Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Thursday, 2 November 1911


Senator SAYERS (Queensland) . - I should like the Minister to say whether he believes the proposed new section will be effective if the word "may," in sub-section 2, is retained?


The CHAIRMAN -I point out to the honorable senator that we have already dealt with an amendment at the end of the clause, and it will not becompetent for him to move an amendment in an earlier part of the clause.


Senator SAYERS - I do not propose to move an amendment : but I wish the Minister to be courteous enough to reply to my question. If he will tell the Committee that he is satisfied that the proposed new section will be all right, with the word " may " in the latter part of sub-section 2, and the word " shall " in earlier parts of the proposed new section, I shall be satisfied. Our numbers may be small, but we deserve courtesy from the Minister.

Senator -Findley.- This is the form usually followed in respect of the matters included in the provision about which the honorable senator is so much concerned. As he is so persistent in the matter, why did he not move an amendment.


Senator SAYERS - I asked the question long ago, and if the Minister had had the courtesy to say that he was satisfied that the proposed new section would be all right, I should have had to accept his statement. He explained why it was necessary to substitute.the word " shall " for the word "may" in two other parts of the proposed new section, and it was only natural that I should ask whether the word "may" should not be altered to " shall " in the latter part of sub-section 2. I should like the Minister to explain that he is satisfied that these penalties can be enforced without the substitution of the word " shall " for the word " may."


Senator Findley - Of course I am satisfied.







Suggest corrections