Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 19 May 1965

Senator MCKELLAR (New South Wales) (Minister for Repatriation) .- The objections fall into two categories. There is objection to the fact that the person in possession or control of the hens will have to pay the levy. Surely that is only commonsense. There may be a lot of hens on a property. When the inspector comes along, he will be told: " They belong to so and so. They do not belong to me. They are only over here." I do not know whether hens, like sheep, are put on agistment. This is a commonsense provision. After all, the provision will be known to those persons who have hens in their possession. They will know that if they are in possession of 1,000 hens, they will be liable for the levy on 1,000 hens, whether they own them or not. Surely we do not need anything plainer than that. Unless there is some provision similar to this, there will be avoidance of the levy.

The second objection is as to the direction by au authorised person by instrument in writing. Clause 7b (2.) reads -

In this section, " authorised person " means the Minister or a person authorised in writing by him to give directions under this section.

I am told that the person authorised by the Minister will be the Chairman or General Manager of the State Egg Board, who will be acting with full authority of the Board. This man will not be a civil servant. Surely that disposes of both of the objections that have been raised.

Suggest corrections