Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Friday, 28 May 1926

Senator KINGSMILL (Western Australia) . - The statement made by more than one honorable senator during this debate, that a tariff or portion of a tariff such as that with which we are now dealing, is one of the most contentious subjects that could be brought before this or any other legislative body, is so true that the only point we appear to be prepared to agree upon is the intensely contentious nature of this measure. The consideration of a tariff is a much more important proposition in this Senate than in the other branch of the legislature.Very often we have tariffs which affect the States in different ways, and it is only on the floor of this chamber, where the small States have equal representation, that they can counteract the preponderating influence in another place of the two big manufacturing States of Victoria and New South Wales. I make that observation without the least intention of creating any State bitterness. We were asked by the Minister (Senator Crawford), when introducing the bill, to look upon this question from an Australian point of view. That is what I desire to do, but I entreat honorable senators who do not agree with the fiscal tenets I hold to remember that I too am an Australian, and that the people of Western Australia, whom I help to represent, are also Australians. Many of them are developing a huge territory. They are pioneering far away from luxurious centres of population, such as Melbourne and Sydney, and carrying on work which is very much more important to the future of Australia than, and at least as important to Australia as is the work being done in the great cities. These people should have a measure of that encouragement which it seems to be the settled policy of this Government and of the Opposition to afford to the very numerous citizens of the Commonwealth who occupy the big centres of population. Mention of the word " policy " reminds one that the policy of a party is one which, it is understood, differentiates it from that of other parties. But we have no such differentiation in Australia in connexion with fiscal matters. It may be, and, indeed, I strongly suspect that it is, from very widely differing points of view that the Opposition - the representatives of Labour - and the Nationalists - who, may I be allowed to say, represent the whole of the people - look at this matter. I do not think the motives that actuate the parties are the same, but the result has been that both parties have combined on the fiscal issue, and have concluded that a high tariff is the one that they desire. Outside, there is an even morebinding, though tacit, agreement betwen employers and employees in favour of high duties. As I have said, they have somewhat differing motives, but they arrive, unfortunately for Australia, in some respects, at the same result. My sympathies are with the members of the Tariff Board, because they are dealing with a situation for which they are not responsible. The situation has been created by a series of what I may term spasmodic, but not always well directed, efforts to establish a useful tariff. We find all sorts of anomalies with which they had to deal, which undoubtedly make their work much more difficult and more liable to criticism at the hands of those who have to work under the conditions which they create. If honorable senators consider for a moment the varying nature of the industries and of the claims that have to . be considered as being of importance to Australia,they will realize the force of my meaning. For instance, provision is made in the schedule to further protect an industry which is already well able to undersell all competitors from outside Australia, and able, apparently, to make a profit. It is asking for further protection, which apparently it does . not need. That, however, I maintain, is not a matter for the Parliament itself to deal with. Honorable senators will realize in a moment the item to which I am referring. ' I am alluding not alone to the Australian whisky distilleries, but also to the match-making industry. The Australian manufacturers are selling matches at from 11/2d. to 2d. a dozen below the price at which imported matches are being sold, and yet we find a very large proportion of the Australian population still using imported matches.

Senator Crawford - That shows what prejudice will do.

Senator KINGSMILL - I should like to have a proper definition of the word "prejudice." It usually means what the other fellow thinks.

Senator Crawford - I mean unreasonable prejudice.

Senator KINGSMILL - Exactly. I have very strong prejudices concerning certain proposals, but I do not so describe them. I refuse to recognize that they are prejudices. Some of my friends say I am a most prejudiced person ; I am not really so; it is that my friends are out of step with me. And so with respect to tariff matters. It is only by meeting together and arguing the matter reasonably, if wo can, and unreasonably if we cannot - by a sort of attrition of various minds, some hard, some soft - that we can some to a decision and frame atariff. I maintain that it is from this chamber, where there is not a preponderance of one- class of mind, where one is more apt to think of the people, and the interests of a State than of the party to which one belongs, that we are more likely to get a decent and workable tariff for the whole of Australia rather than from another place. There must be some underlying reason for the present state of affairs, which has continued for some years. We must discover that the remedy is to be found, not by using political influence or mere words to counteract it, but by following the methods of science employed in other countries. That is what this Government is bringing into being for the first time. I refer to the use of scientific methods. I am looking with pleasurable anticipation to the work that can be done in this direction by the two bodies being brought into existence - the Council of Science and Industry, and the somewhat nebulous and indefinite Commission of Migration and Development. Both of those bodies can do a great deal to mould public opinion concerning the tariff that we should be working under, and to put Australia on the same level of productive capacity as the outside world without interfering - I do not wish to see any interference - with the conditions of Australian industrialism as they exist to-day.

Senator McLachlan - A rule of more hard work would be useful.

Senator KINGSMILL - I do not blame one party or the other, but I feel that improvements in the overhead organization and the provision of up-to-date andproperly run machinery are of great importance in this connexion.

Senator McLachlan - That is not lacking at the Newcastle Steel Works, which are supposed to be the last word in organization and modern appliances.

Senator KINGSMILL - So we are always given to understand. I have heard many remarks concerning work and organization in the industrial arena, but, unfortunately, I have been the victim of so many bitter disappointments that I am inclined, somewhat late in life, to be disillusioned - to look upon statements made to me in some instances with a good deal of caution, and to have a desire to hear the other side before coming to a definite conclusion. The object of a tariff is, I take it, to create, not a healthy, fully employed, and prosperous class, but a healthy, fully employed and prosperous people. That is what we want in Australia. I hope I may say without offence that in the past the tendency has been to make two classes healthy, prosperous and well employed - the employers of labour and, later on, those employed by them. There is, however, an important third section to be considered - those who are working for themselves, who do not employ labour, and who, I maintain, are a great deal more important to Australia in the long-run than either of the classes I have mentioned. It has always been my ideal, political and practical, to see this Australia of ours a country of small holders in as great a proportion as is possible. I realize that we cannot have that altogether, but I also realize that the Australian seems to be losing that independence of character which once upon a time sent him out to look aft.eT himself, to make a place for himself in the world, to refuse to depend upon any other person for his daily bread, and to insist upon supporting himself by the work of his hands and his brains to as great an extent as he could. I fear the tendency to-day is for the Australian as soon as he reaches the years of what are considered discretion to look for some one that he can lean upon. That has not been the characteristic of the people of this country in the years past, and I hope it will not be in the years to come. It is a bitter reflection upon us as a nation that to-day we are looking to other countries for young men to settle upon our land instead of providing the means by which our own people can engage in rural pursuits. The present practice, I maintain, is encouraged to a great extent by high tariffs. I have mentioned two instances in which additional duties are being sought by Australian industries which apparently do not need further protection. Let me direct attention to one or two others. The Newcastle Steel Works to which Senator McLachlan referred is a case in point. In this connexion it is startling to find that, notwithstanding the magnificent machinery installed in those works, and the modern methods to which he alluded, in one instance their price was £14 6s. 6d. as against that of £9 19s. 3d. for British goods. Steel and iron are manufactures on which there is but a small margin, which can be overcome by a tariff that is fair and reasonable; but in this case the percentage is too enormous to be bridged in that way. The remedy has to be found somewhere else. I have often wondered whether the Tariff Board, when considering this and other public questions, has investigated the output, per man, employed . in industries here as compared with similar industries in other countries. Having done that, will it consider what is the cause of the difference in output ? We know that there is a very great difference, because it has been . alluded to very eloquently and forcibly by Senator Lynch in the admirable speech delivered by him this morning. We want to get to the root cause. I do not say that the fault is with the employees or the employers ; it lies probably between the two>. It may be due either to lack of enterprise on the part of employers in the application of improved modern methods to industry, or, on the other hand, it may be due to lack of interest, shall I say, on the part of employees in the work upon which they are engaged. Between these two causes, I suggest, lies the solution of the difficulty which should make these exorbitant tariffs no longer necessary in Australia.

Senator McLachlan - Canada's solution was piece-work.

Senator KINGSMILL - That is a fairly obvious solution. Thirty years ago America passed through just such a state of industrial trouble that Australia is going through to-day, and America found the solution in getting her work people to accept the principle of piece-work. 'Our difficulty is to get the industrialists of Australia to accept it. The industrialists of America are perhaps the most highlypaid workers in the world, they have the highest social and moral aspirations and realizations. America is in the fortunate position of being able, without the aid of a very exorbitant tariff, to manufacture and export her manufactures here at prices below those charged for local products. There is yet another point - I do not know whether it has any connexion with our present position or not - and it is that in America there is no political Labour party. I throw out the suggestion for the consideration of honorable senators.

Senator Ogden - The honorable senator will not elaborate the point?

Senator KINGSMILL - I am not prepared to do so at the moment.

Senator Needham - Does the honorable senator suggest that the tariff is a party matter ?

Senator KINGSMILL - No, I was merely pointing out - the honorable senator, I believe, was not in the chamber when I commenced my remarks - that for totally different motives both sides are supporting the tariff proposals of the Government. What those motives are I shall allow honorable senators to settle for themselves. I was remarking, when interrupted, that although America leads the world industrially and in the happiness and welfare of her people, who enjoy a uniformly high standard of living, the industrialists of that country are not represented by that ornament of the Australian parliamentary system - the political Labour party. I do not know whether it has any connexion with the question we are considering, but I leave it at that.

Senator Needham - But the honorable senator is endeavouring to show that it has a connexion.

Senator KINGSMILL - I shall try to work it out and give Senator Needham the benefit of my lucubrations at a later date.

Senator Needham - Never mind, the innuendo is quite sufficient. I am not asking for it.

Senator KINGSMILL - I understand very well why the honorable senator does not ask for it. I think now that I shall do so, and perhaps refer to certain other aspects of the political situation. The primary industries of Australia enjoy very little protection, and, unfortunately, there is not even a tendency to adopt measures for their protection. One such industry is that of wheat-growing. Every year we send away from Australia mil lions of tons of wheat as wheat instead of exporting it in the form of flour. Surely it should be a matter of national importance to return to the soil that which is taken from it in the process of wheat-growing. We should convert the whole of our wheat into flour and utilize the offal, such as bran, pollard, &c, in subsidiary primary industries.

Senator McLachlan - It is not economical to do what the honorable senator suggests.

Senator KINGSMILL - I find it hard to believe the honorable senator.

Senator McLachlan - Ask the flourmillers themselves. Trust them to get the best out of their industry.

Senator KINGSMILL - Our milling industry, I understand, is conducted under the most scientific and improved lines.

Senator Thompson - But medical men say we are making the wrong kind of flour.

Senator KINGSMILL - I was not looking at the matter from that point of view. If we are making the wrong kind of flour from a health point of view, then the only thing to do is to export it for the use of people in other countries. Speaking seriously, however, there is a great deal in the point I am trying to make. If we are exhausting our soils to grow wheat, and if at the same time we are sending away the products of that exhaustion as wheat instead of grinding it into flour, and returning to the land those essential factors which make successful primary production possible, we are doing that which is economically unsound. From a national point of view, it is economically unsound to continue that policy, and I believe that some better solution of the difficulty can be found. There is another little industry which affects the interests of my State very materially. We talk about the folly of sending away our wool to be turned into material which is worn by every honorable senator, with the exception, perhaps, of Senator Guthrie, instead of manufacturing it for ourselves. But there is another substance, of which Australia is the largest producer in the world, that we send away to Central Europe, and especially to America, to be made up into such articles as buttons, without which not even Senator Guthrie, could wear his Australian-made clothes.

Senator McLachlan - It is quite possible that he could.

Senator KINGSMILL - That is true. I have seen copper wire, and sometimes hairpins, employed instead of buttons. But I was alluding to the fact that every year we send . away hundreds of tons of pearl shell from the north-western portion of Australia and Thursday Island to be manufactured in America and Central Europe into buttons, knife handles, and similar articles. The making of these articles may be described as a domestic industry ; it does not require a very costly plant. The necessary machinery, I understand, for the production of these things by the individual or in the home can be purchased for about £100, yet we allow all this wealth, which amounts to extraordinary figures, to pass away from us by exporting the raw material to be converted into the finished product in other countries and then returned to us. Instead of keeping many of our own people employed in converting pearl shell into the manufactured article we send it abroad to give employment to other people. I do not know that this is a matter for the Tariff Board, but it has a direct bearing on the welfare of many people in Australia. Any man who provides occupation for even ten persons in Australia is doing a good turn for his country, and a very great deal may be achieved if every man, and particularly members of Parliament, direct their thoughts to this end. For instance, we ought not to be importing an ounce of cigarette tobacco, which is the class of tobacco most in demand in Australia.

Senator Grant - Why do we import it?

Senator KINGSMILL - I want to find the reason. If we can ascertain the reason, we may find the remedy.

Senator Grant - We import it because the honorable senator supports a Government that carries out that policy.

Senator KINGSMILL - I am sorry that my honorable friend has been absent either in mind or body during the last few minutes.

Senator Grant - I have been here all the time.

Senator KINGSMILL - Then I still more deeply deplore the fact that the honorable senator has not followed what I have been saying, since it is evident that it was his mind, and not his body, that was absent.

Senator Needham - He would need to be a fiscal contortionist to follow the honorable senator's explanation of his fiscal policy.

Senator KINGSMILL - I do not think so, but the honorable senator himself will have an opportunity to explain' why he holds that view. The establishment of these industries has a very great deal to do with our tariff. The tariff, more particularly with regard to tobacco, is framed for two purposes, in the first place to gain revenue, and in the second place to encourage the tobacco industry in Australia. I have mentioned chances to establish industries which are being missed. Unfortunately, these high tariffs, as I have said, are made for city dwellers. If they are not framed with that intention, they have, at all events, the effect of drawing population from the country into the towns. There is, unfortunately, a tendency, not only in Australia, but also throughout the world, for people to congregate in large cities. Customs tariffs tend to build up great cities. They lead to some extent, I regret to say, to ineffi ciency, and to encourage the pleasure- loving tendencies of the people. There is another aspect of tariffs that issometimes not considered. They remind one of the essay on the horse written by a little boy, " The horse is a noble animal, but he does not always do so." So with tariffs. They may be noble in conception, but sometimes they do not achieve the object for which they are imposed. Let me refer now to a tariff that was imposed some time ago on bananas, with the object of helping primary producers in Queensland. The duty has protected the Queensland industry to a certain extent, but, it has, unfortunately, antagonized two very important commercial friends to a far greater extent.

Senator Thompson - Why does not Western Australia grow bananas?

Senator Duncan - Over there they sing, " Yes, thank you, we have no bananas."

Senator KINGSMILL - We do not grow bananas in my State; but that is not the national anthem of Western Australia. The duty on bananas has seriously prejudiced our trade with Java - a very serious matter for Western Australia - and also with Fiji. Another concession which has been given to Queensland, but which, I understand, is almost taboo in political circles, is the arrangement which has been responsible for the artificial aspect of the sugar industry.

Silting suspended from 1 to 2 p.m.

Senator KINGSMILL - In deference to the feelings of honorable senators from Queensland, I do not propose to make any further reference to the subject of sugar, with which I was dealing at the adjournment, for it is almost taboo in political circles. We will let it go at that. I take it that a tariff introduced by a government should be in accord,- or at least not in violent non -accord, with that government's declared policy. For that reason, it hurts me somewhat to find in this tariff certain items which deal a direct blow at one of the pet propositions of the present Government. Honorable senators will recollect that a part of the Government policy - and one of the best parts of it - is the provision of a fund to assist the States to construct national roadways. It is becoming every day more essential to efficient and cheap production and distribution that we should have good roads. The resources of the States are becoming more and more limited to meet that need ; and the Commonwealth Government has determined to assist them. Yet one item in this tariff will have the effect of increasing the cost of machinery needed for road-making. That is an anomaly from which I, for one, intend to do my best to free the Government. I cannot see why the duty is there. It must be a mistake. It seems to me that the general tendency of this tariff is at variance with the latest announcement of government policy on the subject. In a statement submitted to the last interstate conference,' at which the Commonwealth and State Governments were represented, the following paragraph appears : -

Tlie responsibility for the reduction of indirect taxation rests entirely on the Commonwealth, which has exclusive powers of impos ing Customs and excise duties. In 1901-2 the amount per head of the Customs and excise revenue was £2 5s. 6d.; in 1912-13, £3 5s. 8d.; whilst in 1925-6 the estimated yield is £6 4s. That shows that the tendency to which Senator Lynch alluded in his speech is very real. It is, as a matter of fact, a rapidly increasing tendency. The report also states -

This year relief from revenue duties to the amount of £750,000 per annuum has been granted.

That relief has, indeed, been granted; but I venture to say that the increased revenues which the Government will receive by the imposition of these new duties will more than compensate it for the £750,000 that it will lose annually in direct taxation. Another paragraph in the report is -

As soon as the finances permit, the question of giving further similar relief must be faced. Further relief will directly benefit national development and enable Australian industries better to compete in the overseas markets. A reduction of Customs duties or the substitution of bounties, resulting in the lowering of prices and the stimulation of production, might well prove to be of more benefit to some of the States than an equal amount provided by way of Commonwealth subsidy to the States.

That paragraph enunciates a commonsense and really progressive policy, with which I am in accord, but I do not see how effect can be given to it in the face of a tariff like the one before us. That is one of the anomalies which seem to crop up whenever the schedule is being revised. I pleased to hear Senator Sampson's remarks on the timber industry, although I am not altogether at one with him in his proposed cure. Looking at the matter from the scientific stand-point, and taking a longer view than it is the custom to take, I think it would be far better for us under existing conditions to UBe the softwood timber resources of other countries while we can get the timber at a cheap rate; and, in the meantime, to cultivate and foster our own undoubted resources of that nature so that, when the supplies abroad become exhausted, we shall be in a position to take care of ourselves. That is not a new proposition. The practice has been adopted in other industries. The United States of America has immense oil shale deposits which it is not using, but is holding in reserve against the time when the supply of flow oil has become practically exhausted, or at least very much diminished in quantity. Then it intends to exploit its shale oil deposits. Australia has considerable shale oil deposits also, and I submit that it would be wiser for Ker to take advantage of the supply of flow oil while it is cheap, than to develop her shale oil deposits now. If we do as the Americans are doing, and hold out shales in reserve until the flow oil supplies are more difficult to obtain, they will be much more valuable to us than they are now. I advocate the application of the same method to our timber industry. I do not wish to make reference to anomalies that every honorable senator could cite; but I have in my hand the cabinet-making timber price list for May of this year of one of the leading Melbourne timber merchants. A great proportion of our timber is suitable for cabinetmaking, and should be kept for it; but I find that imported timbers are competing successfully against Australian woods. There is something wrong when Honduras mahogany, which has been recognized for centuries as one of the finest timbers in any part of the world for cabinet-making, can be supplied in Melbourne this month for 2s. 9d. per foot, while our own figured blackwood, which is, indeed, a beautiful timber, and should be easily available for use here, is quoted at no less than 12s. 6d. per foot.

Senator Drake-Brockman - Two shillings and ninepence as against 12s. 6d. ?

Senator KINGSMILL - That is so. It is a remarkable contrast.

Senator McLachlan - Blackwood is getting scarce.

Senator KINGSMILL - But it is hard to account for a difference like that. The gentleman who supplied me with this price list, which is published for public information, told me that he had recently visited Tasmania. Near one mill there he saw two> very fine logs of figured blackwood. He inquired whether they were for sale, and he was told " Yes, we will sell them to you ; but you will not be able to take them away." When my friend inquired the reason, he was told that the logs had been declared black.

Senator Duncan - -Then they were really " black " wood.

Senator KINGSMILL - Yes; it seems like painting the lily, does it not? The sawmiller said, "If I ever knew the reason for it being declared black I have forgotten it; but I know that nobody will touch it." I do not say that many of that kind are to be found; but that is an illustration of one of the disabilities that overtake the timber industry, and it perhaps throws a sidelight on others. . While a discrepancy of that kind exists, we have to go very warily in applying for an increased duty, or for any duty at all. I was glad to hear Senator Sampson's remarks about the present Commonwealth forestry expert, Mr. Lane-Poole. The honorable senator may quite safely trust his case in Mr. LanePoole's hands. But any forester who en ters the forests of our Australian States, where timber-milling has been carried on for any length of time, will come up against vested interests, which absolutely preclude the possibility of putting a progressive forestry policy into active operation. That handicap is a heritage from the years gone by, during which the British Empire neglected and ignored forestry. We have to pay the price tor that to-day. But I am afraid that I am wandering from the tariff. I was much touched by a remark of the Acting Leader of the Opposition (Senator Needham), in which he accused me of being a contortionist. At least, he said one' would need to be a contortionist to follow me. But the tariff is the one question in politics in which expediency is a virtue and not a vice. We are here representing not only our own individual opinions, but also those of such a widely differing constituency that they cannot by any means be reconciled. I have my own idea of what is best for the State I represent, and I know that the present tariff is about as bad for it as any could be. It and the Navigation Act combined have been the greatest obstacles to the progress of Western Australia that anybody could imagine. It is my duty, as I see it, although some other honorable senators who represent the State may see their duty differently, to improve the conditions as much as I can. That is the consideration that will guide me in dealing with the different items in this schedule. Some innocent person asked me some time ago whether I was a protectionist or a freetrader, and he seemed perfectly satisfied when I said, " I am a West Australian."

Senator Duncan - That means that the honorable senator is both.

Senator KINGSMILL - I am quite content to accept that position without either contortion or distortion.

Senator McLachlan - " Take-all " is one of the chief troubles over there.

Senator KINGSMILL - We are not likely to suffer from that disease at the instigation of our nearest neighbour.

Senator McLachlan - We know that too well.

Senator KINGSMILL - I gather from remarks that have been made in regard to a certain duty, which I do not intend to refer to more definitely, that my attitude towards it has been somewhat misunderstood. Because I said that a locally-produced article which could be

Bold for considerably less than the imported article, did not need a duty, I did not mean it to be inferred that no duty should bbe placed on it. There are two kinds of tariff duties - duties for the purpose of encouraging industry, and duties for the purpose of providing revenue. It is idle to say that people with as much money and as strong predilections as the Australian people possess, will not use their money to purchase the articles that satisfy their predilections, no matter how much they cost. I have seen it done too often. I remember on one occasion meeting an acquaintance of mine in Perth. He came from the gold-fields. I asked him what kind of a time he was having, and he replied, " A great time; a drink which costs ls. on the gold-fields costs 6d. only. Every time I have a drink I save 6d." I told him that, judging by his appearance, he must by that time have saved £1. That expresses the Australian point of view. Not only have the people money, hut they have their likes and dislikes. They, perhaps, are improvident, but that is merely one of our national characteristics. The mere fact that the Government places a higher duty on a certain beverage does not necessarily mean a decreased consumption of that beverage. Australian people will have what they want, even if it costs more. The result is that more money finds its way into the Treasury.

Senator Sir Henry Barwell - The Government disclaims the suggestion that this tariff is introduced for the purpose of producing greater revenue.

Senator KINGSMILL - The members of the Government are very modest. They remind me of the poet's reference to the gentleman who did good by stealth and blushed to find it fame. The effect of this tariff will he to increase the already large surpluses. Unfortunately, this protective aim does not seem to be carried out to any extent.

Senator Sir Henry Barwell - If the . additional duty is not required for revenue purposes, there is nothing to justify it.

Senator Drake-Brockman - The additional revenue might be used to increase the salaries of honorable senators.

Senator KINGSMILL - Having regard to the source of that interjection, I must regard it as entirely disinterested; I say that to my sorrow.

Senator Elliott - The consumption of Australian whisky has increased greatly since this duty was brought in.

Senator KINGSMILL - I have not, bo far as I know, contributed tto that result; but one never knows in these days. We may, however, rest assured that the consumption of imported whisky will not decrease because of the imposition of these increased duties.

Senator Sir Henry Barwell - The consumption of imported whisky has decreased by 101,000 gallons since these increased duties were imposed about four months ago.

Senator KINGSMILL - When we know the worst, and are as yet unaware of the best, there are possibilities; and, especially in connexion with substances which can be kept in bond, there is always the tendency to take a chance.

Senator Sir Henry Barwell - The imposition of the higher duties will not mean prohibition.

Senator KINGSMILL - No ; nor do I think that the duties will have any effect on the avenues of trade. In this matter I must be guided by my own opinion; and, unless weighty arguments are brought forward to alter the opinion I have already formed, I shall vote as I have indicated. I shall do so the more readily because I am convinced that the volume of trade will not be affected. Increased duties will not mean a loss to the retailer, because he will pass the duties on to the consumer; in fact, he will add a little to the price to make up for the higher duty and, in addition, something for himself. That is what is always done.

Senator Sir Henry Barwell - It means penalizing the consumer unnecessarily, or driving him to consume other stuff which is not so good.

Senator KINGSMILL - Perhaps the honorable senator knows.

Senator Sir Henry Barwell - I do.

Senator KINGSMILL - I may have imperfectly, and not too lucidly, indicated my views on this matter; but it is my intention to vote as I have stated.

Senator Sir Henry Barwell - Does the honorable senator intend to vote for the increased duties?

Senator KINGSMILL - Yes.

Senator Elliott - Then he is going to live up to the reputation just given him for being a contortionist!

Senator KINGSMILL - The reasons I have given are sufficient for me. I desire only to add that I wish to see an equitable adjustment in this chamber of the varying fiscal ideas which exist. In this chamber the States are represented on equal terms. If we consider this tariff fairly and reasonably we should arrive at a conclusion fair to the people of Australia - one which will be to their benefit and redound to their credit. If that happy consummation be achieved, we shall have done all that could be expected of us.

Suggest corrections