Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

WEDNESDAY, 15 OCTOBER 1913

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Adjournment. [15 OcTOBER.] Su.uar Oane,rt'':., Bill.

"' 1933·

LEGI:)LA TIVE ASSE~I'1BLY.

\VED:<EoDAY, 15 OCTOBER, 1913.

Th<: SPEAKER (Han. W. D. Armstrong, Locl.yer) took the chair at half-past 3 o'clook.

FEES PAID T0 BARRIBTERS AND SOLICI'l'ORS.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC IN­STRGCTION (Hon. J. W. Blair, lps::'ich): I teg to lac: upon the tah!e of the House a return showing the amount paid to barris­ters and ~0licitors for service~ ru1Jdert-v1 to the State from thB 1st of July, 1812, to the 30th Junr·, 1913, as asked fcl' on the motion of the bon. mem'Jer for Merthyr, Mr. Welsby. I may say that thB re~urn is only for the financial y<>ar, although +he motion asked for the ameunts up till August. The other in­formation will be provided later. I move­that the paper be printed.

Q·re,tion put and passed.

PAPERS

The following papers, la:J on the t.able,. were ordered to be printed:-

R<'port of the EngincBr of Harbours and Rivers for the year endc--1 on the 30th June, 1913.

Return in arcordance with section 9 of the Mining MachinAry Advances Act. of 1906 shm-, ing the mone:;s advanced under th.e provisions of that Act during the financial year ended on the 30th J nne, 1913.

QUESTIONS.

PRICE OF GAS AND ELECTRICITY.

Mr. GILDAY (Ithaca) asked the Chief Secretary, without notice-

" Haq the GoYernment any intention of introducing legislation having for ite object the comrolling of the pvwer for fixing thB ratBs and charges for gas and elect.cicity to consu1ners ?"

The PREMIER (Hon. D. F. Denham,. 0>-'ey) repliBd-

" I may at once answer ' No.' "

McKEEX PETROL MoToR-cARS.

· Mr. MAY (Flinders): I would like to· know fro111 the Secretary for Railw.ays Whether he will giYe US a kind of resume of what has bc·en done with regard to the­McKeon petrol motor-cars?

The SPEAKER : Order! Mr. THEODORE: Give noticB of the ques­

tion.

SUGAR CANE PRICE BOARDS BILL.

INITIATION.

Lieut.-Colonel RANKIN (Burrum), in moving-

" That the House will, at its next sit­ting, resolve itself into a Committee of

Lieut.-Colonel Ran/ei,n. J

!934 Sugar Cane Price [ASSEl\iBLY.] Boards Bill.

the Whole to consider of the desirable­ness of introducing a Bill to provide for the creation of sugar cane price boards and to regulate their powers and duties' and for other purposes consequent there: on,''

~aid : I may. say at once that in seeking to ~nt~oduce this measure I do not desire to ?lairn .any pretence to originality. The Bill 1tself 1s based on my own experience and .the result of my own study of the question, fod1_fied by the findings of the Royal Com­missiOn appomted by the Federal Govern­!llent some time ago to inquire into the war k­mg of the. sugar industry generally. I thinlr .that It must be admitkd that there is room for some improvement in the position of the .sugar-grower, particularly in relation to th"' sugar manufacturer and miller. There have been many complaints from various parts of the State, and I myself, in common with man,Y other members of this Assembly, have received many petitions and letter~ from the furthest North right to the remote South of the. sugar belt; a"king us to do something to relieve the unfortunate position in which the sugar-grower finds himself. It is with the view, then, of helping the situation that this measure has been prepared. The idea I have in my mind is to give fairer treatment to the grower and to create, if possible, a better understanding between the grower and the miller. I am of opinion that this can best be accomplished by tho creation of tribunals giving the powers in many regards similar to those extended to wages boards under the Industrial Peace Act-tribunals consisting .of boards elected by representatives of the growers and representatives of the millers in equal proportion, with a chairman mutu.ally appointed, or, failing such mutual appomtment, by the Governor in Council under the direction of the Industrial Court. That is the constitution of the board. I think it is desirable that some such tri­bunals should be eotablished, because hitherto in the making of an agreement between the sugar-grower and the sugar-manufacturer there has been to all intents and purposes only one party to the agreement, and th-at is the miller himself. This question has become more pronounced prP:ent!y than formerly owing to the desire to establish and maintain a white Australia, and owing to the restrictive legislation placed upon the grower both by the Federal and State Par­liaments rendering sugar-growing in large areas less and less profitable and has rendered it consequently more a~d more the work of the small grower. In my opinion any success in the industry now lies in the growing of sugar-cane in small areas, areas that may be cultivated either by the farmer himself or with the aid of his family. WheU: we recognise that, it becomes at once ap­parent ~ha~ the cane grown by the sugar­grower 1s ]ust as much representative of a man's labour as coal won by the miner re­presents that mnn's labour. The suggestion in my proposal is that we should extend the Dperations iust as we would under the In­dustrial Peace Act to the sugar-grower, and in doing that I do not think I am by any means establishing a new principle. After all, the principle embodied in the Industrial P<>aCP Act of 1912 and in the w,,_ges Boar<'ls Act of 1908 to 1912 seeks to bring about a position that shall not be one-sided in any

fLieut.-Golonel Rankin.

contract, but that the labourer and the worker should be able to secure for his labour a fair reward apart from the absence of any competition or quite apart from any peculiar circumstances that may obtain at the moment. It should also secure to the employer that he would get a fair amount of work done in return for his expenditure. It is just extending the same provision to the sugar-grower as we extend to the labourer under the Industrial Peace Act. One of the strongest arguments in favour of this Bill is the absence of competition from the sugar-grower's point of view. Competition, generally speaking, is not to be found in the sugar industry. I myself have had many years of experi.enco in the sugar industry, and I am fortified by the report of th'l Royal Commission. The tin.e has arrived when we should reliev£ tho position, if necos:c:,ry. Ly legislative means. We find that the very thing I desire to have expressed in the Bill I propose was recommended by the Royal Commission, which said in its report-

" \V e see no reason why the principles which underlie our industrial legislation for the protection of the wage-earner should not be extended to protect the grower.''

That is exactly what we seek to do. It may be added that the same principle is equally applicable to any farmer, but that is not so. The cane farmer stands in a position unique and alone. The ordinary farmer who grows maize or wh(at or hay or potatoes or any other stapie product has an open markc>t. He has the benefit of any com­petition that exists. He is not subject to any legislative restriction, such as the sugar­grower is, and there is no parallel between the two cases. The sugar-grower finds him­self in the position that he has to eend his cane to the nearest mill. I, myself, have had some experience of what this means. Most of the areas in Queensland, in order to overcome anything in the nature of corn­petition, have cut up areas into zones, and they have apportioned the land within those various zones to individual mills. And it is with the view of breaking down and over­coming the disability which has been created by the zone system that this Bill is being introduced. I do not at this stage wish to go into the details of the Bill. I have given a brief outline of what it proposes to accomplish. Broadly speaking, there are four things which govern the price of cane-the quantity of cane at the disposal of anv par­ticular mill, the sugar contents of that" cane, the efficiency of the mill, and the price of sugar. Those four factors practically deter­mine what the mill is able to pay to the grower for his cane.

An HoNOURABLE MEMBER : What about the duty?

Lieut,-Oolonel RANKIN: The duty of course IS a factor, but that affects the price of sugar. The four factors I have mentioned pract.ic.ally. govern .the price of sugar-cane. Pr'?viswn 1s made. m the rne~sure I propose to mtroduce that m the event of the market price of sugar increasing and sugar manu­facture be,~oming more profitable the crrower !!'all r<;ceive, some b<>nefit from' the ~ise in ,ne prwe OL sugar.. 4-t the present time th<>re are thrBe parties m the sugar industry -the worker, the grower, and the manu­facturer. The worker is already protected

Sugar Cane Price (15 OCTOBER.] Boards 1hli. 1935

by the industrial board, the manufacturer is protected by a duty of .£6 per ton on sugar, but the grower-the man between the two, the man who has to carry all the ri,,k of fire and flood and drought and any pest -has absolutely no protection at all. It is with the view of extending some protection to the grower that this Bill is being intro­<luced. The Bill is drafted largely on the lines recommended by the Royal Commis­sion. The commission, writing on this ques­tion, put the position of the grower very dearly, and point out that it is imperative that something should be done for his relief. They suggest how that should be done, and ,say-

"Under all the circumstances of the case, we conclude that the price for cane should be fixed for each mill on the wages board system, that the owners of the· mill should elect a representative, that the growers (who are not owners of the mill) should appoint another repre­S"ntative, and that th<l chairman should be either a member of or be appointed by the Interstate Commission. The board so constituted would fix the price for cane on a basis that would allow to the miller fair manufacturing profits, proper maint-enance, and proper writing­off for depreciation.

" The board might adopt the syste'11 .of payment according to the sugar con­t-ents straight out, or according to the sugar contents varying in conjunction with the price of refined sugar, or according to the total average results of the mill straight out, or according to those re,;ults taken in conjunction with the refined sugar, or according to any other scheme which commended itself to the board as likely to be just to all parties under all the circumstances of the case. It would stipulate what reduc· tions should be made for damaged cane. It might also provide that in case of there being a surp.Jus in the Australian output of raw sugar, involving the nem•;­sity for export at .a loss, and a diminu­tion in the price rec('ived bv the mi1l lor its raw sugar, there should'be a revision of the award as regards future supplies."

'That is exactly what the Bil.J proposes to do. Let me give an illustration of the method -of procedure proposed in the measu!'e. Sup­pos<J the Cane Price Board meet before the ·commencement of the season and give an .,award based on the assumption that the crop for that year will be 60,000 tons, that the sugar content of the ca.ne will be 12 per •Cent., that the effici<Jncy of the mill may be represented by 90, and that the price of :sugar will be £13 2s. 6d. per ton, and that their award is that the minimum price paid for < .me shall be £1 2s. per ton. tO up­pose that at the end <Jf the season the re­turns show that 80,000 tons have been crushed that the eugar content of the car ,-, has risen to 14 per cent., that the efficiency ·of the mill has risen from 90 to 94, and that the price of sugar has incn:tsed from £13 2s. 6d. to £14 2s. 6d. per ton; the board \\ oulrl then ~Jeterrnine wh~t increase i11 price sl,ould be allowed to the- gro''· or fJr the im­proved conditions during that season. That practically is the proposal in the Bill. It may be argued that there will be difficulty in arriving at an estimate two or three months before the crushing of the cane; but :I would point out that at the present tima

agreements are made years a!J,m;d. Sur<;JlY it will be easier to estimate a mrmmum priCe eight weeks ahead than a minimum price f?r eight years; and I am aware of cases 1n which agreements have been mad<l for that length of time. The me~sure ~]so ~akes provision for an award b~r:'g revr~ed m the event of circumstances ansrng whwh rer:der such a course necessary. I have grven reasons why I 'think it is desirable that the Bill should be introduced, and I have also given briefly an outline of the purpose of the Bill. I should like here to express my feel­ing of indebtedness to the hon. member fM Mil'ani, Mr. Swayne, and the hon. memb~r for Bowen Mr. Caine, for the sympathetiC assistance i: have received from them in the preparation of the measure. I have. mu<?h pleasure in moving the motion scandrng m my name.

Mr. SWAYNE (Mirani): I propose to second the motion, but do not intend to speak at any length at this stag~, as. I think it will be better to leave the diScuss ron of details until we have the Bill before .us. There is one point on which I ohould hke to disabuse the minds of hon. members. I have heard it said that it is intended to revive a scheme which has failed in the past -u scheme to flx the price of articles to the c-:mF-:mwr. Nothing of the kind is intended. ~\s far as I kno'', there is nothin£ in the measure dealing with the price ?f sugar itseif. All the measure seeks to do .rs to take the price paid for sugar as a basis for the value of cane, and then secure an equal division of that price between the two sec­tions of produc<Jrs-the man who produCGs the cane and the man who produces the raw sugar. Regarding the need for such a measure, without going into details, I sho:rld like to point out that there are .somethmg lilm 4 000 producers of sugar-cane 111 Queens­land, 'and that there are only about twenty large buyer3 of cane. In putting the number at twenty I may be leaving out three. or four small mills in the South; bu~ I th!nk I am fairly well within the mark m saymg that 90 per cent. of the output of those 4,000 producers of cane is purohas~d by about twenty people. Und<er the crrcum­stanecs, it is quite roscihlc thut h:udshiJ?S may arise in connection with the prrce. paid to the growers for their cane. It wrll be found, I think, when the Bill is before ~he House that it is not contrary to the polrcy of the Liberal party. I take it thao .while the Libe:ral party does not seek Y-? urqust!y interfere with privat+., c ntcrprise, it 1s qu1te _rn accord \\:ith their policy to regulate affau 3

when one section of the community secures a monopoly in a particular business and m~y misuse the power they possess to the drs­advantage of any other section . of the cC!m­munity. I have much pleasure m secondmg the motion.

Mr. LENNON (Herbert): Unfortunately, I have not been able to hear what has falle_n from the proposer and seconder . of thrs motion. Some two months ago a big depu­tation consisting of members, from this side of the House principally,. waited uvon. t.he Premier and urged upon him. th<_' desrrabilrty of introducing a Bill for this very purpose. For what reason the Government are unwill­ing to introduce such a measure I am at a loss to understand. I do not know whether this Bill is to be fathered by them or whether they are ashamed of the Bill.

Mr. Lennon.]

1936 Swtar Cane, etc., Bill. [ASSE:\fBLY.] Closer Settlement, etc., Bill',

The SPEAKER: Order! The hon. mem­ber for Burrum is asking for leave to intro­duce tho Bill.

~Ir. LEI\NON: YE\s; but the Gov~rnn1en1, are not t,tkiLg upon the~-· dv,- q the re~f"Jn­sibilitv < ~ intrcd-.1, ing a Bill of L~J.is charhcter. If t~_:.ic:: n1r .1SUl'/' works out, as it rcctciil,ly \vill do, L J the very 0Tt.:1t Llisu1 y;ointl.~:~ont of tLcr.e cont,·rri "d, th(1 Govcrnn1eL~ \\ill 'c rel~3V{>1 of .:...n: re·-pon_,it.iility rL ,_, __ r~:~u;s h. If tie Governn:r_!llt .are gDing to t.helter thenl­se:vos upon an excuse of that Lind, it is not .-ur5 vc,•litablo tD thtcm.

Mr. RYAN (Barcoo): I should just liko to say ont:~ --;vord h0fore this mc~ion i.) ~J ·t ;.') the House. I was surprised t'hat ":;.\fot for­mal " wa" call._·d to thi,, motion. I felt tl..t it was a motion which ought t-u be all<::i\ ,cJ to l-'ass as formal, but the Prcn1ier callt ~1 "Not formal" to it, though he no"Y appears to be prepared to allow the motion tD n;o withcJUt saying anything upon it. I am very pleased w see any move made in the dir c­tion of endeavouring to ensure that tho primary producer sh.:dl get a fair return for his ~.:.1terpri~o and laLour, aLd a" far as I can >~ath"r from the remarks ol the han. member for Burrum in proposing his motion that is his olject. I shall re.-rrve my remarks upon the Bil: itself until I see what it actually contains. The hon. member for Burrum knows from the spe~cb.,, that have fallen from members on this side of the House on various occasions this sPssion that vre are in accurd with any system of cane price boctrd.> which will give the growers a fair deal. I lmo'\ that the bon. member h"s made a frank admission that at prrsent

there is practically no competi­[4 p.m.] tion amongst the buyers of cane,

and that it is necrssary to have some impartial board that will hear evidence and fix upon what is a fair price. I was !ilad to hear the hon. member for Mirani, m seconding the motion, make the candid admission aiso that the suppliers have rea­son for suspicion against the millers. Those were the words he used-" they have ground for suspicion." If such a suggestion came from this side of the House I am afraid that strong exception would be taken to it. The hon. member for Mirani and the hon. mem·· ber for Burrum have been at great pains to point out that in proposing to introduce a. mNmre of this kind it ·is quite in accordance with the principles of t.he Liberal party. I am quite unaware that it is nec(·>· sary tD make any special pleading of that sort. or to apologise for the measure.

Lieut.-Colonel RANKIN: I made no such remark.

Mr. RYAN: The hon. member for J\Iiruni did. He certainly went to great pains to powt out that this measure was thoroughly in acrord with the princip]cc, of the Liberal partv, although I have vNy g-raYP doubts w hethcr that is so, and I shall view with much interest the attitude that will be taken t~p~n this mat"ter toth by hon. gentlemen stttm' on the rront Treasury bench and al,,o b_y some hon. members belonging to the ! arty of which lhre hon. member is lead€1"; I a~ rd'•rring ~o the country p;.rty. I do no.t mb.nd to Je,a.v the House any longer at thiS sta;;-e. but I shall certainly watch with 'cry gr;.,t in:erc;,t ~he various· stages of the 1.::1( 'tS'J.rP throu ~h tl11s House.

Qu,tion put and passed.

[Mr. Lennon.

CLOSER SETTLEMENT ACT AMEND­MENT BILL.

INITIA'£ION.

The SECRETARY FUR PUBLIC L4.NDS (Hon. J. Tolmie, 1'oc%oar.'bUJ, in moving-

" That the House wi;l, at ica next sitting, rc>olve itself into a Cou"1ittee of the Whole to consider of the deNirable­n' cs of ini.roducing a Bill to amcrcJ the­Cioser Settlement Act of lliJ6 in certain particulars,''

said; I presume the leader of the Opposition called " Xot fDrmal " to this motion with the· object of getting some information in regard to the measure, and it affords me very great !-·:Lasure tv give that inforn1ation. rl_lhoro has be~n a considerable demand made from time, to time by those who ar<: selcdor" undct the Closer Settlement Act for an .amendment of the Act in the direction of giving a longer time in which to pay for their selec­tions. Hon. memJers are quite well aware­that the land selccted under the Closer­Settlement Art ic land of a fir,t-cla,o·: qu:tlity and sometimes of a high price, and the prie& of the land, plus interest, is a considerable strain for the selector to bear, more particu­larly in seasons that are not too gDDd, and, unfortunately, during the past few years the· seasons have not been as satisfactory as we­would like w seB them from the agricu;tural standpoint. Hence there has risen .a desire· on the part of the selectors of the more­recently-purchased estates to have an amend­ment Df the Act. This more particularly applies to the case o£ Jimbvur, where the lands, as hon. members are aware, are of a high v.alue and of good quality, and a great proportion Df which at the present time is unselected. It is hoped by the amendment which we are making in the Act that relief will be given to the SBlectors who have already selected lands under this Act, and also that it will afford .an opportunity, in the case of Jimbour, of the land being. readily selected. The provisions of the Bill are few in number. The Bill itself is one of five clauses, and the main principle is the­extension of the time from twenty-five years. to forty years. Another principle of import­ance is that those who have selected under any of the Closer Settlement Acts that have­preceded the one now being amended and under that Act itself, may obtain the advan­tages of the amendment in •accordance with an actuarial table, which is part of the Bill. Further, it is provided that those whD have selected under past Acts and under the­present Act, and who at the present time· may be in arrears, may take advantage of the present Bill so far as paying off their first obligation is concerned, and provision is made that the arrears will be distributed: over periods varying from five to twenty years.

Mr. HuNTER: Does that include penalties?'

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: W c do not int0•1d to charge p<'naltie~. but we ·are including simple interest at the rate· of 5 per cent. (Hear, hear !) Hon. members. will find when the measure is before them that it affords all the relief that has been asked for by the se:ectors, and that it will be an advantage to the settlers and to the State w have such an Act on the statute-

Criminal Code (15 OCTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 1937

book. I do not know that there is any further information that I can give at this 1tage, and I had intended giving this infor­mation to-morrow when the Chairman was in the chair. However, if there is any further information I can give to-morrow, I shall be very pleased to give it.

Question put and passed.

WAYS AND MEANS.

PoSTPONEMENT.

On the Order of the Day-" Ways and Means-Resumption o£ Committee," being called,

The PREMIER : I beg to move that the consideration of this Order be postponed until to-morrow.

Mr. RYAN: Are there no reasons for this .action 1

The PREMIER: I have no message.

Mr. RYAN: Why not have stated that? We do not want these things sprung on this side of the House.

Question put and passed.

PEARL-SHELL AND BECHE-DE-MER FISHERY ACTS AMENDMENT BILL -MINERS' HOMESTEAD LEASES BILL.

RETURNED FROM COUNCIL.

The SPEAKER announced the receipt of messages from the Legislative Council re­turning these Bills without amendment.

CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND READING-RESUMPTION OF :CEB.\.TE

Mr. RYAN: I am very pleased to see that a Bill is being introduced which will allow persons convicted of criminal offences the right of appeal to a properly constituted tribunal. As we are all aware, and as ex­perience has shown, occasions do occur where persons are wrongly convicted, and, indeed, I think a very good illustration was fur­nished the other day in the case against the man Smith, who was imprisoned awaiting his trial, and I believe, there were no less than ten witnesses who were prepared to swear that he was the person who really committed the offence, whereas it was some other person who was very much like him. If that had gone on for trial, I have not much doubt that on the evidence that person would have been con­victed, and if it subsequently turned out, as it did on this occasion that the real thief was found, through having issued a similar cheque to the one he was charged with stealing, there would have been no way of removing the stigma of the conviction unless BO'llB sort of a criminal appPal court existed. The hon. and learned gentleman who has charge of this measure gave a full explana­tion of its provisions in his second-reading speech, and I do not intend to go into de­tails except in certain particulars that I think may require amendment in Com­mittee. At present, as thf' hon. gentleman explained, there are several methods of appeal, though there is really only one that is used to .any extent, that is the method by means of Crown cases reserved, which only allows of appeal by a prisoner on

1913--6 0

points of law which are reserve~ at the tria.!. That is really the only, practiCal ~orm . of appeal which exists at present, .an~ It exish under the provisions of the Cnmmal Cod~. I notice in this Bill it is proposed to ret.am the method of appeal by way of Crown ca;ses reserved as before, except that the hearn~g of the case reserved is in the same manner In which an appeal is heard. The right of appeal is also giwn in three cases: fi~st, against a conviction on any ground whiCh involves a auestion of law alone; secondly, with the leave of the court, or upon a certi­ficate of the judge of the court of t~e tri~ that it is a fit case for appeal agamst ;~us conviction on any ground of appeal whiCh involves a question of fact .alone, or a ques­tion of mixed law and fact, or any other ground which appears to the court to .be a sufficient ground of appeal; f!-nd thirdly, with the leave of the court, agamst the sen­tence passed on his conviction. This seems to me to give a fairly full right of appeal, but it do<>s seem to me somewhat unneces­sary when a full right of appeal is given in the Bill to retain the old way of appeal by way of Crown cases reserved. I do not know what the object i• in retaining that method of ~ppeal when we have a method of .appeal established here on questions of law alone. I have no objection to find with the manner in which tho court is constituted, except to observe, as far as I can see from the provi­sions of the Bill. that it will be possible f'!r the judge who prPRides at the trial to also Sit as one of the judfres in t~e .oourt of app~al, like the old Full Court s1ttmg and hearmg Crown cases reserved. For my own part, I think the principle is a bad one, and T am opposed to the principle of allowing th;e judge who presides at the. trial to also s;t in a court of appeal; partiCularly as prov1· 3ion was made that-

" The judrre of the court of ~ria! shall, in ~ase of a.ny appeal or applwatwn for leave to appeal, f':'rnish to the registrar his notes of the tnal, and also a report giving his opinion upon the case or upon any point arising in the case."

He has the right of sending in a report there and also his opinion upon the cas~. and I therefore do not think that the jud •e who presides at the trial should also be allowed ·to sit on the court of appeal. As I understand the present position, in the case of a Crown case reserved the judge of the trial only sits there, not to take part in deciding the case so much as to keep the court advisf'd on anv matter which they may wish to refer to him during the hearing. But under this Bill he will be allowed to preside as one of the jud~cs of appeal and take part in the decision. Of course, there are some cases in which that might be a benefit, but I think, on the whole, the prin­ciple that a judge who presides af the trial should sit upon the court of appeal is a bad one. It is not allowed in civil case~, and I do not think it should be allowed in criminal cases either. I am verv glad to see that there is a claus'e inserted which allows of a new trial being order'"d as a result of the appeal. Instead of quashing the conviction or affirming the conviction, it is possib!e for the conrt of appeal to grant a new trial of tho case. That is a. provision which does not exist in the English law upon the ques­tion, but yet it is a provision that experience has shown to be very necessary. I can quite understand that experienee ha~ shown that there are cases where the proper relief to be

Mr. Ryan.!

1938 Criminal Goae [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Boll

gu.nted would be an order that the case should be retried before a judge or jury. I litlll not so sure that the grounds stated in this clause are exactly sound grounds upon which a new trial should be ordered. I notice that the wording is that if the court considers that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, and that, having regard to all the circumstances, such miscarriage of justice can be more adequately removed by an order for a new trial than by any other order whiGh the court is empowered to make, they may make the order for a new trial.

The SECRETARY FOR PcBLIO INSTRUCTION : It is an exact copy of the New South Wales section.

Mr. RYAN: That is in the New South Wales Act, I understand, but at the same ti1ne it does not seem to me that it is a very happily worded provision, because, first o± all, the court must be satisfied that a miscarriage of justice has occurred. If they are satisfied or conclude from the surrounding circum.­stances that it was reasonably possible that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, I should think they should t-ake what steps they cDnsider necessary themselves in order to remedy that miscarriage of justice. I should imagine that a new trial should only be ordered when the court is of opinion, from ali the surrounding circumstances, that perhaps the best method of deciding the matter would be to leave it to the jury to decide again. The wording does not seem to me to be the happiest, and I have no doubt some argument will arise over that matter in the future. The wording might be made so clear that no argument could take place upon the mattPr. I alw think the time allowed for appealing is too short. Clause 12 provides-

" Any per,on convicted desiring to appeal to the court, or to obtain the leave of the court to appeal from any oonviction or sentence, shall ~iv~ notice of appeal or notice of application for leave to appeal, in the prescribed man­ner, within ten days of the dat<J of such conviction or sentence."

I think that that time is taken from the English Act, but what may be a sufficient time in England I do not think is a suffi­cient time in Queensland. It might· be that a conviction might take place at Norman­ton, Burketown, or Thursday Island, and ten days is too short a time in which the requi­site notice of appeal, or of application for leave. to appeal, as the case may be, should be giVen.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : They can wire it down.

Mr. RYAN: Of course, the rules might require them to wire it down; but I do not see the necessity of wiring down the notice of appeal. Under our present rules with regard to appeal to our Full Court in civil matters, they are allowed twenty-one days. There is nothing to prevent a man giving notice of appeal at once, but he ought t<:> be allowed a longer time in which to giv--e it. He can give riotice straightaway if h-e can, but if he does not give it within ten days, according to this, he is out of time, unless 'he makes application to a judge tv lengthen the time. Of course, the judge ma.:y grant an extension of time. I think the time should be extended in this Bill to at lea~ t twenty-one days, to make it the same time as is allowed in civil cases for giving notice for leave to appeal. !,notice that although t;he court has power to extend the tim""

~Nr. Ryan ..

within which notice of appeal or applica­tion for leave to appeal may be given, they have not got that power in convictions in­volving sentence of death. In that case they have no power to extend the time for appeals. I do not know the object of that. I know it is done in the English Act. They want to relieve the court of the grave responsibility to extend the time for leave to appeal when a prisoner is under sentence of death. I think that ought to be fully dis­cussed, because if they have the power to grant extension of time in civ.il cases, I do not quite see the object of taking away from the court the power to extend the time for appealing in capital cases. I notice the very good provision that legal assistance may be assigned to the appellant, but that such legal assi~tance has to be provided by the Crown Law Office. I think it will be well for us to give the court power to assign counsel, because I know that under the present Poor Prisoners' Defence Act it is very seldom that the Crown assigns counsel to prisoners. Sometimes the reasons given for not assign­ing counsel are not reasons which appeal to me as being sound for refusing counsel. They appear to spend very little money on that particular portion of the Crown Law De­partment, and I think it will operate in the same way with regard to appeals; conse­quently, I should like to see that power given to the court it%eif to assign counsel to prisoners. We had a case in the Full Court on Tuesday. In a Crown case reserved, Mr. Kingsbury, the Crown Prosecutor, appeared to argue the case for the Crown, and he cer­tainly explained the case fully and fairly as he understood ·it; but there was no one there to argue the case for the prisoner, and it was commented on by the Chief Justice.

The SECRETARY FOR P"GBLIC INSTRUCTION : What he commented on was that the person who originally appealed and got the case re;erved did not appear. .

Mr. RYAN: I am not commenting on the Crown Law Department, because they were in no way responsible for that person not being represented.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION: The Crown sent in a man to represent them.

Mr. RYAN: That is right. They sent in a mll.n to represent them. But the court had to fossick the other part of the case out for themselves, and reserved their decision. I would like it to be clearly understood that I am making no suggestion in that matter against the Crown Law Department, Dr

against anyone. I merely say that it is de­sirable that the court should be able to say in any case, " We shall assign counsel to this man to have his case argued." They could straightaway assign counsel, and ad­journ the case for argument. I also notiQe that there is no provision made for the assigning or granting of counsel in case there is an appeal from the Court of Criminal Appeal. If the Court of Criminal Appectl should quash a convirtion, there is a right left in the Crown to go further and take the matter on to the High Court. In such cases I think there should be a provi­sion whereby the pri,oner is afforded the right of counsel, to have his case argued in the High Court. because he is taken there l;Jy the Crown, and I nave no donbt that it is perhaps an oversight that provision is not made whereby l0gal assistance shall be assigned to him on the hearing of the appeal in the High Court of Australia. I notice a provision whereby a shorthand note shall, if

Ortminal Code (15 OCTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 1939

practicable, be taken of the proceedings at "'very trial of any person on an indictment. That is somewhat novel-that shorthand notes shall be taken at every 'trial on indict­ment. Does that mean that every trial in the Supreme Court and in the District Court .. hall have a shorthand note taken of the proQeedings.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : The idea is, if practicable.

Mr. RYAN: In Brisbane, it is surely practicable, as there are plenty of shorthand writers obtainable, and I have no doubt that now we have the principle of shorthand established to some extent in our courts, it would be just as well if we had a pronounce­ment made on the matter from the han. and learned gentleman in charge of the measure, because it cannot be suggested that it is not practicable to have shorthand notes taken .of crimino:tl trials in .Brisbane, Rockhampton, and Townsville. It would certainly be prac­ticable there, and it will be an innovation which may be a us-eful one. I notice, too, that a transcript of the notes is to be fur­nished to any party interested, upon the payment of such charges as may be pre­scribed by the Governor in Council. I trust that those charges, when the regulation is made, will not be too heavy, so that a person will be able to get the advantage of thu notes without having to pay too much for them. At present, we know that in all :criminal cases prisonBrs are 3ntitled to have a copy of the depositions provided for them for nothing, and I do not think it would .be asking too much to also have a copy of the notes of the trial furnished at the ex­pense of the Crown Law Department if the court grants leave to appeal. It will be a sufficient safeguard, I think, against any undue expense, that every prisoner should not be compelled to purchase a copy of the notes of the trial, but that a copy of the notes should be furnished free to any person who had the leave of the court to appeal. I think I have traversed nBarly the whole of the provisions of the Bill. It is one that I welcome, and that I think is necessary, be­cause there are now-perhaps therB may be a few-but there are now some persons con­victed and undergoing sentence in some of our gaols who should not be there. A mBasure of this sort is calculated and in­tended to do away with any injustice of that kind, and for that r<Jason I have plea,ure in supporting it.

Mr. THEODORE (Chillagoe) : Whilst this Bill is one more for lawyers, being practi­cally a technical measure, still I think that consideration alone should not be given to the technicalities of the measure. AftBr all, it involves watters essentially affecting human rights, that a man should get a fair and full h'ial in any proceedings which may de­prive him of his liberty. Therefore, I think that a layman might be excused for passing some comments upon a mea;ure such as this. I agree with the leader of the Opposition in welcoming a Bill which facilitates any scheme to give absolute justice, and prBvent any possible miscarriage of justice, and if this measure goes in that direction at all, then 1t is to be welcomed, even if it may involve i!ome little additional expense upon the Drown, and sometimes upon prisoners-! think it is expense which is highly war­ranted. I rise particularly for the purpose

<>f commenting upon the question of assign-

ing to the prisoners legal assistance on the hearing of appeals against any conviction. It seems to me that the principle is a good one, but it might be extended so as to be­comB much morB useful. I do not knovr whether it would be within the scopB of the Bill to lay down the principle of the est<tb­lishment ol' public dBfBnders in all criminal

cases, but I think a few rBmarks [4.30 p.m.] upon that subject would not be

inappropriate, althoug:h I do not desire to discuss anything that It not pe~­missible. I have read the Bill through, and I notice that in glause 15 there is provishn for legal assistance to appellants. The Dill is ''"id to be a Bill-

" To amend the Criminal Code by Bstablishing a Court of Criminal Appeal and making better provision for appeals in criminal cases, and for other purpoSBs incidental to the aforesaid objects."

l think that anything which would remove the necessity of assisting a prisoner in such a way-which would obviate the necessity for an -appeal to a criminal court-would come under the heading of "incidental purposes." I do not think it is a very wise thing to restrict any debate on a ·question such a• thie.

The SPEAKER : Order ! Mr. THEODORE: I was saying that I do

not think it is a wise thing to restrict debate on a question such as this.

The SPEAKER: Order ! I do not pro­pose to restrict debate. I lll8rely .ask the han. member to refer only to the principles of the Bill we are now dealing with, which principles were accepted when the order of leave was grant<Jd and incorporated in the Bill. There may be omis;ions from the Bill; but they should have been alluded to when the order of leave was before us. The Bill is now at a second-reading stage. 1'here is no provision in the Bill relating to the employment of a public defender, .and I think the hon. member would be exceed­ing his right m alluding to it.

Ml'. THEODORE : In dealing with a subject of this nature one is at a disadvan­tage if one's speech is to be broken into by interjections or in other ways. It is a regrettable thing that an. han. member has no right to devBlop his argument before he is told that his rBmarks are irrelevant. 1 had no mtention of discussing a principle which is foreign to this Bill. or which is hot contained in it; but I do desire to dis­cuss a principle which is contained in clause 15. It is a new principle so far as Queens­land is concerned, and it deals with the question of assigning counsel to a prisoner when he makes an appeal. Without going outside of Australia, we have numerous inotances in the Commonwealth which show the necessity of a Bill such as this, 'and they can be supnlemented to a great extent by examp-les from other countries. In our experienoo in Australia we have had many instances where miscarriages of justice have resulted from the position the prisoner was placed in in not having able counsel to dAfend him. TherBfore I think the prin­ciple established in the Bill is a good one, and it might go further and give the prisoner the right to legal assistance. It should not be merely done on the approval of the Crown Law Office, but the prisoner should have the absolute right to legal as­sistance when he appears before the Full

Mr. Theodore.]

Criminal Codtl [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

Co:urt or the High Court or the Cour; of Cnmmal Appeal. The system at pre3eil!, is that the Crown Law Office decides whether to assign counoel to a prisoner or not, and it often works out to the disadvantage of a person charged with an offence. It may be a serious offence, and poesibly the evidence against him ?8oms to show that he is gurlty. The Crown Law ;)JHce sPems to Lake the view that where t,he evidence is aga:n,t a n1an it is not 'v.Jrrh ''lui.~ W:E:ignnHr auv counsel to him. !'hey tcecrned to rely on any protnction that they may get from the judge.

The SECRE'rARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : That is not the principle that is adopted. They consider if it is an arguable case.

Mr. THEODORE : Whether the case is arg~rable is a matt ,r of opinion, which is decrded b,; the Attornev-Gcnerd, 11t any tatn.

The SECRETARY FOR PuBLIC INsTRUCTION : The magistrate makes a recommendation as a rule.

Mr. THEODORE: There is even a weak­ness in that. A prisoner should have a right tu apply for counsel, and it should b& a.signed to him 9n his application.

'fhe SECRETARY FOR PuBLIC INSTRUCTION : If the magistrate refuses to make a recom­mendation, he can apply to the Crown Law Officers himself.

Mr. THEODORE: The practice is that the depositions are looked through by the Attorney-Genera1, and counsel is assigned or the application refused, just as he thinks proper under the circumstances. That is a wrong principle; the prisoner should have the right to get counsel. I assisted one pri­soner in hiv, application for legal assistance. He made an application for counsel, and he wrote to me to help him. I did not know him personally. He was charged with a serious offence, and his record did not appear to be too good. I saw the Attorney­General, and he said the case was pretty black against him, whilst his pre~ious character was not too good. The Attorney­General said that he did not propose to take any action. I think there are many reasons why a prisoner should a-lways have counsel a&,igned to him. In the first place, he has the whole organisation of the Crown arrayed against him. The Crown is represented by a very able barrister as Crown Prosecutor. I may say that the Crown Prosecutors ect with a good deal of commendable moderation, and are not inspired with vindictiveneeq as a rul ~. It is nccusSary to give a prisoner eyery pos­sible chance. Even when counsel is assigned to a prisoner, it often turns out that a junior barrister is ,appointed to defend him, while against him he has pitted a very able Crown Prosecutor. We know that the facts against a man can be marshalled in such a way by the Crown P.rosecutor that the prisoner has no chance if there is any sl:adow of doubt against him. The Crown Prosecutor has the whole of the Police Force at his hands to gather evidence against the prisoner, and the prisoner is altogether at a very great disadvantage. Again, counsel is only allotted to a prisoner a few days befort3 his trial, and is generally too late to make any investigation into the case or to gather evidence in favour of the prisone~. TJ_>at s'?rt of t_hin\l" very often leads to a mrscarnage , of J ustrce.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : It is very rare; it is the exception.

[Mr. Theodore.

Mr. THEODORE: The hon. gentleman' Ill opinion on that point would be worth more than mine, as his experience in these matters helps him a good dc'td. Still, we know there have been cases of miscarriage of justiqe. I remember reading in a Southern weekly newspaper where instances of miscarriage of justice occurred through tho prisoner not being properly represented by counsel. I will give a quotation. This is what appeared in this Southern paper on the 31st August, 1911-

" A few days ago a young man named Britton was released from a Victorian prison, on the ground that ' police in­quiries had established his innocence of the crime.' He had been sentenced to two years' gaol for an offence against a girl under the age of sixteen; and he had served three months of th<> term. The history of the case is almost identical with that of manv others recorded during the past few years :-

The conviction was chiAfly due to the sworn evidence of the girl. Detective Sullivan, who was afterwards sent to investigate the affair (owing to a local petition) found that the young man was 11 miles awav at the time of th'' all<eged offence, and could not possibly have committed it. The girl herself then admitted that her evidence was a tissue of perjuries. She had also sworn that she had never mi,,conducted her­oclf before; and this also, she now ad­mitted, was untrue.

"Upon receiving the detective's report, Attorney-General Brown recommended a free pardon, and the victim of the girl's perjuries and the law's blunder was released. And, apparently, the brilliant Attorney-General proposes to leave it at that. Nothing in the way vf compensa­tion is to be offered the victim ; and nothing is being done to the girl. Brown was que:<tioned upon both of these [Joints, and his replies were:-

(1) It is not usual to compensate in such cases.

(2) Nothing has been decided. There seems a good deal of difficulty in taking action upon the uncorroborated state­ment of a girl who . . . . had ad­mittod perjury in the hearing of th" case.

"If the Victorian Parliament allows the matter to rest there, then it deserves to have an Attornev-General like Brown. The quesEon of compensation is a minor one; but the matter of protecting other innocent Brittons from gaol is just about as large a one as any Parliament could' possibly handle. In the first place, the· incident shrieks for a public defender­an official who &hall scee that the State gives just as much help to an accused Britton to prove his innocence as to "' perjuring woman to prove his guilt."

Those comments, I think, were highly justi­fied. This paper from which I have quoted states that there have been many other. such cases. That ma:v be an exaggeration, but we know that there were other cases, ancT this paper ascribes as the reason for these· miscarriages of justice the fact that the accused person was not properly defended. It has often wen said that a judge will keep>

Pure Seeds Bill. (15 0CTOBER.j Pure Seeds Bill. 1941

his eye upon a case where the accused person is not ably defended or where he is conduct­ing his own defence. In most cases that is so, but we all know that there are cases where the judges are irascible and bad tem­pered, and where an unfortunate prisoner has to stand his trial before such an individual, who happens to be suffering from bad liver on that particular day, it is certainly bad luck for him. It does not make for the carrying out of justice. I hope that the Act will be carried out in its entirety, and that 11{1 reasonablE> application on the part of a person who is making an appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal will be refused. Although a man's character may look black, still there may be extenuating circumstances that can be brought out in his favour if he is repre­sented by able counsel. I regret that the limitations of the BiTI do not permit one to develop the argument in favour of a public defender in a general sense. The Bill is one that should meet with the unanimous ap­proval of legislators. It seems to place addi­tional safeguards against possible miscar­riages of justice. Even if it does involve .a little additional expense to the Crown, I think that that expense will be well de­served.

Question-That the Bill be read a second time-put and passed.

The committal of the Bill was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

PURE SEEDS BILL.

SECOND READING.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE (Hon. J. White, Musgrave): It is with some degree of fear and trembling and also some degree of pride that I have the pleasure and honour of introducing this my first Bill into the Legislative Assembly of Queensland.

HoNOURABLE MEMBERS : Hear, hear !

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : I can assure you that I ,am very proud of this Bill for certain reasons. This Pur~ Seeds Bill is one that has been discussed for the last three years by the Farmers' Parlia­mentary Union during the time that I was chairman of that body, and I had the plea­sure of having a good deal to do with the framing of ,a Pure Seeds Bill. It is a Bill which will have a very great influence, not only for the farmers of Queensland, but for Queensland itself. (Hear, hear !) There are verv few States in Australia that have not got· eit'her a Pure Seeds Bill or a Seeds Con­trol Bill. The control of seeds for the purity of seeds, for sowing and planting, is 'a ques­tion of much importance to the farmers, and for that reason it is of the utmost importance that a. Bil! should be brought in here to protect the Queensland farmer from the sow­ing of impure or inferior seeds. It may be taken as an axiom that seeds offered for sale at a small price are always expensive seeds. Since I took this Bill in hand I have tested several varieties of seeds, and in every case wher.e I bought seeds at a low price I got seeds of small germinating power. At the present t;me the Department of Agriculture purchase seeds from various seedsmen, not only in Brisbane but also in other towns in Queensland, and test them with a view to ascertaining their purity, their germinating qualities, the seed content:;, and foreign ingredients. During the year 1912, 148 parcels

of seeds were tested, and I am pleased to say that the results on the whole were such that I can congratulate our seedsmen on the purity and quality of their S<';ed~, more especially the large seeds. But 1t u not so difficult to distinguish pure seeds in the case of J,arge seeds as it is where the seeds are smaller. At the present time a great many new pastures are being laid down with grasses. The grasses sown, not only in Queensland, but also in New Zeala;nd and Victoria, have not been of th~ qu.ahty they ought to have been. In testmg grass seeds in Queensland, it ha• been found that the germinating power of paspalum grass seeds varies from 4 per cent. to 52 per cent., and that Rhodes grass seed varies from 9 per cent. to 62 per cent. If a farmer sows seeds with a germinating power of only 4 per cent. he must be greatly disappointed when he s~es the result of his sowing, and this Bill is to protect the farmer against such ~n experience. There is a Pure Seed Act 111

force in Victoria, and under that Act a private individual can have his seeds tes~ed, but experts of the department cannot go mto a seedsman's premises and ta~e samples ?f seeds for testing and analysis. T~1s B1ll provide' that a farmer may have h1s seeds tested by the Agricultural Department free of charge. If he has any doubt about the quality of a parcel of seed he may ~end a sample to the department for ana!ys1s, but must satisfy the department that the seeds came out of ,a particular sack at the seed merchant's. In this mpasure w~ ha>e remedied the defect in the Victorian Act by giving power to officers of the Depart­ment of Agriculture and. Stock to take samples of seeds for analys1s. New Zealand has a Seeds l'ontrol Bill, but the farmers of that country are agitating for a Pure Seed» Bill, and the Minister in charge of ~he de­partment dealing with such matters mtends to submit such a m•·asure next y:ar. If farmers will only demand and _insist upon getting guaranteed ~eeds, _there 1s no doubt that this measure w1ll ass1st them to secure seeds of pure quality. It is very import":nt that seeds should be not only of good quality and good germinating power, but. also true to type. This is very Important m conneo­tion with the wheat industry. The. Govern­ment have established a wheat-breedmg farm at Roma under a very capable man. We have also arranged that the Hermitage St';tte Farm shall only grow pure seed wheat "?'h~ch is absolutely true to type. In my opm1on the farmers are now in a better position t~an they have ever been in regard to g~ttmg wheat that is true to type and o! a umform first-class quality. The f[erm1ta&'e State Farm will give more attentiOn to th1s matter in the future, and at the Rome. State F,arm attention will .also be devoted to the matter. This Bill is introduced more particularly to protect ,farmers from unscrupulous doolera who have neither the capital nor the, nece~ sary skill to carry on a seed merchants busl• ness properly and successfully. . By other dealers I believe this mp,asure w1ll be wel• corned, as it has been welcomed by ohambers of commerce in different parts of the State. I had this morning two letters from mer­chants congratulating the Government _on their action in bringing forward the B1ll. The Bill is to take effect from the 1s~ J.anuary. 1914. The "expert" will be an officer of the Department of Agriculture and Stock appointed to examine .seeds ~or t'l_lo purposes of this measure. It 15 provided ID

Hon. J. White.)

194Z Pure Seeds Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Pure Seeds Bill.

the interpretation clause that " foreign in­gredients " shall include " dead, diseased, insect-infested or non-germinable seeds," also "seeds of any plant which the Governor in Council has, by Order in Council, declared to be noxious plants for the purposes of this Aot." The word " officer" as used in this Bill is defined as "a State officer appointe<l or deemed to be appointed under ·and for the purposes of this Act." " Parcel " in­cludes "sack, barrel, case, packet, .and pack­age." The phrase "this Act" means "this Act and all regulations made thereunder." I should like to inform hon. members that the regulations under this Bill will be fairly sxtensive, as they will have to include and define what is the meaning of non-germin­.able seeds, what is the actual quantity of foreign ingredients that will be allowed in any parcel or packet of seeds, and so forth. It is provided in the second part of clause 2 th&t-

" Any reference to seeds shall be con­strued as referring only to seed,, for planting or sowing;

" In the oose of seeds to which or to clusters of which any fruit or part thereof normally adheres, ~my fruit or part thereof so adhering shall for the pur­poses of this Act be deemed to form part of the seeds."

Clause 3 deals with officers.

l'.he SPEAKER : Order ! The hon. mem­ber may not deal with the clauses of the Bill in detail, but must direct his remarks to the general principles contained in the BilL

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: Clause 3 says that the Governor in Council may appoint such experts or other officers aa may be necessary for the effectual execution of the measure.

Mr. HUNTER: I should like you to explain clause 4.

The SPEAKER: Order l I must ask the han. member not to deal with the Bill clause by clause. I understand that this is the first Bill the hon. member has introduced, but I would remind him that on the second reading of a Bill it is only permissible to deal with the principles contained in the measure, and that I cannot allow him to discuss the clauses of the Bill in detaiL

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: Olause 4 provided that the proportion of foreign ingredients which may be contained in any quantity of any kind of seeds may be prescribed by regulation. The penalties pro­vided by the measure are pretty severe, but if people will persist in selling impure seeds i~ is only fair and just that they should be punished in a proper manner. Where a portion of any seeds have been removed or seized by an officer, he is to deliver a portion to the owner of the seeds or to the person in whose possession they have been found. A justice may grant a summons calling upon the owner of the seeds so seized to appear before him and show cause why the seeds should not be forfeited. The magistrate may decide whether the seeds shall be forfeited or returned. Clause 5 states that upon the ra,le of seeds of the value of not less than ls. the vendor shall at the time of the sale give to the purchaser an invoice containing ilie particulars required by the Bill. Under olause 8 oan officer may demand and select

[Hon. J. White.

and take samples of seeds for the purpoaell of examination, and such samples are to bG divided into three parts, and one of these parts is to be offered to the person from whom the seeds have been obtained. When the expert has examined the seeds, he is to give a certificate showing the results of hia examination. Any person using such a cer­tificate for trade purposes or as an advertise­ment will be liable to a penalty not exceed­ing £50. Any person committing an offence against the measure will be liable for a first offence to a penalty not exceeding £20, for a second offence to a penalty not exceed­ing £50, and for every subsequent offence to a penalty not exceeding £100, or imprison­ment not exceeding six months, or to both such penalty and imprisonment. Clause 11 deals with the question of forfeiture of seeds, and provides that in case of oonviotion under the Bill, any seeds to which the conviction relates may be forfeited to His Majesty. Such forfeiture may extend to the whole of the seeds and to the whole of any similar seeds found on the premises or in possession of the defendant at the time of the commit­ting of the offence. All seeds forfeited ar.e to be disposed of as the Secretary for Agri­culture may direct. The court may order en independent examination of any seeds in the event of the seed merchant demanding it, or without such request, and the expenses of such examination are to be paid by the per­JOn oonvicted. Prosecutions for any con­travention of the provisions of the Bill may be instituted by any officer authorised by the Secretary for Agriculture in writing, or by, any person aggrieved, and all such proceed­ings are to be taken in a summary manner by a police magistrate sitting alon!'l. A simplification of proof in certain cases IS pro­vided for in clause 15. A merchant may

say that the seeds in his store are [5 p.m.] not intended for sale, o:r; for the

purposes of sale, and 1n every case the onus of proof shall lie entirely upon the individual himself. The purchase and sale of a sample of any seeds for the purpose of examination shall be deemed to be a purchase and sale of such seeds for plan~ing or sowing, and an officer may at any tt;ne require the purchaser of any seed .to give information as to where he got h1s seed. That is to say if the seedsman got his seed from a farme;, or from a merchant in an­other State that information shall be fol­lowed un ~nd the Agricultural Department will see that further seeas of that description shall not be put on the market. Clause 17 is the usual saving clause, and clause 18 deals with the powers of making regulations, which would practically be the largest part of the Bill. The regulations will define what ingredients will be allowed in the case of grass seeds, flower seeds, wheat and potatoes, etc. We have found recently that merchants were selling Grenell potatoes when they were not Grenell potatoes at all, and we have no power to take action.

Mr. RYAN: Was that very general?

The SlWRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: No; it was the exception. I want to say, on behalf of the seedsmen of Queensland, and of the city of Brisbane in particular, that the seeds sold here have been of a very good quality indeed, with the exception of grass seeds. We took 148 samples of seed during last year, and they wera tested by Mr. Briinnich under the most favourable

Pure Seeds Bill. [15 OcTOBER.] Pure Seeds Bill. IOU

conditions, and in connection with th<:> grass seeds, it was found that the germinating power was not very good. In some cases you cannot get a full germinating power without a certain amount of heat, and that is one of the reasons, perhaps, why the germinating power of paspalum and Rhodes grass s3eds was a good deal lower than it should be. As far as other seeds are con­cerned, th0y have been of a uniform good guality; but not always true to type. There IS no doubt, seeing that so much is being done in the matter of putting down pas­palum and other grasses, that it is of the utmost importance that this Bill should be­come law at the earliest possible date, and I hope that it will have a safe and speedy passage through Committee. I have not had much experif'nce of putting Bills through the different stages; but I am fully con­versant with the provisions of the Biil, and I shall be glad to give members any infor­mation I can on the matter. I have got particulars of the germinating quality of the different seeds here ; but I will be able to lay the report of the Agricultural Depart­ment on the table to-morrow, and that re­port will show the germinating power of the seeds tested by Mr. Briinnich -during the last twelve months. That will give members all the information that I have myself on the matter. Mr. Briinnich says the testing of seeds is necessary to give the farmers greater confidence. We could not possibly take tests of seeds held by any merchants and give them a certificate that such seeds are pure, bec~tuse we have no guarantee that those would be the seeds sold to the farmers and this will not be done. Mr. Briinnich further says the official testing of farm seeds having been almost completely neglected in A1].stralia, it has been deemed advisable to make a start, even on a small scale. The Bill will now give us an opportunity of starting on a large scale and doing all the seed-testing that is necessary, and it is abso­lutely necessary that this Bill should be passed, because New Zealand, Victoria, and New South Wales intend bringing in a Pure Seeds Bill, and it is quite possible that seeds which were rejected in the other States might be dumped in Queensland and sold as pure seeds. This should be prevented, if possible, and if the measure is passed I have no doubt that the Agricultura-l Depart­ment will see that it iA pvoperly adminis­tered. Mr. Briinnich, who will have charge of the testing of all seeds in Brisbane, and for the whole of Queensland, is thoroughly imbued with the importance of seed-testing and if this Bill becomes law it will be th~ best thing done for the farmers of Queens­land for some years. I have very much pleasure in moving that the Bill be now read •a second time.

HoNOURABLE MEMBERS : Hear, hear !

Mr. GILLIES (Eacham): I desire to con­gratulate the Ministel"l for Agriculture on introducing this Bill. I do not know that the Bill is going to do all that he claims it will do, as I have not had time to look careful!y through it; but if the Bill is going to protect the bona fide farmer from the unscrupulous or careless vendor of seeds it will do a great deal of good indeed. I was rather pleased to hear what the Minister said about grass seeds. I did not know that hG proposed to include gnass seeds within the scope of the Bill ; but with the strides the dairying industry has made in scrub

areas, and the planting of artificial gras~. particularly Rhodes grass and paspalum, it is essential that these seeds should be pure. I am not surprised that the germinating qu11lities of paspalum, as explained by the Minister, have been found to be as low as 4 per cent., because I know something about the methods employed in gathe1;ing that seed; and also that the germinating powel' of Rhodes grass was found to be as low as 9 per cent. I have known some people engaged in the seed-gathering industry. After the seeds have been cut and left in the sun to dry a thunderstorm was exper;­enced and the seeds have actually germi­nated'· but they were artifici,ally dried and placed on the market. If this Bill is going tv prevent unscrunulous individuals of that character from selling such seeds to the farmer as good seeds it will certainly do a great deal. The Minister has given us to understand that he has an expert employed at the present time; and I take it from what he said the other night that the depart· ment has been obtaining samples for some considerable time, but that they had no power to prosecute; and in this connect~on I do not think it is impossible to provide a 'fheclule to this Bill stating the percentage of germina_iji.ng seeds required in each class of seed said. That would be very much more satisfactory than giving ~he House a promise that it will be prov!ded . for by reo-ulation because too much IS bemg left to "regulation and in the case of the matter referred to by interjection by the deputy leader of this party, we know t.hat the regu· lations have not seen the hght of day, although those regulations . were th~ most important feature of the BilL. I thmk the Minister might very well provtde a schedule to this Bill setting out that the percentage of germinating seeds shall be not less than 60 per cent. or 65 per cent., as the case may be.

Mr. MoRGAN: Under favourable conditions.

Mr. GILLIES: No seed should be placed on the market having a percentage of ger­minating seed less than th~ pe.rc~ntage . seli down in the schedule. I thmk rt 1s possiblo to -do that.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : I do not think it is.

Mr. GILLIES: It would be more sa.~is­factory if the matter was set out in the Brll, so that any seedsman could see immediately that Rhodes grass seed, or paspalum sejld, should contain germinating seeds to the ex­tent of 50 or 60 per cent., as the case may be I take it that when the farmers' p.arty co~re into power they are going to revolu­tionise things il). the Agricultural J?epart­ment. They are going to do. away w1th t~e

. Under Sfcretary and appomt a commiS­sioner to run the show.

The SPEAKER : Order !

Mr. GILLIES: We know that when this Bill becomes law it will give them scope to appoint a commissioner.

Mr. RYAN : Who are yott referring to u the farmers' party?

Mr. GILLIES: I believe they tue now known as the country party.

The SPEAKER: Ordet!

Mr. · GILLIES : Another important fea­ture in connection with the introduction of a Bill of this kind is that it will to some

Jfr. Gillies.]

1944 Pure Seeds Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Pure Seeds Bill.

extent prevent the spread of noxious weeds. Clause 2 of the Bill makes provision for dealing with foreign ingredients, and when the Bill reaches the Committee stage, I pro­pose to move an amendment in that clause. Queensland is fast becoming famous for noxious weeds, and on my first visit to Queensland I thought Queensland was fairly free from noxious weeds, with the exception of prickly pear, water hyacinth-which flourishes largely in the Home Secretary's electorate-the Noogoora and the Bathurst burrs. I think the adminstration of the Local Authorities Act is largely responsible for the spread of noxious weeds in this State, but if this Bill is properly administered it will have a good effect in regard to the spread of noxious weeds, because we know that, in connection with grass seeds in par­ticular, noxious weeds are brought from New South Wales, from which State paspalum and Rhodes grass seeds have been imported, and seeds of noxious weeds have been found to be mixed with the grass seeds. The Government having had a lesson from the spread of prickly pear, should realise the importance of checking the spread of noxious weeds. I presume you will not allow me, Mr. Speaker, to say what I would like to say with regard to noxious weeds, so I will leave that phase of the question at present. I agree with the Minister that the Bill has no new features. A law of a similar nature is in force in all the other States, and has been in operation for the last forty years in Germany. I think that the Bill should be welcomed by both sides of the House. There is one thing which occurs to me, and that is that sufficient safeguard has not been pro­vided against the grower of seeds. The farmer himself is the grower of seeds, and supplies the seedsm.an. As a rule, the seeds­man is not the man who grows the seeds, especially with reference to grass.

The TREASURER : What about the grower, if his seed is bad? Say there is dodder in the lucerne, and he sells it, what are you going to do with him?

Mr. GILLIES: That is what I want to know. I want to know if the Bill goes far enough to protect the seller of seed-the man who buys seeds from the grower and retails them-if the Bill protects him from the un­scrupulous grower.

Mr. BEBBINGTON : If he sells them for seed.

Mr. GILLIES: Would that man come within the definition of a vendor of seeds?

The SPEAKER : Order! Those questions may be more properly asked in Committee_

Mr. GILLIES : Rust, noxious weeds, and things of that kind, I think, are matters that will be checked to a great extent by the in­troduction of this Bill. I have no desire to take up any further time, because this is to a great extent a Committee Bill. Although the Bill does not go as far as I wouTd like it has some good features in it, and I con~ gratulate the Minister on its introduction.

Mr. MORGAN (Murilla) : I would like to congratulate the Minister on introducing such an important Bill so far as it affects the producers of Queensland, coming as I do from another State where they recognise the Importance ·of a Bill such as this, which enables those people who have come from ?ther parts. of the world, and intend going m .for. agriCultural pursuits, to obtain seed wh1ah lS pure and true to name from different

[.Mr. Gitlies.

merchants. Unfortunately, that has not been the exeprience of those who have come from other parts, and who have had to obtain their first lot of seeds from the produce mer­chants and seed vendors in Queensland, more especially as regards wheat. It is most !m· portant that those who go Ill for the growmg of wheat should be able to receive seed as true to name as it is possible to obtain. I admit that there are several varieties of wheat that are so much alike that, unless you see them together, it is almost impossible to tell one from the other, while, on the other hand, it is quite easy to distinguish one variety of wheat from .another. T.he experience of many settlers m my locallty has been that when they have sent for a certain variety of wheat which they wished to grow, they have got s'?ll!ething quite different. It is no use complammg-you have to take the seller's word that the wheat was according to order-if the merchant had not got that particular wheat, he would send along another variety, and the buye;r had no redress. This Bill would to a certam extent obviate those difficulties. We are going to have a certain amount of difficulty with re­gard to the sale of wh~at. For instan~e, there might be a clean vanety of wheat whwh came from a certain farmer, and the miller puts it through the machine and dresses it, and sends it out for seed. It would be a most difficult matter for that miller to give a certificate that the wheat was true to name. We know that new names are being coined for wheat almost every day. So far as the appearance of the grain is concerned, it will take a clever expert to distinguish one variety from another. I understand that this Bill will not prevent a miller from being able to sell clean wheat, notwithstanding that he may not be able to give the correct name; if the farmer can sell that wheat with­out having the name attached, the miller should be allowed to do so.

Mr. BEBBINGTON: Sell it on the invoice.

Mr. MORGAN: If a man advertised that he had "Marchall's No. 3," "Yandina King," or any other kind of wheat for sale, a finmer who applied for that particular wheat should get it, and not have to take any other. But if there is a clean varidy of wheat which has been expooed for sale by a nwrchant or miller and the farmer hr•S to take ii without in~oice, stating that it is true to name, then the farmer should be able to judge whether he is prepared to take that particular wheat, and risk the using of it or not. I am pleased to see that the Bill provides for that being done. In Queens­land it is a most difficult matter to get seed wheat. We have experienced that through­out the Western portion of the State, where we have endeavoured to go in for wheat cultivation. In Victoria, New South Wales, an~ some of the other States the farmers generally get their seed wheat from another farmer 50 or 100 miles away. They do not go to a seed merchant; if they do not save sufficient wheat, and they wish for a change of wheat, they generally ,go into a new locality. It is well known that if you ob­tain a variety of wheat from a loc:alit;y: 1q0 miles away from where you are usmg It, It often has a vood effect, notwithstanding it is the same variety of wheat that you are growing yourself. In the other States we have no difficulty in regard to pure seed in respect of seed wheat, but in Queensland it is a different matter. Eventuallv the diffi­culty will right itself. The farmers who

Pure Seeds Bill. [15 OCTOBER.] Pure Seeds Bill. 1945

go in for clean cultivation, and make a. name for themselves in having wheat true to name, will eventually be able to sell the whole of their products to farmers in new localities who wish to go in for wheat culti­vation. So far as wheat is concerned, I am pleased to know that this Bill will not inter­fen, at the present time with the miller or the merchant who is selling a clean variety <>f wheat as far as the ingredients are con­cerned, but which may not be altogether true to name.

Mr. HUNTER: Where will you find that exemption?

Mr. MORGAN: You will find it in clause 10, where a vendor has to state in his certifi­cate that the seed. is according to the certifi­,cate. If the certificate states that it is a. mixed variety, or something of that sort, .and d<Jes not give a special name to it, that will exempt the seller of the wheat, as he is not selling it as a particular variety <>f wheat.

Mr. HuNTER: This Bill will not stop the selling of mixed seed.

Mr. lHORGAN: So far as the centre of germination is concerned, the information supplied by the Minister is very educational. With regard to grasses, as the hon. member for Eacham said, a lot depends upon how that particular seed is harvested. For in­atance, the seed may be harvested in a green state, or it may be harvested after the first year's crop, and there are many in­stances in regard to paspalum and other grasses in which the germinating power of the seeds is not satisfactory. Very often it is sown in soil which is not suitable, and .also at certain tim€s of the year when it is not advisable to sow. If we had recrulations to provide that these particular s•'ed; had to have certain germination results, then it would be necessary for them to be t€sted by the expert in suitable localities and under favourable conditions. It would not b" right for a farmer to be able to prosecute the vendor of seeds simply because he bought C€rtain se€ds and did not g€t good r,esults. If we find that farmers just scatter the se~d on the soil and have not the judvment neces­sary, then the result is not altogether due to th€ seed merchant, but to the farmer or grower of that particular seed.

Mr. GILLIES : But the expert might tell whether the se€d would germinate or not.

Mr. MORGAN: There should be some way to tell whether the seed will germinate or not. I take it that this Bill will protect the merchant who buys seeds from the gmwer. We know that the merchant or seedsman often buys his seed in la,rge quantities es­pecially so far as lucerne and numerous ,;ther fodder crops are concern€d, from the grower, and if it contains dodder or other injurious ingredients, then he certainly has as much right to be protected from the farmer who sells that seed as the man who buys it has a right to be protected from the merchant. I understand this_ Bill will protect the mer­chant equally as much as it will protect his clients--that is, provided that the farmer who sells that seed must give an invoice stating that the seed has be€n sold to the merchant fDr seed. I have known cases where merchants have bought ordinary seeds, not for the purpose of planting, but to be ground at the mill, and, bein!l' a nice clean variety, they have exposed rt for sale as ,..,ed.

Mr. G ILLillS : Pa.rtigula.rl;r mai. .....

Mr. MORGAN: They have sold that to the people as seed, and naturally have re­ceived much more profit from selling it for planting purposes than they would get from turning it into fodder or grinding it. The responsibil~ty then would not fall upon the grower or the farmer. This Bill will make a vendor liable to prosecution, and to in­d€mnify the merchant who has purchased seed from him which is not as repr€sented in the certificate. I think we must welcome this Bill from both sides of the House, oas it is not in any way a party measure. We all recognise that it is necessary that the primary producer should be given every opportunity possible to grow as much produce as he can, and it is only by receiving the best seed that he is able to oarry out his occupation. The more successful the man on the land is­especially the small man who goes in for cultivation-the better it is for all who are living in Queensland. The farmer in many cases is not able to protect himself, and any Bill that will protect him in the direction indicated in this measure is one which should be welcom€d by all parties in the House.

I have very much pleasure in [5.30 p.m.] again congratulating the Minis-

ter for Agriculture, who was the chairman of the country party, in having the honour of introducing such an important Bill as this for the first time in the House.

HONOURABLE :MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Mr. HUNTER (Maranoa): I, too, join in

welcoming this measure to the Chamber, and I agree with other hon. members that it is an important measure indeed. It sets out to deal with a matter of great consequence to the grower. I hope it will do all that the Min­ister thinks that it will, and that it will con­fer to the producer the good that the Minister has forecaet. He stated that the Bill is the b€st thing that has been done for the farmers for years by the Agricultural Depart­ment. I£ this is the best thing that has been done for years, it shows that very little has been done. What does this Bill propose to do? It simply proposes to issue some regul!'­tions, and provides that there shall be certam penalties for selling seeds that are not pure or which have an unreasonable proportion of for€ign ingredients in them. What these regulations are, and how they will deal with this particular subj,ect, are the most import­ant part of the Bill. To my mind, it is for this House to say what pro;JortiDn of foreign ingredients should be allowed in seeds and what the germinating power of seeds should be. After all, while the measure has within its four corners the p<:ssibi!ities of assisting and protecting the farmer, the Bill itself does not do it. I trust that when it gets into Committee we shall have an opportunity of improving it. I tru't that amendments will be accented by the Minister. The Minister, in inh;c,ducing this Bill, said that he hoped it would be car­ried, and he hopes it will confer on farmers the benefits that he is €arnest to secure for th€m. I would like to see something done by the Government its91f in the matter of introducing new seeds and seeds of the best producing descriptions. We may go on buying and selling seeds that will ger­minate or se€ds that have no foreign matter in them, but the productive quality of the seeds is of even more importance than these two things. I recognise that in the matter of supplying seed wheat it will be absolutely neeessary for the Government to take over

Mr. Hunter.]

1946 Pure Seeds Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Pure Seeds Bill.

the whole business, if we are to have seed pm;e and true to name. They should estab­lish farms in various zones or territories and produce seed wheats suitable for those cli­mates and not trust any seedsman. The suggestions made by the hon. member for Murilla in regard to the different varieties of wheat cannot be met by any regulation under this BilL Supposing the farmer, un­acquainted with the different varieties, asks the miller, or the seedsman, for Marshall's No. 3, or Bunge, or any other '.trietv of wheat, he cannot swear that he has got the right variety when it is given to him. The only time when he can find out he has not got the right variety is when he is harvesting or when the miller tells him, and it is too late then. It is also too late then to punish the man who supplied him with the seed. The only thing is for the Department of Agriculture itself to take on the production of suitable wheats for the grower. That would be the safest and best way to deal with it. So far as my district is concerned, it is most important that the Govf'rnment should deal with it, because it is only right that a man should be supplied with the proper vari<>ty of seed wheat suited to his district that he may have a good crop. This Bill will have no effect whatever on that particular class of seed. There is a c8J:tain amount of maize grown in my ·district. Sup­pose a farmer asks for 90-day corn, he does not know whether he is getting what he is asking for. How is that to be remedied-by regulation or by this Bill? It seems to me that there are a lot of important matters that this Bill proposes to deal with that it 'does not touch at alL The same thing applies to lucerne. We know that a lot of dodder is found in lucerne. One of the biggest offenders in Queensland with regard to bring­ing weeds into the farms was the Government itself in 1903. The Government supplied the brmers with seed wheat, and it was mixed with oats and drake and many other noxious seeds. Some of the seed was good and some of it was bad, and it did thousands of pounds worth of harm to the farmers.

Mr. FoRSYTH : Is there not some money owing for the supply of seed wheat?

Mr. HUNTER : That is 1eside the question altogether. The amount of money owing has been returned to the Government over and over again. I think if the Government had supplied seed for nothing at such a time they would not have been to blame.

Mr. FORSYTH: Yearly? The SPEAKER : Order ! Mr. HUNTER: There is no need to

supplv it yearlv. I think the Government shoul.d establish· their own farms in each dis­trict a.nd raise the different variety of seeds that are most productive, and which give the best crop, and supply that seed to the farmers. If that was done this seeds ques­tion would be largely got over. The real reason why there is such a nece,,sity for this Pure Seeds Bill is that we have people trad· ing in seeds who get se~s from all parts of the country and all parts of the world, and they do not know what they a.re getting. They sell the seeds just as they get them. These traffickers in seeds are the cause of ,all the trouble, and we should minimise them. I am afraid that this Bill may lead to rising the price of seed on the farm.

Mr. RYAN : It is sure to. Mr. BEBBINGTON : There is no reason why

it should. [Mr. Hunter.

Mr. HUNTER: A special price will be· put upon what is called pure seed, a'!'d the seedsman is bound to put on the price be­cause he has secured a variety that is con­sidered to be' extra good. I would like to• see a provision made that not only shows where the seed is grown, but th~ m~n from whom it was bought and the drstrrct from which it comes. I think these things should be added.

Mr. BEBBINGTON : A very good thing, too.

Mr. HUNTER : You could then put your finger on the ma.n who supplied the seed and if necessary write to him. In that way the department would be able to discover those tricksters who deal with this class of seed, because they could put their finger on them right away and find out whether they got their seed from them ?r not. That .would be much simpler than 1s proposed m the­present Bill, and it would . ha_ve the -:ff-:ct of keeping the seedsman withm the lrmits so far as profits are concerned. I intend to support the Bill, and I give it a very hearty welcome into the Chamber. I only hope­that it will have the good effeets that th<> Minister expects and that I kn'?w that he wishes for. The Bill is in the mterests of the grower, and it will check the evil !n a certain way, but it could be checked m e. very muoh better way if the Government. took the matter in hand themselves and tested all seeds before supplying them to the· selector, who, in turn, will supply them to the farmer in his neighbourhood.

Mr. G. P. BARNES (Warwick): Whilst everyone will hail with ~atis!action the­introduction of a Bill of this kind-a Pure Seeds Bill-still I •am a bit doubtful as to whether when the general conditions are made k~own and the regulations are issued, it will be found to be quite as acceptable to the farming community as. the Minisj;~n­hopes it will be. I can see m connection with many grass seeds, such as paspalum grass, prairie gr.ass, and other seeds, that thev have other elements mixed with them. I quite understand that very extreme cars in dealing with such seed is absolutely neoes­aarv. \Vhon vou come to other seeds, such as maize wheat· and lucerne, and particularly the l~rger s~eds, such as maize, oats, and barley, I am sure that the . farmer. can see at a. glance-particularly with maize-that when he asks for .a certain kind of seed he 'Viii know probably as much as the seller what variety is being given to him. T~c.t is all right with the larger seed, but wrth the smaller seeds there is bound to be a great deal of trouble. An embargo is to be placed on the producers of seeds on the Downs, and to a large ext~nt this will apply to lucerne seed. The farmer is put to the trouble and the necessity devolves upon him to see that the seed is tested. How are you going to test enormous quantities of seed? In my district-in the districts surrounding Warwick-the growers may have .anything up to 20 tons of lucerne seed. How in the name of conscience are you going to find .farmers on the Downs who will have an opportunity of testing all that quantity of seed? What is going to be the result? My fear is this-and I share the fear expressed by the hon. member for Maranoa.....and it is borne out by the congratulations the Minis· ter has received from merchants on intro·

Pure Seeds Bill, [15 OcTOBER.] Pure Seeds Bill. 1941'

ducing this Bill-Pure Seeds Bill-it is going to have the effect of cr~ating specialists. The specialist will gradually become .a monopolist and no one will deal with seeds except thr~ugh a given channel. I can see that a very great deal of hardship is going to fall ori many farmers who for years have not been troubled in any way because they have practical knowledge themselves, but immediately red tape comes into it they will have to "Comply with the conditions which the Minister has told us to-day are very much more 1imporJtant to the Bill, and immediately these are put into pla.y you will find many farmers and producers immediately kicking over the traces. No merchant and no miller has a.ny particu­lar liking for selling seed wheat. Some of them will not touch the business, and none of them is particularly .anxious to undertake the sa.le of seed wheat. Yet enormous quanti­ties of seed wheat are put through the mills which do touch it. The miller is indifferent in the matter, and is not at all anxious about the business. The result will be that he will decline to give the guarantee necessary, and the trade will be passed on to the merchants who have been congratulating the Minister on the introduction of this Bill, and th8 farmers will have to pay a very much higher figure for their wheat than they paid hereto­fore. You will readily understand that millers who live in the district year in and year out find it to their interest to give a man as nearly as they possibly can what he asks for, but they are not prepared to give a guarantee. I have been asked many a time if I was prepared to give a guarantee with this or that article, but, of course, I could guarantee nothing. The Darling Downs pro­duce about 63 per cent. of the wheat grown in Queensland, and I suppose the farmers of that district are the largest distributors of seed wheat to the wholesale merchants, and they will be considerably affected by the provisions of this Bill. I am afraid that the provisions of the measure will operate very harshly upon the men whom it is proposed to benefit. The Bill maims any person a vendor. Farmers do a great deal in the way of exchanging and selling seeds with and to other farmers, and under this measure im­mediately a farmer sells a shilling's worth of seed he becomes a vendor. Some hen. members seem to be in doubt as to whether the farmer will be drawn into the meshes of this mea,ure. Undoubtedly he will; he will be a vendor just the same as any other in­dividual, and, when he realises his true position in this matter, I am afraid that he will not feel too kindly towards the Bill. As the Minister said, the Department of Agriculture is devoting considerable atten­tion now to the growth of seed wheat, and they are to be highly complimented upon the work which they have done in that direc­tion. Some of the most reliable seed wheat distributed on the Downs has been grown at the State Farm, and it will be a good thing if the department make further ad­vances in work· of this description. I think that increased business might be done by our experimental farms, and I understand that the department has determined to devote more attention to the production of reliable eeed. That will be in the interests of the grower, and will give general satisfaction to all conowned. While I recognise that a mea­sure of this- description will be an advantage as far as small meeds are concerned, I am

afraid that it will not be equally acceptable to the people as far as larger seeds are con­cerned.

Mr. BEBBINGTON (Drayton) : I m_ust congratulate the Minister upon introducmg, this Bill. The Minister has stated tl?-at tha department are growing wheat at d1fferent experimental farms. That is undoubtedly a very important matter. I d.o. not see pow anyone can object to the provlslOns contamed in this Bill. It is merely a proposal to der:l with seeds in the same manner as food Is­dealt with under the Pure Foods Act, which provides that merchants shall se!l on!y what they invoice or advertise. Th1s B1ll pro­poses that seed merchants sha)l sell what. they invoice, and it is only fa1r t? expect that merchants will supply the art1~le they undertake to supply. There is no doubt that a farmer who sells seeds will also be held responsible for the quality of the seed~ s~ld, just the •arne as a merchant would be m hke case and that is only right. I know that scm~ seed merchants in Toowoomba, before they buy lucerne seed, go out to the pa~­doqk where the lucerne is grown to see If there is anv dodder in it and if the lucerne­is clean. When you buy seed from those mer­chants you can rely upon their seed being. what they say it is. Sometimes lucerne seed ha.s been bought as Hunter River se~d, and it has afterwards been proved that 1t came from Germany. Such seed is practically of no use to sow on the Downs. There is­another lucerne with a small leaf which is­only fit for sheep food; it is of no use for cutting. All that is asked in this measure is that the seed shall be according to the description.

Mr. HUNTER: How does Billy Peak like· this Bill?

Mr. BEBBINGTON: I cannot say. We are not dealing with individuals.

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr BEBBINGTON: This Bill does not consider individuals; it considers the publia in general, and it only provides that a man shall sell what he invoices. I do not think we have got the right kind of crops for· the Darling Downs yet. I believe we shall' find that certain oil-producing plants are more suitable for the Downs climate than many crops which are grown there at pre­sent, and that it would be a good thing for the Minister for Agriculture to try to intro­duce the S8edl3 of such plants. Thuc ctre different oil-producing- seeds, wch as ithe soya bean. I think the seeds of that plant might be introducRd and an experiment made in growing it. This Bill is not against farmers selling seed to each other. I know· that in many districts when a farmer grows a nice crop of seed wheat, pos.·,ibly on new land, he sells every bag of that wh~at for seed to his n<•ighbours. I regard this mea­sure as another effort to help thP man on the land. We have quite sufficic. nt t-0 con­tend with in bad eJasons without beiw: sub­ject to loss throu,rrh sowing '"'ed of bad' quality. Many of us have sown seed throe­or four times in a bad season and have got nothing from any of tho.se sowings, and­when you get a supply of bad seed :>fter such an experience it is n1ost aP'gra"Vabng. The, small se-Jds are not, in my opinion, of so · much imnortance as farm seeds. I kno-;v a­person who boug-ht parsnip seed which came­up gooseberries. (Laur;hter.) There are·

Mr. Bebbington.]

.1:948 Pure Seeds Bill . [ASSEMBLY.] Pure Seeds Bill.

~plenty o£ cases in which wheat that has been kiln dried or dried by heat has been sold for .Beed. Such wheat is utterly useless for seed _purposes, and in many cases thp people who bought it did not know that it had been kiln dried. Tank maize has also been sold .for seed. Some people say that such maize will not grow. I believe that it will not grow if it has been in a tank for a certain .time, and I hold that when maize of that kind is sold it should be described as " tank maize." I should like to see tests made of >Oil_-producing plants, which I believe would .amt the Downs very much better than SO'Ile crops that are being grown there at tho present time.

The SPEAKER: Order I The hon. mem­'ber may not return W that subject; it is not under consideration at the present time.

Mr. GHAYSON (C1tnningham): After per· .usmg this Bill I have come to the conclusion that the Minister has copied a great deal .from the Victorian Act. Victoria is the only State in the Commonwealth which has .a Pure Seeds Act, and when I was in that Btate six months ago I made inquiries as to how the measure was working, and the in­formation I received was that it was not the .success which it was anticipated it would be. However, I join with lother members .in .co!'gratulating the ~iinister o!' introducing this measure. I believe that m Committeu it can be made a measure which will help the primary producers considerably. I understand that the principal object of the Mimster in introducing the measure is to ensure that farmers purchasing seeds shall obtain seeds true to name. Thor<' is on~ seed which I should like to refer to specially and that is m:tize. For many years Queens: land has been one of the largest maize pro­.ducing States in the Commonwealth. \V e produce more maize than any other State in Australia, and it is of a much superior quality.

Hon. R. PHILP: No; New South Wales is the largest maize producing State.

Mr. GRAYSON: I believe that for some years Queensland produced more maize than NBw _South WalBs, .and maize of a quality superiOr to that of any other maize grown in the Commonwealth. I regret to say, how­ever, that our maize has deteriorated in

quality. I think the time has [7 p.m.] .arrived when the Secretary for

. Agriculture might indent and Import a large quantity of American maize of difforent varieties, and I am confident that if he did so he would have no difficulty ";hatBver in obtaining for it .a price suffi­ment to cover cost and expenses. We a.ll know that the maize crops have been the

_salvation of many a home in Queensland. It has been the means not only of enabling those who have cultivated it to maintain their families, but also to improve their positions, with the result that many of those farmers who stuck to maize-growing are in

.a most prosp0rous position to-day. Speakino­before t;'a, I said that Queensland was th% le.rgest maize-producing State of the Com­monwealth. I wish to correct myself an-d say that it is the second largest maize-pro­ducing State in Australia, for New South Wales produces more than we do. But I

'believe I am correct in saying that Queens­land has more 1and fit for maize-growing

-than any other State in the Commonwealth,

IM"r. Bebbington.

and I think that is .a reason in favour of encouragement by way of assistance from the Agricultural Department. I do not for one moment mean that the departmenil should import seeds in large quantities a.na distribute it free. Far from it. I have no such thing as that in my mind. What I would suggest is that the department should import a large quantity_ of seed maize of the different varieties and distri·bute it for cash amongst the farmers. I noticed in a report of the Agricultural Department of South Australia which I have read recently, that the Gove~nment there goes in very largely for securing seeds for the farmers. At the present time the farmers owe nearly £50,000 to the State for that purpose. In Queensland, under the then Premier, Hon. R. Philp, 6

very large quantity of wheat was imported from South Australia, and I have no hesita­tion in saying that it was .an excellent piece of business. That seed was sold to the hrmers in the wheat-growing districts, and I have heard stated that the farmers did not pay up for it. But I find that there is only £7,000 owing, and many of those who owed the money are dead and many have left Queemland. I would like to say th':'t I be­lieve that in my electorate, Cunnmgham, which is the largest wheat-growing elector­ate in the State, and in Warwick, there will be more wheat produced this year than in all the rest of Queensland. And in the Cunningham electorate I notice there is only £300 owing for the seed procured by the farmers on the oc-casion I mention some ten years ago. I believe that we have a sym­pathetic Secretary for Agriculture.

Mr. FIHELLY : Was not the last one sym­pathetic?

Mr. GRAYSON : Yes ; I believe that he was and I believe that the present Secretary for 'Agriculture is desirous of assisting the men on the land if he can do it, and also has a keen desire to assist all primary pro­ducers in every possible way.

Mr. FIHELLY: Smoodging now? (Laughter.)

Mr. GRAYSON : There is no need for that. I am speaking my own mind .and I have been watching the Minister carefully since he was appointed to that office.

Mr. FIHELLY: You will have to keep on watching him, too. · (Laughter.)

Mr. GRAYSON: To get back to whea.t­producing I notice that the hon. memb2r for DraytDn ~tated that he believed that t~e varieties of wheat that are now planted lll the whPat-growing areas are not suitable for the Queensland climate. Well, I am of exactly the opposite opinion. About fifty years ago, when the people first began to grow wheat on the Darling Downs, year after year, I have seen the farmers lose whole crops through rust and smut--! think the. hon. member for Pittsworth will bear me out in that. But latterly; we have intro­duced a wh<>at which is suitable for the climate; I refer particularly to the .h~rd Indian wheat. These wheats are now grvmg every satisfaction to the farmer.

Mr. MoRGAN: Is it Manitoba wheat?

Mr. GRAYSON : No; it is not. Manitob11. wheat is certainly very profitable for the farmers, who get from 4d. to 6d. and even up to 9d. more per bushel than they do for

Pure Seeils Bill. [15 OcTO:BER.] Pure Seeds Bill. Hl4~·

the ordinary grain. The millers seek it very keenly for mixing pu_rposes; in fnct, they are compelled to buy 1t for that purpose to make a good quality of flour. I heard the hon. member for Murilla stating that the millers woul-d be exempt under this Act.

Mr. MoRGAN: No; but they would have to give a certificate.

Mr. GRAYSON: I find, on going care­fully through clause 10, that the millers are not exempt. They c.re under e~actly the same conditions as seedsmen or any other vendors of seeds.

Mr. G. P. BARNES: It would be absurd to differentiate.

Mr. RYAN : Do you agree with the remarks of the hon. member for ·warwick on the Bill?

Mr. GRAYSON: Now, I hope that the hon. and learned leader of the Opposition will allow me to proceed without interrup­tion. (Laughter.) I am always very care­ful not to interrupt the hon. gentleman. I think that he will admit that I cause less interruption than any other han. member and I claim from the hon. gentleman th~ same courtesy. I know that many farmers on the Darling Downs have been in the habit of sending their orders for seed wheat t,, the different millers, for the reason that tho millers have got the cleaning machinery that the farmers have not, I know of one mill in particular in Warwick, that con­ducted by the han. member for Warwick, which has one of the most up-to-date plants in Australia. I know also that the Farmers' Co-operative Milling Company supply their shareholders with seed wheat during the season; and it would be utterly impossible for the mi1ler to give a certificate as to the true name of the particular seed wheat.

Mr. BEBBINGTON : The Bill does not ask that.

Mr. GRAYSON: The Bill does. The seed has to be true to type.

Mr. MoRGAN: If he calls it mixed wheat it will be all right.

Mr. GRAYSON: I trust that. this clause will be modified in Committee. My experi­ence of the farmers in Queensland is that they are very careful in regard to their seed wheat. Probably in the early stages ·of the history of the State the farmers were not careful enough; but for the last twenty years they have been very careful indeed; and I think the farmers on the Darling Downs are the most up-to-date farmers in the whole of Auatralia.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: What about tho sugar farmers 1

Mr. GRAYSON : I am speaking about mixed farming. My experience of the far­mers is that in tho planting season they look around their neighbours' farms and ascer­tain who has the best line of clean wheat, and if their own seed is not suitable for sowing they purchase their seed from their neighbour, and get as clean a seed as it is possible to get. It is also necessary to exer­cise considerable care in regard to lucerne seed. There is a weed called " dodder" that grows in the lucerne paddocks in several parts of Queensland, and that is the most deadly weed that can be introduced into our farming districts. I have had "dodder" in my own lucerne paddocks, and I have

sent men to dig it up. They have dug it up, and they have tried all sorts of schemes­to get rid of it, but the only means by which I could eradicate " dodder" was by carting many loads of wood on to it and burning it clean out. This is the most deadly weed that has been discovered in lucel'ne seed, and lucerne is grown ~ost extensively on the Darling Downs, and IS a wonderful asset for the State of Queensland. This Bill, in my opinion, is a Committee Bill, and the speeches made from the Opp_o­sition side of the House have all been m favour of the Bill. It is a non-party measure, and is one that every memberJshould give careful consideration to. We should do our utmost to pass a .measure that will give satisfaction to the farmers of the. Stat.e. 'rhe Minister has not introduced th1s B1ll on his own initiative, but at the request of the Farmers' Association. The Farmers' Association at the present time is a very strong body and has about 12,000 members, and the Far'mers' Unions throughout Queens­land are unanimous in the opinion that th~> time is opportune for the introduction of a Bill of this kind.

Mr. MAY: A Pure Seeds Bill is one that should receive very careful consideration by members of this House, as it is necessary that the farmers shoul<l receive absolutely pure seeds for planting purposes. I was connected with agriculture for many ~ears, and I think the best method of obtammg pure seeds, whether it be wheat, oat, barley, or lucerne seed, would be for the Govern­ment to set aside selected spots on the Stata farms, sow them with good see~s, ~nd then, when the crop has ripened, d1stnbute tn~> seeds to the agriculturists throughout Queensland. It is a well-known fact that middlemen very often put in a large quan­tity of spurious seeds and distribute them to the grower, who is ignorant of what he is obtaining. Very often seeds are purchased from samples received, but when the bulk arrives and is compared with the sample the seed is found to be of an entirely different quality. The only way we can get pure see~s is by having pedigree seeds. We have pedi­gree stock both in regard to horses, cattle, and sheep, and even in goats. (Laughter.) I would suggest to the Minister for Agricul­ture the necessity of having a c8l:tair; par-_ tion of land set aside for the germmatwn of new seeds-say at the Hermitage Farm, which is situated in good growing wheat country, or at Gatton, or any other suit­able place. We could thus find out the best seeds, and eliminate all the bad seeds. W 1> should them be giving a benefit to all our farmers, no matter how much they had to pay for these pedigree seeds. I am en­tirely in accord with the Bill, although it does not go to the extent I desire, and I shall give all the assistance I can to improv~> it in Committee.

Mr. GU~N (Carnarron): I just wish to say a few words in reference to the Bill. I think the farmers in my electorate ar~> very glad to see such a Bill brought forward, and expect to get a lot out of it-more, in fact, than I expect. I think myself. when it is all ov<'n·, it will mean that we shall have to give more for our seeds than we do at the present time, and the farmer will have to pay for it. Apparently, he "ants the· Bill, but he will have to "pay the piper" in the long run. There is another thing I wish to bring under the notice of the Com­mittee. I should like to see this Bill, if

Mr. Gunn.l

]950 Local Authontzes Acts LASSEMBLY.] Amenament Bill,

possible, extended to pure plants or true _plants. (Hear, hear !) I represent an elec­torate wJ:.ich lives principally by fruit, and .those fru1t trees are not grown from seeds but from plants which, perhaps, come fro~ nurseries in other districts.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : The Bill '(){}V8rs that.

Mr. GUNN: I am glad to hear that, be­causa the farmers in mv electorate often pu~ohase apple trees o.J' a certain class, whwh turn out to be qmte a different sort. I have purchased navel oranges, and grown them for perhaps three or four years, when .they have turned out to be ordinary common oranges. If the Bill turns out as well as the farmers e_xpect-and as I hope it will-the Hou~e w1!l have no hesitation in taking .Qred1t to 1tself; but I am afraid when it is all over, it will mean that we ~hall have to give more for our seeds than we do at present.

Mr. STEVENS (Rosewood) : I have lis­tened with pleasure to the Minister in in­troducing the Bill. Hen. members may recollect that last session I advocated such a Bill ]:>eing brought forward, and quoted a case m my electorate where a man had gone to v_ery considerable expense, and then, after havmg performed all the labour, found he had absolutely no return for it, on account .of the seeds not germinating, or else being untrue to name. One instance such as that is sufficient to prove that a Bill of this kind is necessary. I, myself have had a similar experience-in fact, I had a very peculiar expenence on one occasion. I purchased a quantity of seed oats, and there were two samples in it, one of which I sowed in one place, and the other sample in a different place. . One sample germinated, and the .other d1d not. That is the sort of thing which discourages a farmer. As the hon. member for Carnaryon says, it is possible th~;~t a measure of this kind may raise the f'riCe of se~d to the farmer, but, even if that 1s so, 1t will p~y a man to give a fair price for seed. ~rov1dcd he knows he is getting a goo_d artwle that will give him a return for h1s labour. I do not think it is neces­sary. to speak at any length on the second readmg of a Bill of this kind. We agree that it is desirable that such a measure ~hould be enacted, and it is possible we mav be able to improve it in Committee, but be­yond that I think it is quite unnecessary to take. up the time of the House on the second readmg. Therefore, I shall reserve anv furthe~ remarks until the Bill reaches th'S Committee stage.

Question-That the Bill be now read a second time-put and passed.

The committal of the Bill was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

LOCAL AUTHORITIES ACTS AMEND­MENT BILL.

SECOND READING-RESUMPTION OF DEBATE.

Mr. T~EODORE : I desire to make a few re_marks In . connection with this stage of the BII~. I des1re only to touch upon the matter whwh the han. the Home Secretary raised

when we had the Miners' Home­[7.30 p.m.] stead Leases Bill under con-

. . sideration at an earlier stage of this sess1on. The Home Secretary gave an

[Mr. Gunn.

undertaking that he would embody in this Bill a clause which would give relief to shire councils with regard to the power of rating certain holdings. I notice on perusing the Bill that provision has been made which will to a large extent meet the difficulty that has been experienced by the Chillagoe Shire Council and other shire councils in mineral districts. To enable the shire councils con­cerned to overcome one difficulty, provision is made for a reduction of the minimum valuation of property within the shire areas comprised within a gold or mineral field. The minimum valuation has been reduced to .£10. A further provision is made that there will be no limit in the amount of general rates which may be levied within a gold or mineral field. Up to the present time the limit on the general rate has been 6d . in the £1, but in future there is to be no limit to the general rate which may be levied within gold or mineral fields.

The SPEAKER: Order ! There are a number of members conversing in the Cham­ber. If they wish to continue their con· versation, I hope they will do it where they will not disturb the han. member who is speaking.

Mr. THEODORE: A provision is inserted in this Bill which will have the effect of removing the limit placed on the amount of general rates which can be levied by any loca~ authority on any ~roperty within its area on any gold or mmeral field. That will enable shire councils situated in any gold or mineral field, if they think it is necessary to raise revenue to carry on their work within that district, to increase the rates accordingly. On account of the abnormally •mall valuation that exists in regard to these properties, it is sometimes necessary to levy a higher rate than that previously fixed as the maximum. So far as that is concerned, this Bill will afford the local authorities concerned immediate relief. There is a further provision which adds to the defini­tion of "occupier." It provides that the definition of occupier shall include any person in actual occupation of any land comprised within any gold-mining lease or mineral lease under any form of tenancy. Dealing with the Chillagoe Shire Council, it proposed to value the land used by certain occupiers, but they found that they had no such power. They found that they could only rate the company that held the land occupied by these different people. Many of thmn were employees of a particular company and they got off scot free, without paying >m:y rate, whatever to the shire council. I think the definition we have here of "oc­cupier " is ample enough t<J include the people I have refern'd to. I notice that this definition does not include as occupiers people who ,reside on miners' homes~ead: leas<>s, althou:~h it is possible to rate one person who holds one large miner's home­stead lease. It is possible for a man to take up a miner's homestead lease of 80 acres under the Miners' Homestead Leases Bill which we have p,assed and which will soon b_ecome law .. If a number of employees re­side on a mmer's homestead lease I do not know that this definition will CX:ver them. This definition mif{ht be widened to enable these people . to be :ated separately. Of course1 the shire counml could place a higher valuation on the whole lease held by the one !I!a;r, and in that way they wouid get a h1gner revenue from it. I do not know if that would be permissible, because the method of valuation laid down in the Local Authori-

Local Authorities Acts [15 OcTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 1951

ties Act with regard to mining leases does not permit the shire council to value the land any higher because twenty people re­·side on it than if only one person resided on it. I think this definition might be still further amended by the insertion of the words, "miner's homestead leMe" after ''mineral lease." I think that would meet the difficulty I have pointed out. It seems to me that if a company has a miners' home­stead leao,e and allow their employeee to reside on it, that would be the proper course to pursue, so that the local authorities could rate ~·:1ch one of them as occupiers. Another thing I would like to refer to is the question of '"'luation. I do not think that the provision mude br the Home Secretary will cover the difficulty the Chillagoe Shire Council has been plac.:d in with reference to arriving at a true Taluation of a miner's homestead lease and a mineral lease in certain portions of their .areas. I imagine that the same difficulty must be experienced by other local authori­.tres in other mineral fields. (Hear, hear!) In the Local Authorities Act there is a cer­tain method laid down bv which certain leases have to be valued. "In regard to a gold lease the valuation is easily arrived at, as all the local authority has to do is to multiplv the annual' rental by 20. That is held to be the value of the particular lease .and it is rated accordingly. Section 195 of ;the Local Authorities Act says-

" In the case of land held under any other tenure peculiar to gold fields or mineral fields the value of the land shall be es~imated at thP fair average value of un~mprove? land of the same quality held m fee-simple In the same neigh­bourhood.''

'The Chillagoe Council have been faced with .a difficulty that there is no land held in ·fee-simtJle in the _neighbourhood. Then they had. this alternative as set out in the saC~w :sectwn-

" Or if there is no land held in fee­simple in the same neighbourhood then at one and a-half timPo; the fair a~erage value of the land of the same quality and held under the same tt•nure in the l_'ame. neighbourhood, but without regard In either case to the value of any im­provements made or work done upon the la!Jd, or to any metals or minerals con­~tawed or supposed to be contained in I.

'The Chillagoe Shire Council found that -wheJ?. they attempted to value certain pro­pertie~ m accorda11ce Ith that alternative . . and give to these properties the value equal to one and a-half times the fair average va!ue of land of similar quality in the same nmghbourhood, tha.t the land had practically no value at a!l unless they could have re­·!(ard to the mmerals contained in it or the Improvements done on it. Of course • the Act p~ohibited that. The Chillagoe Shire Council pursued the same course as is laid .down in _regard to gold leases when they put .a valuation on the properties of the Mam­moth Copper Mines and the McDonald ·Copper Mines at Cardross, covering an area -of 490 acres. The shire council rated those .~ases at tw_enty times the annual rental. l he C?mpames have appeaied against the valuatwn, anq they seem to have good ground for domg so, and the shire council will find that their valuation is wrong

according to law. That is why I want an amendment inserted in the Bill to make tha position clear. I think they should .be given the right to arrive at the valuation by taking into consideration the rental paid and multiplying that by a cert<J.in number, as is done with regard to gold-mining leases, or else some alternative should be provided by which th<Jy can arrive at a fair valua­tion. I do not think the Bill does that. It certainly gives local authorities the right to increase the rate when they have arrived at the valuation; but, as the rate must be uniform, it will be seen that it may operate harshly in some cases, and in other cases more lenientl:v than it should do; whereas, if they have the right to vary the valuation, those who should pay higher rates can be made to do so, so long as the valuations are equitable. Although I have referred to the Chillagoe Shire Council only, I think the same difficulty exists in other shires in the mineral districts, and I hope the Home Secretal'y will give consideratiun to the question of adopting a new method of valuing miners' homestead leases and mineral leases. I would suggest that one basis for valuation ia the case of miners' homestead leases may be arrived at by taking the price which will b<J paid to the Crown for a lease when it is put up for auction or public tender under the new Act as the basis for valuation. I trust that in Committee the Home S0cretary will be prepared to accept some amendments which will have the effect of giving the relief that is asked for.

* :\Ir. WILLIA:HS (Churtr s Tou·ers): I am glad to see that this Bill has been brought in, and particularly to see that it deals with the question of rating on mining fields. It has been stated that we get too many Bills t•J amend the Local Authorities Act, I think it has been said that we get one every year; but, when we consider what a large amount of the governmnt of the country is performed by the local authorities, it seems almost im­possible to a void bringing in constant amending Bills. Both sides of the House will probably be agreed on what is the main point so far as my constituency is concerned-that is, the question of rating on mining fields. I understand that the deputy leader of the Opposition is in some doubt if, when there are a number of tenements on a miner's homestead lease, they can all be rated. I have not had an opp01·tunity of loolnng at the Local Authorities Act since the han. member spoke; but I think he will find that all such tenements can be rated separately.

Mr. THEODORE: A decision was given against the Chillagoe Shire Council.

Mr. WILLIAMS : I am inclined to think that is wrong. There has been serious trouble wi-th regard to rating on fields such as Gympie and Charters Towers, where the valuations have gone down considerably. It is absolutely imperative to get a revenue to keep the streets in order and to carry out the other functions of local government; but it has been found impossible under the pre­sent rating system to do that. The maxi­mum. rate in_ a. city is 6d. in the £1, and in a shrre 3d. m the £1. The consequence is that, to get the necessary revenue in a city like Charters Towers, they have simply to work upon an artificia.J valuation. I may

Mr. Williams.]

1952 Local Authorities Acts [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

mention one instance to show how absurd the whole thing is. Some year or two ago a man bought a piece of ground with build­ings on it for the sum of £90, and, to enable the revenue of the city to be kept up on something like former lines, the council valued that land without the buildings at £400. That sort of thing has been going on right through the city, and, out of a spirit of patriotism, the ratepayers in most cases have not appealed, because they recog­nise that revenue must be got. At the same time, they are always faced with the fact that some men will grumble, and will try to evade paying rates on such valuations, and for that purpose it will be exceeding-ly useful that the minimum in goldfields should be removed altogether. l know it will afford a lot of relief to the people on gold­fields. There are other matters in the Bili that might be referred to ; but perhaps they can be nwre eacily dealt with in ()om­mittee, and I will reserve any further re­marks until the Bill gets to that stage.

Mr. LENNON: I am very disappointed in this Bill. I had hopes that t.he Home Secretary would have been guided to a large extent by recommendations made by the Local Authorities' Conference. Generally speaking, he is guided by recommendations emanating from that body, and, unless he is prepared to continue that course, I do not see any reason for the existence of the Local Authorities' Association. One of the resolu­tions carried by an overwhelming majority at the last conference was to the effect that new shires-particularly remote shires­should receive some assistance by way of subsidy or otherwise from the Government in order that they may be able to cope with

the exceptional difficulties that confront them. The history of local government in this State shows that the older shires and municipali­ties have benefited in many ways in which new shires do not participate at all. In the early days, before endowment' cam,e in at all, Government roft.d engineers were sent round, and all the older towns like Toowoomba., Townsville, Charters Towers, Rockhampton, Warwick, Maryborough, and Gympie enjoyed a benefit from that system. Later on the divisional board system came into operation, which carried with it an endowment. Later on, the divisional boards were displaced by shire councils, and the endowment system went on for a considerable number of years, and all those older shires participated in the very handsome subsidies paid upon rates col­lected. In the city of Brisbane, for example, some hundreds of thousands of pounds were received by way of subsidy, while, on the other hand, there are many new local authorities rn Queensland that have not re­ceived one penny piece from the State by way of subaidy. Corcsequently, they are very nnfairlv treated: and the Local Authorities' Conference, realising that, passed by a very large majority a motion requesting the Go­vernment to grant a subsidy for a term, say, of five years, to level up these new shires in the remote districts to something like an even keel with the older local authorities. If the Government could not see their way to adopt that suggestion, the conference carried .another rf'solution suggesting that in districts where the timber industry is carried on tha Government should grant to such local authorities a portion, if not the whole, of the royalty on timber. Everyone who has

[Mr. Williams.

been in a district of that kind is awaro that the hauling of logs along a road does inca!· culable damage to the road. I do not know whether it does not cost in many cases all much to repair such roads as it doe~ to_ make them in the first instance. The Brll rs per­fectly silent on those two important recom· mendations. The Administrative head of the­local authorities has a real field day at these­conferences. He lets himself go completely QJl those occasions.

The SPEAKER : Order !

Mr. LENNON: Whether those conferences. are held only for the glorification of the Home Secretary, I do not know.

The SPE·AKER: Order ! I think. the h~n. member will allow that I have grven hrm considerable latitude. The question before the House is the second reading of a Bill to amend the Local Authorities Act. While the hon. member may refer inciden~ally to local authorities' conferences! I thrnk . he should not proceed further wrth the subJect at the present juncture.

Mr. LENNON: Well, Mr. Speaker, of course, you are the only judge of that matter.

The SPEAKER : The House has placed me in that position.

Mr. LENNON: I shall leave that matter and proceed to another. A .few .weeks ago, on the introductory stag~ of thrs measure, I endeavoured to ascertam from the Home Secretary if it provided for any enlargement of the system at present in fo.rce wit_h respect to the construction of works m specral area~, and the hon. gentleman intimat~d that :t did contain provisions of that kmd. Tlns Bill provides that one-tenth of the whole ~f the ratepayers in .any area may, upon peti­tion to the shire council, have. a special work carried out in that partiCular a~ea upon their guaranteeing to pay .a specral rate levied for that purpose. That does n?t meet the case at all, because m many dis­tricts as is well known to persons who have any ~xperience of local authority work, rates are frequently levied •an~ collected m o:'e­district and spent wholly m some other diS· trict without any regard to ~her'! the !"tes. hap been raised. In new sh~res m whwh I am personally concerned rates are collected and are not spent in the district wher(') ~hey. are raised. Such shires are mostly d:vided into three or four divisions. I have m my mind one shire which is divided into three divisions, each returning three. memb~rs, ·and it is •a typical instance of the m~uffimency of the provision in this measure wrth regard to· special work. Those people c~ntend,_ and .I say rightly, that the money col.e?ted m therr· particular area should be spent m that area, and that ·after the money they have p-re· viously paid in r>ates has been absorbed by other portions of the shire, they should not be called upon to pay ll: spec!a.l levy in order to have work done rn therr own par· ticular area. I had hoped that the :f:I?me· Secretary would have enlarged the proyrswns of this Bill to meet such cases. I admit that such oases will not arise in thickly popu· lated centres like those on the Darling Downs and between Brisbane and Rock· hampton but when you go further afield to· the North and the far West you will find' that oases suoh as I have mentioned are-

Local Authorities Acts [15 OcTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 1953

·quite common. I regret that the Home Sec­retary has not thought lit to define what the word '• area'' Inean:;:,, It might mean an area of 20 miles square. I think that rates should not be spent at a greater distance than 5 miles from where they are collected, and until ~~l}ffie provision of that kind is 1nade the people to whom I refer will not be ab~c to get any sort of junice from the shir<:>, because they are not numerous enough and

,c;_nnot r£turn a sufficie-nt number of nlc·.ll­bers to Yoice tlwir ne.ode. Those 6re the pc ~' ts to \Vhich I \Vish to dra \r particular .a;t:~{~nt.i.on. I do not kno\v \Vb::>ther jn Coin­mittc·e the :Minister will be willing to a• cept an amchdment to m€et such <.13es, but I trust that he ,.-ill be good enough to bear the n1atter in 1nind, and that if he y,-ill not intrcduce an amendment himself he will be prepar-ed to a{'eept an .uinm<chn'.'nt n1ove.d by so1ne o: L·er hon. n1emb.~r.

:Mr. RYAN: I clesir<? to say a word with .ngard to th-· queBtion of the limitation of the liabilih' of locctl uuthoritie;; in cedain matter"' f notice that in regard to ferries, culverts, and bridge,, the liability of a lo~td .authority is limited to any '' negligt,nt aDt,'' and th ct it i•o propo.-.ed to give iocd authori­ties pmver to make by-la\', b;.· which they ma': limit the amount cf their liabilitv under the Act, and may prohibit or autho­rise the travelling of pasgenger0 or goods over ft>rries and bridge;; at the o•• ncr's risk. I wish to cc nment upon those prcvisicns, because they u.rc piec8meal and do not attempt to grapple with the ··ubject of the liability of local authorities in any particular or comprehensive way. I am at a loss to know "hat is the reason for making this limitation of liability apply only to ferries, culverh, ~nd bridg<'s. It may be that only in such cases ao, these h.1S the matter been brought prominent!:.- und<?r the notice of the Home Socretary, but there are many ways in which a local authority may be liable for l1eayy damages. They may be running tram­w:tys.

The EmrE SECRETARY: Tho>o, of course, are run for profit.

Mr. RYAN: Are not ferri<?s run for pwlit?

The HoME SE~RETARY: No; I never knew a fm·ry which was run for a profit.

Mr. RYAN: I knew qu:te a number of tramways which arc run at a loss. But I think the 1vhole question of the liability of lo•:al authorities in rega1·d to damages occur­ring through their negligent act" O!' omis­sions is one which the hon. gent!Pman might go into thoroughly and fully in this measure. 1 nctice that the limitation is made in such a way tc coniine the liability to !!te " negligent act " of the local <tuthority. A good deal <lf controversy and argument wav take place <ln the question as to whethei· that phrase covers neglig<·nt omiRsion ;. The word " act " is usually used in contradistinc­tion tc omission, and if it is the intenti<ln e0f the Home Secr<?tary to make the local authority liable for negligclnt omissions as well as negligent acts, I think it would be better to make the liability attach to thr nc-gligt>nce of the local mithoritv without using either the word " act " or· the W<lrd "omissions." But I would invite his earn<?st <Jonsideration and attention to the whole mat­ter of the limitai ion of the liability of local

1913-6n

authorities. The Railway Commir>ioner has his liability limited to a cert.,in amount, and if we are going tc extend that principlt> to local authorities we might as well extend it in a ~omprt>hensiYe way. I bring the matter up b,'"'cause-' it is n1y desire that legislation of this kind should haYe some principle runnin;; thn.mgl1 it, and Hct h~Lve tho lia­bility Jimit&:d in a pit>cen:eal fashion, be­om•e if it is limited in that way on<? local authority will ,qy thn.t if .a lou] authority next door is not liable in re':Ject << a ferry or culvert, why sho:;ld they be !;able for n. •,;hole stL.et. If i~ is desirt>d to Jna.l:·e lo< a! authoritie, liable for ncglig~nce, by. .all m<?ans do so; if it i; dt>sirecl to ma.ke them

liable for a cerLin amount only, [8 p.m.J by all means say so; but do not

say that they shall be liable in respect Df ferries, culverts and bridg,,_, 'J .and ~€aV.e a who\~ lot of other t:1ing·;:; unprovided for. It is that kind of kgi.,Iation \Vhich leads to "Yerb,ting amendment of the Local Authoriti{;J Act in this particular. I am qui: e u•rtain t:J:.ct hon. gentlemen sii:ting opposjte \Vho b:.:olong to the leg-.1l p:ufession ,,-ill quitA appreciate the desir.;tbility Gf hav­ing some broad general principle 'aid down which mGY have tlw eff<?ct of curtailing the necessity of their employment, but •Yhich, mverth<cle• s, wou!J be for tlw g.1od of the people.

:Mr. IYI);'STA?-;LEY (QuC<nton): I desire t<l make one or h\ ·CJ brief comments be for<? the t ,,,ond re ··.cling of this Bill goe·s through. I have listened 1\ ith interest to what has already been said during the de­bate, and, whilbt the Bill is more for Com­mitt;;e, I think there are some things that might be said at this stage. I notice that •.lne part of the Bill deals with the local .authoriti<'·, that nt>glect their duties in fail­ing to provid' r<?creation grounds and parks. It seems re<ther a remarkable thing that the Home Secr<?tary should have it in his mind that there are ·A)me local authorities who are lib·ly to be carel<?,s in this r<?spect, .and has had to make pro>·ision in the Biil that if they do not do these things the Go,·ernor in Council shall have the power to step in and practical!~- curry out the "ork that the local authorities haY<? bt><?n .appointed to do. One would think that if these things were not don<?, the people living in that com­munity, and 11 ho would have to pay for th<"" rc.~rcation grounds and parks, would think that it was infinitely bett<?r to gi;-e the people power, }tv giving t·hnn .a 1Jroper fr.anr'1ise, to elect people who \\Cmld carry out th<:>ir c; ishc ·, rather than give that power to the Governor in Council. But it is quite cYident that the idea is prevalen' in th<? mind of the Hou1·~ Secretary that the'e peoplt> may not do their duty, and cGn'<<?­quently he makes a provision that, when that occur,, he, a • administrative head of that department, may be able to step in and carry it out. I think, however, that something better than that might hwe been done when we are making amendments to the Local Authorities Acts. Then there am clauses in relation to the liabilities of the local .authorities in r<?g,ard to ft>rries. There seems to be a half-and-half kind of business about the whole thing. I nctioo that in one pc.rt of the Bill there is a provision for dividing areas of !•and and rating parts and leaving another part unrat<?d. I do not know what th<? idea is, and what has prompted the provision, but it is there. It

Mr. Winstanley.]

1954 Local Autl9rities Acts [ASSEMBLY.]

doe'c seem rather a pecul!ar kind of 1.wthod of dealing with matters of this kind. The point has been raised by the han. member

-: fvr Chil!agDe, and is evidently a very real .an·~ tangiLlo point. I not're th;:;_t the ques­tion ·xas raiJt l on Charters To\,--rrs when the Loc,d Authoritic, Bill hrst came into upcrat:.)n in 1902] und the id::.: t in tlie 1ninds o' ,c- -'-' pc:>1Jle V,<t that they could nDt twice r~tte t ;.,·:n' pi::-.:c of land. l 1"'or i·.· tance, the./ ~.-JLdd not ratf; a Inir:i_~g '_as( :1vld and then fate the ~· o_·-lo \Yho hv-l Luilt Ul10n it. But 11{ ·_oc.l:: \Vould go 1.:" th'~ exjJ( ~ ... c, Df

pmt;ns the ,,ue -tion to the test, although it was in :he mind Df the pee ple there that it couiJ ::1ot be ,d.)ne. I thlnL that ~hr ques­tion v:a~ askt-<:l here and a 1~-e.._)l) given that it ccmld be dDne. It would makt a \\Onder­ful diffe>.2nce to so1ne }-Jcal authorititd if they could onl: Le rat<od in that way. I know that i1. many mining lo alitic·- even on a 1uart0r Df an acre allotment, on Thich thov ha vo two cottagPs, there are two st:_parato 3ssc.~ nnent.;, and hvo srpara.t,~ lots of ratin0-eVf';J on "'J t:>ill·all an area a•, that. Xo>Y, I nHtie-c that pro·, ~,ion has Lecn n1ade fer r~ ~lrt.jng tho ~·.tinin~un1 in coun,•<:>tion with the V-3 luations, and while it may be .a ver .. r· de."-11 a b1e t·hing that the 1ninimun1 should b-, reduced and thr- powers o; rating, -"' :ar as goldfields arc conccrnPd, chou!d Lle 1 ,L·cd it~ order th.,_t t 1:l·.; 1111y g<.:t a high revenue, I think it is a point on which we wunt f->mo infonnation "'hen we get into Co:m 1itte: _ SnlN;ction (3) of section 210 of the princil;a] Aco says-

" '\Vhen un area is divided the amounts of the general rates made and levied upon the rateable land in the several divisiDns need not be the •:t.nP, but cv-"ry gm~eral r"'te nwde and levied in respect tD the divLi·m shall '_,e made and levied equally upon all ratea1•lp land in tl-e division."

T:C,c: ;!_,Q nDt able tD uifferentiate v.lwn the val· -,tion h"" been made as to the amount of ntu that are to be lc vied in the divi­sion. Aceor~.-i.in•.t to thi.~ BilL tha~ is le­peal<ed, ,:nd they will be able to wal:e a diff-er<entiation. ThB pDint I wish to mako ie th,ct it would nDt be f::.ir and equitaLle ii the valm: 'ions ~.re ,;Ding to be lmv ,:nd the rates leigh to people who live a\• ay from the main streets, who are r,.:t going to have 1:wir sha~c '})f t1-::.e ra.tr"-. spent in ~heir lor ality. I kno ,>;- that v·hen tho Bill came into op<?racion there \Y<lS -a gDod deal of dis­safi>fa:cion amDng,t thD people owning pro­perty on the principal ctreets, becnuee they tlwught that th<ey wer,e paying more than a fair share, notwithstanding that -almost -all t~ c 1ncne:y rai",ed ;v.as ~-:,pent in those streets. Th(Cre are a. great nun1ber of other points on whieh we will dcsir<e infDrn•ation, and prc:ra'Jy '\;ant in lYh.tke son1o ;-mcn-lrnents ·:-hen t 1w BiJl is :ping through Committee, for tho-.- ::-ill b, bot'·''' dealt with then than a' prp; nt, and for that re:<son I shall re­' :~rv,: Lat I have tD eay till then.

:Hr. GILLIES: I c1'''n'e wh::t the hon. memhr for Hnbert has s ,eel-that if this Bill is an actempt to give eff<ect to the wishes oi the loc'll anthorities' cDnferenc3--either th<> lo3t' or the one lcfore it-i' certainly falls verv short of the mark. As one of those who hc:~·rd the Home Secretary at the loc-al authDritib picnic, I must admit that I am a little disappDinted in the administrative head of the HDme Department, I submit that the most impDrtant resolution, so far as

[Jtr. Winstr,wley.

the whole of Que.onsland is roncerned, ,,-hich wa,. passed at that CCJnference, and one, I am pkas'ld to know, supported b:z the h?n. mem!Jer fDr He,bert-the resolutwn to g1ve ''>me ctssistan_e to nmv local authorities to build their roads and bridges and open up their country. I have repeatedly -said here ancl Dutoide the Chamber that the GDvern­ment ha,~ noc a semblance of •a road policy. I am quito convinced that until some roa-d p: !icy is adopted, permanent land settle­ment' cannot ~ .1kc place in Queensland. I ' 11 mom convinc<ed Df that e.- ry cl-ay. 1-Vhen I go back t>C' n1y native State, ~c~x. ~outh \-Y;;,Ls, and ta'k tbout the po-,c~b1hhes of Quf'ensland, I am confronted by these two h,,.at01nents. Practical farmer3 :,"t..y, '' y,",'S, but yo,t havt• no road poli<'v- The shire counci:,j are not endo-wed a.s- they .axe in 'New South \Vales, and ,,-hen railways are built through farming dish·ictc the people ~here a1-~ call- d U1 )0~.L to provide a fs-laran­t< ~." I am disappointed that no P- ovision is made in thi,; Bill for assista-nce to lDcal authorities or in son1e \vay to gin) effect to ; he r<esolutions almost unanin -msly carried by the conference, to provide some- ilnanci~l l}elp .._or new shire,_, in new areas, 1n order to promote permanent land sdtlement . The rnoolutiDn propDSed >Yas that shires in the fi1·,t f1ve Years of their existence should have-- '

The SPEAKER: Order ! The han. mem­ber is not in order in making the references be is doing, He must see that he is dis­tinctlv out Df order in discussing det.:tils at this s'tage. The provision he is debating is not part Df this Bill.

:Yh. GILLIES: I admit that it does not come within the >cope of the Bill, as the Homo Secretarv said when he was intro­ducing it, but 'I wish to say that in this respect the Bill falls "hart of my B'rpecta­tions. In fact, I think the Bill, from a. lac a! authoritic,' point o: view, is practically a. usel(_•,,;:; me:1sur.e. There '\HiS a proposal alSD that timber royalties should be pro­vidNl for. There is nD pr,Jvi;ic_,n fDr that in tbo Bill. I cor ider the hui!cliw.s Df roads is a qm-stiDn of nation,,\ importanc<e. As th,-- hte mavor of X cw York-'Y!ayor Gaynor ----sa-id. "G{;od roads means civiliFatiDn, but bad roads mean barbarism; and the better the roads the better tho civilisation!' It appear- to me that the Question of good roads is one that does not at all concern the Government. They ·helter themselves behind un Act of Parliament, and say to the lo<ca ~ a11thorities, "You 1have t1H rG.'ting power up to 6d. in the £1, and that is -all we ean do for vou." Until the Go.-ernment realise thB imi;ortance of at lea<t building trunk roads, land settlement in this State will be verv slmv. There is another ques­tion that •,~auld havB be en considert d 1>y the Home Secretary when drafting this Bill -it is a question that does not affect the c .mntry districts, but it is Df vital importance to the citv Df Brisbane and ,adjoining muni­circalitics_::_and that is the question of forcing private landowners, v.jhen they cut up esta_tBs, to provide proper ro"tds. Take the VV18n­holt Estate, for instance. vVhen -an estate like that is cut up, the ownec" of the estate should be responsible for the setting apart Dl streets and even for the formation of those streets.

T11e HolliE SECRETARY: That is . ,all pro­vided for.

Jury Bill. [15 OCTOBER.] Jury Bill, 1955

.Mr. GILLIES: I do not think it is pro­v.Ided for. I think a privatB individual cut­tmg up an. estate should be compelled to put the roads 111 the nwst acce.sible placec<, and there should be some compulsion on him to make those roads 66 feet wide and also to put the roads in a workable co,;_dition bPfore they were handed over to the local authority. At present, any pe1·wn who buys one of those allotm<cnts is called upon to pay rates to enable the lor•al authority to make docent streets. That obligation shonld be on !he land speculator, and before a subdivision was approved by the Crown, those roads and streds should be in a proper condition. The question of employing a qualified engineer ~s also on.e that might very well have been mcluded m the B1ll. I admit that it is a hardship at the present time for local authori_ ties, especially in new districts, wh<'re the selectors are very poor, to r<>ise sufficient funds to en<~ ble them to pa'· a thoroughly qualified engineer, but in Ne~v Bouth Wales and :Victoria the employment of a thoroughly quahfied local government engineer is com­pulsory by ),ct of P;n·liament, and I think the time has arrived 11 hen the Io~al authori­ti;;s in this State, by joining two or throe together, should be compelled to employ ~mly thoroughly qualified engineers. There ts a power in the Bill comnelling local authorities to purchJse land for- the purpose of parks. This is a proof of the short­sightedness of past Governments. This is a new State, and last year we passed a Local Authorities Amending Act gi•ing local au.thorities power to purchase parks, and thiS year we are asked to pass a Bill giving the Government power to compel local authoritie" to purchase land for parks. In a new country like this it does appear to be a vote of censure on pa"t Governments that it is found to be necessary to compel local authorities to purchase land for parks from private speculators. I hope the Government will come to the conclusion that they made a fatal mistake in the past and that when they are setting aside townshin sites in the future they will make ample -provision for parks and for breathing snaces, so that it will be unnecessary to pass legislation com­pelling local authorities to purchasE' land for parks. That is all I desire to say on the second reading, and when the Bill is in Com­mittee, poor and all as the measure is, I shall endeayour to improve it b,- one or two amendments. ..

Question-That the Bill be now read a second time-put and passed.

The committal of the Bill was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

JURY BILL.

SECOND READING.

The HOME SE0RETARY: In rising to move the second reading of this Bill, I do not propose to occupy the time of the House for any considerable period. This measure was very fully explained on the second read­ing last year by the hon. member for Too­wong, then Secretary for Public Lands. It is essentially a Committee Bill, the major portion of it consisting of provisions for the administration of the measure. Unquestion­ably, there is a very important policy in­volved in the Bill in connection with what is

known as the substitution of a majority verdict in certain cases. I admit that so far as our jury syst-em is concerned, it is a matter which requires the greatest care in dealing with-the greatest care so far as any alteration of the principle which is under­lying that system is concerned. There is no question about it that it has been con­sidered that the palladium of British liberty is the right of a man to trial by a jury of his peers, and a unanimOUF verdict of that jwry upon the question of the innocence or otherwise of the person that i2 so tried. But with the growth of modern times, the _Jtd­Y n: teen:·•nt of education and ideas, and the yery different forrr. of Government under which we now exist, I think that the question of the substitution of the majority verdict is one which may well be considered by the House.

Mr, MURPHY: Has it been done in any other part of the Empire?

The HOME SECRETARY: I b£lieve it has. \Ve must realise that, in many in­... tan, "S. it is imposcible to obtain unanimous vordict.s, and I speak no"' of a portion of our own State. There are manv instances where the evidence is amply sufficient as to the guilt of the accused, and yet it has l::een found impossible to obt.ain the unanimous verdict of a jury, unle'' the off.cnce is one which has roused the general indignation of the communih·. But, in connection with meny mi<Jemeanours which have been com­mitted, it is practically impos,ible to obtain the unanimou" verdict of juries who sit on those caFes.

Mr. RYAN: Can you mention any?

The HOME SECRETARY: I do not think it is neces;ary for me to indicate .my par­ticulm district, but I think that fact must be known to the lc·ader of the Opposition, as it is known to a number of members <Jf this Hou··e. The Bill makes this innovation, which I submit is the important part of the m"asure, and the one which will unquestion­ably cause the greatest amount of debate. The Bill consist' largely of administrative provisions. It is a codifk,ttion of the five Acts dealing with juries, and it repeals that portion of section 74-dealing with the sam~ subject--of the Evidence and Discovery Act of 1867, and of two sections of the District Courts Act. It is d<>,irable that we should have the whole of the provisions relating to juries embodied in one measure, and that measure brought up to date. The Bill will be divided into six parts. The major part of Part I. oonsists of the interpretation and definition clauses, and deals with the repeal of certain enactments ; it contains the usual saving clau,es, and also provisions as to the general duties of the sheriff. Part II. pro· poses to deal with the qualifications and exemptions of jurors. Here we 'have an alhration of the present law, the Bill pro­viding that every man between the ages of twenty-five and sixty-five, who is of good fame and character, and who resides within Queensland-not being an aboriginal native of Australia, China, or the South Sea Islands-is qualified and liab1e to serve as a juror for any trial within the jury dis­trict in which 'he resides, thus doing away with the property qualific"tion which at present exists, and consequently widening the scope from which jurors may be drawn. This

Hon. J. G. Appel.]

1956 Jury Bill• [ASSEMBLY.] Stock and Farm, etc., Bill.

part likewise contains the qualifications. It provides that certain persons nam"d therein shall be disqualified from sitting on juries.

Mr. RYAN: Are you raising the age?

The HO::it1E SECRETARY: Yes, we are raising it in both ways-making twenty-five years and sixty-five y+:ars the limits. Then it contains a number of exemption9, which are oet forth, and which I do not propose to particul.arise, as they wiil be subject matters for debate in Committee stage, when i'c will be for the Commit lee to say whc !her they are to be limited or further extended. Th~y have been placed here as the re•·-ult of the •.xperience of qu"'lified officers in com1ec· tion with those who should be exempted from acting on juries. There is likewise a provision in the exemptions, where'q a mem­ber of the fire brigade may be excused on production of a certificate to the effect that he is on active service as a member of such brigade. Part III. deals with the jury dis· tricts, and new court tov. ns-pradically all matters of administrative detail, mJ.king the neces,;ary provision for the proe,amation of jury districts and also the necee-ary matters in connection with juries so far as the new oourt towns which have been proclaimed are ooncerned. Part IV. deals with the method of prepartion of jury lists, and the method in which the books in connection with those jury lists are to be written up and dealt with, and also contains the necessary machinery clauses so far as the administr a· tion in connH1tion therewith is concerned. Part V. contains clauses dealing with the number and fees of juriec, the number of jurors to be 'ummoned in criminal cases, and the number who are to be summoned in special cases, and it deals with special juries of twelve in civil cases, also the right of trial by jury in civil cases and the nec0<cary provision for expediting of trial where such is required, when the case has been called and it also makes provision for the neces: sary fees and compensation to l::e paid to jurocs who can be so summoned. Part VI. has the necessary clauses dealing with jury precBpts •and panels, and also contains the necessary proviswns as to summoning and exempting jurors by sheriffs, and other administrative details in connection there. with. Part VII. of the Bill deals with the formation of juries, the method of choosing them, the standing by of jurors, the peremp­tory challeng·es, the discharge of jurors by the court, and also states that either party may pray a tales. V\~hen I asked for leave to introduce the Bill, I then described what tales was, and l do not propose to refer any further to it now. Then there are provision. whereby a majority verdict of three-fourths of •a jury in certain trials may be accepted but it provides that in cnpital cases the ver: diet of the jury must be unanimous, as it is to-day, but that in civil cases, after the jury hav8 deliberated for six hours or lo~ge:r, the judge may accept •a majority verdict arrived at by three-fourths of the jury; and in criminal cases, after a deliberation of fo~r hours or more, the judge may accept a three­fourths majority of the jurors who are e!l;t. panelled. '.Phere are further provisions in oonnection with the discharge of jurors in civil cases, and provision is made whereby juries may view the locus in quo. Then there is provision for the necessary reb·eoh.. ments for juries. Ther-e is a further provj. aion that aliens have no right to claim to b€

fHon. J. G. Appel.

tried b~ a mixed jury. Part VIII. contains the nec+·esar:> general provisions such as. to the non-attendance of jurors, personatiOn, offenceo by sheriff, neglect or misfea.cance by clerks and police, and likewise power to make the necessary regulations in connec­tion with the BiH. Thi' shortly embodies all th<· provisions contained in the Bill, and with the excPption, I scebmit, of the altera· tion which it is propos"d to make in con­nection y, ith mujority verdicts, tho balance of the Bili consists pure:y und simply of ma·i :.~rs which can be dealt with at the Com· mittc·e stage. I move that the Bill be now n ad a sec<md time.

Mr. RYAN: I beg to •n0ve that the debate be now adjourned.

Question put and pass0d.

The> resumption of the debate was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

STOCK AND FARM PRODUCE AGENTS BILL.

SECoND READING.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: In moving the second reading of this Bill, I would like it to be clearly understood that I am not a new convert to the farmers'

party, and that I am not forced [8.30 p.m.] into this position, as has been

stated in the Press comments, nor is it a fact that this Bill has been introduced in order to try to se-cure the support of (ne farmers. I have been con­nected with the farmers' party for a con­siderable period, and I was appointed their leader when you, Sir, were appointed to the Speaker's chair, and during that time I was proud of th·' position that I held in that party. This is one of the m ·a­sures that has h-een talked about for three or four years by the farmers' parlia­mentary party. I a•,l glad to have the opportunity of moving the second reading of this Bill to-night. The Bill has been in the hands of members for a considerable time. Under the provisions of this Bill all agents who sell farm produce, grain, vege­tables, fruit, hay, chaff, eggs, butter, cheese, poultry, game, horses, cattle, sheep, and pigs, whether alive or dead, must take out a license each year, for which he shall have to pay a fee of £1. It may be considered that the fee is not a large one, but many auctioneers are already paying a licenee fee of £15, and it was ·r·onsidered it would be inequitable to impo>e a further penalty upon them by making the license fee a large sum. The idea of charging. for the license is for the purpooe of locating farm and produce agents in all parts of the Sbte, so that the Agricultural Department will have ample knowledge of where farm and pro­duce agents carry on their businef,3 and what their actions are. It was asked the other day, What was the need for this Bill? The neBd for it is practically this : There are still a few unscrupulous agents who take advantage of farmers who live a long dis­tance from this place. If the farmer is not satisfied with the price he receives at the present time and is dissatisfied with the agent in any way, it is difficult for him to nuke any inquiry, because he <'•lnnot find out how much his produce brought at the market, and who bought it. This Bill wiH not interfere with the l<?gitimate merchant

Stock and Farnt [15 OCTOBER.] Produce Agents Bill. 195'1

and the legitimate agent who is engaged in the pro_duee trade. It is for the purpose of protectmg the farmer who sends in his produce from the few unscrupulous men who might be inclined to take advantage of him. I tave taken an excerpt from the Justice Department's record of a case heard in Hr1d1'iJlle-L,anlPiy, Ed-,1ards v. Izatt. There is also another case against Howes Brothers. These cases were brought before the farmers, and it was decided that some­thing should be done to protect them from people of that description. The report of the Justice Department in the case of Ed­wards v. Izatt is as follows:-

" Th~ above defendant was charged in the Bnsbane Police Court before Lieu­te~ant-Colonel Moor.:; with stealing cer­tam moneys belongmg to one David Robert :fi::dwards, a farmer residing at NobbJ:, and on the 9th July, 1912, was committed to take his trial at th,_-, crimi­nal sittings of the Supreme Court t; be held in Brisbane on 19th August, 1912.

" The defendant duly appeared before Mr .. Justice Real on 2_3rd August, and havmg been found gmlty by the jury was sentenced to twelve months' hard labour, execution of the sentence bE·ing suspended on Izatt entering into his own recognisances in £100 to be of good behaviour for that period.

" It ap_pears from the depositions taken at the Police Court hearing that defendant was a commission agent and produce salesm:on earn-ing on businEss in Brisban0.. On the 1st and 2nd May, 1912 Mr. Edwards consigned to defendant ~ quantitv of lucerne chaff representing 168 and 157 bags respectively. He re­ceived in return account sales showing that the 168 bags had been sold at 7s. 6d. to Ss. per cwt. and the 157 bags at 7s. 9d. per cwt. With regard to the former con­:ignment, the evidence of various wit­nesses, and the defendant's bookkeeping records, put in as exhibit's, go to show that Ss. 3d. per cwt. was actually realised when the produce was offered for sale by _public a notion in the Rom a street markets. Edwards receiVed a net re­turn of £37 4s. 7 d. instead of :£40 4s. lld. for those bags. The account sales in connection with the 157 bags showed a return of 7s. 9d. per cwt. in regard to 70 bags, wliich, however, actually realis8d 8s. ld., leaving a discrepancy of 15s.

" On the 4th May following two fur­ther trucks of lucerne chaff were sent down to Izatt, and in connection with this transaction it is shown that a sum of £42 7s. 7d. was realised, whereas Ed­wards only received a gross amount of £40 Os. 4d. The facts in this instance were similar to those in the previous case, the entries in the account sales and day book corresponding with the entries in Izatt's note book, sales book, and journal, with the exception that the prices did not agree.

"After the first transaction, Edwards's suspicions appear to have been aroused, and a complaint was made by him to the Criminal Investigation Branch. On the 5th June, 1912, he despatched a third consignment consisting of 130 bags of lucerne chaff, and on the 6th idem accompanied Acting Sergeant O'Hara to the Rome street markets. This particu­l!l.r consignment was sold at 5s. 9d. per

cwt., the sale being witnessed in the market by Se~geant O'Hara and Ed­wards; but a return was made of only 5s. 'I'he total realised was :£22 9s. 5d., and the gross amount received £19 19s. 4d.

" The above facts were corroborated in evidence by the purcha&Prs of the various consignments and others, and on this' evidence a conviction was obtained and recorded.

" Further evidence was given in this case, though immatnrial to the charge, relating to the practice in regard to the consignment and sale of farmers' pro­duce. It would appear that the mer­chant or agent to whom goods are con­signed regards himself as reeponsible for the value of such consignment placed in his hands, whether a settlement as betwPen the agent and the purchaser is -effected or not. Moreover, he suffers if there is a defective ot short-weight consignment and shoulders the responsi­bility unless the account sales has not been rendered."

There are more references made in the report. but it is hardly worth while dealing with them now. What I have read shows the absolute neoe,sity of a Bill of this kind to protect the farmers from unscrupulous agents who are inclined to take advantage of them. I may say that I have gone conscientiously to the markets on different mornings to see the sales of produce that took place there, and I must say thLt, so far as I could see, the farmer is fairly well protected by the respectable and responsible houses that are dealing with the produce tra<;Ie. But, ~or f!II that I still think the necessity for this Bill is u'rgent, and I hope that it will have a spe\!dy passage through the House. In New _ South Wales they have an Act for the regulation and sale of produce. I_n Tas­mania they regulate the sale by auctwneer~, but it does not go to the same extent as this Bill. In Victoria they have a similar pro­vision; in South Australia they have an Act i'Cgulating aw .. ' tionee::_s, pr,•,sed in 100:3. In Western Australia they have also an Auc­tioneers Act. There is no State in the Com­monwealth which has such a comprehensive measure as I am now introducing. In this respect Queensland is the pioneer. In many cases the farmer is ignorant of the system of buying and selling which is in operation in the Brisbane market. That was fully exemplified in the case of Mr. Edwards, who had to come to Brisbane and to stay here a long time and go to a great deal of expense in getting a conviction against Izatt. A stock and farm produce agent is d,efined as any f<~rson \vho, as an arr~?nt for others1 and either alone or in connection with any other business carries on the business of selling stock 01: farm produce. The term only ap­plies to persons in Queensland, and i~ f!'-rther includes agents who work on commisswn or for gain in any other way. There was so_me idea of preventing merchants from actmg as agents for farm produce, .b!'-t I. absolut-:ly refused to insert such a proviswn m the BilL The Pure Seeds· Bill is just about as perfect .as it can be made, but it may be necessary to make some amendments in this Bill. I have already received notice of one amend­ment, and, if it is drafted in ~ form which will be acceptable to the Cabmet and my­self, I shall be prepared to consider it. A

Hon. J. White.]

1958 Stock and Farm [ASSEMBLY.] Produce Agents Bill.

person employed merely a' a clerk or ser­vant or a :egistered banking company will not be considered to be an agent. The term " farm produce" includes-

" Cereals, ~rain, vegetables, potatoes, and other edible roots and tubers fruit hay, and ?haff, and all dairy pr~duce ; the term mcludes live or dead poultry an~ game and eggs, and any other artrcle or class of articles which the Go­vernor in Council by Order in Council may from time to time declare to be farm produce for the purposes of this Act."

It does not include wool as wool is on a d!fferent plane altogether; and is sold in a different way: Stock means horses, cattle, sheep, and swme, whether alive or dead and any o~her animals which the Govern~r in Councrl may declare to be stock for the purposes of the Act. The term " person " mcludes a corporation or joint stock com­p~ny,_ and the "court " referred to in the BI_II r.s a court. of petty sessions. All ap­piit;atwr:s for _licenses must be made in the police. distnct m whrch the applicant resides. No license shall be issued to any person under twenty-one years of age. A licensee can carry on the business of a stock and farm produce _agent in any part of the State. The license will expire on 31st December in each year, but may be renewed from year to yea: u;rll'lss the agent has been convicted of an mdictable offence during the· previous year. The license fee is £1 per annum. Tho ~!Jrm for taking out a license in the first case IS extended to Ziht March next. vVher<> a firm carries on the business of a stock and ~arm produce business it will be sufficient 1~ one member of the firm is a holder of a lwense on behalf of the firm. The maximum penalty for carrying on business without a license is :J?25. .'\. lictnse may be cancelled by the court rf the li<'ensee is convicted of any offence against the Act or is in any other :espect _unf!t to hold ~ li?ense. If an agent I~ conviCtea of any mdwtable offence, hie license shall be deemed to bP ipso facto can­celled. A register of all licenses granted or cancelled, with particulars thereof, shall be kept by th<; clerk of the court .. Every agent who commits a breach of section 8, which refere to _the application of trust moneys, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding £20. It has been suggested in some of the paper~ that the pemlt} should bP higher, or that It should be treatRd a' an indictable o!fence, but in my opinion £20 is quite suffi­Cient. for a first offence. Originally the Bill pr'?vi~ed that all moneys received should be pa1d. 1_nto a trust account, but, on making mqmrres at the banks, I found that they do no.t open trust acc'?unts, but all moneys re­cerved by agents will have to be paid into a separate account, and such moneys will not be liabl':' to be att:>ched for any other debt. Regulat!~ms ma_y be prepared dealing among other thmgs with th~· form and narticulars of account sales and the time within ,,-hich they ohall be rendm·ed; the ree-Jrds to be kept by agents : for the inspection of the r~cords .and books of agents by the prin­Cipals or other authorised persons with re­gard to transactions in which such principals ~re concer';•'?· They may also cloe I with th.e Issue ?f offimal market reports, the checking of werghts of produce, and tho rendering of a?c.oun~s as to ':·eight~. There is also a pr0 .

VISion m t~e B~ll whwh makes agents liable for any pnce hsts or market rcpoi·ts issued

fHon. J. White.

by them. The first and second schedules set forth the forms of application for license&. I do not profess to regard the Bill as per­fect. I have introduced it in the hope that it will be useful to the primary producer, and that it will protect him from even a suspicion of injury. I am prepared to accept any amendments which I consider will be an improvement. I may say that I find that 90 per cent. of the farm produce that comes into the Roma-street markets at the present time is the propetty of the merchants or agents who sell that produce, and not the property of the farmeh at all. I believe that even after this Bill becomes law a good many farmers will prefer to sell their pro­duce to the merchants in the way they have done in the past.

Mr. COYNE: Will they be compelled to do so?

The SECRETARY FOR AGRIOULTURI1: I do n0t think a single farmer in Queens­land is in such a position that he is com­pelled to do so ; but, if the farmers wish to protect themselves to the grc,1test extent, they can, perhaps, do so by the formation of co-operative societies among themselves. That has been the experience of farmers in New Zealand. I have just been reading the report of the Farmers' Association in New Zealand in which it is stated that they made large sU:m, of money by killing and freezing their own lambs and sending them to the home and other markets, and by the selling of their own produce. The farmers here have the whole thing in their own hands; they can start co-operative associations, and so long ;:;,s they can get the right men at the head of their produce business they will succeed. The whole difficulty very often is in getting the right man in the right place -the man who will do the be·Jt he can for the farmer. The farmer is, perhaps, just as able to manage his own business as others are able to manage it for him. I am sorry to sav that a good many of these co-operative concerns have not had the success in Queens­land that they 9u,;ht to have had. There is a sort of jealousy among them, and through that jealousy they have penalised themselves to a large extent. The, only object of this measure is to give confidence to the farmer that when he sends his produce to the pro­duce agents he will have an opportunity of followin? up that produce. after it is sold, and seemg who bought it, and what was paid for it. Any merchant or agent who does not carry out his du1ies in an honest and straightfon,ard manner viii be penalised through the courts. There ar,o a great many agents in Brisbane who, in my opinion, are doing the very best they can for the farmers at the present time, and I hope they will continue to do their best fall the farmers. I do not think the farmer has much reason to complain at present, as long as he keeps to the merchants and agents who are well known .ond respected in the trade. If this Bill will give the primary producers that confidence that I hope it will give them, it will have a good effec~, ·1,, ithout penalising or inflicting any injustice OJ; ag·ents who have been acting for farmerR in the past. I have very much pleasure in moving the, second reading of the Bill, and I sincerely hope that it will receive thB support of h.Jth sides of the House, as it is entirely in the in­terc>ts of the primarv producer.

Question put and passed. Mr. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker--The SPEAKER: Order! I declared that

the "Ayes " have it.

1Warsupial Proof, etc., B~ll. [16 OCTOBER.]

Mr. HUNTER: I was on my feet before you declared it. I appeal to tho House.

Mr. G. P. BARNES: Yo.u are too late. lHr. HU="TTER: i\lr. Speaker--The SPE_\KER: There is no question be­

fore the House. ;y1r. HUNTER : I want to ask you a ques­

tion. I want to know, even if you did not see me "hen I rose--

The SPEAKER: Order! I saw the hon. member risin;r, but the hon. member did not addreos me btfore I declared that " The 'Ayes' have it."

Mr. HUNTER: I did. The SPEAKER: Order!

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: I move that the committal of the Bill be made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

Mr. RYAN: I should like to know whether it was the intention of the Minister to proceed with the Committee stage of this Bill to-morrow? I regret that the un­fortunate incident happened which did happen, because the Bill is rather an im­portant onf', and it is very unfortunate that we had not an opportunity of more fully discussing it on the second reading.

The PREMIER : We will not take it to­morrow.

Mr. RYAN: I hope we shall be allowed full latitude in Committee.

Mr. HUNTER: Before this motion is put I think we should hear from the leader of the House whether he is prepared to recommit the Bill for a second reading dis­cussion, seeing that it has not been dis­cussed. I purposely waited to .allow the leader of the country party to address him­self to this mea•mre, as it was largely at the instigation of members representing the country districts that it was introduced. The hon. member had papers in his hand, and I expected that he would ;set up in ,his place and discuss the Bill. I refrained from rising until I was quite satisfied that he was not going to speak, and w:hen I rose from my seat I addressed Mr. Sp•:.aker, and I am satisfied that as far as this side of the House is concerned, you can have the assur­ance that I addressed you before you de­clared that the ''Ayes" had it.

Mr. G. P. BARNES: You were just too late.

Mr. HUNTER: No; I was not too late. Question put and pas~ed.

MARSUPIAL PROOF FENCING ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

MESSAGE FROM COUNCIL.

The SPEAKER announced the receipt of a me'"ago from the Council intimating that they did not insist upon the omission of clause 4 from this Bill, but proposed to amend the clause by inserting on line 4, after the word "holding," the following word':-" or on a group of selections not exceeding eight in number or two hundred square miles in area."

The message was ordered to be taken into consideration to-morrow.

The House adjourned at two minutes to 9 o'clock.

Electwns Acts, etc., Bill. 1959