Legislative Assembly Hansard 1949

Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

TUESDAY, 8 MARCH 1949

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Queensland Parliamentary Debates

'lLegtslatt~e Rssembl\?.

SECOND SESSION OF THE THIRTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT (Second Period)

[V01LUME 3]

TUESDAY. 8 MARCH, 1949.

Under the provisions of the motion for Special Adjournment agreed to by the House on 9 December, 1948, the House met at 11 a.m.

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. S. J. Brassington, Fortitude Valley) took the chair.

GOVERNOR'S SALARY ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

RESERVATION FOR ROYAL ASSEN'l'.

Mr. SPEAKER reported receipt of a message from His Excellency the Governor intimating that this Bill had been reserved for the signification of his Majesty's pleasure.

ASSENT TO BILLS.

Assent to the following Bills reported by Mr. Speaker-

Criminal Law Amendment Bill. Elections Acts Amendment Bill. Medical Acts Amendment Bill. Apprentices and Minors' Acts Amend-

ment Bill. State Education Acts Amendment Bill. J,ocal Government Acts Amendment

Bill. Diseases in Stock Acts Amendment Bill. Diseases in Plants Acts Amendment

Bill. Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration

Acts Amendment Bill. Matrimonial Causes Acts Amendment

Bill. Supreme Court Acts Amendment Bill. Land Acts and Other Acts Amendment

Bill. Workers' Compensation Acts Amend

ment Bill. Agricultural Bank (Rate of Interest)

Bill. Wheat Industry Stabilisation Bill. Aliens Act and Another Act Amendment

Bill. 1949-3v

Statutory Salaries Bill. Hospital Benefits Agreement Variation

Bill.

Police Acts Amendment Bill No. 2.

Public Service Superannuation Acts Amendment Bill.

Hide and Leather Industries Bill.

Health Acts Amendment Bill.

Constitution Act Amendment Bill. Parliamentary Contributory Super-

annuation Fund Bill.

PAPERS.

The following papers were laid on the table:-

Proclamations (2) under The Public Works Land Resumption Acts, 1906 to 1940 and The State Development and Public Works Organisation Acts, 1938 to 1940 (17 February).

Proclamations (2) under The Diseases in Plants Acts, 1929 to 1948 (24 February).

Orders in Council under-The :F'auna Protection Act of 1937

(2 December, 1948). 'l'he Fruit Marketing Organisation Acts,

1923 to 1945 (16 December, 1948). The Primary Producers' Organisation and

Marketing Acts, 1926 to 1946 ( 4). The Rural Fires Act of 1946 (16 Decem

ber, 1948). T'he Stock Routes and Rural Lands Pro

tection Acts, 1944 to 1946 (13 January).

The War Service Land Settlement Act of 1946 (13 December, 1948).

'l'he South J ohnstone, Gin Gin, North Eton, and Mount Bauple Sugar Works Acts, 1927 to 1937 (23 December, 1948).

The Aliens Acts, 1867 to 1948 (24 February).

The Landlord and Tenant Act of 1948 (15).

2002 Electoral DiBtrictB Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Electoral Districi8 BiU.

'I'he Public Curator Acts, 1915 to 194 7 (10 February).

'l'he Supreme Court Act of 1921 (3 March).

'l'he Magistrates Courts Act of 1921 (3 March).

The Jury Acts, 1929 to 1934 (2) (3 March).

Regulations under-'l'he Diseases in Stock Acts, 1915 to 1948

(24 l<'ebruary). 'Ihe Fruit Marketing Organisation Acts,

1923 to 1945 (8).

The Primary Producers' Organisation and :VIarketing Acts, 1926 to 1946 (6).

The Slaughtering Act of 1898 (10 February).

The Mining Acts, 1898 to 1948 (9 December, 1948).

The Stock Routes and Rural Lands Protection Acts, 1944 to 1946 (23 December, 1948).

The State Forests and National Parks Acts, 1906 to 1948 (10 February).

The State Children Acts, 1911 to 1943 (16 December, 1948).

The Medical Acts, 1939 to 1948 (6 January).

The Health Acts, 1937 to 1948 (27 January, 17 February).

The Nurses and Masseurs Registration Acts, 1928 to 1948 (17 February).

The Elections Acts, 1915 to 1948 (16 December, 1948, 3 March).

The. Landlord and Tenant Act of 1948 (10 February).

The Trust Accounts Acts 1923 to 1925 (24 February). '

The Motor Spirit Vendors Acts, 1933 to 1934 (13 January).

The Picture Theatres and Films Acts 1946 to 1948 (16 December, 1948). '

The Local Government Acts, 1936 to 1948 (27 January).

The Censorship of Films Act of 1947 (24 February).

Ordinance under the City of Brisbane Acts 1924 to 1948 (6 January). '

ELECTORAL DISTRICTS BILL.

INITIATWN.

Hon. E. IU. HANLON (Ithaca-Premier) by leave: I move- '

''That the House do now resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider of the desirableness of introducing a Bill to n;take provision for the better representatiOn of the people of Queensland in Parliament and for that purpose to increase the number of members of the Legislative Assembly and the number of electoral district~ to 75, to allocate representation by zonmg, and to provide for the distribution of electoral districts.'' Motion agreed to.

INITIATION IN COMMITTEE.

(The Chairman of Committees, Mr. Mann, Brisbane, in the chair.)

Hon. E. 1\1. HANLON (Ithaca-Premier) ( 11.23 a. m.) : I move-

'' That it is desirable that a Bill be introduced to make provrsron for the better representation of the people of Queensland in Parliament and for that purpose to increase the number of members of the Legislative Assembly and the number of electoral districts to 75, to allocate representation by zoning, and to provide for the distribution of electoral districts. ''

I think most hon. members of this Parliament expected this motion.

During and since last election attention has been called to the disproportionate representation in this House of various parts of the State. Basically, of course, in a democracy the ideal is equal representation for all people throughout the State, irrespective of class or calling, but it has been found that in a country such as this there is some need for a variation in the number of people a member represents.

Hon. members have also 'e'Xpected an increase in the representation in Parliament. In Queensland we have only one House of Parliament whereas in all the other States and in the Commonwealth there are, of course, two Houses.

The area covered by members of this Parliament is greater than that covered by members in any other State and it must be remembered that every acre of land in Queensland is held in occupation-great areas in many places-and in all parts of the State, even the isolated parts, people are living. Those people are entitled to at least the same services as those in the metropolitan area get; as a matter of fact, if there is to be any balance in favour of any section in this respect it should be in favour of the people developing the outback parts of this great State.

Mr. Evans: But they do not get it.

1\Ir. HANLON: To a minor extent they do.

1\Ir. J.\'Iacdonald: Very minor.

Mr. HANLON: We propose to improve that state of things. It is to be remembered that during the time the Moore Government were in power they took away that representation; it suited them at the time to do so. The representation in sparsely settled areas was reduced by the political fathers of the present Opposition and hon. members opposite should have a little respect for their political fathers.

The present population has, of course, increased immensely the work members of Parliament have to do.

Mr. Sparkes: There are fewer people on the 1948 rolls than before.

Electoral Di8tricts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electoral Di8trictt. Bill. 2003

lUr. HANLON: The hon. member will have ample time to debate this question later on and it would be helpful if he allowed an explanation to be given at this stage. The growth of population has increased the work of members of Parliament, and, particularly, the growth of services given by the Government to the people has further greatly increased their work. We have been expanding year by year and people find themselves under some handicap or desire or rlemand some new service of the Government. In a democracy the people's will must prevail and the Government may have to keep on increasing and improving services givPn to the people. Day by day the people er~· for more protection from unscrupulous persons in the community who are out to exploit them; they cry out for services that nobody but a Government will give them, because they are not profitable services financially. And so the work of the Government has increased.

Furthermore, people are becoming more conscious of the fact that members of Parli::unent Hre the servants of the community and gone is the day when they regarded a member of Parliament as a supernatural being endowed with supernatural powers who was to sit in this Chamber and by inspiration solve the problems of the day. The member of Parliament is regarded as being a person closely allied to the people themselves. The member for his district is regarded as the channel through which the individual can make his complaint and obtain redress of genuine grievances. He is the person to make representations to the Government for improvements in the various services.

I\Ir. Barnes: He is nothing but a glorified messenger.

I\Ir. HANLON: Not necessarily a glorified messenger. I do not regard it as undignified to spend every Friday night that I am in Brisbane at my home seeing people from my electorate. I see old people, sick people, and poor people as well as the wellto-do people, and I regard it as a privilege to be their representative in Parliament, and I regard it as a privilege to be able to do a service for them. There is nothing undignified about it. It is only the J?erson without dignity who thinks it undignified to render a service to the community and I, as a matter of fact, regard it as the greatest honour--

lUr. Barnes: You know nothing about service to the community-service to yourself.

}fr. HANLON: If service to the community consists in making a noise, the hon. member would be giving a great service.

As I was saying, all these things are increasing the work of members of Parliament. I have heard hon. members opposite as well as hon. members of my own party point out the heavy tasks that fall upon them in attending to the large numbers of people they have to represent. The hon. member for Logan represents the largest electorate

numerically in the State; in acreage it is one of the small electorates-and there are other electorates almost as large numerically-and I am sure that t~e ~on. ~ember for Logan will agree that It IS >Vlth the utmost difficulty he can give attention to the number of people he represents, particularly in attending to their requests.

For the time being, too, the people are comparatively well off and not nearly the same services are required nor are there the complaints today that existed in times when the people were not as prosperous as they are 110"\V.

If we happen at any time to reach a stage where we have not the high standard of prosperity that we enjoy. today1 hon. m~mbers will find it utterly Impossible to give adequate representation to the people.

I\Ir. Kerr: How does the Federal member do it~

I\Ir. HANLON: He does it by leaving it to the State member.

Jllr. Kerr: That is not quite right.

I\Ir. HANLON: I know perfect_ly well that people in my electorate, knowmg th::t the Federal member of the electorate IS clown in Canberra for most of. the year, come and make their representat10ns to me. That is rightly so. I know that the Federal member has to be in Canberra to attend Parliament and I am only too happy to be the mediu~ of communicati.on to him .of any representations or complamts of h1s constituents. I am not one of those persons who think they should be spitef:rl to m~mbers of other Parliaments. There IS nothmg to be gained by being spiteful or vicious or of personally belittl~ng. members of other parliaments. (InterJeCt10ns.)

Tile CHAIRIIIAN: I ask hon. members to allow the Premier to make his speech without interruption. This is ~ very important Bill and if they keep qmet and allow the Premier to explain it, they will be better able to debate it when it comes before the Chamber again.

I\Ir. HANLON: TI1e Federal me~ber for Brisbane represents an ~rea that IS repre· sented in this House by six or seve~ men;bers. If he has to go to Canberra on pubhc busmess, he is not available for most of the poor people to sec. It is all very ·well for hon. memb~rs opposite to suggest that ~hey shou~d wl'lte to their member about theu complamts. It is amazing the number of people who cannot put into vvriting the difficulties they have to face. It may be all right for qualified accountants, professional men, docto:s and, particularly laYI'yers, to put complamts on paper in the r1gh~ phraseol.ogy, but the or~inarv man finds It very difficult to comnut to ,~riting the point he wants to make. I find that in many cases where I get corTespondence from electors I have to write back and ask thnt they set out clearly what their trouble is.

The proportion of people in this State in the metropolitan area is growi~g. T~at is due largely to the greater llldustnal development that is taking place.

2004 Electoral Districtl/ Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Electoral Districts Bill.

Mr. ~Iacdonald: And the 40-hour week.

Mr. HANLON: The hon. member ha~ a queer way of thinking. If he hates a thmg nothing else matters but his hatred .. H_e has a particular hatred of anyone's enJoying a decent standard of living and leisure. In consequence every storm thfl,t occur~ and every pain and ache that he suffers IS due to the 40-hour week.

Mr. Maher: That is the big ache Australia is suffering from at the present time.

The CHAIRI\IAN: Order!

~Ir. HANLON: As I was saying, industry in the metropolitan area is growing rapidly. Notwithstanding the lesson of the last war it is very difficult to get industrialists to decentralise their industries. One of the things that struck me forcibly in England was the way the people there were decentralising industry. There is hardly a village that has not its own factory. That policy has been adopted so that an industry cannot be wiped out in one fell swoop. We know that anyone manufacturing goods for sale will endeavour to locate his production in as big a buyer's market a& possible and where the most labour is available ftJr his factory and that consequently there is a tendency to establish new industrit::s in the larger centres of population.

The population of Brisbane is growing rapidly, but we do not wish to reach the stage in this State when the representation of Brisbane in this Parliament will overshadow country representation. It has not in the past and it would be very foolish for Parliament to allow that result to take place. It would be a bad thing not only for the country people but in the last analysis a bad thing for the metropolitan area, because on the successful development and expansion of our country areas depend the very life and security of our capital cities. It is not a good thing for a growing population in the metropolitan area to obtain an overwhelming control of representation in Parliament. Therefore we propose to make a drastic alteration in the method of representation under this Bill.

The present law provides for the division of the numbers of electors in the State by the number of members of Parliament the quota for our metropolitan area being the same as for the out-back areas. To continue that principle would be fatal. There would be the ever-growing representation of the capital city and the e ,,er-lessening re ;J re· sentation of the rural and, particularly, far northern areas. To my mind the danger spot of the Commonwealth is the Far North, and consequently it is essential for our welfare-and the welfare of the people in Sydney and Melbourne as well, if they only realised it-that the northern _t,art of the State should be populated. So we propose to zone the State and to make the first zone the metropolitan area and put a limit on the number ,of members the metropolitan area can have.

An Opposition Member: Do you propose extending the boundaries of the metropolitan area'

~Ir. HANLON: No, the metropolitan area is the city of Brisbane. We ~ropose to limit the number of members m the metropolitan area to 24. . We propose to increase the total membership of t~e House by 13, allowing four in the metropolitan area and nine addlt1onal representatives Gf the country. That will keep the balance of the representation of the country.

Mr Pie• What do you term "country"Rockhampt'on or Townsville~

lUr. HANLON: If the hon .. member contains himself he will get the B11! and he will have a full explanation.

The ''Courier-Mail'' of 14 June, 1947, said-

'' The provinces must b.e built . and the best way to build them Is. to give them more responsibility, breaki_ng ~o:vn the centralised control that capit~l Cities ~ave always exercised. Queensland IS vast. Folk of the North and the centre and the .west regard us and each other as distant strangers. The time has come to end that detachment.

I think Lhat wat:; quite ~uU1Hl. .L u~ ~1ot think we can do it any better than by givmg greater representation in our Parliament to the far-out places of our State.

Back through the ages the L&bour Party in the old days pioneered the slogan of '' On6 adult, one vote. '' I do not know whether there are any membfJr~ of . t.he Opposition \Yho were interested I~ politics at that time when a property-man might liave a vote in e;ery electorate in Queensland.

~Ir. Brown: Some of them did.

ltir. HANLON: Of course they did.

~Ir. Luckins interjected.

~Ir. HANLON: I did not catch the interjection made by the hon. member. If the hon. member knows of an:J:body who ha~ two votes he is recreant to his own oath If he does not notify the police. If the hon. member knows of any breach of .the elec~oral l~w he has a duty to lay an mformatwn. With the police. If he does not do that, he IS not fit to be in this Chamber.

As I was saying, we must do something to avoid the continual growth and. repres~ntation of the metropolitan area m Parliament. Our capital is, rather unfortunately, situated in the south-eastern cor~er of the State. If tt were in the centre Its .growtJ1 would not have such a bad effect as It does; but it is in the south-eastern corner :;nd there are areas 1500 miles f:;om t~e cap1tal city. That makes it especially Important that steps should be taken to preserve representation in the country.

The Leader of the Opposition made a statement recently when this Bill was su~gested. The following is what appeared m the Press:-

'' The State Government's sugg~sted plan of giving Brisbane four new Parliamentary seats was condemned las~ n~ght by the Opposition Leader (Mr. NICklm).

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARcH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 2005

'' 'The plan conforms with Labour policy of giving everything to the city and nothing to the country,' said Mr. Ni0klin. Legislation providing for redistribution will be included in the programme for Parliament's March Session. No increase in country electorates is likely, although boundaries will be re-aligned. ''

I am sorry if I am disappointing the hon. member. I know I am robbing him of a grievance.

'' 'The city is more than adequately represented at present whereas the country could easily do with extra members because of the larger territories to be covered, and the greater need for effective representation,' said Mr. Nicklin.''

I am not quarrelling with him; that is quite true, except the suggestion that this party, which has always been interested in the development of the country, was not going to give any additional representation to the country. As a matter ,of fact, it is the work of this party that has developed this State.

Of course some members of the Opposition will naturally take the opportunity to find fault and oppose the measure. There are certain city interests that will be opposed to the measure, certain city financial interests that regard the country areas as legitimate fields for exploitation. They are a decreasing force in the community today, and I believe that since the war there has been coming throughout the community a better sense of the general community responsibility for the safety of this country. But still the fact is that there are certain property-owning people who do regard country people as an excellent field of exploitation.

Any representative in this Parliament who faces the situation as it is today cannot find fault with giving greater representation in this Parliament to the country than the countrv now has. There are some remarkable electorates represented in this Parliament today and I do not know whether members of the Opposition realise the job that members of large areas have to do. I will give the Committee a list of electorates that cover more than 1,000 square miles. That is a lot of country. The figures are-

Cooroora West Moreton Wm·wick Fassifern Stanley Aubigny Cunning ham Nanango Wide Bay Isis .. Mirani Dalby Herbert Keppel Port Curtis Carnarvon .. Kennedy The Tableland

Square miles. 1,313 1,361 1,697 1,890 2,424 2,464 3,122 3,149 4,457 7,074 7,970

14,567 1,740 7,214 7,569 7,864 8,230

10,0(14

Square miles. Charters Towers 22,905 Maranoa 26,620 Normanby 37,518 Barcoo 47,573 Cook 48,334 Warrego 92,090 Gregory 129,640 Carpentaria 156,535

Hon. members should give thought for a moment to the Gregory, Warrego and Carpentaria electorates. Each one of these has a greater area than all the electorates represented by the Country Party in th_is ~::rliament today-each of those three md1v1dual electorates is greater than that-and the Leader of the Opposition will agree that he has a fairly busy life trying to keep in touch with his electors. The members for those electorates each represents an area greater than all the electorates represented by the Country Party. As a matter of fact, it is rather staggering when one realises that the W arrego electorate is nearly 5,000 square miles, larger than the . Sta!e of Victoria. The whole State of VlCtona, or the whole of England, Scotland and Wales, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands would go into the Warrego electorate.

lUr. Pie: And you are talking about decentralisation~

lUr. HANLON: Yes. The electorates of Gregory and Carpentaria a~e ?-early. 50 per cent. bigger than that. It 1s 1mposs1ble for the people scattered in the little lonely centres i!l those areas to be adequately represented. As a matter of fact, looking at the matter plainly and practically, one would be inc~il!-ed to say that in this Bill we are not glVmg them sufficient representation; but we must endeavour to keep some relationship b~tween the value of the vote of a person m one place and the value of the vote of. a person in another. I hope that as populatwn grows -we shall be able to keep population growing in those areas-we shall be able to increase their representation much more.

As a matter of fact, if we are to get a balance of outlook in Canberra, I should say that the Commonwealth badly needs at least three States in northern Australia. I think that it will not be until there are three more States in northern Australia with representation in Canberra that we shali get a properly balanced outlook in Canberr'l. The major representation in the Pederal Parliament is for the south-east''r'l corner of the Commonwealth.

lUr. Brand: We could give one to North Queensland.

Mr. HANLON: We could, and this Government have told the people of North Queensland t·hat as soon as they are. i.n. a financial position to carry the respons1b1hty of a new State we shall be only too pleased to recommend it. I know there are certain people in the south-eastern corner of Queen~land who would cheerfully abandon their obligation to help North Queensland to be developed because iu is costing the people of the south-eastern corner somewhere

2006 Electoral Districts Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Electoral Districts Bill.

between £1,000,000 and £2,000,000 to carry out the works in progreS's in North Queensland. I believe that with proper representa· tion and continued development we shall get to the stage, in the next decade or so, when \re shall have a North Queensland State and possibly a Central Queensland State. I hope we have a State in the Northern Territory and another in the north-western part of Western Australia.

If hon. members look at the map of thC' Commonwealth they will realise that the curse of thiS' country has been that there haYe not been enough States and that \Ye haw not had any inland States. If Longreach had been the capital of an inland StatP created 30 years ago we should have had a city of 70,000 or 80,000 people at Longreach today and a population in the surroun<ling country four or five times bigger than it is now.

If you look at the map of America you will find that the big industrial centres form the capitals of the various States. If you look at a map of Europe you will find that the great cities that have grown up there have been the capitals of kingdoms or principalitieS' at some time or other and the same thing would have applied to this country if we had ha<l more States, particu· larly inland States.

That is why we are embarking on a policy of decentralisation in an endeavour to build up J 8 or 20 centres in the country where people will be able to go with their Government work, where they will be able to pay their taxes and get their wants attended to, where they will be able to go with all Government business, where all administration will be done, instead of having to send everything to Brisbane. In that way we shall build up self-contained areas in various part' of the State.

We· come now to the proposal that we have to make to Parliament. It is to divide the Htate into four zones. The first zone will be the metropolitan area, which is the area 0f the city of Brisbane. The second zon~ 1vill be the closely-settled coastal strip from the southern boundary of the State to somewhere just south of Mackay, probably rounil about Broad Sound. The third will be the northern area, from south of Mackay up tr> and including Chillagoe, Atherton, and tl:r whole of the Cape York Peninsula. The fourth will be the western zone,, taking in t!F grazing lands of Central and \Vestern Queen~land.

Jl.Ir. Wanstall: How far west will the coast:Jl strip extenfl?

Mr. HANLON: It goes in as far as Dalb. . taking in the thickly-populated areas.

At present there are 20 representatives in the metropolitan area. If we had a rediotribution under the present Act, with one 'jl:ota, we should increase the representation of BrisbanP. tremendously and decreRse the representation of the country.

I might point out that the proposal is worked out on the 1947 roll, as the 1948 Toll had not been completed when these

statistics were drawn up. The population is increasing rapidly and the quota in the metropolitan area will be much larger when the redistribution is made and when the next election is held than the figure I shall quote now.

In the metropolitan area we propose to restrict representation to 24 seats, with a quota of 10,716.

The representation for the Souther:1 Division is now 25. We propose to make 1t 28 IYith a quota of 9 ,536.

I might point out here that these zones do not coincide with the present State electorate boundaries. When I say there are 10 seats· in the northern zone I do not want anyone to understand that they run accnr· ately round the boundaries of 10 seats, but the new seats that will be created will br within that area. \V e propose to create 13 seats in the northern zone, thus giving the people there three additional representatives, and the same will apply in Western Queensland, for "·hich there are now seven representatives.

On last year's enrolment the quotas were-Brisbane 10,716 Southern area outside Brisbane 9,536 North Queensland 7,852 Western Queensland 4,783

lUr. Pie: How many seats will there be in Western Queensland~

lUr. HANLON: Western Queensland and Central Queensland will have 10 seats each. All. the quotas will need marginal allowanceR so that the commission that is to be appointed will be able to split up the area into electorates along the lines of communication.

l\Ir. ::llalwr: Permanent Labor dictatorship.

l\Ir. HANLON: I want to point out what is being done in the other States of the CommomYealth. This system of having separate zones for the city and the country has gone. on right through the ages, except m Western Australia, Tasmania and Queensland. Victoria works on this system and has created a metropolitan zone with a 25,000 quota. The urban quota is 10,500 awl tha rural quota 13,800.

JUr. Hiley: The Labour Party is very dissatisfied with that.

lUr. HANLON: I know, and nobody will be satisfied with this (Opposition interjections). I have not yet found the distribution of seats that satisfied everybody. I have been taking part in elections--

]}lr. Brand: This has no justice in it.

lUr. HANLON: I do not say that. I haye bee,n taking part in elections since I was 16 and I have never known an election result that satisfied eYerybody, nor have I know11 anything to be done by Parliam(mt that satisfied everybody. We do not e.xpect everybody to be satisfied with this. But rnost people will be.

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 M.AltCH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 2007

New South Wales has a11 average representation of 150 membe.rs, 90 in the As,sembly and 60 in the Upper House. They are all paid and there is an average of 11,551 electors to each member. There is a Syodney zone, a Newcastle zone, and a country zone, an-1 the ratio is: Sydney, 1; Newcastle, 1!; and country, 2. It works pretty well.

South Australia has no zoning at all and has an average of 6,800 electors to e.ach member of Parliament. It elects a commission and the Government give the commission certain terms of reference. The people of South Australia are not bound by any quota unless it is set out in the terms of reference. The bulk of the South Australian population is within easy distance of Adelaide.; I suppose within the radius of 125 miles of that city you would find 90 per cent. of the population. Their problem is not so difficult.

·western "\.ustralia has an average of 4,450 electors to each member of Parliament. There are 4 7 seats in the metropolitan area. In the North-West every elector is equivalent to two in the metropolitan area. Previously the north-western quota was comparatively very high; this has been altered by the McLarty Government, who are seized of the importance of preventing the metropolitan area from completely swamping the representation in Parliament.

Tasmania has another system, known as the proportional representation. With many othe,r enthusiastic people I was one of the virtims who fell, when it was put up by John Humphreys, to the iodea that it was a fine system. The proportional-representation system is very fine on paper but it works out very destructively to Governments. Tasmania ·will never, under that system, bE'! able to get a Governmen:t with a majority capable of carrying on until the overwhelming majority of the people are of the one mind. With a narrow cleavage of opinions there are deadlocks. At the. moment there are an equal number of Government and Opposition members in Tasmania.

l\Ir. Hiley: The same argument will apply to the Senate.

Mr. HANLON: Yes. In every Senate election there will be five vacancies and three representatives of one party and two of the other will be elected. As a matter of fact, I should say, as an cld member of Parliament, that if I wanted to make sure that I should sit in Parliament for ever and ever I would support proportional representation, because all well-established members of Parliament would be safe and all the younger and brighter men would be liable to get their heads chopped off in any swing.

Let us see how proportional representation works out in other countries. France has ::1 dopted this crazy system. It is a crazy system. Under it France cannot get any effective government. I was in Singapore on my recent journey to England and while I was there I discussed with Government officials the prospects of a settlement there. I went on to England and to France later. After the war ended the Government of

France promised self-government and the franchise to Indo-China. France promised a constitution that would enable the people of Indo-China to elect their own representatives to their own Parliament. France elected her representatives to her Parliament about a year ago, but up to date the French Parliament has not given Indo-China statutory authority to create the measure of selfgovernment that was promised. That is because under the proportional-representation system the Communist Party in the French Parliament is strong enough to prevent that measure from being passed. That enables a great deal of propaganda to be proceeded with against the dominion status promised to Indo-China. The result is that the people of that dominion find it is hopeless to get redress of their grievances. The point to remember is that the Communist organisation in France is strong enough to prevent that measure of freedom forever being given to Indo-China, and while the people of IndoChina are prevented from getting this measure of self-government that was promised them they afford a fine field of recruitment for Communism. In the same way it is very difficult for the Allies in Western Germany to obtain stable administration, because they cannot get any authority from the French Parliament for stable government there. The Communist Party in the French Parliament is in the position to make the Government ineffective. Consequently it is hopeless to expect anything great from France today.

The same conditions caused the collapse of France during the war. That was the basis of the ineffectiveneB's of the French Government for at least two decades and their inability to arrive at any solution of her difficulties and problems. This was due to the cranky parties in the Chamber of Deputies as a result of the proportionalrepresentation system, under which, if you eau whip up some proportion at all of the votes, you get a seat in Parliament.

In Czechoslovakia we have an amazing lesson against proportional representation, a system I have heard one or two members of the Opposition espouse. In the Czechoslovakian elec,tions in 1946, 2,695.2.915 votes were cast for candidates of the \JOmmnnist Party. Under the proportional-representation system they got 114 seats in Parliament. The Nationalist-Socialists polled 1,298,917 and received 55 seats. The Nationalist-Socialists and the parties I am going to quote are all anti-Communist. The People's Party polled 1,110,920 and got 47 seats. The Social Democrats polled 855,771 votes and got 36 seats. The Democratic Party polled 998,775 votes and got 43 seats. The J<'reedom PartyLord help us-polled 67,575 and got 3 seats. 'l'he Labour Party polled 49,983 votes and got 2 seats. That Labour Party was just a crank party like the King 0 'Malley Labour Party, or some other fanatical party. However this was the result of the election to which I want to call hon. members' attention: the total votes polled by the Communist Party, which won 114 seats, was 2,695,915 votes., while the total non-Communist vote wmr


4,371,441 votes, with 186 seats. The Communist Party was able to wreck Czechoslovakia because of this multitude of parties fighting amongst themselves. 'rhese parties were in a hopless position when pitted against the organised 114 Communists.

JUr, Hiley: The real thing is the basis of the trade-union movement.

1\Ir. HANLON: Let us get back to the key of the situation. The working-class movement arose because of the slaughtering, sweating and exploHation of the working people through the ages. There you have a lesson in the crazy system of proportional representation. You see it every day in our pastoral areas, where three or four sheep dogs shepherd a mob of sheep because the sheep dogs are organised whereas the sheep do JJOt know what it is all about. That is what you get under the crazy proportional-representation system, under which you have a multitude of parties squabbling and the highly-organised, well-disciplined Communist Party; and they wrecked Czechoslovakia.

Mr. Maher: Who is advocating proportional representation f

Mr. HANLON: Several members of the lton. member's party.

Mr. Barnes: Do you expect to win the J37

1\Ir. HANLON: I do not expect that the people of Queensland will have suffered any mental deterioration between this and the next election. I cannot visualise the return of a majority of members who put in their whole time at one another's throats, as the Country Party and the Liberal Partv do fighting and scrapping with one anothe; seeing who is going to get most out of it. You cannot expect stable government from any system of politics that does not give you " unified, solid majority for a Government. , i ~ ·

1\Ir. Maher: That is what Hitler said. You are doing it in a subtler way.

Mr. HANIJON: I know Hitler was one of the hon. member's heroes; the hon. member ' as a great admirer of Hitler, I have no doubt. I am speaking of facts. Hon. mcml·rrs should read the Press notices on .T olm Humphreys, who died in 1946. All the Press of England hailed him as a man who e~poused a principle to which he deYoted l1is li /e. They gave him credit for that; but they congratulated Britain in that neither Consc rvatives nor the Labour Party adopted it, b< cause it would hm·e prevented Britain from ever having a Government with an adeqrate majority with which to goYern. The beaut~' about the single-seat system is that some party or other is told by the people to govern the country nnd the;v are answerable to ne people at the end of a given period. I think we can wipe out entirely the idea that the proportional-representation system ,.-oulr! be any better than the system we have adopted.

Mr. Nicklin: You were going to mention margins.

llir. HANLON: It will be the same as it is now; 20 per cent.

As soon as the measure has been agreed to by the Committee, the Bill can be distributed and members can have the rest of the week to study it before we take it any further. That will give members ample time to study the Bill and make up thei; minds whether they can make any suggestwns for improvement. (Opposition laughter.) If anybody can suggest improvement, if hon. members opposite may still be worrying a bout giving the country sufficient representation, if they are prepared to put up something, we shall be glad to hear their views on it. Personallv I think we have arrived at as fair a compromise as we can between the principle of preserving equal values of voting among our community and at the same time giving due consideration to the distances that have to be travelled by representatives of the country areas and the difficulties under which their electors have to live.

1\Ir. NICKLIN (Murrumba-Leader of the Opposition) (12.11 p.m.): Mr. Mann, the measure the Premier has introduced this morning was brought down with unseemly haste. After all, although it is a very important Bill there does not seem to be any need to override the measures we already ],nve on the business sheet.

llir. Hanlon: I thought it would be helping you by having it earlier.

1\Ir. NICKLIN: Admittedly we need plent;· of time to study a measure of t~1is kind but it is rnther contrary to usual Parhamentnry procedure to overi·ide the business sheet to introduce such a Bill.

I listened with considerable interest to the Premier, who talked of many things. He gave a dissertation on proportional representation. He even introduced the question of new States. He shed crocodile tears over giving the country a fair deal, and read with great gusto the preamble of this Bill, which is allegedly to give better representation to the people of Queensland. After listening to the Premier one can come only to the one conclusion, and that is that this Bill is designed for the one purpose of endeavouring to save the political skin of the Labour Government. \Vhen one looks at what the proposed representation is to be, one arrives inevitably at the conclusion that this proposed redistribution and the increasing of the number of Parliamentary seats will have only one result, and this is to give a very unfair advantage to thE' Labour Party.

\'IT e know, Mr. M ann, that at the present time the Government are a minority Government. They represent the minority of the electors of Queensland, and after the passage of this Bill they will continue to hold office representing a minority of the people of Queensland-as they do at the present time. Is that democracy~ It is not. There is no doubt that now we can see why the Premier gives such major importance to this measure as to introduce it before the Bills already listed on the business sheet. The Premier and his party think that they have

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 2009

made ~hemselves poli~ically safe, but the electors of Queensland wrll have a say and though the Government introduce what they believe to be an electoral r-edistribution that will make them absolutely safe, I would point out that no Government are ever safe from the wrath of the electors. When the eledors of Queensland realise exactly what is behind the measure, their wrath will· descend on the Gover_nment and instead of being a winner this Brll may become a boomerang that will be the means of tipping out the Government.

It must he admitted that because of the changes in population of QueeuRlaml over recent years, there has to he son:e measure of elertoral redistribution. Even under present legislation there are a great number of electorates in this State that are unc1er OT over quotas, and something had to be done. But nobody cxpectecl the Government to incTease so largely the numheT ·of members of this Parliament. I do not think it is necessary; in fact, it has never been waTranted at all by the electoral position.

The Premier, in justifying the introduction of this measure, referred principally to these facts: the basis of Tepresentation as between country and city in both the services given by the Government and the need to have adequate representation so that these Government services can be given to the people. He mentioned the duties of a member of Pm·liament, and at the same time introduced the New State question. As to that, if the Premier wanted to introduce some measure with statesmanlike vision behind it, instead of introducing this redistribution of electorates and increasing the number of members of this Parliament, he would have introduced leaislation to bring about the establishment ol' new States in Queensland. I venture to say that to the Premier and his Govemment the New Stat_e movement is only an opportunity for lipsernce. They haYe no Teal intention of giving the pe~ple of the North, the \Vest oT Central Queensland what they so urgentlv neecl to accomplish the development of those areas, that is, new States.

Now to look at the growth of services by the Government. Admittedly there has been a tremendous gTowth in tlu) services by the Goyernment, but of what Government~ We find the big increase in Governmental service~ has been given by the Federal Government. that G~vemment having gver-ridden many of the State activities and taken from the States many of the activities that are logically theirs and should be theirs. IV e hear no 'protest from hon. members on the Government side against this action.

Let me draw the attention of hon. members to another very dangerous tcndenev that is evident in :Federal affairs at present,· by which the Federal Government are filching further powers from the States by the cam')ufiag-ed nse of their defence powers. What is going to he the position of State GoYernments if this tendency continues~ ·we shall haVP further powe'rs filched from the States and ]Pss need for State representation than we have now. I mn one of those who do not believe in unification. I believe that the States play a very important part in the

government of this continent, but unfortunately unification is one of the main objectives of the Govemment party, with the result that we hear no loud protests frmn hon. members on the Government side when the useful powers of the StateK are taken away from them one by one. I have heard no pi·otest whatsoever from hon. members opposite at the action of the Federal Government in misusing their defence pow<.'rs to over-ride the functions of the State. We in Queensland havP not yet suffered from this, but there is no r1oubt that when our time comes we shall sufft·r just as much as the other States are now. So that when we examine this proposal from that viewpoint it is doubtful whether the services of the State are going to grow any mo1·e than they aTe at present.

It must be admitted that the duties of a member .uf Parliament are many and varied. Any hon. member "-ho does his job in this Chamber has moTe than a full-time jol1, if we take the 40-hour week as a standard.· 'l'hat applies not only to the representatives of farflung electorates but also to those who represent the more closelv settled and more easily serviced electorates,· but can anyone tell m"e that one cannot represent adequately a considerably larger quota of electors in an area such as the metropolitan electorate th~n has been allocated under the amending Bill-10,716 ~ Representatives of the metropolitan area are now giving full and adequate representation to almost twice that number.

In the western electorates we find that the quota is being reduced to 4, 783 >vhcrPas the majority of the westem electorates at present run to between 6,000 and 7,000. It is admitted that representatives of western electorate$ have a big job in covering their arpa~ but there is some compensation in the fad that they are lll'i·essnril;· compelled to lin' away from tlwir p]c•etmates for the greater part of the year nnd as a consequence do n Jt get as much "-ork as thosp hon. member~ who are fortunate enough to he able to live in their electorates. I speak of them as bPing fortunate because it is a big advantage to he a hle to live in yonr electorate all the time, and if we are to judge by the numbers who aYail themselves of members' services, th~ t is appreciated by the people. So that, again, when we examine the question I do nrt think the duties placed on members of Parliament can be userl as a sound excuse for the action that is being taken by the Government under this Bill.

I am pleased to note that the Premier rends what I sav ahout the disadvantages snffereil by the co1~ntry districts of this State. T feel honoured at having him quote my rrmarks, hut he rould have used them far a better purpose than allegedly to back up a measme of this kind.

It m11st lJr rrcogniseil that even-thing quoted by the Pren~ier of what I said is absolutelY true. Does the Premier for one moment ·suggest that the increased representation he is going to give the metronolitan area, for example, is going to rectif1· the ills from which this State has sufferer] as a result of tlw mnl-development existing in all parts of it, as a result of Labour's


policy f Is this measure we are considering this morning going to return to the central a;nd weste~n par~s of Queensland the populatwn that rs leavmg at present~ Is it not a terrible commentary upon the Government's policy and administration that the northern and central parts of the State are losing a ?ig proportion of their natural increases, an mcrease one would expect to stay there W Do the Government think that the proportion of people who live in the metropolitan area will be discouraged from living in this area because of the increased representation now to be given to them~

The Premier said something that was very true when he stated that the life of thi~ St~te is dependent upon the country. That bemg so, he could at least, if he were game, when he was increasing the numbers of members of this Parliament, give the greater part of the extra representation to the country. He is going to maintain the same proportion in representation that exists now.

Mr. Hanlon: You could move an amendment to restrict the city further, if you wished.

l\Ir. NICKLIN: It is a suggestion that will receive consideration; no doubt there will be many amendments to this measure.

From whatever angle the measure is looked at, one cannot say that there is any justification for its introduction. The matter should have been tackled by readjusting the mal-distribution that exists in this State. When we examine the obvious result of the proposed redistribution we :find that it will not result, as the Premier suggested, in better representation to the country; rather we shall :find that the proportion of representation as between city and country is being maintained.

This is a measure that will have to be studied closely to see exactly what effect it will have.

Mr. Hanlou: It needs analysing.

l\Ir. NICKLIN: I appreciate the fact that the Premier is going to allow the Bill to lay on the table for a considerable time before he proceeds with its further stages, so that hon. members will have the opportunity of examining it.

Looking at this measure in the light of what the Premier has told us, I can only repeat that it will not remove the electoral anomalies that exist; rather it will give a very unfair advantage to the Labour Party. No doubt the whole of the work put into the ir,troduction of this measure has been done with one idea-to endeavour to consolidate the present shaky political position of the Government and give them an unfair electoral advantage. The matter is in the hands of the electors, and when they have the opportunity of judging the actions of the Government they will express their views in no uncertain terms.

Mr. HILEY (Logan) (12.29 p.m.): It is obvious that such a measure as this will call for careful study and analysis, but a

quick travelling opinion is that it impresses me as being the most perfect example of inconsistency ever presented to this Chamber. If there has been one tendency traceable over the last century in British politics in every country, it is the tendency with which the Labour Party in many parts has closely allied itself, that is, the correction of electoral abuses.

It was the tendency to correct, for example, the abuse of the pocket borough, and to correct-this is something Labour in other parts of the world has been particularly care· ful about-the heavy discounting of the industrial vote as against the vote from the other parts of the State. In the last few years we have seen in Australia the Labour Party in Victoria openly e:unpaigning to put an end to the sort of thing which this Bill seeks to perpetuate. We have seen the same movement in Western Australia and in other parts of Australia taking steps to end the very thing this Government are putting before us in an aggravated form. It is not the only matter in which the Labour Party has given proof of their inconsistency. \Ve hear much from them about what they describe as useful citizens, but we see that wherever Labour goes gambling becomes more highly organised that in any other country.

lllr. Hanlou: That is not so at all and you know it.

Mr. HILEY: I take it, then, the hon. gentleman takes pride in the ever-increasing number of Golden Caskets~

Mr. Haul on: Gambling is all right from your point of view as long as you make a few bob out of it, but the Golden Casket goes to benefit the public. What about gambling on racing and the stock exchange~

Mr. HILEY: That is a cheap sneer.

No-one suggests that the present electoral system is a creditable one. For example, if we analyse the result of the last two elections we must admit that the state of affairs disclosed a negation of democracy. Every thoughtful person will agree that there should be some correction of it. In the 1944 election the Government obtained 224,491 votes, or 44.2 per cent. of the total votes cast. For that total they got 31 seats in this House. The Opposition parties, that is, leaving the Independents right out, got an almost equal number of votes, or 42.5 per cent. of the total votes cast, for only 19 seats. Although the votes cast for the Opposition were only 2 per cent. less than the total votes cast for the Government, they got slightly over half the number of seats won by the. Government.

That was bad enough, but when you come to the 194 7 election the position was infinitely worse. At that election the Government got 227,350 votes, or 43 per cent. of the total votes for 35 seats, whilst the Opposition parties between them got 228,000 votes, equal to 46.2 per cent. of the votes and 2t per cent. more votes than the Government got, for only 23 seats, as against the Government's 35. On these :figures alone it must

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.) Electoral Districts Bill. 2011

he admitted that the result of our present electoral system is the very negation of democracy.

At this point I might refer to one state· ment made by the Premier with 1vhich I entirely agree. He stated his view that the basic test of real democracy was in the case where you had equal 1·epresentation irrespective of class or calling. That is the foundation on which the whole of this question must be approached. Whilst I fully concede that allowances must be made for the factors of distance, remoteness and sparsdness of population, I suggest we should ever keep our eye on the beacon of equal representation, representation irrespective of class or calling. We should keep as close to that beacon as possible, making allowance for the three factors mentioned, and not turn our back on it. My quarrel with this Bill is not one of principle or that there should not be zones and allowances, but with the fact that it discloses a clear departure from the principle of Pqual representation of class or calling.

1Ur. Hanlon: Are you suggesting the snme quota for the cities as the country~

l\'Ir. HILEY: No, the hon. gentleman cannot understand the argument. My quarrel is the degree to which he cnrries this principle out.

l'Ir. Hanlon interjected.

lllr. HILEY: As a matter of fact. the general application, not in all cases but the general tendency, is for metropolitan electorates to tend to be above the quota and country electorates below it. The general tendency was for the metropolitan areas to he above the average and the country areas to be below.

l\'Ir. Hanlon interjected.

i!Ir. HILEY: Generallv there was the carrying out of that desirable principle. lf the principle is carried through to the extent this measure envisages it will become possible for one area in the metropolitan area to have nearly 13,000 votes and an area in the \Vest to have a little over 3,500 votes.

:ur. Haul on: Within that area. Thev may be that much above and that much belo'v in that zone.

)Ir. HILEY: That is something that has not been explained to us. It seems to me that in principle it will be possible-far from implementing the principle of equal representation irrespective of class, as the Premier held up-to reach a degree of variation as great as three to one. That impresses me as being too great a departure from the principle that the Premier enunciated. 1 accept the principle that sparseness of population and remoteness of location should be recognised.

)Ir. Hanlon: You must have abancloned ''one vote, one value.''

)fr. HILEY: It is quite clear that the Prf'mier has abandoned the itlea.

lUr. Haul on: We had to a ban don it, in view of the population.

)Ir. HILEY: The hon. gentleman has forgotten the principle that he told us was a very desirable principle.

)Ir. Hanlon: I have not forgotten it. I explained the reason for modifying the opinion 11·c had held so long.

lUr. HILEY: The Bill calls for special study. At this stage there occur to me four points. I was not nnwilling that the size of the House should be increased because 1 was always unwilling that the numller of country representath·es should be reclueed. 1 recognise that there is something wrong with the present system of uistrilmtion, which makes a minority Government possiblL'. Not even the Premier "·ill say that it i:; good democracy for a minority Government to be possible. A minority Government is possible and is in fact in existence. We all know that. Accepting that there is to be a redistril.ution, I think it would be necessary to mcre;lse the size of the II ouse. Personally I do not want to reduce the country representation hy one member. If a redistribution involved the creation of a few now seats I was ready to swallow that rather than attempt to make a readjustment hy reducing the country representation even by one.

.llr. Hanlou: You were going to make aduitional representation for the city without increasing the country.

llir. HILEY: That may be so. But twenty per cent. increase in the num

ber of members impresses me as heing too great. ·while I was prepared to accept some increase, 20 per cent. is altogether too much.

The secoml point is that I cannot remove from my mind the instant impression that every suggested area-every area constituted in the most favoured zones-is at present held l1y the Government. Every square mile of tl•ose most faYmrrecl zones is held by Labour. It is imposs:!Jle for anyone who has regard for that fact to accjuit the Government of the charge tlwt they have so arranged things as to give themselws an electoral advantage. There can be no other conclusion.

The third objection I have is this: the Premier has agreed that it is not a good state of affairs that minority government should be possible. I observe that there is n0 safeguard unGler the proposals the Premier announced that will ensure that a minority of votes can no longer elect a Government.

~Ir. Hanlon: You pointed out that a change of 5 per eent. would completely revolutionise the Government.

l'fr. HILEY: I never pointed out anything of the sort.

)Ir. Hanlon: Your party did.

l'fr. Hn~·EY: \Ve got 2~ per cent. more \·otes than the Government did.

.llr. Haul on: No, you did not.

l'Ir. HIL.EY: Yes. we did. Not only did we do thnL hnt "·e got two-thirds of their seats, althongh we secured that many more votes.


Mr. Hanlon: You are taking the Communist Party vote with your party.

Mr. HILEY: No. I was charitable to the Government. I aid not add it to that total. I took the endorsed Labour candidates only and I took only our endorsed candidates. The hon. gentleman will find he is, in fact, the head of a minority Government.

The next point of objection, then, is that there is no safeguard against the election of a Government by a. minority of votes. That is something that the Premier, on his Gwn admission, recognises as a necessary safeguard in a democracy.

The fourth objection is that there is no attempt to correct the vicious, undemocratic principle of first-past-the-post-something in 1·espect of which, in the light of some of their own fears in the North, the Government may have thought fit to realign their viewssomething that permits all sorti'1 of accidents to occur with the electoral system and succeeds in denying the general wish of the great majority of the people. There is no attempt to correct that, and on that ground alone I feel that the Bill is insufficient.

In the time at my disposal, Mr. Manu, forgive me if I have something to say about the sheer delight that filled my soul at hearing from the lips of the Premier such a condemnation of proportional representation. This was delightful. It may cause some thrills of delight down the Barcoo, but I think it will cause some chills down the spine of Canberra. We have one wing of the Australian Labour Party solemnly deciding for the Senate of Australia, a!'1 an innovation, that proportional representation is the acme of progress. We have here, from another section of the Australian Labour Party, in Queensland, a savage condemnation of the principles of proportional representation, with some of which, I might tell you, I find myself in entire agreement. But I cannot help asking: where is the consisiency in the Labour Party1 What, are we to ask, is the view of the Labonr Party on electoral matters and what is desirable on electoral matters W Are we to believe Mr. Chifiey, the Prime Minister of Australia, Qr are we to believe Mr. Hanlon, the Premier of this State~ It was a glaring example of what comes of expediency-in the instance of the Federal House an attempt to safeguard some men who are retiring from the wrath to come, and in the caoo of the State House attempting by the clever selection and manipulation of zones to secure multiplication of the Labour vote and at the same time to see that there is no corresponding extension of either the Country Party or the metropolitan votes.

So, Mr. Mann, I quarrel with the degree with which the principle has been accepted in this measure, after making full allowance for the country vote and the sparsely settled vote, and unless when we see the Bill there is something in it additional to the outline given by the Premier, I say that it is not a measure I can support.

Itir. MAHER (West Moreton) (12.46 p.m.): Without doubt, every hon. member who heard the Premier introduce the Bill this morning could come to no other reasonable conclusion than that the sun has set on democracy as we know it in the State of Queensland. The Bill merely seeks to extend the undesirable and unlawful features connected with the conduct of the polls at the State elections in 1947, when no fewer than 22 electorates of the State, 33 per cent. of the total electoral divis·ions of the State, were outside the lawfully prescribed limit or margin: The Electoral Districts Act of 1931 prov1des for a 20 per cent. margin above or below a fixed quota, but nt the last election 22 electorates did not fulfill the requirements of that Act in respect of margins. That meant that virtually all the electorates held by members of the Opposition were heavily overweighted in regard to the number of electors on their rolls. For instance, take the electorate of Logan, with 17,000 electors, but with the quota set at 1J ,000 odd voters. Of course, in the rural electorates the position was the reverse. The s•eats held ?Y members of the Labour Party were heavily under-weighted, and, of course, by the nonapplication of the requirements of the Electoral Districts Act, the Govemment were able to gain a majority of members in this Parliament on a minority vote, on the aggregate votes of 43.8 per cent. of the total electors of the State.

Here are the Government in office today on a minority aggregate vote at the last State election t All this Government could poll was 43.8 per cent. of the total votes cas~ at the last State election, yet they come mto this Parliament with an almost two to one majority because of these margins. Where is the democracy about an electoral n;ck~t of that kind 9 T'here is no democracy m 1t at all. When it comes to working these electoral rackets, I sec very little difference between the type of mind that seeks to impose the yoke of dictatorship on the people by the armed camp and the type of people who by more subtle means do the same thing and deny to the people the free choice of who shall govern.

If there is going to be democracy in our country, surely there must be a reasonably fair application of the principle of one vote, one value. If we are prepared to give concessions to the rural districts of the Stateand I think we should-it should be done at least on a reasonable basis that will apply fairly to every part of the rural districts and ·not merely to the Far West and Far North, where the big concession is being given. We find that the coastal strip to which the Premier referred as southern Queensland-all that highly fertile and fairly well settled country running from the southern border right up to within the vicinity of Mackay and inland as far as Dalby, as the Premier said in reply to an interjection-in all that country, where there is a big population, the country districts of which are frequently represented by members of the Opposition, there is to be an increase of only

Elwtoral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Elwtoral Districts Bill. 2013

three, from 25 to 28, and the quota will be out that the depopulation that is proceeding 9,536 votes. Far-western Queensland, how- in North Queensland, in the North West, ever, is to have an increase to 10 members in the Central district, and the far West of instead of the 7 as at present. There will be Queensland is not a result of !ack of repr~a disproportionate increase of 3 for western sentation by members of Parliament. It 1s Queensland as against only 3 in the very not the result of that at all; it is aB a result closely settled rural areas all along the coastal of the policy pursued oy the present Governstrip. 'rhere is complete disproportionate ment, a policy that is making conditions of

,-in;justiee-there •. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-life-more-attractive_in_the_metrop_olitan_ar_eJ!s ~for instance, by the imposition of the 40-

l'\Ir. Hanlon: Your suggestion is that the hour week and less work to be done~and quota for the whole of the country should by the amenities the Government are willing be the same~ to provide for those in the more densely

lUr. MAHER: I am prepared to enter populated parts of the State. That policy into any reasonable agreement with the Gov- is having the effect of drawing men and ernment to compose the different rural zones, women away from the parts of the State I but there is no reason in this proposal at mentioned; they are leaying the remote parts all. The quota in the West is reduced to to live under the better conditions provided 4,783 and this, after allowing for 20 per for the inhabitants along the coast and in cent. below the quota, could mean that many the capital city and the proYincial cities. of the Westem seats could be held with about 'rhis constant drift of population is pro-3,000 voters. ceeding and, as I said, is the result of the

Area is not the test. 'rhe Premier pointed policy of the GoYernment. The fact that out that these vast electorates were impos- Parliament provides an additional six meming too much work on members who repre- bers for the diminishing population of the sent them, but that is all nonsense. I know North, North West and the far West is not the weRtern areas very well. I contested the going to overcome the conditions that exist. Balonne seat at one time and it was certainly What is going to happen~ Over a period very wide in area, running from Mungindi of time Labour mem!Jers representing the and St. George right out to the P'aroo far West and other parts will find themselves River. There is nothing to prevent an active with nobody to represent. The Premier member, with the improved transport facili- knows full well the truth of what I say but ties today, getting over the Warrego, Gregory he tries to brazen it out in justification of and Maranoa electorates with comfort and this unjust measure, which is aimed at keepease. Parliament has made provision for air ing his Government and party in pO\ver in transport for members living in remote parts perpetuity. of the State, they have the facility of motor As I interjected when the Premier was travel, and there is every opportunity today speaking, this Bill will achieve a permanent for them to get over these areas without dictatorship by the Socialist Party of Queensdifficulty. They are not asked to visit the land because as electoral rolls will be congreat wide open plains where nobody lives; stituted there "·ill be little hope under normal they merely pass over them to the centres conditions~except by a revolution in public of settlement, and that is all that matters. thought~ for :my political party . to defeat

It is a negation of democracy to give a the Socialists. I say that these thmgs breed hanclful of people living in the Far West a dissatisfaction and discontent in the country. Yote disproportionate to other country areas, Today the outcry amongst many citizens is as is being done for the Far 'VVest. The against Communists because the Communists margin in favour of the Far vVest and the wish to impose a dictatorship upon the free-Far North is too great for fair allocation. dom-loving people of this country by force. It simply means that because the GoYernment The Communists would sweep Parliament invariably win those Far-western and l''ar- into the discard and impose a power upon northern seats they are prepared to do an the country by virtue of secret police and injustice to the whole structure of democraey armed force. Force is the dominating in order to gain a paltry political advantage. factor in the Communist's outlook; force is

That is what it means, and I say that the dominating factor in the Fascist's outthere is no true democrat sitting on the Gov- look. Whether you get a dictatorship from ernment side of the Chamber who is prepared the Right or Left, force is the dominating to tolerate such a position. factor.

Let us have a fair adjustment. I favour There is very little difference between the principle of zones, but when it comes to most Fascists and Communists. I might striking different proportions of Yoters in throw the Socialists in for good measure. the rural areas, I say that we can approach There are factors in disciplining and goYern· the issue on a fairer and better basis, in ing any race of peoplB. Democracy, of the interests of democracy, than that con- course, is repugnant to the Communist, tained in the Bill. At the present time we repugnant to the Fascist, and, of course, the have ten members of Parliament representing Socialist is almost in the same category. He the northern zone and the Bill provides that does make a lip demonstration in faYour of this number shall be increased to thirteen. democracy, but he wants democracy on his For the outlying parts of the State, with own terms. He wants to secure unlimited their limited population we are providing for and unrestricted power, just the same as the an increase of six members. Communist and Fascist but by different

The real crux of the trouble was touched means. At least the Communist says hB is upon by the Leader of the Opposition when prepared to work for the day of revolution he addressed himself to the Bill and pointed and put everything to the test in order to


gain by force the overthrow of constituted authority. The Fascist is prepared to do the same. The Socialist, of course, stands for the same principles but he is not prepared to risk everything to the throw like his friends in the other two dictatorship groups, but adopts less showy but equally effective means of imposing his authority and power upon the helpless people. Evidence of that is shown by the Bill introduced this morning. There is clear evidence in it that true democratic power, unadulterated and undefiled democracy, is repugnant to the Socialists who hold power in the State of Queensland. They will not give the people a fair opportunity to express their opinion at the ballot box.

Mr. Collins: In what way? lUr. MAHER: At present they are exer

cising power in this State on a minority vote. They want to extend their grip on the democracy of this State not by a fair and equal vote of the people but by loading the whole electoral machinery against those who stand in opposition to them. I indict the Socialists as standing for principles that are the very negation of democracv. Had the Government come down to Parliament with a Bill for an increase in the number of m~mbers of this ~arliament by thirteen, and tned to su~port 1t, by pointing to the growing populatwn and arguing that an increase of members was needed to combat the invasion of State rights and State fields of power by the Commonwealth Government and had it been contended by the Premie~ that the proposed increase in the number of members would help in upholding the Federal principle of government, or strengthen the sovereignty of the State against all the elements about us today that seek to undermine and destroy the State power, and had he shown that the increase would be based on a fair and cquita hie distribution w~th .some allowa.nce in favour of the country d1stncts as agamst the metropolis, the Bill would have attracted some support. But the Bill has not been drafted to express such high-minded principles at all. I have no hesitation in declaring that it is the machiaevillian product of a bunch of cheats. It is the product of spurious democrats who fear the wrath to come and who shrink from the fear of an equal political fight against the groups opposed to them in Queensland today.

lii~. GAIR: I rise to a point of order. I thmk the language of the hon. member is extravagant and he reflects on the integrity of the Government. He is saving in effect th.at we are trying to destroy· the standard of democracy of the people of this State. That is extravagan.t language and I think the hon. member should withd1·aw it.

The CHAIR~IAN: I think the expression '' a bunch of cheats'' is reflecting on and suggesting impraper practices by the Government Party and I ask the hon. member to substitute more moderate terms than that.

llir. lliAHER: I feel that the Bill in its present form could only eome about from a Party ganged up together to defraud the people of the State.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I think the hon. member is getting further into the mire. I think he would be better advised if he did not use such extravagant language hut used language more in keeping with the dignity of this Chamber.

llir. ~IAJIER: If a fellow holds you up on the roadside at midnight with a pistol you do not use kind words to him. The Opposition groups are being held to ransom by the Government and we have no redress at all; there is no redress to the democratic members of the Opposition on this side any more than if we sat in one of the European countries governed by the Communists today, where the only answer to any protest against the form of government or the form in which elections are held is to put any criticiser at the point of the gun. ·we may not be held up at the point of the gun but we are just as effectively deprived of our rights before the electors under this Bill as the people under any Communist or satellite Government of Russia in Central Europe today. We have no chance. We are handicapped out of the political race. A brief look over the quotas would indicate that there is no hope for the Opposition to win against the Government. The whole Bill has been designed, not to bring out the best features of democratic goyernment, but to keep the present Socialist group in power. If that is not cheating I do not understand the English language.

'l'he CHAIRJIAN: Order!

:JUr. JIAHER: I can come to no otller conclusion. I am sorry to use strong language, but I feel something vital in the life of this community is going out this very day in this Parliament, something everyone values, particularly with the upsurge of these elements that seek to destroy our democratic forms of government. I frankly regret that the Government, who claim to be the very essence of democracy, should prove to be the Yery antithesis of de!ThOcracy as is demonstrated by the legislation they are introducing and by which, without doubt, they are taking away from the Opposition groups any hope of an equal contest when the next State elections come round. The whole basis of the Bill is: how can we, the little men, the Socialists in Queensland, carry on a permanent dictatorship of power in Queensland~ The little men have devised this scheme because they are not willing to give the people a fair chance to express themselves. The creators of the Bill hope by these unjust and unfair means to retain power indefinitely.

When you look over the Bill, you find that, while the Government claim to have increased representation to the country districts, it is noticeable that if the increased representation were given where it should apply with some effect it would be in the group of rural electorates that run from the border to the south of Mackay and, for that matter, right up to Cairns. That is where the practical effect could he given to that principle. But where the big population lies, between the southern border and Cairns, there is only a very limited increase, whereas in the far North-West and in the far North and the

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 2015

western areas the proportionate increase of members is out of all relation to the rest of the rural areas of the State; which shows that the whole thing is a delusion and a snare with which they hope to gull the country people into believing that they are giving out something in the way of a concession to the country voter at the expense of the city voter.

(Time expired.)

Mr. BARNES (Bundaberg) (2.27 p.m.): Mr. Mann, as usual, it is a pleasure for me to sit in this Chamber and be an Independent. I can always see a different angle from that of the Opposition, because I am not governed by any other body. That means that the Opposition parties are governed by financial interests, as is also the Labour Party. I am absolutely an Independent. So much am I an independent that I am the only true Independent that has ever sat in this Chamber, and from that independent outlook I am able to see arguments that never occur to members of the Opposition. That' has been so repeatedly.

'l'o-day the Premier, a metropolitan member, in bolstering up his argument, stated that he must help the country electorates and the Bill was designed to help country' electorates. That is unadulterated hooey. He put forward the fact that the Carpentaria electorate is seven times the size of Maranoa or it may have been some other electorate; that it was twice the size of Victoria-o; whateyer th~ hon. gentleman did say. However, 1t cons1sts of 156,000 square miles. He proceeded to tell the Committee that Gregory comprised 120,000 square miles. I would not be sure of these figures, and therefore give them approximately. He brought the heavens down to the earth to prove the reason for this Bill-the fact that these territories enumerated were so large. If he wanted to develop those areas he definitely disproved it by his subsequent arguments as to the reasons for, and the objects of, this Bill. If the Premier wants to be consistent in his arguments, he must carry them further. On no occasion did he tell the Committee that the electorate of Merthyr represents only 1.7 square miles.

~Ir. lUoore: 1.5 square miles.

~Ir. BARNES: I will quote the figures for the hon. member. Brisbane represents 1.5 square miles, Merthyr 1.6 square miles and Kurilpa 1.7 square miles. The Ithaca electorate, the largest of all the small Brisbane electorates, is 3.3 square miles. If the Premier i~ honest, taking area into consideration he should have in each of the Brisbane elector'ates not l~ss than 60,000 electors. That is according to h1s own argument. But no, that is not the object; the object being, as I said by way of interjection, to bring 10 of the 13 proposed seat.s to the ~abour Party. There is no other ObJect behmd this Bill. It gives the people of Queensland absolutely nothing.

If the argument the Premier put forward in this Chamber is correct, it makes the hon. members representing Gregory, Warrego and some of the other western electorates useless in t~is Parliament, because they could do nothmg for the \Vest. I believe that they,

along with all the other members of the Government, are useless as far as the real issue is concerned. Not one will fight the only issue at stake. The only way the people can be given representation is to carry out a correct system of finance, not by increasing the number of Parliaments or members and putting a heavier rope of debt round their necks. Before the war the financial cost to maintain each member in this Parliament a year was 3s. 7d. per head, but now with the increases in Parliamentarians' salaries and with that racket of pensions for Parliamentarians the cost has been increased. I will deal with the scandalous racket of pensions later.

The CHAIR~IAN: Order!

Mr. BARNES: There is only one motive behind this Bill, and it is to retain a privilege for each and every member of the Labour Party. The motive behind this Bill is that they can sit on the Government benches and be "Yes" men. The position is such today that they are afraid of facing their electors next year. The members of the Government are afraid of becoming members of the Opposition.

Each Labour member of Parliament is confronted with one big scare, and that is of becoming an ex-M.L.A. That is discouraging to them. They lack courage and fortitude. A member who came into this Parliament at the same time as I did said that when he heard me running down the Australian Labour Party it used to make his blood boil. He asked: "What can I do but support it~ If I do not the Q.C.E. will not endorse me for the next election." His electorate is bigger than the State of Victoria. Hon. members can now work out who that is. He asked how could he, as an independent, defy the party, and retain his seat. He said that he could not go back to the Australian Workers' Union because the Q.C.E. would see that he did not get back' his job. It meant, in other words, that he would have to go back to the pick and shovel on £6 a week, whereas he could sit in this Chamber and be a "Yes" man, and get £16 10s. a week, now £20 a week.

Mr. 01Shea: They have provided a home for you.

Mr. BARNES: This hurts the hon. member. Although he is not the hon. member to whom I have referred, it applies equally to him.

This Bill is introduced not in the interests of the people but simply in order to be able to retain the reins of government. The Premier wept buckets of blood for the country people of Queensland this morning. What consideration have they got about cyclone damage~

31r. O'Shea: Shut up.

Mr. BARl'iES: That dill from Warrego would not know about it.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I ask hon. members on my right to allow the hon. member to make his speech without interruption.


Mr. BARNES: He is drunk as usual. Let him go. I will handle him. He is drunk, as usual.

llir. O'Shea: Ah, Ah! Go ahead, now.

Mr. BARNES: If I were as silly as the hon. member I should not have shown my face here.

Mr. O'Shea: Have a go and see how you go.

Mr. BARNES: The Premier pretended to vve~p _buckets of blood for the country people, cla1mmg that the people need more repre· sentation. If what he says is true then those hon. members who represent the western and northern electorates have been sitting here doing nothing for their people. Either that or they have been doing something for their people, and I agree that with the exception of the interjector, th~ representatives of western and northern electorates in this Chamber have been very active on behalf of their people. That being so, the real object of the Bill must be to enable the Government to retain office.

Mr. O'Shea: How much did you collect from the western people on your stunt in connection with the change-over in the business of the Licensing Act~

Illr. BARNE1S: If I told the hon. member I collected £10, he is so drunk he would swear I said I collected £100.

ltlr. O~Shea: You collected just on £900.

llir. BARNES: I wish the hon. member were right. Roughly, I collected £22 and it cost me £25 to nuance it.

If the Government were sincere about helping the North and helping the West why have they not embarked upon a policy of reducing rates in those areas or recommending to the Federal Government a reduction in income tax, just as the Barnes Labour . Party did P Actually what he wants to do is to give the lad who works on a sheep station in Cunnamulla three votes while giving the lad working on a dairy farm on the coast only one vote.

lllr. Denies: Would it be any more effective than it is at the moment~

Jir. BARNES: Of course it would, because it would enable the Government to retain office unfairly. As an example, if the hon. member's electorate is reduced to 3,500 and the Brisbane iigure is to Btand at 10,800-odd it means that the Brisbane iigu1·e is approximately three times that of the hon. member's electorate; therefore the vote of the man in the hon. member's electorate is worth approximately three times as much as that of the man in Brisbane.

If the Government were sincere about giving the W e.stern people some consideration they could give them a reduction in railway freights. Let me point out that not one hon. member of the Opposition represents a western electorate. This means that the three western seats will go to Labour.

Jir. Denies: What about the hon. member for Dalbyf

l\Ir. Jiaher: The Premier said Dalby was in the coastal strip.

Mr. BARNES: The Premier did say that. In the area between the border and St. Lawrence the Tories will possibly get two seats. The Murrumba electorate will have to be split up. I think that is the biggest country electorate and I think mine is the second or the third biggest. The Government can take my word for it that if they are going to use this Bill to get me out they will be mistaken. They can take the inside or the backside out of my electorate and it will not affect me. My prophecy is that in making the three new electorates they will make one round about Ipswich or Toowoomba; mwther about Biggenden to Monto, extend Port Curtis towards Rockhampton; and the third somewhere between N ambour and Brisbane.

I am not divulging party secrets; nobody has told me these things, I am simply using my own intelligence. That is what they will do. They will take a few thousand off me and give it to Isis, but I am not concerned one iota about what the Government will take from me.

I am, however, concerned about the object of the Bill. All that is happening is that the world is turning to Communism. Every move has been a turn towards Communism, so is this. I agree with the Premier when he said that a big proportion of our work is Federal ,,-ork. Why, Mr. J\fann, during the war 95 per cent. of my work was Federal work. Has the Premier made representations to the Federal Government to give us the same postal facilities as Federal members have~ Have I the use of telephones and telegrams as they havef No. If the Government want to give the public better representation, the Premier should make some request to the Federal Government, seeing that we members of this Parliament are doing Federal work .

Whate,-er my work has been, it has lJeen brought about by bureancrats. I say again that as a member of Parliament 95 per cent. of my work has been brought about by bureaucracy. Have the Government done anything to eliminate it~ No, they have increased it. All the Government have done has been to increase bureaucracy, which is the stepping stone to Communism.

As I said some four and a half years ago, in my booklet, the Labour Party, the Tory Party, the Communist Party-

An Hon. lliember: The North Queensland Labour Party.

Mr. BARNES: Yes, including the North Queensland La hour Party, are controlled by the international.Jewish banking system. Have the Government fought that issuef They will not iight it. I remember walking into the bar one day in 1944 after I had made a speech on the A.B.C. of banking, showing how banks manufacture money out of nothing. I had spoken 10,000 words in one hour. The hon. member for Maree had asked me to have a cup of tea. I sat down to have this cup of tea and found that I was without

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.) Electoral Dist1·icts Bi.ll. 2011

cigarettes. To get them I had to go to the bar and at the bar there were eight Labour members. One Labour member was standing back about three yards from the others and he was pointing out that the only member in Parliament who was on the right track was the hon. member for Bundaberg. I paused when I heard these remarks and for confirmation of what I had heard, I said ''Bravo.'' 'fhis hon. member said that there was only one issue in politics and that issue was the money issue. If we tackled and cured that evil all other ills would fall by the side.

lUr. Devries: Who said that? The hon. member for ¥V an·ego 9

~Ir. BARNES: No, he did not say that. I will say the name of the hon. member if the hon. member wishes, as there is no secret about it. He went on to say, ''I don't rare whether they endorse me at the next elections or not. There is only one issue and that is the money issue and the international Jewish financial system that controls it.'' For the information of hon. members, with the exception .of the dills-and there are some of them here-I have brought documentry evidence to prove these things, but I cannot instil the information into their minds. In fairness to the intelligentsia, I will say that they admit privately that what I say is true. If Hitler was fair dinkum, he was the only man in the world war who was right.

An Hon. Member: Hitler was against the Jews.

~Ir. BARNES: On the contrary, the Zionists brought him to power to start world chaos.

This hon. member of Parliament I was speaking about went on to say, "What can I do about iU I shall have to go back to the pick and shovel at £6 a week. I cannot get my A.W.U. job back." Likewise the Opposition will not be able to go to the Queensland Club if they oppose the bankers. As I said, we are, in short, glorified messengers. I have in my hand a little piece of poetry that I intend to quote. I am not the only member who has quoted poetry. This piece runs in this strain-

'' Egg Boards, Keg Boards, Pull-thePeople 's-Leg Boards,

Pass a law to grab your stuff, and pay you for the dregs, Boards.

''Gay Boards, Play Boards, Make-thegrower-pay Boards,

Grab the dollar, more to foller Skin- 'em-all-the-way Boards.

''Pear Boards, Hot-air Boards, Make'em tear-their-hair Boards,

They can't take it, make them take it, Never-on -the-square Boards.

''Wheat Boards, Meat Boards, Starvethem-on-their-feet Boards

Keep deducting and obstructing, till there's nought-to-eat Boards.

''Control Boards, Parole Boards, Kill-thepeople 's-soul Boards

Penny pinching, never flinching, till they grab the whole, Boards.

''Clothes Boards, Hose Boards, Pay-methrough-the-nose Boards

While-the-war 's-on, pop that clause on, No-need-to-disclose Boards.

''Protector Boards, Rejector Boards, Sweet-job-as-an-Inspector Boards, Ten pound a week to stickybeak All-pinched-from-the-selector Boards.

''Bluff Boards, Tough Boards, Rob 'em, that's the stuff, Boards,

Quiet their wails with fairy tales, They'll swallow any guff, Boards.

''Tariff Boards, Extortion Boards, Make·· the-price-a.-ea ution Boards,

Double the price, won't that be nice~ We'll mal'e a pretty f-ortune, Boards.

''Honey Boards, Funny Boards, Got-you-on-the-run Boards, Afraid you-won't-get-any-money Boards.' 7

No, you never get money boards because they rrre the secret of salvation of the whole world. That secret, so far as Queensland is concerned, is not the extension of the number of electorates.

This poem was bst with my papers some years ago. It was written during the war. 1t could be greatly added to today. I came across it recently and thought it appropriate to read today. The Government will do everything they can to increase the number of boards. You remember when the Apple and Pear Board was created in this State that apples and pears were brought by rail from Stanthorpe to Brisbane and then consigned back to Stanthorpe again. You will also remember that eggs were brought from Bundaberg to the Egg Board in Brisbane and then taken back to Bundaberg. This all occurred despite the desperate shortage of transport during the war. It did not need the intelligence of a five-year-old child to know that such things should not happen in this enlightened community.

The Government, by direction of the Learnetl Elders, are a party to a plot which is to control the world through Communism. The banking system is such that the world's bankers merely carry out the policy of the Learned Elders. 'l'his money system controls international governments and minor governments. It dictates its policy through its leaders or agents. They tell you what to do. N c i~sue is created except through those agents.

I remember during the railway strike the Government introducing a Bill to deal with it. They later repealed it. The Tories capitalised their act, notwithstanding that when it was introduced they put a halo ro~md the Premier's head. The Premier by h1s latter action took the halo off. The Tories came a crash later when Mr. Hallway did the same. Mr. Hallway refused to put such a la~ into force in Victoria. That was an exception to the rule. Mr. Hallway then ceased to be a yes-man. I told you over eig~t years ago .that the whole object of the bankmg system 1s to create world strife. Today in this country there are strikes, strikes, strikes, and major strikes. In France there are 114 Communist members of Parliament. France is so torn

.2018 Electoral Districts Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Electoral Districtll Bill.

by strife and factions that one does not know what will happen next. A member in this Parliament came to me one day and asked, ''If I bought a house on the slopes of One Tree Hill and grew a few cabbages, should I be safe~'' I replied, ''If my kids are starving I will go and pinch them. Ab~ut the only place where you will be safe is Birdsville." We see Labour Governments nnd Tory Governments, such as the Mackenzie King Government in Canada and the Smuts -Government in South Africa, bringing in precisely the same legislation. They do that notwithstanding that they run dmvn Socialism and point out that the issue of conscripting labour is part and parcel of Socialism. Sir Stafford Cripps stated that it is impossible to have Socialism without conscripting lahow.

Who introduced conscription of labour~ It was Lord Beaverbrook, a Tory M.P. Mr. J. B. Chandler, the father ·of the Q.P. Party, spoke against Socialism in this House and then turned round and socialised our bus ser·dces. That shows that when orders come through, irrespective of who is in charge of our public affairs, the)· must obey because it is said in the Protocols that na man will be raised to power unless he is ''under our thumb,'' meaning he must accept, say, £10,000, £20,000 or £50,000 as a bribe or l1ave a panams on his soul, in other words some dark undiscovered sin on his soul. Let me put a suppositious case. Say Mr. Chandler as a boy stole a pig or committed a dark undiscovered sin which the Learned Elders are aware of. Thev would use that fact to their advantage. The Protocols say that "the aristocracy of the Goyim (Tories) are dead, but as land owners they can be of eonsiderahle interest to us.'' So they think out arguments such as these for the Premier, if he cannot think them out for himself. The object of the Protocols are to keep socialism in power in this State.

The other dav in Englanfl, after six -wars of war and fo1ir years of lJeace, the kiddies were getting lollieS' for the first time. We have weak-kneed Governments, with RuR"ia virtually at war with us in Germany, and what are we doing about iH We are doing nothing, because of the League of Nations. As I told you years ago, the United Nations are controlled by the Jewish banking system, iust a,<; they were after the previous war.

(Time expired.)

}lr. EVANS (Mirani) (2.51 p.m.): I listened very attentively to the remarkEl of the Premier when introducing this Bill, which was so hastily brought forward, and I came to the conclusion that the issue is not a matter of 10,716 for Brisbane or 9,516 in southern electorates or 7,000-odd for northern or 4,000-odd for the western; it is whether it iS' right or wrong.

Mr. Hanlon: What do you say?

Mr. EV ANS: I say it is wrong. The reason for bringing in this Bill is that the Labour Government want to defy democracy; they are not concerned with democracy. They are only concerned with being the Government.

A Government }!ember: You have not seen the Bill yet.

}Ir. EV ANS: I listened attentively to the introductory remarks and I have ordinary intelligence. The Premier always gives a pretty full account of a Bill on the introductory stage. I have enough intelligence, for instance, to know that it means• 13 more seats. In analysing those areas of the distribution I know the Labour Party will win 10 of them and consolidate itself in the other seats held by its members.

Has there been any agitation from the people of Queensland for more revresentation ~ Have they been satis£.ed with the representations of the member for Carpentaria, the member for Gregory or the member for W arrego? There is only one thing the Government wants in this Chamber and that is votes; it is not their object to help the people.

}Ir. Hanlon: Don't you think the North should have more representation 1

lUr. EYANS: If a redistribution is necessary, the redistribution should be done by a commission without this Government or the Opposition moulding it for them. This has been moulded for them so that it is ''Heads Labour wins and tails the Opposition lose.''

JUr. Hanlon: It is to be done by a commission.

lUr. EVANS: It is moulded in such a way that the commission has very little alternative but to make such a redistribution that the Government's position will defy democracy, and throw the wishes of the people to the winds and they will sit on the Treasury benches, notwithstanding the faet that they sit there today on a minority vote.

If we did not know the Premiel', we might have believed him this lllorniug, but knowing him we know it was mere camouflage he was indulging in. He \\cut to Czecho-Slovakia and all round the world and told us great stories of \\'hat happened; but what he is eoncerned about ::md what l'is party is concerned about is holding the Treasury benches; and the people and democracy do not count.

During the period I have been a member I have visited my electorate every month and I have paid my plane fare in order to visit it. I did that for the reason that I want to represent the people as they desire to be represented. I know that when the election takes place under this redistribution many of the members who will be elected for the new electorates will not live in their electorates; they will live in Brisbane. I am not going to say that the member who lives in Brisbane, as long as he visits his electorate, cannot do his work as effectively as if he were living in his electorate. I think he can do so. I believe the personal representation of a member in Brisbane has more weight than writing letters from his electorate.

How will more electorates and more members help these people~ They will not help them and the Government do not want to

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 201!)

help them. Why do they not be honest~ All they want is more Labour members to hold the Treasury benches for them irrespective of democracy, about which we hear so much talk.

The Premier said that they wanted to give a further service to the outback. He is a long time thinking about the outback~

lUr. Hanlon: It is never too late to mend.

ltlr. EVAN,S: I think it is too late. I believe in action and, I believe, as I tol<l the hon. gentleman previously, in right and wrong.

Mr. Hanlon: It is never too late to mend.

ltlr. EVANS: If these people have been entitled, and they are entitled, to better conRideration and amenities, the Labour Party has lJeen on the Treasury benches for 30 years, and it is about time it woke up to the fact that these people are entitled to these things. But what do we find~ What do we find in my own electorate~ What do we find as regards Blair Athol ~ A big sellout, a big misrepresentation. We were told that the British Electric Supply Corporation had £18,000,000 to finance the scheme, that there was no doubt about the monev. Thev had a paid-up capital of £44,000. The h01i. member for Herbert always asks a question if he is told to do so, and when he asked a question of the Deputy Premier that hon. gentleman went on to point out all the money that company had invested in Australia. But where has it gone~ Another company with £200,000 capital has been formed. Where are all these millions~

Let me get down to what occurred. What is happening in Nebo today~ Today the Traction Finance Company, to which I understand the franchise is consigned, is boring in N ebo and where did it get a permit to do that? I cannot find that in the Bill. What did I say in this Chamber'! I told hon. members that they would go to Nebo and get the N ebo coal. That can be read in the reports of '' Hansarcl.'' 1 said that is what would happen, and this under this great Government who are out to help the outside people and give them the amenities and services to which they are entitled. I ask the Government why they did not give a fmnchise to the Mackay Harbour Board, which is a semi-governmental body with a considerable amount of funds? This body represents the people of the shires in the Macka v district. It carried a resolution and wrote to the Government asking for a franchise, but all that was done was that the letter was acknowledged. Was that a way to help them1 Is that the kind of service the Government give to the people of the outback! Is that the development these people are to get~ They are not getting any development and will not do so. The only concern of the Government is to hold power, camouflage, and mislead the people, as they are doing today. This Bill is the biggest travesty of democracy that has ever come before Parliament. It is certain to pass through Parliament, and the people of Queensland will have to stand np, take it, and suffer for it.

The Premier said also that the proportion or population in the metropolitan area is increasing. Of course it is. But why~ Because the metropolitan areas are getting all the consideration. In this Chamber I have asked questions as to where the money from the Development tax is expended. Where is it expended? In and around Brisbane.

l11r. Hanlon: That is not true.

Mr. EV ANS: The Premier and I had a very heated debate on the Story Bridge, as to why it was paicl off. Why~ Because it is located in Brisbane. Did the Government pay off any bridges in my own or the western electorates 'I

~Ir. Hanlon: They put in 50 per cent. of tlw i\Iackay Harbour.

Mr. EV ANS: They put 25 per cent. T'he Story Bridge was the subject of a eo,·enant entered into by the interested parties. The hon. gentleman's Government broke that covenant.

ltlr. Hanlon: Nobody in this State got a. better deal than yom district.

Mr. -EVANS: We never got a fair deaL

l\Ir. Haul on: No-one got a better deal in this State from this Government than vour district. ·

Mr. EVANS: You cannot get into my district today. Roads leading to Mackay are· not trafficable in wet weather. We are cut off. The Premier is making that statement because a former Premier, Mr. ];'organ Smith, was member for the J\Iackay electorate. Although ~ir. Forgan Smith is opposed to we politically, I would say that nothing m1s clone in the Mackay district unless it was sound. The district had to pay for it.

lUr. Haul on: That is true.

lUr. EVANS: We got a 25 per cent. subsidy on the harbour, but we are paying for the lmrbour. The producers, industry, and people of Mackay are paying for the harbour; £1 ,800,000 was written off the Brisbane sewerage scheme. Considering these things, IYoulcl it not be right for the Government to go throughout Queensland ancl write off tl1e same percentage of indebtedness of every town and electorate in the State~ But the Government do not do that in the outback. I am using these points to show that the 0overnment are not concerned with the people m the outback they are only concerned with power.

l\Ir. Hanlon: You are talking a lot of rubbish.

l\Ir. EV ANS: The lwn. gentleman knows what I say is facts. Since 1933 the population of Brisbane has increased by 105,000 and the population of the otl1er cities by 58,000. That is because the Government catPr for them by giving them amenities. It is the country areas that produce the wealth of this State, and the towns and shires in the country areas comprise 45.6 per cent. of the population. The Premier is not serious when he talks of the services the Government are

:2020 Electoral Districts Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Electoral Districts Bill.

giving to the outback. The people of the outback are a forgotten legion. There is only one motive behind this Bill and that is power-~or the Government to hold power urespecbve of the desire of the people.

The hon. gentleman mentioned also a new State. In fact, he said three new States. I believe in new States, but I believe in new States with vastly different powers from those the Premier has in mind. The Premier might believe in the same powers as those in which I believe., but he is not allowed to say so. Unification is the policy of the Labour Party.

lUr. Hanlon: Who told you that?

llir. EV ANS: The Premier knows that is tru.e. He ge.ts up every year and says, ''I heheve m th1s, '' and, ''I believe in that '' but when the whip is cracked he turns' a somersault and says, ''I agree with what Mr. Chifiey says.'' When he went down to see him while the railway strike was on, he was told to repeal the Antipicketing Act. When he was putting the Bill through this Parliament he said. ''I will do this and I will do that,'' hut ";hen he came back from Canberra he repealed it. When, he was told he had to release the Comms did he do so g Of course he dicl. He rel~ased them because he was told to do so just as he is told that unification is the poli~y· of the Labour Government. His 01Yn members have said that in the House.

llir. Hanlon: Let us hear which one of them said that.

lUr. EV ANS: I am making this speech.

JUr. Hanlon: You be truthful. Which {>ne of them said that~

_llir. EVANS: Unification means that you Will have a central Government and vou will have States with delegated powers." Those are the States the Premier would give Queensland-States with delegated powers. Does North Queensland want a State with delegated powers~ Does North Queemsland want what is only a glOl'ified shire c.ouncil ~ That is what the Premier means when he talks of a new State.. He does not mean a State with sovereign rights. Let us l1ave the position clearly without this camouflage. Do not let us mislea·<l the people.

Mr. Hanlon: What bad dream is this ~-ou are suffering from?

lUr. EV ANS: It is not a bad dream; it is a fact. It is hurting the. Premier and that is why he is squealing.

I give the Premier all credit for being a very astute politician. No-one in this Committee can surpass him as a politician. With all the wrongs we think he did, we know he is an astute politician. His own party thought he was wrong and they put the skids under him and had them very well gre,ased, but he was too good a general. He came back and said, ''No, you are not going to push me off. I am not ready yet. This Blair Athol business is not finished. We have to get it under way by hook or by crook; it does not matter where we get the money or whom we sacrifice. You

are not going to push me out. I will bring in a Bill that will keep you in Parliament for ever,'' and he has brought it in. The skids were we.ll under him. He was right on the siide, and I do not know what stopped him.

I do not propose to say any more until I have seen the Bill. I have given the facts and my opinion as to the reason for its introduetion. I have pointed out the hypocrisy of the Premier's statement about a new State and I have endeavoured to show that his statement about senice to the outback amounted mere.ly to promises and lip-service. If this Bill goes through-and it will-and if the people of Queenslan<i do not rise in the name of democracy and stop this Government who have ilisregarc1ed democra.cy we shall have a position in which this Government will be, as Mr. Calwell said the Federal Government will be if they win this election, here for evermore.

ll[r. lUULLER (Fassifern) (3.8 p.m.) : I an sure the people of Queensland have waited the introdu,ction of this legislation with eonsiderahle interest and I am equally sure that when they read the Premier's speech they will be sadly disappointed. Never have I seen the Premier making such heavy weather as he was this morning when endeavouring to justify the Bill. I think all hon. members will agree that the Premier is eloquent, but this morning he faileil to introduce one sound reason why this State should have 13 more representatives.

I am sure every hon. member of the Committee is tolerant enough to listen to any case advanced for the improvement of existing conditions. As the last redistribution was made in 1935, an<i in view of the increase in population and the heavy movement of population within the State, I believe that there is need for an adjustment. If the Premier had introducted a Bill to increase the number of seats by three or four, or perhaps even five, there would have been no great objection.

When it comes to increasing the number of seats in this Parliament by 20 per cent.ancl that is what it means-there should be some real reason 1Yhy a Bill of this kind should be introduced. The Premier, in the course of his remarks, wandered over the greater part of the world and dealt with the conditions in the different States throughout the Commonwealth. After he has advanced all his arguments there is only one conclusion to be drawn and that is that it is the intention of the Government to erect an invulnerable fence around their party.

I have always endeavoured to be fair; noone has a greater sense of fairness than I. Only a few months ago in this Chamber we were discussing the advisability of increasing the salaries of members of Parliament. I have no objection to offer to an increase in salaries, but on that occasion I never heard one argument advanced that hon. members of this Parliament were overworked. If you increase the number of seats you are admitting that hon. members are overworked. Despite the fact that the hon.


member for Carpentaria represents a very large area and you, Mr Devries, represent a vast area in the electorate of Gregory, no hon. member is able to cover such large areas very frequently, and I say that under the proposed legislation the position will not be improved. Those areas are still going to be large.

The Premier camouflaged his speech by 1 elling us that the object of the Bill was to make for better representation, but he has not advanced one argument showing how that representation will be improved. If an hon. member today neglects his duties he will neglect them under the amending legislation. In other words, if an hon. member cannot look after his electorate at present he will not be able to look after it if he has a few hundred electors less. The Government are suggesting that he will be able to do more work than he is at present doing--

JUr. Power: We are going to reduce areas too.

lUr. lliULLER: After you examine the proposals closely you will find that the areas in country districts will not be reduced very much. The hon. member for Carpentaria will still have a big electorate to manage and in fact it is doubtful, under the proposals outlined by the Premier, whether the Oar· pentaria eleetorate will not be larger than it is now. And the same thing applies to the Greg·ory electorate. Owing to the drift of population from the country areas, if you apply the quota system it is possible that some areas will be larger after this amendment is made.

To my mind there is only one conclusion to be drawn from this legislation and that is that there is a deliberate attempt to erect a fence round the present Government. A principle is involved in legislation of this kind. We frequently hear people complain about lawlessness within the State. The Government are going to offend in this direction, defy the rights of the people, and destroy our democracy. They are going to say, "We will do these things in order that we may defend ourselves. We will not look to the Industrial Court' '-in this case the people of Queensland-'' and we will beat you to the gun and get ahead of you and see that no power in Queensland will put us out of office.''

We in this country arc concerned, as are people in other countries, with the spread and growth of Communism, and I tell you, Mr. Devries, that there is nothing that breeds Communism quicker than legislation of this kind. If you destroy the people's rights they plot for self-preservation or protection. No party has the right to say "We will pass legislation of such a kind that our position becomes invulnerable.'' No-one can deny that that is the object of the Bill. I will not attempt to discuss it in detail, as I have not yet seen it; I can only speak on what the Premier told us, hut I do believe that when we see the measure we shall find that the position is worse than we have expected.

'l'he Premier told us that 31 per cent. of the 13 additional seats would he allocated to Brisbane. It seems to me, without having seen the Bill, that an additional 33 per cent. of these seats will be allocated to provincial cities and towns. The Premier described Zone 2 as embracing the area from the southern border to Mackay and including the cities of Toowoomba, Ipswich, Maryborough, Bundaberg, Rockhampton and Mackay. You cannot tell me that those cities will not claim an additional 33 per cent. of the extra seats. I feel sure that when the proposals are examined 66 per cent. of the new seats will go to the cities.

The Premier endeavoured to make a strong ease of the fact that the country was entitled to better representation. Perhaps we are prepared to concede that hon. members representing very big electorates would, if they were reduced in size, be able to give better representation to their electorE>. But the GoYernment are not going to do that, as 66 per cent. of the additional seats will be allotted to the cities.

Another principle we are concerned about in this proposal is the fact that it will cost £17,000 or £18,000. It might he said that is getting down to small fry, particularly when you have regard to Queensland as a whole, hut nevertheless it is £17,000. The Prime Minister told us a few weeks ago that the time has arrived when we must be more careful and not spend our money on luxuries and to forget about those things that could wait until some future time. I do not always agree with Mr. Chifiey, hut I do on this point. There is a tendency on the part of some people to demand luxuries they cannot afford. Mr. Ohificy has warned them on that point, because we have not the manpower nor material to go round. The £17,000 that must be set aside to cover the cost of this additional representation will not help the people a great deal more, while at the same time it will be a bad example for them. You are going to bring another 13 men into this Chamber who could be employed in some more useful occupation than politics. (Laughter.) I am not sugge,sting that the political occupation is not a useful one.

JUr. Power: You are not judging everybody by yourself?

JUr. lUULLER: I include the Minister as one of them. The amount of money may not he large. The number of additional representatives is not large; nevertheless a principle is involved. If we ask the people to observe a policy of economy, we should be prepared to set an example ourselves.

I call this proposal a sort of political bushranging. I cannot call it anything else. Members of Cabinet know perfectly well that this legislation was devised for one purpol'!e and for one purpose only, namely, to secure the future of the Government.

lUr. Power: Oh, no!

1\Ir. MULLER: If that statement is disputed, I ask, why all the conditions, as outlined by the Premier, if this proposal is clean and aboveboard, as the Government endeavour to tell the peoplef Why did they not come


straight ant into the open and appoint a commission to do the job~ Why put a condition on the proposal1 Why the zoning1 They are endeavouring to tell the people they are introducing the system bec~use they desire to give country people greater representation.

In actual practice they do not do that. 'l'hey do not give the country people additional representation. As a matter of fact, the ratio between city and country, under the proposed alteration, is going to be worse from the viewpoint of the country than it is today. If the Government were sincere in their intention to provide for more equitable representation they should have given the job to a commission and not put these checks on, such as Zones 1, 2, 3 and 4. When the commil'lsion set out to do this job, it will be guided and directed by the conditions laid down in the Bill. That is conclusive evidence that the Govern· ment have only one object: to tie the hands of the commiRsion before it starts.

'l'he people of Queensland are not .so stupid as to swallow things of this kind. The reaction will be great. I admit that I nm not concerned about the Government in that regard, but I am sure they will find the reaction is not of the sort that they now 1hink it will be. You might be able to make their position secure for a while, hut the mind of the average Queenslander or Australian is generally fair, and he will see what the aims and objects of the Bill really are. This legislation will be received with very bad grace. During the last fortnight, s·ince the Bill was foreshadowed, the papers have hecn inquiring as to the necessity for it. The leading articles have been very fair: thev h~ve heen prepa1'ed to concede the point, if there is any justification for the introduction of the legislation. but thev would like to know what it 'is and if it is neeessary they are prepared to support it.

It is true that perhaps other States may have a greater numher of members, havin<;! regard to both Houses; neverthpless two wrongs do not make n right. I do not believe in two chambers; I believe that one Chamber O'hould be sufficient. I think duplication is unnecessary. If we are going to advocate the policy of democracy we have to allow 1 he mnjority of the people of any State to say who their representatives are going to he. If we frame legislation that will ens·ure that the minority party can remain in office, we shall make it more difficult for the wish nf the people to be carried out. The Government must admit that their political policy is quite out of line with democracy. Tt is not a bit of use the Government's slating the Communists, who they allege are out to hreak down our present system. We know toilav that there is >·ome concern about nnr nresen.t system of arbitration. Can you ,,·onder why people lose confidence in He political party that is nrepared to hreak faith ;;·ith the peonle ns it has demonstrated Jq· the intToduetion of this Bill todny~ ·

Jfr. PIE (Windsor) (3.25 p.m.): The Premier agnin entned the debate in n dnal

capacity; he has in fact been nametl by members as the Dr. J ekyl and Mr. Hyde of this Assembly. In one breath he said that equal representation is the basis of demonacy. Then he introduced a Bill that was the very opposite of the basis of democracy. Whnt do we find~ We find that you have 10,716 people in one section in one zone,. allowing up to another 20 per cent., thus bringing it up to over 12,000 and the lowest section in the western zone has 4,700 less 20· per cent., bringing it clown to approximately 3,600.

Mr. Hanlon: That is not right.

lUr. PIE: I will go through it again for the Premier's edification. On the Premier's own words the basis of fiuctua tion L ~0 1 er cent. one way or the other.

For the metropolitan zone there is a base figure of 10,716; consequently, by increasing it by 20 per cent. it can be brought to over 12,000. On the other hand, for the inland and western zones there is a quota of 4,780, less 20 per cent., consequently under the zoning there need be only 3,600 people in that electorate. This means that one member of Parliament can represent only 3,600 people and another over 12,000 people, hut the· Premier has said that the basis of democracy is equal representation for all the people. Surely that is the very opposite of the basis that he has propounded~

Now let us have a look at some of these electorates, for instance that of the hon. member for Gregory, now sitting on the back bench. He has an electorate comprising 6,956 electors. Divide that figure by two and he nevertheless qualifies to retain lwlf his electors nnd represent 3,600.

lUr. Hanlon: Who?

JUr. PIE: The hon. member for Gregory. As I have pointed out, he can come into this Parliament representing 3,600 voters, while an hon. gentleman representing a closely settled electorate may represent 12,000 peoplE'. That is not the basis of democracy as democracy was meant to be. Consequently we enn have one section representing a minority und another representing a majority. The Premier knows this only too well. I term the Government a Socialistic Labour Government. That is their correct title. They are not a true Labour Government, but bound to Socialism hand and foot. The Premier knows that, and also that the bedfellow of Socialism is Communism. Socialism and Communism are one and the same, now and always. Very definitely, the Premier, by the introduction of this Biil following the salaries grab, is increasing the cost to the State. Did not the hon. gentleman get a Christmas prest'"t \Yhen he :urived back from overseas~

JUr. Hanlon: You got one too.

Jlir. PIE: Yes, I got one and I gave it away to charity.

Then there is the business of pensions for members of Parliament. The hon. gentleman, in reply to me in Maryborough on the suggestion of the introduction of pensions. is reported to have said that it was political

Electoral Districts BiU. [8 M.utcn.] Electoral Districts Bill. 2023

eyewash. 'l'he hon. gentleman will not that he said it was political eyewash. is an instance of hypocrisy.

The CHAIRJU.a.N: Order!

deny That

llir. PIE: I am leading up to the amount that all these things will cost this State, which will desperately need money for development. In the years ahead Queensland will not be able to budget for a surplus, because this State is dependent on the hand-out from the friends of the Government at Canberra. The Premier knows that better than I. He will haYe to face up to the position where he will not have enough finance to do the development work that this State justly demands.

Mr. llanlon: We will manage that.

Jlir. PIE: The hon. gentleman knows very well he has not the money to do the work. Bvery Minister sitting on the front bench knows it. And whY~ Because the Commonwealth Government "say to the Pre· mier, "You do this or else we will cut off your supply of finance.''

The extra cost of this Bill will increase our expenses. I have taken out a rough figure of the increased cost of the salaries grab. The pensions scheme will make a deficit of £116,000 unless it is put on an actuarially sound basis. In addition we now are to have additional State members of Parliament. These will cost Queensland approximately £20,000 a year. Where is the money to come fromf We have not got the money, nor have we the taxing powers to get the money. As I have said, we are dependent on hand· outs from the Commonwealth Government. If the Premier had been present when the Bill permitting the salaries grab was under discussion he would have found that never once was it suggested that a member on this or the Government side of the Chamber was not doing his job effectively. Members were doing their jobs effectively and were to be paid increased salaries because of the increased cost of living, and to enable them to spend more money to visit their electorates and do their jobs. We are now dividing the whole thing up again on the say-so that these members are not doing their jobs effectively.

Mr. Hanlon: Who said that?

llir. PIE: The hon. gentleman said it himself. He said the electorates were too large to get ,around, but never during the whole course of the debate on the salaries· grab Bill was there mention of a member not being able to do his job effectively.

The hon. member for Gregory, the hon. member for Mt. Morgan, and the hon. member for Kennedy claim they do their jobs effectively, as does every hon. member on this side. Now the Premier says,'' No, we must have 13 more men, we must add to the cost of government." That i~ a charge on the people, who are surely paymg out enough now. T'his will be an addition to the cost of living b.ecause the peop!e must pay for it by taxatiOn ~nd they Will ~ot be getting any more effective representation. The Premier knows that every man on his side of the Committee

is doing his job; otherwise he would not be endorsed at the next election. There are some who will not be endorsed at the next election, and the Premier knows it.

This Bill takes from the people something we are not entitled to take. Where will these new representatives be put W Goodness knows, we ha Ye not enough rooms in the House now. Our party room is a disgrace. 'fhere is no privacy. We cannot get an interviewing room. Where are we going to house more members? Will the Premier lend us his office to interview them~

This GoYernment are out to make themselves safe for all time. We did have a chanec to lift them from the Treasury benches before, but the position is different now. Ju the Gregory electorate we shall ha Ye two Labour seats; there will Le two Labour seats in the \Varrego. There is no doubt this is a frame-up to keep this Government in oflire for all time. They have feathered their nest. The first step was an increase in salaries. The next was the pension of £6, £7 and £8 a week, and now they say, ''We will stop in Parliament for all time." 'l''hat is what will happen. They will be the Government for years to come if this goes through.

Then we have the Premier's hypocrisy when he said, ''If we had an inland State round Charleville we should have a population of 70,000.'' Then he speaks of decentralisation of industry in Great Britain and compares it with a State like Queensland. Decentralisation in a pocket-handkerchief country like Great Britain is not possible, yet the Premier quotes it.

Then he referred to proportional representation. \V e all remember how he damned it. We all remember the picture he painted about what happened in Czechoslovakia, Prance, and other countries, but he did not tell us that his boss in Canberra brought the same thing into the Senate. Did we hear hrm criticise Mr. Chiftey on proportional representation~ We did not. He said, "It is a grand thing for the Commonwealth, but it is wrong in principle, but if the Commonwealth Government say it is right I accept it.'' His whole speech was designed to cloud the issue in the minds of the people. There is no more help for the country in this proposal than we had before. If he wanted to give the country more representation he could have redistributed the present electorates and giYen greater margins one way or the other.

If the GoYernment are returned after the next election-and I think now they probably will he-they will be elected on a greater minority of the aggregate vote than ever before in the history of Queensland politics. What about the industrial people whom this Labour Party is supposed to represent in this CommitteeW They say they can look after 10,716 people in the industrial centres but in the country they can look after only 4,783.

llir. Jesson interjected.

Mr. PIE: The hon. member represents the people of Kennedy bnt lives in Brisbane, and for that I do not blame him. Probably

.2024 Electoral Districts Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Electoral District8 Bill.

a country member representing an electorate such as Kennedy can do more effective work !n B_risb~ne by residing here than by reirldmg m lns electorate. 'l'hat might be right. I say that an hon. member representino- 4 783 people and living in Brisbane has le~s ~ails on !1is time than an hon. member repres~ntm!l' 10,000 people in the city area. Your t.Ime IS not .you! own; if you open every fete you are mvited to you would not have a m~nute to yourself. Hon. members repres~mtmg country electorates and Jiving in the c~ty have not the same demands upon their tune.. I_ say that the whole thing is cockeyed and IS m need of review but review on a sound basis .. Do not let ~s build up a Government agam on a greater minority of votes than ever before in the history of the political life of Queensland.

lUr. ROBERTS (Nundah) (3.40 p.m.) : Iu the first session of this Parliament I sat as a new member and listened to the vitriolic speeches made by hon. members opposite soured by the results of the then recent election. They were unable to take the decision of the people of this State. After listening to the speeches delivered on that occasion I am, to say the least of it amazed to hear the criticism levelled today at the measure before the Committee. I really expecteu that hon. members opposite, particularly those representing the Country Party, would have acclaimed this measure as something that was perhaps long overdue. Instead of that we have lieard criticism to the ~ffect that the measure is hypocrisy, and I thmk the term '' bushranging'' was used and some suggestion was ma<le that the Government Party is endeavouring to fence itself in. Speaking personally, I should have no hesitation in going into any part of the State and justifying the Bill. I shoul<l uo that, realising the difference there is between one part of the State compared with anotlwr.

We have heard criticism of the zoning provided for in the Bill. We know, and hon .. members ?pposi~e. should know, if they are mte;·est~d m politics as they should be, that zonmg IS not new. It is new to Queensland, but it is in operation in the southern States. Victoria has two zones the metropolitan zone and the country zon~. Although the Government are a Liberal Government !h~t s;yste~n can work considerable injustice_: m.Justice m that country areas are not uniformly populated. In Queensland we have :1 very sparse western and central-western population, slightly denser population in the_ No;·th, and a compar11;tively dense populatiOn lli what the Premier has called the south-ea.stern zone, and a dense population in the metropolitan zone. What could be fairer under those circumstances than to divide this State for electoral purposes into four zones?

So far as the metropolitan zone is conrerned, if th~re was any necessity to justify the measure It could be done on the basis:md I know this as a metropolitan memberthat one hon. member can with reasonable efficiency represent 10,000 or 12,000 city

electors. By the same token, with tllc distances to be travelled I can understantl the ~li~CJ_rlty, in fact the impossibility, of one mdiVIdt;al 's representing 10,000 or 12,000 people If he had that many in one electorate m the West or Northern Division of the State.

In addition, as the hon. Minister pointed. out, there is the question of expense. In the city-and I am speaking for the majority of intelligent people in the city-we rC'alise the importance of the country. We realise that whilst we like to live in the city and prefer the amenities of city life to the hardships that confront many country people, our very existence and the fact 'that we enjoy rity life depends on our having people on the land.

I want to show the inconsistency of hou. members representing the Country Party by pointing out their attitude concerning the fiow of population to the cities. In one breath they decry this flow of population from the country to the cities and say that the Go,-ernment should do something to stopit, and in the next breath they complain about shortages of materials and manufactured goods. The present State r,abour Government have accelerated the production of secondary goods. They have not done so by adopting the dictatorial attitude hon. members opposite would do by telling secondary industries where to establish their businesses. If any person desires to establish a secondary industry he can do so wherever he chooses. If he cares to establish it in the metropolitan area, as is done because of the population here and because ther0 labour problems virtually solve themselves, he can do so. That means a greater population in this pa .. t of the State. That is unlike the policy that would be adopted by some hon. members opposite who profess to represent the country people.

I was brought up on a farm and until I reached the age of 20 years I probably milked as many cows and lived under conditions as arduous as any hon. member opposite. I appreciate the outlook of men in the western and country districts towards this problem. They do want to get closer to their elected representatives, whether they be in the State or Federal Parliaments. We can do that only by creating country electorates with fewer electors than the metropolitan electorates. Today we are complaining about the flow of population to the city. We must not overlook the fact that despite our appreciation of the worth of the country man n great deal of credit for that fact is due to Labour Governments of the past who have enabled country children and country people to acquire an education as good as that of the city children. Because of that education, and because of the opportunities that Labour Governments have rightly given to eountry people, their children instead of sta;,iug on the land have sought what I might caH white-collar occupations.

ilir. Sparkes: Like yourself.

ltir. ROBERTS: Yes, like myself. They have gone into the professions, the Public Service, banks, insurance companies, and

Electoral Distr·icts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 2025

shipping lines because that work is more congenial. Who can blame them f The point is that apparently hon. members opposite decry that policy of the Labour Government, which ha£ given country children the same opportunities as the city children possess.

There is one further aspect of this matter, and that is the obvious cleavage or difference of opinion between the representatives of the Country Party and the representatives of the Queensland Peoples' Party on this issue. The representatives of the Country Party !1ave clearly shown that they favour an increased number of representatives, but thev want them a.ll f_rom country districts. Tliey forget th~ rmpo:t~nt . part played by many pcop~e m the crb~s m k_eeping farmers, pastora!Jsts, and agneultunsts generally going. '!.'hey want increased representation for the country districts and to ''let the city go h_ang.'' On the other hand, the representat~ves of the Queensland Peoples' Party, partiCularl;y: the hon. member for Windsor, cling to the rdea of equal representation. If we adopted equal representation without any regard to other circumstances it would mean as t_h~ Premier pointed out, that almost every addrtronal seat to be created would be in the ~netropolitan area. I am opposed to that rdea. If we accept this policy of equal representation and give Brisbane the additional seats, what would be the result~ Brisbane with a population of 402,000 in a total popu~ lation of something over 1,000,000, would haYe nearly half of the total representatives in this Chamber. If that were so, country p_eople and country representatives, irrespectrve of party, would, I feel, have some real cause for complaint.

Under this measure there will be nine additionnl seats to country districts and four in the metropolitan area. we shall ha.ve 24 representatives from the metropolitan area ou_t of a total of 75; in other words, only one: thrrd of the total numbers will come from the metropolitan area. If hon. members opposite are opposed to that I prefer to differ from them.

I see no need, in view of the remarks made by members opposite in the Address in Replv debate, and in view of the public statement"s by ~he Leader of the Opposition from time to trme, to attempt to justify or vindicate this measure. But I say again, looking at it in the l~ght of the explanation made by the Prem1er, that I should have no hesitation in justifying it to anyone, whether in tlw North, the West, the central or the metropolitan part of the State.

l\Ir. PATERSON (Bowen) (3.52 p.m.): I am opposed to this Bill. I agree with the Premier's criticism of the state of Queensland but I do not agree with the solution he has enunciated this morning. I agree that this State is being badly run. I agree that the policy of CPntralisation is very bad for the people of Queensland. I agree that there has been a dangerous drift to the city. But who is responsible for thaH The Government or the party of which the Premier is at present leader. They have been in power for 31 years out of the last 34 years. Who then is responsible for the drift to the city~ Who is

responsible for the fact that western distrids are languishing today~ Who is responsible for the fact that the northem parts are languishing today~ Who is responsible for the fact that there are no iron and steel works in North Queensland, or in any other part of Queensland~ Who is responsible for the fact that we are short of steel and cement in Queensland, and that therefore local authorities and the State cannot carrv on many of their public works. This Government had the power to build those industries in the North and in the Centre hut they did not do so. So while I agree with the Premier's statement of the position in Queensland I must alsCJ state that I believe it is the party to which he belongs that is responsible for that position.

The Premier states that if 1ve enrrv out the rrovisions of the Bill, that is; if we increase the representation of the ·west and the North on a basis not in proportion to population, nll will be well. Supposing that increased representation returns candidates of the same political parties as are now returned, how will that alter the situation~ The West has been returning Labour members for years. Very well, if the Labour GoYernment in the past have not looked after the West, how will the West be looked nfter any better if the governing party have three more members from the West~ I do not blame the members from the West; I blame the whole party. In fact, western and northern Queensland have supplied most of the Labour Premiers of this State. During the 31 years that Labour has been in power, every Labour Premier from 1915 to 1944, that is, with the exception of the three years of the Moore Government, represented the North or the Central West. The late Hon. T. J. Ryan represented a central-western electorate. The Hon. E. G. Theodore, the late Hon. W. N. Gillies, the late Hon. W. McCormaek and the Hon. W .. Forgan Smith represented northern electorates. It would seem, therefore, that this representation of those northern districts and the Central West by Labour Premiers has not been able to solve the problem that the Premier admitted does exist. There is one thing on which every member is agreed and that is that the country has been neglected compared with the city.

JUr. Hanlon: Nobody said such a thing on this side of the Committee. You and your pals over there have said it.

lUr. P A'fERSON: I kept quiet when the hon. gentleman was speaking; he can reply to me. If I said a falsehood, he can deal with it then.

~Tr. HANLON: I rise to a point of order. I did not state that the country has been neglected by this Government. That is a falsehood; the hon. member knows it is a falsehood; and I ask that he be asked to withdraw it.

1\Ir. PATERSON: The statement I made was that it has been neglected.

1Ir. HANLON: That we admitted it.

JUr. P ATERSON: That you said it.


The CHAIRlUAN: I ask the hon. member to accept the denial of the Premier.

lUr. P ATERSON: I will accept his statement. I ask him to withdraw the statement that I made it deliberately knowing it to be false. I did not. I ask for that withdrawal and I ask that the hon. gentleman be asked to accept my statement, as I have been compelled to accept his.

lUr. HANLON: The hon. member for Bowen was here when I spoke. I never said such a thing and he knows I never said such a thing. He would not believe I said such a thing, because he ~would know I would not be so dashed silly as to !'lay it. He said it quite consciously, showing that he knew it to be false.

lUr. PATERSON: I ask the Hon. the Premier to withdraw the statement he has made. I made the statement in perfectly good faith.

The CHAIR~IAN: Order! I would ask the hon. gentleman to accept the denial of the hon. member for Bowen.

JUr. HANLON: I accept the hon. member's denial, the same as I have to accept a lot of other denials.

lUr. P ATERSON: In the same way as I have been compelled to accept the hon. gentleman's denial.

The CHAIRlUAN: Order!

Mr. P ATERSON: I have just pointed out that the North has been well represented so far as Premierships of this State have been concerned; they have had Labour Premiers here for 26 of the 29 years between 1915 and 1944. We had Labour Premiers from the North and Central West, and notwithl'ltanding that we have to admit today that the country has been neglected. Whatever else the Premier's views may be, he did say the population of Brisbane is increasing.

Mr. Hanlon: It is increasing.

:ilir. PATERSON: The hon. gentleman said that industry in Brisbane has been developed. He did suggest in thil'l Chamber that a stop had to be put to this: in other words, there has to be a more rational development of industry throughout the State from the point of view of decentralisation. I agree with that, but I suggest that this Bill will not cure the evil, because, irrespective of whether we have 13, 10 or 6 representativeE1 from the North or the West, if we still have the same party in power obviously the same policy will be pursued. That policy has produced that state of affairs in the past, and if persisted in will produce the same s•ta te of affairs in the future.

I believe that we are not getting to the root of this problem. If we are to develop the State along the lines the Premier would have us believe he wants it developed, that is, on the basis of decentralisation, "-e have to change the policy which has been pursued

by the present Government. In fact, the Premier indicated that if Longreach had been the capital of some central-western 8ta.te or E1ome State with another name it would probably today have a population of 70,00_D. Now, a Labour Government have been m power most of the time since 1915, but the Premier admits that if there had been a separate State in the Central West with Longreach as the capital it would ha.-e a population of 70,000. Is that not an admission that Longreach has not such a large population becaus·e of the policy pursued by the Government~ If this Government were to pursue the policy that the Premier would have us believe would be pursued by that non-existent western State, there is no reason why Longreach should not have a population of 70,000 now. And the only conclusion we can draw is that the policy of this Government is respons1ble for the deterioration in the development in the rest of Queensland in relation to the development in Brisbane.

Now let me examine the figures the Premier gave this morning as the basis for the new zones. In the Brisbane zone the basi11 is to be 10,716 and the basis in the West is to be 4,783. That means that, if we accept that basis as the basis for democracy, we could have 31 per cent .. of the people who would exercise the controllmg vote in the community, because it means that of every 100 voters 31 voters in the West are supposed to be equal to 69 voters in the metropolitan area.

If we take the West and compare it with the southern zone we find that in the latter the basis is to be 9,538 and in the former 4,783. This would mean that 33 per cent. of the Western population would have a weight in voting power equivalent to 67 per cent. in tho southern zone.

I shall now give an illustration which will show that one of the reasons given h support of the Bill is not genuine. It has been suggested that one of the reasons is that in the larger electorates the memlier has a much greater area to cover and it is much more difficult to meet his electors. Nobody would dispute that. It is perfectly true. That is merely a recognition of the physical and geographical truth. But if that is so, surely there must be some distinction in the basis for, say, a city like Rockhampton or Townsville and a country area in either the northern or southern zone~ It cannot be said that it is any more difficult for a member to visit his electorate, say in Rockhampton or Townsville, than in a metropolitan area, except that he has to travel from the metropolitan area to these centres.

Once you get there you have to operate in only a small area. The Townsville electorate is more or less the equivalent in area of the average metropolitan electorate in Brisbane.

lUr. Hanlon: The city of Townsville is divide.iJ. into three electorates.

Mr. PATERSON: I am talking now about the Townsville electorate not the~ city of Townsville. The Premier will find that in

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electoral Distt·icts Bill. 2027

:area it is more or less approximately the same, as the average city electorate in Brisbane. If it is sound to increase the basis because the area is small, then obyiously the basis for Townsville should be totally different from the basis for the Kennedy, Herbert, Cook or any other country electorate in the North, but in the Bill there is no differentiation in that respect. The same argument applies to the Rockhampton electorate, which I understand will be in the southern zone. If it is corrc>ct that representation s1wuld be on an area basis, then I cannot see why representation in Rockhampton should have the same basis as Fitzroy, Nanango, Wide Bay or any other country electorate in the southern zone ..

So it seems to me that the reasons ac1Yancec1 by the Government contraclic.t one another. If I aece.ptecl the principle that representation should be on the basis of m·ca, then I think that there shoul<l. be separate zones for those electorates in the zones outs~'.le Brisbane that are at pre.sent comprised ;yithin purely city boundaries.

But I do not accept the zoning basis as set out in the Bill a.t all. I believe that as far as possible representation should be made on the principle of one man, one vote, and if it is necessary to provide extra assistance to cou_ntry members I clo not see why that extra assistance cannot be provided without giving any voting power to the pe:rson who is appointed to assist the country member. For instance, if the hon. member for Gregory-and I . take this example purely impersonally Without suggesting that it applies to him or not, but purely as a hypothetieal illustration-

JUr. Wanstal1: You are not suggesting the,y should have a liaison officer, are you~

lll~. P A_TERSON: I say if it is necessary to gwe him extra help, then give it to him without giving the assistant any voting power. In that ;vay we shall be abie to solve the problem of giving sufficient help to do the job ;vithout violating the principle of one man, one Yote. I am not suggesting you can work out electorates that will be based without any deviation over a continuous period on that principle because I realise that populations vary from time to time, but we shoul<l. retain as far as possible that sys,tem which gives the same basis for every electorate in the State. There should be absolutely no differentiation. I believe that if that is adopted the, problem then depends solely upon the policy of the governing party. If the governing party does not adopt decentralisation it does not matter whe,ther we retain the present electDTal basis or adopt the new basis or adopt some basis entirely different, because we shall still have centralisation.

Like some hon. members, I was amazed at the PreJnier 's attack on proportional representation because I, too, realised that it was the Federal Prime Minis.ter, who is the Federal leader of the Labour Party, who was responsible for bringing proportional representation into the Senate elections. If my memory serves 1ne correctly-I stan<l. subject to correction here, because it is a conside:rable time since I read this up-they have a system of proportional representation in Tasmania, and Tasmania has a Labour Government.

lUr. Hanlon: It has 15 per cent. each way.

JUr. P ATERSON: I say I stand subject to correction. Apparently, the Labour Party's policy on these matters can vary from State to State. Apparently 'tl1ere is no uniform policy because for years the Lrtbour Party of Victoria has assailed the basis that gives to the country greater electoral representat-ion per 10,000 people than ·the metropolitan area of Melbourne. The Lal,our Party in Victoria has always said that the reason it has not been able to alter this basis up to the prese.nt has been the existence of the reactionary Legislative Council in Victoria. If that is so, it is obvious that the Labour Partv in Victoria is opposed to the, principles set out in the zoning system in this Bill, yet "e find that the Premier in Queensland justifies the very principle that the Labour Party in Victoria has consist<mtly condemned.

Hon. E. Jll. HANLON (Ithaca-Premier) ( 4.9 p.m.) : The hon. member said that the reason why the country was not making progress was that the working people in the city had not decent humane conditions under which to work.

Then he said ex a etly the same thing in different words-Industry is developing in the city areas-and that is true, I want to contradict the statement he made that the \Vest is languishing. It was never as prosperous as it is today. Hon. members opposite are incapable of understanding simple English or are wilfully distorting what was said.

Mr. Brand: What did you say?

lUr. HANLON: I said that if there had been a State out there originally, there would be a capital city of 60,000 or 70,000 people. 'l'hat has nothing to do with the statement that the \Vest is languishing. The West is short of labour and so is the East. That is one of the troubles with the West. I should like the hon. member for IV est Moreton to take note of this-a lot of the young fellows from the West went to the war and lived amongst people who had enjoyed better standards of living than they hacl and on their return they did not want to go back to the West. There will be a shortage of labour in the West for some time. These young fellows were treated on a scale that ;>as not commensurate with the average working-class conditions of those with whom they mingled. 'That is why employees of the hon. member for \Vest Moreton would not go back to the properties they had been on.

The problem is that we are facing a growing population in the city because new industries are springing up every clay. Hon. members opposite know very well that new industries are springing up in and around Brisbane every clay of the week, ne;y companies are being formed, and the Secretary for Labour and Industry is inundated with requests for permits to build new factories and extend existing factories. The bulk of the industrialisation is centred in Brisbane. We are taking steps to prevent ·what has happened elsewhere, because whilst we have a little over one-third of the people


in the metropolitan area Victoria has 53 per cent. in Melbourne. Unless we do something to see that there is some method of giving higher representation to the country areas than we give to the city areas, inevitably the city of Brisbane will have more than 50 per cent. of the hon. members in this Parliament :md that will not be a good thing for the State of Queensland.

Almost every hon. member opposite who has spoken has agreed to the principle that there should be more members of Parliament, &ome suggesting three, others four and tive more. I call attention to the fact that as far back as 1887-the year in which I was born-the population was between 300,000 and 400,000 and the Government of the day incrrased the representation in the Legislative Assembly to 72. The number remained at 72 until 1931, when the then Government -a Government of the same political faith as hon. members opposite-had a go at altering it. 'l'hey cut the number down to 62 and took 4 seats from the sparsley populated \Vest, two seats from the Far North, and only one seat from the metropolitan area and three from the rest of Queensland. 'l'hat was the way they did it. They took four seats from the West, as against one from the metropolitan area.

Mr. :illaher interjected.

lUr. HANLON: The hon. member for \Vest Moreton cannot clean it up that way. The fact remains that they cleaned out ten seats, taking four from the western areas, the areas the pre&ent opposition pretend to be so concerned about, they took two from the North, and one from the city.

The Opposition, I repeat, have admitted the principle of more members of Parliament, the Liberal Party suggesting that the principle of one vote, one value should persist, something that will give the whole increase in seats to the metropolitan area. The Country Party members say that there should be an increa&e in the country representation l:;ut not in the representation for the West or the North but for the thickly-populated south-eastern area.

:ilir. Nicklin: We do not say that.

:ilir. HANLON: Hon. members can not have it both ways. First of all, hon. members opposite say there must be an increase in the number of seats but they must not be in the metropolitan area. They object to their being in the North and they object to their being in the West. Where should they be~ The inference is that they should be in the thickly-populated areas, which they represent.

Our population is increasing. The population on our eastern sea board and on our dairying and rich agricultural lands, from Broad Sound down, is increasing.

:ilir. Brand: Are you happy in being a Government on a minority vote~

lUr. HANLON: Would the hon. member be happy if his party were the Governmentf

:i1Ir. Brand: Are you happy in being a GoHrnment on minority vote~

Mr. HANLON: I was put here to govern on behalf of the people of Queensland. They decided the issue. His party, when governing this State, decided that he should not be one who should help in governing it.

T'he population of Queensland is increasing. The areas to which we propose to give additional representation are the areas that are not increasing, as are the south-eastern section and the metropolitan area. Some hon. members opposite stated that the population of the North was being drawn away to the cities. That is not so. What is happening is that the population here is increasing and the population of the N'orth is more or less stationary. That is why the Government have planned big decentralisation schemes that will make for population there. That is much to the discouragement of hon. members, who think there will be nothing in it for them. Some hon. members opposite say this party governs on a minority. Admittedly this party did not get a majority of all votes cast. N'either did either of the other two parties.

JUr. HILEY: He is right in that.

Mr. HANLON: No. Supposing today we were to resign or supposing, on the number of votes cast-the hon. member for Logan has repeatedly stated that a swing of 5 pe.r cent. of votes either way in 'the single electorates would make a difference of a majority or minority-

:ilir. Hiley: I think it would.

Mr. HANLON: A 5-per-cent. swing in the single seats would unseat any Government. In so many single seats the voting is so even that a swing of 5 per cent. would swing the Government out. Take it thiE way: at the last election the combined votes of the Country Party and Queensland People's Party did not reach a majority of the votes that were cast.

J\'Ir. Hiley: They exceed yours.

lUr. HANLON: Obviously. The two parties combine<l received a slightly higher vote than the Labour Party. Which party would be the GovernmenH Only one party could be the Government.

Opposition :i1Iembers: No.

:ilir. IIANLON: There could be a combined Government if both parties are prepared to say to the people, ''We are going to sell out on the principles we pledged ourseh·es to, and we arc going to be the Government.'' Both parties espoused an entirely different programme befDTe the people. The fact remains that according to the usual system of British government, with single electorates, the party with the strongest representation governs.

There is not much more I want to add, only to say that I hope hon. members will study the map. There is no map. attached to the Bill. The Bill contains only a description of the electorates. At the end of the week I got a photostat copy of the map of Queensland of which each hon. member will get a copy tomorrow. They can then follow the zones. It is rather difficult to

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 2029<

follow the area of the zones from the descriptions given by the Surveyor-General of their areas. The zones are fixed but if Parliament likes it can raise the representation of any zone according to the population in it. If a big development takes place in one zone and not in another there can be a redistribution in that zone and not in another.

The Bill is worth studying and each hon. member tomorrow will get a photostat copy of the map giving the boundaries of the zones so that he can follow the boundaries easily. If Parliament thinks there should be a variation of the zones it can make it but today the Government are making thes~ suggestions.

lUr. W ~N~TALL (Toowong) ( 4.21 p.m.) : The admissiOn by the Premier that the Government are in power with a minority of the total votes is the first time in my memory that we have had admitted that obvious fact. I reinforce the Premier's statement; it is long overdue. The Premier went on to point out that no single party on this side got a majority of the total votes, and_ t~e two parties combined did not get a maJOrity of the total votes cast either. That has r,wthi_ng to do with the question. The questiOn IS: how many seats were obtained by the parties in respect of the total votes they got~ On page 25 of the Queensland Year Book for the year 1947 we find that the Labour Party obtained a total of 272,103 votes for a return of 35 electorates the Country Party polled 119,145, for whi~h it got 14 seats, and the Queensland Peoples' P_arty polled 164,04? _votes, for which it got nme seats. In addition there was a jointly endorsed Queensland Peoples' Party and Coun.t~y Party. candidate, making a total for the JOmt parties of 287,237 votes, showing a surplus over Labour of 15,134. In return for 287,000 votes the combined parties obtained 23 seats. There is a glaring discrepancy· wherein lies the grave injustice of the diB: tribution.

JUr. Power: You did not get enough votes in the seats you won.

llir. WAN STALL: There is the point~lt~ough the Labour Party is down 15,000, It IS . up by 12 seats. There, despite the Premier's attempt to camouflage it lies the evil of the position. '

The Secr.etary for Public Works interjected that we did not get enough votes in the s~mts we w?n· Let me give some of the majorities by whiCh members of his party won, and see where we stand. There are three sitting n:embers of the Labour Party whose majorities are less than lOO; there are four whose majorities range between 100 and 300 and another four whose majorities range between 350 and 500. That means that 11 members on that side enjoy a majority of less than 500; yet the hon. gentleman claims that we did not get enough votes in the seats we got. The figures I have quoteil show that the narrow victories were obtained on their side and not on our side. On this side there were one or two with narrow majorities, but on the other side there were 11.

The Premier made a statement that was entirely contrary to fact-that members of our party want to see an increase in metropolitan seats but none in the country. That is untrue. The attitude of our party was stated by our leader when he made it clear that he regarded the principle of one vote, one value as being a beacon towards which we should steer, but not slavishly. He gave full recognition to the tolerant factors indicated by the Premier as reasons why his party was abandoning the principle. He said he would not go as far as the Premier in turning away from that beacon. It is not a statement that we want the seats in the metropolitan area. Our attitude, as stated by our leader, is that we recognise t~e nec.essity for an adjustment of quotas m wluch proper attention should be given to the sparsely populated areas of the State.

Mr. HANLON: If I misunderstood the hon. member I am sorry. I understood the hon. member to say that one quota should suffice and 20 per cent. rise or fall should make up for the allowance ~f the country _or metropolitan areas. If I misunderstood lmn I am sorry.

Mr. WAN STALL: He did not say that. I accept the Premier's assurance. I am not heated about the matter; it is a case of correcting the wrong impression.

A point was made by the hon. member for Bowen that I also made in my notes and that was that a good deal of the trouble that the Premier speaks about in the adjustment of the population of the State is due to the policy of his Government over the past 30 years. That assertion is irrefutable. The development of a country can be attributed only to the policy an<l administration of the Government who have obtained control over that country for a long period, such as this Labour Government have had over Queensland .. The Labour Government claim credit for everything of virtue that happened in this State for the past 30 years but they must also assume responsibility for any condition of evil that obtains in the State today.

It was stated by the Premier that the metropolitan area is growing in population whereas the remainder of the State is static. That is not the position at all, as was disclosed in the 194 7 census. That position obtained in North Queensland as the Premier stated, but in the vast area of inland Queensland the population is on the downgrade. And the growth in the metropolitan-city area, if it was accompanied by a position of no change at all in the country areas, would be bad enough, but where there is combination of both evils-the rapid increase in the size of the metropolitan population coupled with a fairly rapid decline in the population of a large belt of Central Queensland, we have a very deplorable set of conditions, which can be attributed to nothing else but the policy of the present Government and their predecessors during the last 30 years. I need not waste breath concerning that because it is irrefutable. He would be a rash man who· would attempt to excuse the hon. gentleman's Government when they have been in power for so long.


In an attempt to check this evil the present Government have seized the opportunity of ·doing themselves a bit of good. They have adopted the old slogan that it is an ill wind that blows nobody any good. Taking advantage of the opportunity presented by the ·entirely disproportionate addition of populat.ion in Queensland and in the electorates the ·Government have hit upon this happy device for entrenching themselves in power for many years to come but at the same time presenting to the people a bold front as champions ·of democracy. The Government, in presenting this Bill, have attempted to save their face; rnther, should I say, the Labour Government are attempting to san• both their faces in this Bill.

Let us hearken back to an article that appeared in the Brisbane ''Courier-Mail'' a fe\\· days after the last State election two ,vears ago. The article is headed, ''Labour worried by narrow win.'' The article comTnenres-

'' A swing of another 1,000 \'Otes coultl have put Labour out of power in Queensland. Realisation of this position is worrying Labour leaders.' '

'The article proceeds to mention a number of ·iletails concerning the worries of the Labour Party in regard to the result of the elections. Realising that it was necessary to bring :about some adjustment in the electoral boundaries the Labour Party, still frightened as they were after the 1947 elections, and terrified at the prospect of the next electim1, particularly because of the maladministration of their party in Canberra and the absolute disregard by that party of every principle of democracy-a party that of course is part

:and parcel of this party, and which, if I may use the phrase, enjoys the tolerance of every member of the front bench over there, in·cluding the Premier, had to do something to make a proper job of keeping itself in power in the next elertion. So it hit on this happy device.

But let us see how it will work. It is put fon\·an1 as a genuine attempt on the part of the Government to help the under-privileged people of the far inland areas of western and northern Queensland. Here I challenge the <Validity of the argument put forward by the Premier that the contemplated redistribution will he! p the rural dweller. vVhen set against the facts it is found to be an entirely false . argument. According to the Bill, there are to be four zones. For the time being we can leave the metropolitan zone at one side. Zone No. 2 comprises the coastal strip to just south of lvfackay and inland to somewhere about Dalby.

In this area there are at the moment 25 seats, which are to be increased to 28, namely-

Albert, Fassifern, Warwick, Cunningham, West Moreton, Toowoomba, East Toowoomba, Ipswich, Bremer, Aubigny, Stanley, -Murrumba, Nanango, Wide Bay, Cooroora, Gympie, Dalby, Maryborough, Isis, Bundaberg, Port Curtis, Rockhampton, Keppel, Fitzroy and Mirani. The seats in that area are io have a quota of 9,536.

Looking at the existing enrolments of those seats, it becomes blatantly obvious that the only areas in which new seats can be created in that zone-and I want hon. members to mark these areas• particularly -are in and around Toowoomba, East Toowoomba, Ipswich, Bremer, and Murrumba. It may be possible in the Maryborough area, too, 'or in the Bundaberg district. They are the only parts where you can carve out an electorate and give it a quota of 9,500-odd. You cannot do it in the other areas except by changing the boundaries and altering the names of the electomtes. The position is that the rural dwellers are not going to get any better representation in that zone; the people who are going to get better representation in that zone are the "rural dwellers" in the provincial cities I have mentioned.

That position is repeated in Zone No. 3. Three new seats are to be made there. There are at present ten, and they are

Mackay, Bowen, 1\:l:undingburra, Kennedy, Townsville, Ha·bert, The Tableland, Cairns, Cook, and Carpentaria.

Their quota is to be 7 ,532. In order to illustrate the point I am making, the enrolments for those electorates are-

1\:l:ackay . . . . . . . . . . . 12,000 and a few Mundingburra ........... Over 12,500 Kennedy .............. Nearly 11,500 Cairns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nearly 13,000

and all the rest are down round 9,810. In this area the quota is 7,500 and I repeat that the only places in that zone where new seatEJ can be carved out are in parts of Mundingburra, Kennedy, Townsville, Cairns and adjacent areas. Again you will have the position that the only people who wm have more members of Parliament will be the dwellers in the main provincial cities, while the rural dwellers will get no benefit whatever.

The only part of the State where the Premier's argument has any validity is in Zone 4, which is the far-western zone rompriS'ing the electorates of-

Charters Towers, Gregory, \Varrego, Maranoa, Carnarvon, Normanby, and Barcoo.

They are to have an average quota of 4,783. That area has no very big towns or provincial cities, so that there the rural dwellers will have extra representation .

Taking the scheme all round, the figures I have quoted and the analysis of the areas in which it is possible to create new seatsyou cannot create them where the population does not exist-are those areas either in or lying closely adjacent to the big provincial cities along our coast. So the principal argument put forward by the Government in order to camouflage this Bill and present it to the people as one that is designed to improve the working of democracy in this State ancl to improve the lot of the distant country dweller has been shown to be entirely specious.

That fact alone should double the suspicion that has already seeped throughout Queensland on the Labour Government's motives

Electoral Districts Bill. [8 MARcH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 203!

in introducing this Bill in all the circum· stances in which they have done, particularly when one remembers some of the other things that the Labour Government have done in the past few months, particularly when one sees the inconsistency between the action of the Labour Government in that connection and their protestations of desire to help the rural dweller in this case.

Look at the Government's policy in connection with local government. ·I do not propose to traverse the whole field but I wish to make the point that there have been a number of amalgamations of shires over recent months.. I do :10t suggest that every one of those IS undesuable or indefenS'ible · ! merely wish to illustrate that the polic3· IS to reduce the number of representatives of country people on local authorities.

lUr. Power: They are different circumstances altogether.

lUr. W ANSTALL: It all depends upon one's political philosophy. If it is purely a question whether the

co~ntry people should have better representation, I say that the vast majority of political problems that affect them in their daily lives concern matters of local O'Overnment There is the inconsistency on the "'part of the. Government.

.lUr. Power: Local authorities cannot giVe the people amenities.

~~~ •. WAN STALL: It is not a case of amembes at all. How can more members of Parliament provide more amenities for the P.eople f The whole thing shows the inconSistency of th(l Government's approach; it shows that there is every reason to suspect the Government in this matter. Let me deal with the point made by the Secretary for Public Works, Housing and Local Governn;ent, with whom I have been carrying on a httle exchange of words. He interjected during the speech of the hon. member for Fassifern along these lines-"What about abolishing the Opposition f''

~Ir. Power: It would be a good idea.

lUr. WAN STALL: He repeats it.

Mr. Power: We do not propose to do it.

lU:.;. W ANSTALL.: The Secretary for Pubhc Works, a semor member of this Governmen~ and a gentleman holding a senior portfolio, puts forward in this Chamber that he thinks it would be a good idea to abolish the Opposition. All I can say is that his idea is by no means original, because a gentleman by the name of Schickelgruber, commonly called Hitler, beat him to it a long time ago. He not only expressed the desire but carried the desire into effect. J osef Stalin has the same ideas as the Minister. If this Bill is proceeded with and put into force in accordance with its apparent contents, as outlined by the Premier, it will go a long way towards abolishing not only this Opposition but any Opposition in Queensland, and therein lies the grave ev~l. I am grateful to the Secretary for Pubhc Works for letting the cat out of the bag in such a way-one of the objects of

the Bill is to abolish the Opposition and hinder the Opposition and thus frustrate the free expression of the people's will. So far as the Opposition are concerned, it does not matter two hoots. I -do not care whether I am a member of Parliament or not; but bound up in the question is that if you abolish the Opposition you are abolishing the expression of the free will of the people. That is the point. That is why I oppose the measure. r t will lead to the frustration of the people's will.

It is possible for the present Government to be in power on a minority of votes, under the present set-up. The chances of that will be increased manifold under the proposed BilL The position is revealed by the Premier when he spoke of Czechoslovakia, saying that tlw Communist Party was able to seize the reins of government. That militant minority party has done that in every country where it has been in power. Every step that the Government or Parliament takes which makes it easier for a minority Government to be saddled upon the people of Queensland is playing into the hands of the Communist Party.

I do not approach the question from the same point of view as does the Secretary for Public Works. It is not a question of which party will be the Gove.rnment. Any law that puts in a minority party-a party that is badly in the minority-as the Government, is bad electoral law. T·he lesson concerning Czechoslovakia, as pointed out by the Premier, illustrates the point I am making, namely, that minority government is l)ad for a democracy, and we should turn our backs on it. Instead of introducing legislation to make it possible for a minority Government to come into power we should introduce laws to enablethe proper and fruitful expression of the people's will at the ballot box.

JUr. BURROWS (Port Curtis) (4.45 p.m.): The point that the Opposition seems to be so afraid of is that the Government can by legislation entrench themselves in office for an indefinite period. As I said before, their memories are short.

~Ir. Sparkes: I will show you that later on.

When by an accident of the ballot box the· party represented by hon. members ~pposite obtained control of the Government m 1929 it immediately set out to exploit the theory that by a redistribution of electorates they could make its members safe for life. It was not a matter of policy; it was a matter of redistribution. If you analyse the redistribution made by that pernicious Government and see how viciously it was made and then analyse the results at a subsequent election and see what the people thought of it, I am sure that every member of the Opposition would admit that only one thing counts and that is policy. Under a democracy no Government can afford to be vicious and mean. The Opposition will be enjoying their seats, which will be upholstered many times beforethey enjoy the office of government, because they espoused a policy which is mean and: lousy.


We will get back to this cock and bull story a bout a minority Government occupying the Treasury benches. Let us examine the figures. On the figures submitted the Labour Part.)• got 43 per cent. of the votes cast at the last election.

lUr. Wanstall: And 35 seats.

)Jr. BURROWS: The Country Party got 23 per cent. of the votes.

iUr. Wanstall: No.

lUr. BURROWS: The hon. member even rows about the figures. The A.O.B. 's or any othe.r par'ty got 35 per cent. Look at the position logically. One of the parties had to be the Government. Supposing one went along to someone who did not know which party got the greater percentage of votes and said, ''There are two parties, and then there is a mixed breed ; one of those parties or the mixed breed must be the Government; which will it beF' No matter whom you appealed to he would logically answer, ''The party that got the biggest percentage of votes. ' ' rr 0 further strengthen that argument he might add, ''The one that got the greatest number of seats.'' Whatever rule is applied, the Labour Party should be on the Treasury benches. That is logical.

The hon. member who just resumed his seat obtained from his political Bible, the "Courier-Mail," the statement that had they got another 1,000 votes something would have happened. That reminds me of the story that if the little dog had not stopped to look around, or something like that, he would have caught the hare. (Laughter.) The "Courier-Mail" did not say, "If we had got another 100 votes the hon. member for l\Iaree would have lost his seat.' ' It only puts this one argument forward, which is consistent with its policy of being one-sided. That is why the Opposition will continue to occupy the Opposition benches for many years to come.

Enthusiastic "Hear, hears" came from the Opposition benches when the hon. member for Bowen attacked the Government today.

~Ir. Hanlon: He is one of their supporters now.

)lr. BURROWS: Of course he is. The members of that party know the collusion that exists between those two parties. The hon. member for Bowen attacked the Government in certain places because no iron and steel works had been established. No-one knows better than he that there would have 1Jeen iron and steel works if the Labour Dovernment had ndt been jammed by the financial interests in London. The hon. member for Bowen said also no cement works were established by the Government. If M:r. Forgan Smith, when he was head of this Government, had not encouraged the Darra cement works, its operations would have ceased long ago. Hon. members opposite who are shareholders in that concern kno.w that fact. One of the greatest dangers that

-threatened the Darra works in 1932 and 1933 was the free-trade policy that Lord Bruce of Melbourne, then Mr. Stanley Melbourne Bruee, and his big importers followed.

I know that we could land cement in Gladstone at about 1s. a bag cheaper than we could buy Darra cement, but Forgan Smith issued an order that priority had to be given to the Darra cement works. If the Government had not taken that action our cement position today, bad as it is, would be infinitely worse. The hon. member for Bowen might have been looking for the applause of members opposite; anyhow, he certainly got it.

If there were Communists in power no load bonus would be paid to the miners at Mount I sa; it would be worked by slaves, more than likely by members opposite (laughter). We should he all there. Bad as members opposite think the Labour Government are, they are still a long way better than the Communists.

I am not going to accuse Country Party members individually of opposing this proposal. I sincerely sympathise with them. 'l'his proposal is consistent with the Constitution of Norway. Norway has always been held up in this Chamber as a country having a democracy from which we could learn much. :!V[y remarks appear in '' Hansard'' regarding the fact that it was compulsory in Norway for the country districts to elect twice as many representatives to the legislature as the city electorates. Members opposite taunted me by suggesting that I was not game to advocate that policy. There is no need for me to advocate it today; here it is introduced by the Government. We have had members opposite wanting to deny the country people the additional representation but individually they know and believe that that is the only way that the country interests will get a fair go; in other words, it will prevent country interests from being swamped by city intere,sts, which would ;happen if we based representation on numbers.

J)Jr. Luckins: Are you the father of this Bill~

Mr. BURROWS: No, and I should hate to be the father of the hon. member. (Laughter.)

The Bill is a further example of the sympathy of the Labour Party with the country interests. 'rhey are not a Queen Street Government; they are not bound by interests that dominate and cause members to vote one way and think another way. It is because the Labour Government have introduced something that will give equality of representation throughout this State and will not allow the city interests to dominate the position that members opposite have been directed to oppose it.

lUr. CHALK {East Toowoomba) {4.56 p.m.): The Premier's remarks on the introductory stage about equal representation met with agTeement by me, and I believed that perhaps he had something to place before the people whereby we should be able to improve the general representation of our electorates. First he endeavoured to inform us that the ideal manner of representation was equal representation; in other words, that one vote from the country should be the equivalent of one vote from the city. In that I agreed entirely with him.

Electoral Di.strictB Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electoral Districts Bill. 2033

'l'hen he went on to explain that the hon. 1nember for Logan represented something like 18,000 electors, and the number in some of the northern electorates was only about 6,000.

I concluded that perhaps there was some solution that could be advanced to justify the alteration of our present set-up. However, as the Premier unfolded the pages of the Bill he disclosed that it was already established and agreed upon by Caucus that this State was to be divided into zones and that in the metropolitan area the basis on which the electorates were to be divided would be 24 seats, with an approximate representation of 10,716 votes. The hon. gentleman then went on to refer to a southern coastal belt which in reply to an interjection he mentioned would extend as far as Dalby; that there would be 28 seats in that area, and that the representation would be approximately 9,536 electors. He then went on to tell us thut in the northern area it was proposed to establish 13 seats where there are now 10, and that the representation would be approximately 7,852. Finally, there was to be a western division on which the representation would be 4,783 Yotes.

That is the basis on which it is proposed to divide this State into 75 electorates, but there is a point I wish to raise particularly: I cannot see how that basis will provide a hetter representation of the people than we have at present, and I propose to deal first with that part of the area to which the Premier has referred as the southern coastal strip, that part which he tells us will extend west approximately as far as Dalby. Taking a quick glance at the figures of the population of these places, such as the city of 'l'oowoomba-and I bring in the area of Dalby-it will be found that it is proposed to set up electorates upon the basis of 9,536 ,-oters. New areas to come into existence will be round what might be termed the cities along the coast. I have no doubt that we shall :find an electorate set up taking in mainly the township of Dalby and there will be one small electorate there of those people who today are exercising their franchise in the Dalby electorate but those people just outside Dalby will be cut off and probably be in some electorate with a centre miles away.

Now let us look into the position as it :1ffects Toowoomba. Probably two industrial seats will be established in the Toowoomba :1rea, and the people who today represent the country area in my electorate will be disenfranchised from the present position they are in. They will have to be put into some other area, and an area will probably be set up below the Range. The representation that the people of East Toowoomba will get, for instance, will be that some people will be cast out of the area and placed much further away than they are at present from their representative.

Along the coast no doubt we shall :find electorates on the basis of 9,536 springing up within the areas in the closely populated

1949-3w

areas, and in certain cities along the coast there will be established additional electorates.

But the Premier has told us that the idea of establishing country electorates is to give better representation to country people. The hon. gentleman failed to point out or to drew the attention of this Committee to the fact that every part of the State beyond the small metropolitan areas is reclassified by him as country areas. Are the people of Townsville, Rockhampton and Toowoomba to be classified as being country electorates~ They are people who are working industrially towards the development of this State, and in such cities. We shall :find that the three extra electorates in the southern area vvill spring up, not in the country parts of the area, as the Premier has said; rather all the new electorates will spring up round the cities I have mentioned.

Now let us take the northern area. We are told that it is to be cut down to 7,582 electors Can anyone convince this Committee that by app~inting an extra member in the North, for instance in the Gregory electorate, the distances will be such that an elector will not still be far from his member?

The Premier has said it will improve conditions in the West. I fail to see how three extra members of Parliament are going to improve conditions in the West, how their app9intment will mean bringing to this State the iron, steel, wire and other items required for the development of the State. We all know quite well that the position in the country is deteriorating not because of the representation by members of Parliament but because this Government have not been awake to the position that has arisen, because they are not doing all within their power to bring to this State those much-needed supplies that He essential to our development.

Again, how will increased representation stop the drift to the cities to which the Premier has made reference W How can a member of Parliament prevent people from coming into the city where good conditions are provided~ It is this Government's duty to see that the State is developed and that amenities are taken to the people ·outside. I cannot see how one or even 13 more mem hers of Parliament will improve conditions but I do know that 13 extra members will mean a considerable increase in cost to the people. Their election will mean a considerable increase in the cost of Government. It will mean that certain of the handouts made to this Government bv the Chifiey Government will have to be spent not in production but on costs for the increased members of Parliament, who cann8t possibly improve the position.

We all know that what this country needs at present is greater development of onr agricultural pursuits and increased supplies of those essential commodities to which I have referred. To come into this Chamber under a camouflage, as the Premier has done, and introduce a Bill saying that the extra representation is necessary to improve the conditions of the people in the West is entirely


wrong. The extra representation in the zones to. whi~h I have referred will go to those distn~ts In wlut:h the great bulk of the people I·eside now.

When the Salaries Bill was before this House1 ~id any hon. member say that he was not g1vmg the best possible representation that it 1yas possible to give~ Did we hear anyone saymg that he could not fulfill his obligations~ Every hon. member was prepared to admit .that it was possible for him to represent h1s area but the extra cost .of living and the. numero11:s claims made upon him justified an mcrease m salary. At that time we heard nothing to the effect that the areas represented by those hon. members were to be reduced.

We must look at this Bill in. the light in which I believe it has been introduced by the Labour Party, not in the light in which the Premier has camouflaged it. It is assuredly being introduced by the Labour Party to ensure their return at the next election, irrespective of the wishes of the majority of the people. As a result we shall have an even worse position than we have today. It has been admitted already by the Premier that the Government were returned on a minority vote.

If we are going to reduce our electorates to the figures mentioned, it is quite plain that after the next election Labour will have many more representatives but many fewer actual voters in favour of the Labour Party's policy. I believe that we must fight this Bill and point out to the people of Queensland the conditions under which it is being introduced.

The. hon. member for Port Curtis spoke on the Bill, but I want to remind him that in condemning the speech made by the Communist member for Bowen he was condemning the very party that supported him and brought about his election to this Chamber. That is the position as he knows it.

By reducing the electorate figures, as the Premier indicated, we shall get a minority Gov~n;ment, a_n~ we could easily be put into a similar positiOn to that of the countries the hon. member for Toowong spoke of. The people of Queensland must realise that this Bill is being introduced not with the idea of better representation but rather for the return of a Labour Government at the next State elections.

. Mr. DECKER (Sandgate) (5.10 p.m.): I nse to register my protest against the introduction of a Bill to increase the number of members of Parliament. The Premier said he had not heard anybody suggest that the increase was not justified. I think that the 62 existing members of this Chamber would give full representation to the State if the electorates were properly defined.

:ru:r. Gair: The hon. member for Logan said he could understand an increase.

Mr. DECKER: I think the metropolitan area is a fair index as to what should be done in a redistribution of seats. Some fOlectorates have more electors than the law liays they should-Sandgate is one-but

I do not think there is an hon. member representing a metropolitan area who will say that his electorate is too big for him to handle. I could handle 15,000 electors comfortably, and I think every member of a metropolitan electorate could care for 20,000 electors comfortably if he was not lazy, or had enough energy to carry out his job. It is all very well to draw a smoke screen over the position by talking about the heavy duties of hon. members. I do not neglect any of my duties, and I can say truthfully that my electorate could be enlarged and I could handle it comfortably. What do we find is the position in regard to Federal members of Parliament~ How can a Federal member possibly represent 40,000 people if we say it is impossible for a State member to look after more than 10,0001

The position is absolutely absurd; elections are becoming a farce. They had almost reached that stage already, but now elections will be farcical. It is a disturbing position, particularly when we look at what has happened to other countries, in some of which elections have become farcical because one power allows its voters to support only one particular party. Russia for example. Here we have detached ourselves from Communism, but at the same time we are introducing legislation that I can honestly say is designed to do away with elections. Admittedly elections will be held, but they will become farcical because the result will be assured before the election takes place, and there is no opportunity for the people to displace those in power, in power through jugglery and trickery in passing the election laws.

It is proposed to add four city members. We could wipe them out and make the quota 14,000 and nobody could object to that. After a study of electoral-booth figures in each ar<>a for the city of Brisbane, I see what is happening.

If the quota in the electorates were increased to 14,000 the Labour Party would lo101e seats in Brisbane. Its members know that. On the other hand, if the quota was decreased the same position would result. There is no doubt about that. The present scheme has been well thought out.

. Now we come to the reason why the extra nme seats are spread over the rest of the State. They are to offset any loss the Gov· ernment might sustain in the city electorates.

~Ir. O'Shea: As an ex-country member, wouldn't you say it is more difficult to represent a country electorate r

Mr. DECKER: I am sick of these intoxicated interjections.

~Ir. O'SHEA: Mr. Mann, I rise point of order. The. hon. member the statement that I am intoxicated. that the hon. member withdraw.

to a made I ask

1\Ir. Barnes: But you admit you drunk.

are

The CHAIRMAN: Order!

1\Ir. O'SHEA: I ask that the hon. member withdraw that remark.

Elec«Jral Districts Bill. [8 MARCH.] Electora /District8 Bill. 2035

)Ir. BARNES: I would not withdraw it.

'fl1e CHAIR]}IAN: The hon. member will do what he is asked. He must obey the Chair.

IIIr. Barnes: Rats!

Jir. DECKER: I withdraw.

The time has come when these stunts have to stop. This is a stunt to incr·ease the r·~presentation of the country as against the erty to ensure that the Government maintain their _majority. It is all very well for the Prer~uer to get up and put a little lollyroa tmg over the proposal. It is a sort of low confidence trick to put it in the way he has. There is not an hon. member who cannot analyse the figures in the metropolitan area, nor is ther<: one who does not know that what I say is right, that if the quotas of the metropolitan seats are increased or decreased it would tend to weaken Labour's representation. The safety valve is in giving an additional nine seats to the country.

Let us examine those nine additional se.ats. The Premier does not say where the:y 'nll be. He knows very well that not more tl~an thr~e will be in the rural areas. They •nll be m the popular cities on the coastal .strip. T~e proof of the pudding will be m t~e eatmg, when we get the electoral boundanes at the next election.

It is time that the people were warned of the farcical position we are facing. Tlre m;ly way w~ can obviate it is not to proceed wrth the Brll: .Why not appoint an independant commrssron to make recommendations as to where these additional seats should be allotted~ This scheme has been hatched in the minds of Caucus and Caucus schemers. The divisions as prescribed in thiR Bill hatched in Caucus, will be handed to th~ commission to be appointed and its members must keep within the bounds of its terms of reference. The whole matter should h~ (~ealt with from the other angle; a comnusswn should be appointed to recommend the new boundaries and Parliament should legislate . on the commission's report. The whole thmg would then be handled in an honourable way. The people will be tired of the continual scheming that goes on within nw Labour ranks.

:Jir. LUCKINS (Maree) (5.20 p.m.): I sho~1ld not like ~hi~ motion to be put without hanng a word 111 rt. I was rather surprised when I read in the Press that it was the intention of this legislature to increase the r.umber of seats.

Mr. Gair: The leader of your party expressed no surprise.

".'\Ir. L UCKINS: I was surprised. The Government should have informed hon. members at the beginning of the session that this measure was part of their contemplated programme for the year; this session is only a continuation of the one that began last year. This Bill was not mentioned in the Governor· 's Opening Speech.

These surprises disturb the public very much. The public ask why is it that representation on local governing bodies is being continually decreased, notwithstanding that they play an important part in the development of this State, and why the representation in this Chamber is being increased.

It is on the agenda that we are going to amalgamate a number of s·hires, thus lessening the number of repre.sentatives in those shires to something like one-half or onequarter of the present number, yet local government plays a prominent part in the development of the State. On the other hand we have 62 members in this Chamber and the Government want to increase the number. I am not averse to adequate representation for all parts of the State, but I think 62 members is a full complement for the State of Queensland. I may look at it from a different angle to other members, but I do say that the metropolitan area has 20 seats out of 62, virtually one-third. The population of the metropolitan area is virtually one-third of that of the State. Parliament House is situated in Brisbane, as well as most of the other government offices•; the officials are nearly all here, too, and that makes it easier for metropolitan members to do their work. I am in favour of cutting out some of the metropolitan seats and adding more elsewhere, especially in northern and central Queensland.

I have spoken on many occasions about the neglect of the development of the northern parts of the State. The Premier has called public attention to it, and the Commonwealth military advis•ers and others have done likewise. As members of Parliament, we should see that development is brought about in every part of Queensland. I am disappointed that Northern Queensland has not had the same consideration as the southern part. If you neglect one part of the State you neglect the State generally. State economy must be uniform. If we are to live up to our responsibility as citizens and members, it is the duty of the Government to see that such development takes place from Thursday Island to the N.S.W. border and from South Amtralia to the seaboard.

If we go back a numr>er of years we realis·c the extent of the activities associated with mining 30 or 40 years ago. Will anybody deny that mining has played a very important part in the development of this State~ It was the forerunner of pioneering works throughout the length and breadth of the State, but during the last 30 years it has been badly and sadly neglected. We have tremendous mineral wealth, but for some reason or other it has been sadly neglected.

}[r. Gair: Where have the investors been?

i)[r. J,UCKINS: We do not want to look to investors. If we have an article and we investigate it and make it known they will come from many parts of the world seeking our materials and minerals. We have


cut down our forests and made millions of pounds out of them. It is a reflection on this State that the best of our woods are not manufactured here but are sent overseas and down to Victoria to be manufactured.

The CHAIRJUAN: Order! I hope the hon. member will connect his remarks with the matter before the Committee.

Mr. LUCKIN,S: I am dealing with the development of the State and what could be done with better representation by members of Parliament. Many members have ne.glected the matter of the development of tins State, whereas we should all be interested in it. If we are here for the purpose of a meal ticket it is a poor look·out for the future of the State.

I will give all the help I can to develop North Queensland and Central Queensland. We have neglected the Dawson V alley. What have we done to develop Central and Northern Queensland~

A bridge has been given over the Burdekin River at Ayr, but a member of the Labour Party representing the Bowen electorate was defeated because the Government would not he~d him as regards the building of that bndge. It was only after 20 years with flood .after . flood taking place and 'public attentiOn bemg drawn to it, that this bridge was begun.

We sit in this Chamber idly year after year doing virtually nothing for the development of Queensland. I have seen representatives coming to this Chamber but they have failed after a number of ye~rs. I do not make any distinction. They have come from all political parties and put forward proposals for the development of Queensland. For instance, wp.at did 'a former Secretary for Agriculture and Stock do to develop North Queensland so far as tropical fruits were concerned~

Mr. Haul on: Are you dealing with papaws~

lllr. LUCKINS: No, the growing of rice. lllr. Haul on: What has that to do with

electoral districts~

Mr. L UCKINS: It is the representation for Northern Queensland that has been neglected. Every member of Parliament must speak not only for his own electorate but for the development of the State. Unless a programme for the development of the State is set out and one that will satisfy me the Government will not get my vote for the appointment of an additional 13 members to this Assembly.

I am a Queenslander and interested in Queensland. Queensland is the only country whose development I care about, and the people of my electorate sent me here to represent them-not only to represent them but to help in the development of this State. The Premier has just returned from a trip overseas. I am pleased that he made it because he has returned greatly enlightened

on the potentialities of this State. We have tried to develop it, but what has happened to all our endeavours and schemes~ I know, as you know, Mr. Mann, that at election after election balloons are floated and promises are made as to what is to be clone for the development of northern and central Queensland. But what has been done~ Three representatives in the Ministry are from central Queensland, but no part of Australia is more neglected. I am ashamed to have to admit that my home town, Mt. Morgan, which has been responsible for bringing millions of pounds to the State, has not yet a water supply. Millions of money was sent from that mine to London, but nothing came back. It is essential to have prosperous industries because whether they are mining or industrial the revenue comes to the Government in the form of taxation and other avenues. The least we can do is to see that there is proper representation, properly directed to the development of this State.

The Secretary for Public Lands, at one time Secretary for Health and Home Affairs, told me that a great concern of the Government was the development of the aboriginals. But does this Bill include any provision under which the aboriginals or half-castes will have any voice in the government of the country that was taken from them but so badly neglected during the past 60 years1

Mr. PLUNKETT (Albert) (5.32 p.m.): I have listened very attentively all day to the discussion on this Bill and most of all did I listen attentively to the Premier on its introduction. He stated that its object was better representation for the people of Queensland. But this Bill will not bring that about. Its proper designation would be ''a Bill to make greater provision for the ,safety of the Labour Party in the Queensland Parliament.''

I have been wondering how the figure 13 as the number of additional members has been arrived at and after consideration I have come to the conclusion that an increase of 13 members wi1l give to the Labour Party in the future a greater advantage than they had in the past.

An additional reason given for the increase in numbers was the greater work placed on members of Parliament. I think we will all agree that the work of a member of Parliament has increased, but who has been responsible for this increase~ Nothing other than the legislation of the Labour Government with their controls, permits and all that 'sort of thing. The position now is such that a member's work is never done.

When mention is made of increased work on members, I begin to wonder why . the Labour Government have been so anxwus to give the Federal Government so much of their work in the last couple of years. The increased work argument carries no weight with me. Nor does that as to the growth in population, because the increase has taken place in the cities. When the Premier spoke this morning about how the North had been


neglected, and said it was in the interests of the security of the whole of Australia that it be developed and populated, I agreed with him, but on examining the whole position I am forced to the conclusion that he was merely indulging in good political talk.

The extra services may mean more work, but I do not think we need another 13 members. We were able to carry on through the difficult war period, even when the Government seemed to be looking for work by controls for which there was no need. That being so, I cannot see how another 13 members will reduce the amount of work or lighten the burden present members are carrying now.

A new principle is being introduced into this electoral legislation. It may be argued that there is need for an adjustment of seats, or a redistribution of present seats, but the zoning system is new, and indicates to me that under it the Labour Party will be given a start of 40 yards in a lOO-yards political race. If that is the democracy under which we are to live, it would seem that political expediency is to take pride of place over everything else.

I was pleased to hear the Premier say that no member could find fault with giving the country people more representation in Parliament. The country people are the wealth-producers of the nation, and unless we encourage them and help them by giving them a decent franchise that will enable them ~o elect !he people they want to represent them 1~ Pa~hament we are doing them a great disserviCe, and I suggest that this Bill will do them a great disservice.

It has been suggested that the present Government obtained office by a minority vote. That may be so, but I have always understood that the majority should rule, and whatever happens we should so adjust the seats as to ensure that the majority shall rule. I have no hesitation in saying that the present Government must face the next election in fear and trembling. Their action in various matters in the last two or three years has brought them into disfavour. Everybody has had an OJ?portun~ty of .realising the clanger and destructiOn facmg h1m under Socialism.

In Zone 1, we find that there will be approximately 253,000 voters. It is proposed to increase the number of members for that area by four. In Zone 2 the coastal area the approximate figures ar~ 255 000 or 2 000 more than the city figures but Z~ne 2 will' get one new member less than the city. In face of that we talk about giving the country people better representation. If 255,000 are worth an increase of only three members I want to know why 51,000 are entitled to three new members.

The whole thing is out of balance and is loaded against country interests. That is why I speak as feelingly as I do. I really think the Bill is quite wrong and that it has been loaded for a special purpose, the protection of the Labour Government in Qneenslancl.

In Zone 3 there are approximately 92,000 electors and that zone gets another three new members. Why should 92,000 get the same

representation as 255,000 ~ If anybody can argue that 92,000 people are entitled to as much increased representation as 255,000, I should like to hear the explanation. That is one of the things that justify me in saying this Bill will be of the greatest detriment to Queensland that I know of. I feel that it is to protect the Labour Government and put them in the position of, come what may they will still be the Government.

How long will that Government be a Labour or Socialist Government~ How long win it be before it becomes a Communist Government~ Many hon. members are not as honest as the hon. member for Bowen, who said straight out that he was a Communist. We know what happened in Canada and other overseas countries. I am hoping that my words will never come true but they might, if a Bill like this goes through. The Premier quoted what happened to Czechoslovakia. We know that the franchise of France has been its downfall. It has been said that a minority of Communists in Czechoslovakia dominated the Government there and I want to say that in my opinion Communists, without being in Parliament, have dominated our national Parliament in Australia.

It seems to me that the Labour Government in Queensland are running for cover by putting through a Bill which does not give a fair and equitable opportunity to the people of this country to choose whom they want and what policy they want. It is not going to do this country any good. A brand of politics that favours that sort of thing might not be in our best interests. I hope that the Bill when it comes into existence will not have the effect I expect.

Hon. E. lU. HANLON (Ithaca-Premier) ( 5.44 p.m.) : I want to say in reply that taking it by and large the contents of the Bill have been more or less accepted by most speakers. Its object is better representation in the country. Every member of Parliament would like to design his own electorate. All Parliament can do is to set out the law giving the principles of a redistribution and I think that when hon. members see the Bill they will find that there is nothing in it to be alarmed at.

I just want to assure hon. members that the idea that the purpose of the Bill is to save the Government is pure nonsense. That is the beauty of the single-seat system. Everybody knows that no matter how he may try, no representative can save himself from the people-under the single-seat system. It is the single-seat system that upsets Governments. No matter what one may do, there is no way of defeating the people in the last analysis. We should be very foolish if we entertained any other'idea. We all subscribe to the doctrine that the will of the people must prevail. The people of this country realise that it is impossible to make provision, under the present method of representation, for the welfare of this country.

Mr. :1\Iaher: Under this redistribution you will get 33! per cent. of the representatives for the metropolitan area.

2038 Electoral Districts Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Questions.

)Ir. HANLON: I am trying to get the hon. member to look at this matter from the viewpoint of the welfare of the country people, not from the welfare of any commercial interests he may have.

)Ir. Sparkes: You are looking at the deserts. There are no people there, only thousands of square miles of deserts.

)Jr. HANLON: I believe that if you attempted to take this power from the people holus-bolus you would hear from them.

1 want to point out one other thing to hon. members. There has been a great deal of talk today of the evils of minority government. I doubt whether there has been a majority Government in Britain at any time. 'There they are very lucky if 60 per cent. of the people vote at a general election. Before we introduced compu~sory voting in Queensland we were very lucky if we got more than 70 per cent. of the people to vote.

Let us look at what this Parliament represents. After all, in the last analysis, we in Parliament represent the people of the country. It is not the people who were defeated who represent the people in the eountry; it is the people who are in this (Jhamber. The Government members, the ],abour Party, represent 51.95 per cent. of the votes in the electorates where they were su0cessful, the Country Party represents 23.32 per cent., the Q.P.P. represents 19.50 per cent., a.nd the other mixturp of members represents 5 .. 23 per ce.nt. No matter how an electorate may vote it is quite easy for anyone to take ·np a list of the returns and say, ''If so-andso got 100 votes there that wouH make a difference of 200 votes and bring about a {· hange,'' or ''If someone else got 350 more ,·otes it would make a difference of 700.'' You could take these particular seats, no matter what party represented them, and say, \f a percentage of the total vote, whether it he 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 per cent., changed their allegiance that party would have been defeated. You mnst have that in single seats. That is the safety of the single-seat system. The single-seat system enables the electors to get rid of an individual member if they do not like him.

The Bill will be ready for distribution tomorrow and hon. members will have an opportunity of studying it before it is prot:ceded with any further.

Question.-That the motion (Mr. Hanlcin) lw agreed to-put; and the Committee diviclecl-

. Mr. Brown Bruce Eurrows Cl ark Collins Copley Davis Devrles Donald Duggan

,, Dunstan Farrell Foley Gair Graham Gunn Hanlon

AYES, 31 . Mr. Hilton

Jesson Jones Keyatta Larcombe Moo re O'Shea Power Smith Taylor, J. R. Theodore Turner

Tellers: Crowley Roberts

Mr. Barnes Brand Chalk Deck er Evans Heading Hiley Kerr Lucklns Macdonald Maher Marrlott

AYES.

NOES, 22.

PAIRS.

Mr. Mcintyre Muller Nicklin Patereon Plunkett Sparkes Taylor, H. B.

, Wanstall

Tellers: , Bjelke-Petersen

Low

NOES. 2.\Ir. Gledson Mr. Madsen

Ingram Pie

Resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported.

FIRST READING.

Bill presented and, on motion of Mr. Hanlon, read a first time.

The House adjourned at 5.58 p.m.

Legislative Assembly Hansard 1949

Documents

Transcript of Legislative Assembly Hansard 1949