular polling·place where difficult. to get on the roll-that it was difficult you are going to vote when you get your name to get claims witneSBed on account of having to on the roll; and if you go into another district go to a magistrate or a teacher or some other where there is another polling-place you have to official to get them witne,sed. That same con­ apply to the registrar to have your name trans­ dition prevails in New South Wales, where the ferred, so that you may be able to vote at that Elections Acts [ 4 SEPTEMBER. J Amendment Bill. 483 particular place. This, perhaps, accounts largely altering the franchise of this State s1mply for the fact that the same number of electors do because the Commonwealth Parliament happens not go to the poll and record their votes to do something. "What particular sort of legislative as do in Queensland. Supposing we insisted capacity has the Commonwealth Parliament on a similar condition, and required that every shown lately? It has disqualified hon. members man in an electorate like that of the Barcoo opposite from even becoming candidates for a should state the polling·place at which he in­ seat in that august Assembly unless they have tended to vote, what an outcry there would be been three months out of this House or any in this Chamber. [.Mr. KERR: \Ve had to do it other Parliament. I believe that that provision at one time in Qneens],nd.] There was no such limiting the choice of the electors of Australia provision in the Act of 1885, RO that it has not is entirely unconstitutional. It is laid down in been the case for seventeen years, at :my rate. the Oommonwealch Elections Bill what the At one time there w"s a form in the cla1m which qualification of electors shall be, and I say it is said that "man might elect to vote at a par­ impossible to ''Iter it, and for the clause to ticuhr polling-place if he liked; but he was remain valid. But whether they can do that or not bound to do it. It is true that, under not, does such a proposition show a broad, those circutnstances, 1nen sometirr..e~ n1ade a tolerant spirit which we should try to follow? mistake, and elected to vote at a particular Tbe Commonwealth franchise is restriction pullins;-place:; but tbnt was the result of ignor­ instead of expansion, an example to be a vuided. ance. But in South Australia at the pre­ I am not going to talk this measure out. \Ve sent time a man nmst elect to vote at a are going to introduce a measure particular polling - place, and be must vote [5 p.m.] later on, and I am going to have a at that place, and "o other. \Vhat is the great deal to say on it when it use of putting a man on the roll, and then comes forward. I am only giving hon. members imposing conditions which prevent him from oppooite somethmg to think about on the present exercising the right to vote? The Queensland occasion, and I can assure them that there is law is much more iiberal in that respect. It absolutely nothing in the claptrap we hear about may be defective in some points; it may aot the country of the freedom of the people and of please hon. members opposite, but it has its elector;:cl liberty. I believe that the position of good features. If it suited the Government, we the fr,wchise in Australia is not known to should not propose to bring in a new Bill. It ninety-nine people out of every lOO in Queens­ does not suit us; we want to be in the van of land, or perhaps in the States generally. I con­ progress, and that is why we propose to introduce fess that it has been so often drummed into me a new Bill. I wish now to refer to another by hon. members opposite that, before I gave the point, which was one of the main points of the question some attention and some scudy, I hon. member for Rockhampton. Vvhen moving really thought that the people of the other States the second reading of this measum, the hriginal native of Australia, and no Chinaman, portion of the people are on our rolls, and a even if naturalised, shall have the right to vote greater number of electors record their votes. at federal elections, every single aboriginal Having regard to the fact that there is an native and every Chinaman who is on the roll in , annual purification of the rolls in Queensland any State in Australitt has the right to vote for a i there is a fted by the bon. member I have not the least intention of being a party to for Bowen can be found in the speech of Senator 484 Elections Arts [ASSEMBLY.] Amendrnent Bill.

O'Connor in the Senate on the Federal Electoral and others who are disfranchised.] That means Bill. Instead of going to the Registral-General, that there are 5G,990 adult males who are not on I have gone to the Blue Books and the census, and the roll. 'l'his number, it is pointed out, is to the returns laid on the table of this House, decreased by those whose namesappectrupou more showing the voters on the rolls in the various than one electoral roll. I know of one voter constituencies. [The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: whose name is duplicated sixteen times, and That is exactly what I d1d, and I got the there are many whose names are duplicated half­ Registrar-General to verify them.] How does it a-dozen times. To what extent the number­ pan ·out? I shall quote the hon. gentleman's would be thus affected the Ref!istrar-Geneial own constituency as an gxan.ple. I tind that in admits that he is unable to form an opinion; but the return laid on the t.::tble in 1000, on the this fact remains: that there are 32,000 male motion of the hon. member for Hockhampton, Mlnlts in Queensland who are qualified to have .Mr. Kid"ton, the tom! nun.ber of electors is vote~, but who h~tve nn vot1-s at all. [The given for each electorate to so· h ,J nne preceding. Sgcm,'rARY FOR RAILWAYS: Take 111,000 from Taking half-a-do~en of the tirst electorates that UiG,OOO, and :10.000 from that, and it brings it occur, I finrl that in Albert there w~re 1,588 down to 13,000.] And take awpy the other per.,ons on the roll; and, looking up the cmhus 15,000 and there will be nothing left. ::\1any of returns, I tind that the t•>tal number of nw.les in those 32~000, the Regi:;;trA..r-General points out, are­ that electorate was 2, 1-i!\. [The SECRETARY FOR probably visitors, i ravellers, recent arrivals, and HAlLWAYS: That is two years ctfterwards. Get others who fl.re not entitled to vote for various the figures for the same year.J If you take a reasons. All the same there is a large number off number of constituencies, the same thing happens. the roll who ought. to be on it, and this Bill ,-dms at [The SECRETARY ~'OR RAILWAYS: The TII;"lll'8S providing n1eans for those persons get tin~ on the you ctre giving were those for 1899, and the rdlk On the eve of the referendum the late census wa~ taken in 1901.] I am quoting the Sir J. R. Dickson fJromised usth .. t if we entered census figures for Hl01 as well as the figures from into the compact with the other States we should the return !Hid on the table of the Hr.nse for be gran1ed one man one vote. Four years 30th June, 1\JOO. [The SECRETARY t'OR HAIL­ have elapsed, and there is no prospect, as far as WAYS: But the tigurt"S given in that return are I can see, of this House being given the oppor­ for the year before that again.] It makes a little tunity of discussing one man one vote. Year difference. [The SECRETAllY FOR Acmcl:LTcm;: after year it hcts been inserted in Governors' You are comparing different things.] ::"ro, I 'lln speeches and Premiers' manifestoes. :Members not. I can take the figure' from the returns laid on both sicles are pledged to electoral reform; on the table for two or three yurs, and I find a ctnd yet this is the only colony that has made no gradual decrease in the number of electors in attempt to libemlise its franchise. It is perfectly districts where the popu)ation ha:.; been increaBing. sclndalou:S. It is a constant repetition t1f broken [Tht· t:lECRETAllY FOR RAlMI'AYS: There were promhms. The country is crying out for a about 400 navvies in the Albert ctt that Bill like this, which will give facilities to time even.] I shD.ll place these figures on many men scattered through Queensland to get record. In Aubigny Lhere were 2,177 adult males their nmnes on t lw roll, and strike out of exis­ according to the nen•ms, and there were l,,)Stl tence that wretched piece of legislative blunder­ electors on the roll in 1D01. [Mr. MACARTNEY : ing-the property YO~,e-which gi\'es one n1an There are 1,800 there now.] There is a di,parity twenty-five vote,, and takes awcty those of then of some hundreds of men. In Balonne 32,000. That is tbe kind of thing we are sent there were 2,129 adult rmtles and 1,403 on the here to remove, and I hope hnn. members roll. I believe there has been a slight increa''' opposite will not adont the tactics they appear since 1897. In Barcoo there are 1,9GO adult to hn.ve done of deliberately talking this Bill males in the district and 1,329 electors on the out. As to the Bill itself, there is only one roll. They are well organised there, and yet thing in it to which I object-that is, the sub­ there are some 400 or 500 men off the roll. In section of clause 2 which prevents women from Bowen there are 2,351' adult male' and only 907 becoming members of this Assembly. As to on the roll-t.hat is a, badly organised electomte. that the constituencie., are the best judges. If a In North Brisbane there are 4,505 adult males cnnHtituency choos' s to elect '1 woman to rPpre­ resident within the bounds of the electorate, sent it in Pctrliament, it should have a right and only 3,444 on the roll. In South Bris­ to do so. Thctt argument wa" used in the bane there are 4,593 adult males and only House of Lords by a well-known Tory peer; 3,606 on the roll. [l\lr. MACARTNEY : 4,000 it was, be said, the business of the consti­ now.l They generally hurry up about the tuencies. No doubt the average woman will elections ; but we wanted to ascertain exactly be perfectly content to exercise her vote at the number of people who could vote at the an election, but still she should have a right federal elections, and that is why the hon. mem­ to a seat in Parliament; and if the Bill should ber for Rockhampton moYed for thi.; return. In ever get into committee, I shall vote againsb that year there were 103,3G9 on the rolls of the that particular pro vi -ion. My only reason colony-that was in 1900. I do not know for occupying a few minutes this afternoon whether there are more now. [Mr. l\IACARTNEY: was to place the figures I have quoted on 111,000 now.] That is an increase of 8,000. I record, so that the public may see that there is find in the Bulloo there are 1,484 adult males any quantity of room for improvement in our and only 557 on the roll. There has he<•n a electoral law, and that this Bill, even though slight increase there. [Mr. MACAR'l'NEY : There introduced by a private member, makes some are 700 now.] There were 900 on the roll in attempt in that direction, andslwuld be supported, 1896. In 1901 there were 1,441 adnlt males, although I recognise the fact that it is almost and in 1897 the number of electors was 597. impossible for a private member to get such a Taking those electorates alone, we find that out Bill through. The Government have in their of a total of 28,108 adult males there are only mind a ln.rger scheme of electoral reform, and 18,500 on the rolls, which means that there are they seemed inclined to kill this scheme in favour 9,600 men who have no vote at all. From the of their own, which will not be brought down census report I find that the number of adult until the closing days of the session. I intend to males in Queem.!and, exclusive of those on board vote for the Bill. vessele, is lii6,972, while the return of the Prin­ Mr. BURROvVS (Charters TMven) : I did not cipal Electoral Registrar shows that the number of intend to speak, because it is the desire of this voters on the roll is 99,982. [The SECRETARY l<'OR side of the House to come to a vote; but hon. RAILWAYS: There are 30,000 kanakas, Asiatics, members on the other side have decided that Elections Acts [4 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill. 485

they will not allow a vote to be taken, and there­ the secretary of the National Liberal Union, was fore I will offer a few observations. I listened asked why they did not get a better class of carefully _to the Secretary for Rail ways, and it candidates, and he said one reason was that the seemed to me that the only point in hi8 speech contest cost too much, and another was because was the blame he cast upon the other colonies men would not go to PCLrliament to waotf so for the effect" of their legislation. Now, if the much time in listening to men speaking for hon. gentleman i' so well informed as to the hours on subjects which they did not under­ defect" of electoral legislation elsewhere, why stand, simply for the purpo'e of getting their does he not use his influence to induce the remarks into Hansa1·d. \Vhen such men as the GovernmBnt to bring in a perfect 1neasure? I Secretary for Agriculture show such ignorance -do not propose to deal further with the hon. and talk for hours on subjects which they gentleman's speech, which has been effectually do not nnderstand, it is no wonder that good pulled to pieces by the hon. member for ;.;Jermont. men cannot be got to enter Parliament. I When a debate of this kind is adjourned from notice that the National Liberal Union has the 'Thursday to Thursday, it is necessary for hon. laudable ambition to climb to the plane art'ived member. to take notes, and I have a few at by the Labour party. After notes of what thB Premier referred to. The [il'30 p.m.] mentioning certain m>ttters, Mr. hon. gentleman told us that he thought there Adams says: " \Vhen this has was no business in the Bill, and then he been achieved we shall then be on the same referred to the Government !Jroposal which has plane tts the so· called Labour party." That is a been before us for so many years. \V e know very estimable object; but members like the that that promise is the same old bosh. It has Secretary for Agr-iculture are preventing them been brought in year after year, but no attempt IS from attaining that object. The hon. gentleman made to bring the proposals to a definite issue. condemned the Bill because it did not provide for The hon. gentleman's attitude was entirely dif­ giving votes to aboriginals, and in doing so he ferent to that of hnn. members. sitting beside showed that he was talking about some­ a.nd behind him. \Vhereas he did not discuss thing of which he was ignorant, bec~use his the Bill in detail, others are anxious to keep on colleague, the Home Secretary, took the hon. talking. The Premier said th11t instead of being member for Rockhampton to task for giving a the strongest argument in favour of the Bill it vote to aboriginals. The Home Secretary said was the weakest to assert that we ouii;ht to the hon. member for Rockhampton was on bring our legislat:on into line with that of the horns of a dilemma; but there were no horns the other colonies. It appears that if the on that dilemma. It was a sort of a poley word "Commonwealth" is introduced, it has dilemma, and I may say that the hon. member the same effect as shaking a red rag in front for Gympie had the Secret< s, would the Government have been humbugging the give us some explanation in the matter. The people for the last two years on this sub­ latter hon. gentleman has now spoken on the ject. Last year they introduced a Bill which matter, and had he don'l so in a comparatively they never intended to pass, and it is not brief manner I should have had an opportunity of their intention to allow this Bill which has making my speech this afternoon. I consider been brought in by the acting leader of the that hon. members opposite have adopted a very Opposition to pass. Nor do I think it should improper attitude in this matter. They have pass. A Bill which affects every person in taken up a position of the man who goes into the State should be introduced by the Go­ court and asks the court to give him a decision vernment, and until it is introduced by the without hearing his case. If an hon. member Government it is not likelv to become law. brings in a Bill, he and the party with "horn he The extension of the franchise to women has is associated should give adequate reasons to been promised before, but the Premier came new members to enable them to make up their nearer to a definite promise in the answer he minds as to whether they will vote for or recently gave to a deputation than any we have against that mEJasure. I believe in a measure had hitherto; and seeing that he has promised to of electoral reform, and if it could be shown in~roduc.e a mev.sure embodying that principle to me thn.t this is a good Bill, anrl that thiil se ,sJon, I would suggest to the hon. member it should pa>s, I would vote for it, not­ for Rcckhampton th,.,.t he should withdraw this withstandin;:; that it has l1een introdu~-"s desirable to collect It as seen them sitting on benches.] I am sure that inexpensively as pcssible. In all tax<·tion pro­ the hon. member has a much mnre extensive and po-.t!s, and cspPcially in an Income Tax Act, intimate acquaint:houJrl be employer would not be called upon in Hny way permitted to exercise tbe franchise in exactly the to collect the income tax from his employees same manner as men ; but I am not prepared to unless there had been defnult in tbe fi st go beyond that. vVe give them the franchise in instance~ and then the Oomrni~";ioner would be connection with divisional board and municipal able to ·protect himself by an appeal to the elections, but we do not permit them to sit on employer. He moved the omission of lines 35 to boards or councils. I may, of course. be 49, with a view of inserting the following:- reminded that a Mrs. Y a tea wrts on one occasion (1.) In any case where any taxpayer mnpl0\'8'1 by any the mayor of a town in New Zealand, but I do 11erRon, loecting has failed to pay the tax payable by him, and requiring leader of the Opposition would not pur,ue a course such agent to pay the same on behalf of such tax­ that would make the legislature appear ridiculous. -payer. (2.) 'rhereupou every such ag-ent shall deduct and re­ :\fr. AIREY (F/indc>'s) could not agree with the tain ftom t,irnc to time ont of such earnings, salnry, clause in the Bill, or the Treasurer's amendment, wages, allowances, pension, m· stipend rc·~peetively so or the amendment sug-gested by the acting leader 1nuch as is sufficient to pay such income tax, aud shall of the Opp. ,sition. rrhe Trf iRUr~r's ainendment pay the same in pursuance of this Act.. was practically the same as the ciause, with the Question-That the words proposed to be important exception that the Government was omitted stet when and wages paid by them. It seemed to him thatJ any taxpayer earning wages intimated to the the collection of the tax was a duty that should Commissioner that he was willmg to have his be done by the State itself. employer appointed his agent for the collection and payment of the income tax, and that such Mr. HARDACRE (Leichhardt) quite agreed employer was willing to act as his agent, then that where a taxpayer woulrl not pay the tax, the the Commissioner should have power to appoint Government had a right to appoint such employer as the taxpayer's agent. Until [7.30 p.m.] anybody they chose to collect it; but an intimation Wt>R made by the taxp<>yer that he the oc jection to the clause was that was willing for his employer to deduct a certain it compelled an en:ployer to collect the tax, and amount from his wages, he thought it was alto­ thus forced upon him a very obnoxious duty. gether bad in principle that they should give The clause as it was now framed was an absurdity, the employer power to make any deduction inasmuch as it proposed to make the employer without consulting the man who had earned the collect the tax on an income which had been paid wages .. If both the taxpayer and the employer to the employee, not for that year, but for the were w1lhng, of course that was another matter previous year, and possibly by some other em­ but he believed as the amendment stood it wa~ ployer. How could such a provision be made absolutely bad. workable? Mr. MACARTNEY (Toowono): The objection .T~e TREASURER: If the taxpayer was not of hon. members opposite was that the clause wlllmg to pay the tax himself he would not be sought to make an employer a tax-collec~or for the wi]ling fo_r _his employer to pay it for him, and State; but thelegiolaturehad incertaincasesmade th;.s proviSIOn was necessary to ent>ble the Com­ the employer a debt-collector, and why should miSSIOner to call upon the employer to pay in they not extend to the Government the same relief those cases and deduct the amount from what as they extended to an ordinary creditor? '!'he was due to the employees on whose account he acting leader of the Opposition complained that the paid the tax. His <>menclment did not deal employer would be made a t<>x-collector without with r;ersons .'~ho were willing to pay the tax, any remuneration. But in the case of a garnishee and this provisiOn was no more stringent than the employer was neither consulted nor paid for the clause which t>ppearecl in the Bill originally. his services. If the clause was amended to suit * The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Hon. Sir A. the views of the acting leader of the Opposition, Rutledge, Mo,rano(f,): It seen,ed to him that the it would be made ridwulous. There ar,peared to <>mendment suggesteci by the acting leader of be a feeling pervading the Committee that the Opposition would rerluce the clause to an because certain hon. members were ag<>inst the absurdity, and it was not likely that the Committee Bill it was their duty to endeavour in every would corrnnit itself to anything like that. There possible w;~y to make it ridiculous, instead of was a principle analogous to this in the V al nation bowing to the decision of the majority and try­ and Rating Act of 1890, which provided that, in ing to make it as effective t>S possible. the absence of any expres~ provision to the con­ Mr. OANLI<;RON (B,·isbcme N01·th) : The trary between the partie<, a mte leviable upon amendment appeared to him to be worse than property occupied by a man must be paid in the the original clause. The Premier stated the fir,;t instauce by the occupier, but that the previous evening that very few employers on occupier could tender to the owner the amount that side of the House took exception to the of rent clue les" the amount of ra'es, and clause. He (Mr. Oamernn) was an employer, the owner was bound to accept that. This and in this matter he represented a great m<>ny was . a very effectual way of obtaining from other employers in Queensland, and, speaking a third person the amount of taxation which on their behalf, he had no hesitation in con­ anot~~r person w~s liable to pay under the demning the provision. For years past he had Pl:ovislOns of the Bill. It was a principle of the used his best endeavours to establish friendly Bill that everybody should pay something and relations between employers and employees in unless it was desired that there should 'be a the Western country, but if this clause were Inl'ome Tax Bill. [4 SEPTEMBER.] Income lax Bill. 489 passed it would destroy those friendly relations, very few cases would the amount be more than because in its operation it would be objectionable 10s. or £1. If the employer was not empowered to the employers and extremely offensive to the to cCJ!lect the amount of the tax piecemeal, it employees. He should oppose the amendment. might be very hard upon an employee to deduct Mr. DUNSFORD (Charters Towe>·s): 'fhe nearly the whole nf his weekly w•ge to satisfy clause was ohjectionaJleeven in its amended form, the Government. At the same time, a man as it would creo,te a number of unwilling debt­ who was willing to pay the tax would just as collectors, who would be requeste.d to collect debts soon pay it through his employer as direct to the from men who, in many cases, could not pay their Commissioner. butchers' or baker,' bills. Hon. members would Mr. J AOKSON (Kennedy): ·while he thought scarcely o,gree th .t an employer should be made the amendment was decidedly better than the a collector of rem, doctor·<', butchers', and bakers' original clause, it was otill very objectionable. bills. 'Why, then, should they compel an em· The argument of economy, used last night, plover to becom<3 1 debt-collector for the State? seemed to have been discarded, for it was Mr. ARMSTJWNG(Locky,r): Tloe hon. mem­ assumed ther8 would be very few ca,es cf default. ber for Toowong must know that it was very im­ The Let seemed to be that the Gov1-1rnment, proper to attribute motives to any member in the having passed a poll tax, were nut game to Chamber. Because he (Mr. Armstrung) happened collect it, and wanted to shift the odium from to be opposed to this o,mendment, and had spokPn themselves to the employers. \Vhy could not against it, and would vote against it, \Vas he to the Government sue defaulters in the ordinary be told that it was because he wished t•l wreck way in a court of law, and proceed by levy and the Bill? He refused to allow any such "tate­ distress? Were they unwilling to face that ment in regard to him to go mi.rllsput~d. He position? If defaulters were going to be few, contended that Parliament should not ask an where would the expense come in? Seeing that employer to make any deduction from the wages so many hem. members on both sides were of his employees, whether they were casm1l or against the amendment, it would be better not permanent. The Home Secretary had quoted to press it to a di,·ision. the case of those engaged in the pearlshell 'l'he PRK\HER (Hon. ll. Philp, Townsville): industry in Torres Str<1its; but did the hon. The Government took up the pusition last night gentlenun mean to place the white men of (~ueens­ that all the taxes were payable at the office, that land on the same level a' those aliens? He repre­ they were not going to send round tax-gatherers at sented a very large number of men, some of all. If pec,ple did not pay, there was power in the whom employed more labour than he did, and Bill to make them pay. But it would save some some less, and he refused absolutely to cast upon employees both money and trouble if they paid them a work which the Government, by the the amount through their employers. He be­ clause under discussion, declared themselves lieved the great majority of people were honest unable to do. A great deal had been said by and would pay the tax, and that there would the hon. member for Clermont and by Ministers not be oo much trouble in collecting it as ab

There was a special provision in the amendment and being pushed from post to pillar in the which relieved the employer from deducting the endeavour to pay his tax, he could pay it at his whole sum at once. He might deduct 6d. or ls. employer's office. He should support the clause a week from the amount payable by him to the as proposed to be amended more willingly than employee. The hon. member for Kennedy had he would support the original clause. suggested the expedient of obtaining a garnishes Mr. OAMERON denied most emphatically order against the employer, but that would mean that he had any desire to kill the Bill. It was extra expenses, which would be demandable as well known to hon. members that he did not well as the tax. \Vhy should a man be made to approve of the Bill, and that on the division pay costs in that way when it might be a case of he 1·oted with the minority of five against it; but simple negligence on his part in regard to paying the majority of the House having affirnwd that the tax? The Commissioner was not likely to it \Vas necessary to in1pose an ir1con1e tax, and act the tyrant, and he would not be fit for his that this Bill should become law, he loyally position if he did not manage in mch a way as to accepted the position. At the same time, there avoid all unnecessary friction. JI.J:ost employees were provisions in the Bill to which he took would pay the tax voluntarily, and it wonld only exception, and he was perfectly justified in be in a limited number of cases that the employer objecting- by his voice and vote to those pro­ would be required to pay the tax, and deduct visions. the amount from the wages of the employee. Mr. HARDACRE : If there was a.ny force in He thought hon. members should cease to raise the hon. member's arguments at all, they were difficulties which were only imaginary. This in favom of the original clause, which did pro­ was a simple and economical way by which the vide an efficient and cheap means tax could he collected, under judiciqus manage­ [8·30 p.m.] of collecting the tax; but the amend- ment, wit bout any friction at all. ment proposed to abandon that Mr. LESIJ\'A: Tbe difficulty he saw in the means, and provided machinery for making the provision was in connection with the poll tax. employt"" collect the tax in exceptional cases He was in favour of an income tax, and this where the Commissioner failed to obtain pay­ machinery clanse was the simplest and most ment. [The PREllriEil: l said last night, and I expeditious and economical method of collection say again to·night, that everyone is expected to from persons who failed to pay when the tax pay his tax into the Treasury; but, if he does was due. Under the Treasurer's amendment, it not, his employer will be asked to collect 1t.] was only after the Commissioner had made an Then the Commissioner would have to write to effort to coilect the tax and had ;ailed that he every taxpayer in the first instance, and he would call in the assistance uf thr employers. aRsun1ecl that the police wo11ld go round in He was surpri~ed tllat hon. l!I~'>Inber.-3 ~hould country districts to collect the tax. [The object to this provision when they had passed PHllMIEB : None will go round collecting the tax. previous clau,es in which the garnishee prin­ All the taxee will have to be sent in to the ciple had been adopted to some extent. Treasury.] Then why bring•in such a clause? There could be no sincerity in the belief in the [The PREli!IER: For those who do not send in necessity for thi" form of taxation, which the their tax.] If that was the case, and it was only Labour party had advoce~ted in season and out of in isolated eaees where people did not send in season for many year::.;, if n1em bers were not the amount of their t:~.:x, thEre :l.S no neces~ anxious to assist the Government in iwpo<;;ing sity for the machinf•ry provided in the clause. that tax in such a way as would pay for col­ The Govennnent had nu right to n1ake an en1- lection. Clans'' 4:1 of the Bill interferE 1 with ployer do dirty work which the Commissioner the private rights and liberLies of individuals, could nCJt do himself. Supposing an employee inasmuch as it provided that when a member of refu~ed to pay th•: tax to his employer, how was a company was an absentee such company should the empl0yer goi1:g to enforce it? [The PREMIER' be deemed to be the agent of bUCh member, and The employer would very likely inform the Com­ should pay the tax on his beho.lf. Clm,se 7!\ missioner, who would take him to court, and it imposed a penalty on any person car!-ying on wouU cost him more than the an101.mt of the business who refused, when requestGd by the Com­ tax.] But under thi8 clause the employer was missioner, to disclose the name and re~idence of compelled to co.1lect the tax under a certain the person entitl~J to receive or pJrticipate in the penalty. income or rent derived from such business, \Nhich The CHAIRMAN : Order, order ! 'When I was another interference with the rig-hts and lib­ call " Order," it is only becoming on the parb erties of private individuals; so that the principle of hon. members that they should respect my of the clause under discussion was embodied in direction. [Honourable members: Hear, hear!} other parts of the Bill. If hon. m em hers were i\Ir. HARDAORE: The employer was com .. going to persist in finding difficulties in impo·iug pelled to collect the tax, under a penalty not this direct taxation, then they mig-ht expect that exceeding £50. [The PRE11IER: The penalty is it they got over to tbe other side and attempted knocked out-.] \Vel!, that was something, and to impose a direct tax on land, they would be met it woul.d not be so objectionable if it were pro­ with sirnilar difficulties. They were making a vided that the consent of the employer should be whip for their own b8cks. X o cheaper method obtained before appointing him to collect the of collecting the tax than that proposed in the tax, and he might even be allowed the cost of cla.nse had been suggested, and they had no collection. reason to believe that employers would object to Mr. HA\VTHOltN (Enoggera): The amend­ the provision. One hon. member who was an ment would be far less harast-ing to the employer, employer stated this evening- that he did not as it would only be practically in the case of what approve of the clause; hut he '111dPrstood that the was equivalent to gar11ishee prl~ceedings that two hon. members lot North Brisbane, the hon. they would have to collect the tax, so that his member for Herbert, and two or three other objection to that ]Jortion of the clause was hon. membere on that side. desired to take every removed. At the same time they should have opportunity to kill the Bill. [Mr. O.niERON: something more than a withdrawal of the You have no reason at,,,]] to say that about me.] penalty, and he W'Juld suggest the insertion of a The discussion had gradually formed in his mind clause expressly stating that for any default in a conviction that there was a desire to kiil the collecting the tax such agents should not be Bill. Personallv h8 lJelieved that it would be an liable to any penalty. . advantage to the employee if, instead of losing Mr. P J. LEAHY: Speakmg as an employer half-a-day's wages going to the Treasury, and of labour, he did not think toere would be any hanging about there interviewing ll1f:::ssengers, great trouble in getting employer" to collect the Income Tax Bill. [4 SEPTEMBER.] Income Tax Bill. 491

tax in the manner proposed in the clause as it case the position of tax-gatherer was an objec­ stood, which he preferred to the amenr1ment. tionable one; and as an employer of labour he It would provide a very cheap and expeditious objected to the slur of being called a tax-gatherer. method of collecting the tax. <\_s to the objec­ .Everything connected with this portion of the tion that it would create friction, and t.hat there tax was most objectionable. Members on his would be a difficulty in keeping men, as the side were accused of being against the income scheme would apply to all employers of labour, tax because they opposed this provisicm, but and as it was necessary for men to get work, he that was not so. \Vhat they did wae to point failed to see where the difficulty c;ht be having to go to the nearest police statir three broken days. The as the employee under this clause, hut he wished nu1nber of na1nes on the list was forty~ four, and to impress upon hon. member" that the power the amounts paid r::tnged from £1 2s. 9d. to 5s. existed in an Act already in forcE' whereby one Suppose the encployer had to collect a tax of £1 man acted as agent for the Government in the from the man who received £1 2s. 9d., and he collection of a tax payable by another man. handed the man only 2s. 9d., would there not be very strong language used? And he should like Mr. RYLAND (Gympie): No one was contra­ to know what would happen when,. person had dicting the principle that one man might under forty-four men to deal with if he deducted .£1 or the Bill act as agent for another man. That wae 10s. from their wages. An employer had no provided for under clause 24, which was passed right whatever to do such a thing. The men last night without discussion. In the casP the had served their two or three days, and were hon. member quoted, the payment was not for entitled to their money. The name "\Villiams" personal exertion, but the debt was due on the occurred no less than four times on this sheet, property. Income tax upon property could be and they might have half-a-dozen "Smith's," collected quite independent of the amendment "\Villian1s's," "Buckley's," and "}~ass's" on moved by the Treasurer, as the occupier could the wages-sheet. :\Iany of these men worked always be made the agent. The Attorney­ on the ''Duke of Portland" to-day and on General quoted the procedure under the Local the "\Vodonga" to-morrow, possibly under Government Act to show that the tenant paid the another name, and how were they going to taxes a.s occupier, and afterwards could tender his follow those men? The Government were receipt as legal tender to the owner. That was imposing upon employers no end of trouble, and quite right. The local authorities did not go it was absurd to attempt to saddle them with a hunting around for the ownet·. They simply duty of this sort. His colleague, l'vfr. Carneron, went to the tenant, and intimated that the pro­ had thought it necessary to explain to the hon. perty owed the local authority so much, and member for Clermont whether he want0d to that he must pay as occupier, and settle with kill the Bill or not. He (Hon. E. 13. Forrest) the landlord afterwards. The proposal they did not think it necessary to explain to anybody were considering now was to get the poll what his motivr s were in voting. Hon. members tax portion of the Bill from the employer. could judge of his position by what he said and This provided that a local authority might be how he voted, and 1t was not for the hon. mem­ made a collector, but he thought ber for Clermont or anybody else to question his [9 p.m.] local authorities had enough to do motives. He should vote against the amend­ to coliect their rates without col­ ment, and if the clause went to a division he lecting this tax for the Government. In any should also vote against that. 492 Income Tax Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Income Tax Bill.

Mr. TUH.NER (Rockhampton North): The employer of labour, would have to put up with, more the~· considered the clause, the more it as he had to put up with many other inconveni­ bristled with difficulties. 'Where employer and ences, and no better or more work~tble scheme emvwyee were mutually agreed, it would be an had hitherto been suggested. easy way of cnllecting- the tax, but he objected Mr. DRNHAM (Oxley): The amendment was to the duty being forced upon any employer di8tinctly in the interests of the taxpayers, who, if against his will. they did not pay the tax within the thirty days' Mr. KIDSTON : Tbe hon. member for Bris­ notice, would bF compelled to pay it by the court bane North had just pointed out how difficult it with 10 per cAnt. and costs added. He believed would be for employers to collect the tax, and that most employers would willingly a>-sist the how much trouble it would entail, and that was men to comply with the tenns of the .<\et, and a m·•tter they should consider before passing makA the arra;1gements with them for that pur­ such a clause. He made no pretence of wishing pose as easy as possible. It was neee"'~try that to provide the Go,·ernment with a cheap and there shonlct he snch a clause, so that the tax­ easy way of collecting the obnoxious poll tax. payer would feel that he w~ts safe in h~tnding the He did not want to see it collected at all; but, tax to the employer. A great deal had bten said if the Government impused it, they should about nomadic or casual labourers, but he main­ certainly bear all the odium 8f collecting it, and tained that the c.,mmissioner would exercise com­ not put it on employer>, besides saddling them mon sense, and "ould understand !Jow difficult with a penalty of £50. [Mr. FORSYTH: That is it must be to exact from the empl~>yer the tax withdrawn.] It w~ts not withdrawn. lt was due by that c1tL'S of labour. It had been assumed quite true that the Treasurer had withdrawn that only those who paid the minimum amount the penalty from his amendment, but that would would be Cfllled uvon to pay through their em­ not remove employers from the penalty imposed ployers. Hts opinion was that the compara­ in clause 83. [The PRE)!IER : That can be tively poor man would as readily hand over his altered when we come to tbat clause.] It could 10s. as the man who was better off, and he not be eliminated from clause 83 without believed the operation of the Bill would "ffect emasculating the Bill ~tltogether. The amend­ more largely those in receipt of large salaries ment sugg,-sted by the hon. member for Enog­ than those in receipt of small ones. gera was necessary, stipulating that employers Mr. COW AP (Fitsroy) was as much against should not be subject to any penalty, despite the amendment as the clause. The fact remained the provisions in other parts of the Bill. That that it would cause friction between employer and was the only way in which they could remove employee in many cases. Personally, he should that unfair liability. be inclined to resist being maoe the collector of Mr. BURROWS:· As the question of inter­ a bad or a doubtful debt. In the case of fees for ference with the liberty of the subject had been miners' rights and homestead rents on goldfields, raised, h·' would like to quote from a work by they were voluntarily paid by the persons con­ D. G. Ritchie, 1I.A., on State interference. cerned, and the warden had not to ask the The CHAIRMAN: Unless the hon. member employer to collect the muney due. He thought carries out his intention in a very different way the public officers should collect the tax, and from what I anticipate, he will find some diffi· that the duty Rhould not be thrown upon culty in reconciling the line of argument he employers. intends to follow with the question before the Mr. BARBER (Bundaberg) believed that what­ Committee. ever amicable relations existed at present between employer and employee, this clause would break Mr. BURRO\VS : The clause proposed to them np altogether. Although it might be a very compel employers to act as collectors, and that easy matter to collect the poll tax from men who was an interference by the State with their were regularly employed, it would altogether fail liberty. [The hon. member then proceeded to in the case of casual labour. For instance, many quote from the work referred to.] men were employed in the sugar industry who, The CHAIRMAN : I am bound to tell the at the beginning of the seaeon, commenced in hon. member that I think that, at the committee the Southern district and \"orked perhaps for a stage of a Bill, he is going too far in reading few days at a mill, then worked a week or two principles laid down in text-books. The hon. at Bundaberg, and gradually drifted up North, member must really see that himself. and when they came to be paid there would be If Mr. BURROWS could not see why they only 10s. or 12s. due to them. they were met should compel a private individual to fight a with the request to pay the poll tax, he would battle that the Commissioner himself refused to not care abont being in the position uf the em­ fight. One phase of the question had not yet ployer. It might be very well to deduct a certain been referred to. It appeared from amount from the alien population at Thursday [9•30 p.m.] the report of the Labour Bureau Island for hospital purposes, but he did not think that certain employers of labour, to that would apply so well in the case of the white whom men had been forwarded by train, had workers of the State. forgotten to remit to the Rail way Department Mr. HARDACRE asked for an explanation the amount of the fares they had collected from of the first part of the amendment. Did it mean those men. Might it not happen that under that the employer would have to collect the tax that clause many employers would collect the on the salary or wages the employer paid to the tax, but would not p:>..y it in? In that case the taxpayer? If so, it appeared to be contradictory Commissioner would have no remedy, because to the rest of the Bill, which said that the taR he would not know the number of men employed was to be paid on the previous year's income. by large employers of labour. Indeed, it would The TREASURER : The amount of income be quite possible for the employers to make a tax would be settled by the Commissioner on the good thing out of it. If the Government would, income of the previous year. This clause gave even now, drop the iniquitous poll tax there authority to the Commissioner, when he had not would be no necessity for such a vile progosition been able to collect the tax in any year from any as that before the Committee. taxpayer, to declare the employer to he the Dr. GARDE (Maryborough): Whether they agent of such taxpayer for the purpose of paying liked the tax or not they must face the position, the tax; and it was provided that the employer which was that the money must be collected. should deduct the amount of the tax from such The system proposed was one which he. as an taxpayer's earnings in one sum or in instalments. Income Tax Bill. [4 SEPTEMBER.) income Tax Bill. 493

The agent was not responsible for anything SO.ES, 27. beyond the amount payable to the taxpayer 2\ir. Airey C\fr. J acksou while acting as his agent with respect to the tax. l~a-rber Kenna , Blair , Kerr Mr. HARDACRE : As he understood the Burrows Kidston amendment, it meant that the employer would Cameron Martin ,, Cooper 'liaxwell have to deduct the amount of tax due on the , Oownp 11cDonnell income paid by the employer, while the taxpayer ,. Co\vley )lulcaby had to pay on an ao.se,•srnent of his income for the , Dibley ,, .'\ormun previous year. ., Dun~!'ord , Ryland , l"orresL ;-;:nnmerville The TREASURER: The clause provided , Grant Turner that the employer should be the agent of an ,. ''r.Hamilton , Woods employee who had failed to pay his income tax, , Hardacre and when called upon by the Commissioner, the 1'elle•·s: )Jr. Blair and Mr. \V. Hamilton. employer would have to pay the tax and deduct the amount of the tax irom the earning.! of such PAIRS: employee. A.yes-::\Ir. O'Connell, :J.lr. Foxton, and Mr. Thorn. Mr. HARD ACRE: He was still under the Xoes-Mr. Plunkett, Mr. Fogarty, and 3-ir. IIodge. impression that the amendment was not in Resolved in the affirmative. accordance with the explanation given hy the The TREASURER moved the addition of the Treasurer. following words to the amendment :-"And for •- Mr. HA \VTHORN : If the hon. member any default in so doing such agent shall be liable for Leichhardt read the amendment properly to a penalty not exceeding five pounds." he would see that the employer might be declared nir. KIDSTON was opposed to any penalty to be the agent of a defaulting employee only being inflicted upon employers for any default in with respect to the earnings of that employee. He performing that odious duty. did not say anything in the o.mendment ubout incmnes earner1 in the previous year. Question-That the words proposed to he added be so added-put; and the Committee Mr. HARD ACRE: The hon. member for divided:- Enoggera had proved that his contention AYES, 30. wus right. The clause stated that ::lir. Bl'id~es }!r. P. J. tcahy [10 p.m.J an employer should collect the tax , Campbcll , Losina on income, wages, or salary paid by him to his employee at that time, but the Bill :: J~~-J~i,·ih!J " t;.~~~ey , '1'. B. CrilJO :: ::\iacm·tney provided elsewhere that the tax shnuld be on the , Dalrymple )Iackintosh taxpctyer's income for the previous y ar. , Denham }lc:Jiaster The TREASURER: To prevent any miscon­ :: i~~~syth ;: ~~~1~e of ception on tile part hon. members, he might ,, Garde , Philp mention that he had only proposed the amend­ .J. Hamilton Sir A. Rutledge ment printed as far as the word "Act" in the , Hanran }fr. Stepbens latter portion of pangraph (2), leaving out. the , Hawthorn , Stodart words referring to the penalty. If the amend· Lamont , Story ment was c"rried, he intended to move the ., J. Leahy ., 'l'olmie "''insertion of those words, but making the Tell eN: ~Ir. J. C. Crihb and :Yir. J. Hamilton. penalty £5 instead of £i:i0. NoEs, 26. Mr. HAWTHORN: He presumed that the ::\Ir. Airey .:\Ir. Jackson Treaimrer was taking that course in consequence B:ul)er Kenna of what be had pointed out-that the penalty, Blair Kerr under a further clause, would still be £50 or Burrows ,, Kid::,ton f'ameron )lartin J:lOO. He should very much rather see it £5 Cooper }'laxwell than £50. nowap :vicDonncll Mr. KIDSTON : Although the Treasurer Dibley )lukahy proposed that the penalty should be £5, yet an ., Dnnsford Xorman employer would still be liable to a penalty of , Forrest Jtvland , Grant ~lmnnerville £50 for not u<>rrying out the regulations provided '\Y. Hamilton , Turner for in a subsequent clause. ,. IIardacre , WoodR. The CHAiltMAN : I must point out to the Telle1·s: Mr. :Ylaxwell and Cll:r. Summerville. hon. member that the question of the penalty is not now before the Committee. I understand PAIR~. that the Treasurer intends s•.1bsequently to move Ayes-:Yir. O'Comwll, :VIr. Foxton, and }Ir. Tborn. an amendment dealing with that matter. Xoes-::IIr. Plunkett, }Jr. Fogarty, and 2\Ir. Hodge. Question-That the words proposed to be in­ Resolved in the affirmative, serted (the T·reawrer's ctmendmcnt) be so inserted­ Mr. LESINA: As the penalty had been put; and the Committee divided:- reduced in this clause from £50 to £5, he hoped it would be taken as a precedent, with the view of AYES, 29. making a corresponding amendment in oubse­ Mr. Bridges :Yir. Lesina , Campbell , Lmdley qucnt clauses. , J.C.Cribb , Lyons HoN. E. B. l<'ORREST: It did not matter a T. B. Cribb , '!11acartney rap whether the penalty was £~ or £50. ThPre , Dalrymple , }fackintosh Denham , }fc111aster was a principle involved, and if there was to be , Forsyth , :Moore a. penalty at all it might jnst as well have been , Fox , Paget left at £50. Garde , Philp Clause 29, as amended, put and passed. ,, J. Hamilton Sir A. Rutledge Hanran Mr. Stephens Clause 30 put and passed. Hawthorn Stodart On clause 31-" Assessment of incomes of , Lamont :; Story foreign companies"- , J. Leahy , Tolmie , P. J. Leahy The TREASURER moved that in lines 36 Tellers: Mr. Hawthorn and Cll:r. Lamont. and 37 the words "Queensland deposits bear to 494 Income Tax Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Adjournment. its total deposits" be omitted with the view of The TREASURER admitted that at present inserting the words "amount that its assets and !t was more than probable that all properties liabilities in Queensland bears to its total assets m (lueensland belonging- to absentees sho111·ed a and liabilities." That would bring it into line loss; but they were legislating for ordinary with the Victorian Act. times; and, speaking generally, a man investing Amendment agreed to. in propert)- in queensland expected to make a The Tl:tEASURER moved that the clause be profit. He proposed to amend the clause by further amended in line 40 by omitting the word omiLing on the 15th line the word "five" and "fifty" with the view of inserting the words inserting '' three." "t,venty "five." HoN. A. S. COWLEY : He would state his Amenme, he could assess it at 3 per cent. dispose of it in two more nights, as most of the Mr. RYLAND asked for a ruling from the contentious clauses have been passed. Chairman as to whether the Treasurer w~·· justified in assuming that there would be any Mr. KIDS TON: I am rather surprised to profit. \Vas it not against the principle of tlie hear the Premier speak as if he was in a hurry Bill to deem companies to have a profit when to pass thrs mea"ure, because I was beginning to tbey n1ight have a loss? suspect that the Govennnent were delaying its The CHAIRMAN : I am unable to see any­ passage in order to give themseln's time to get thing in clause 31 which appears to me to be out other bminPss ready. Twice the Premier has of order. promised to have other Bills ulac0d on the Mr. LA:YI:ONT (Brisuane South): It appeared notice-paper, but they have not b~en introduced. to him that there was a slight inconsistency I ,,gain urge upon the hon. gentleman the need between the alteration here and the one in the of getting other Bill;; on the notice-paper, so previous clause. The alteration in the previous that there may be no excuse for rushing them clause was to assess at 3 per cent. on the turnover, through afterwards without full consideration. which was a very different thing from 3 per cent. Ho:s-. A. S. CO\VLEY : I would ask the on the c>< pi tal. 'l'reasurer if he would be so good as to have The PREMIER exphtined that a lot of com­ copies of the Income Tax Bill-which is a very panies were described in the chmse, but not all. important and intricate measure-printed with This was a sort of dragnet clause to catch com­ all the amendments made up to date, and distri­ panies which might otherwise escape. buted to hon. members before we meet on Tues­ Amendment agreed to ; and clause, as day next? amended, put and passed. The TREASURER : I shall have much On clause 32-" Assessment of foreign com­ pleasure in obliging the hon. member. panies or absentees carrying on business in Question put and passed; and the House Queensland by agent"- adjourned at three minutes to 11 o'clock.