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
Tuesday, 27 May 1902


Mr GLYNN (South Australia) - I do not agree with making special allowances for extra services. If a private member of the profession gets instructions to draft a Bill he is supposed to attend so as to be able to explain the provisions ; and if, as incidental to the duties of secretary, there are the duties of Parliamentary Draftsman, surely the salary of the former office ought to cover the work of attending at Parliament House. The Minister for Trade and Customs has his officials here in connexion with Tariff matters, but I do notsuppose that in these instances any special allowance is made. Parliament is very often sitting when the Parliamentary Draftsman, if he were not here, would be in his . office, and surely he ought not to be paid extra for changing his location. I do not say that the allowance is not deserved in this case ; but the payment of allowances introduces a bad principle. Our presentParliamentary Draftsman is, I think, a good man, but we have to judge of these officers in the abstract ; and it is better to have a fixed salary to cover all duties. I would prefer to see a salary of £800 rather than a salary of £750 with an allowance of £50.


Mr Deakin - The salary of heads of departments has been fixed at £750, and in future it will be necessary to have a secretary with that salary.


Mr GLYNN - Then the office of secretary ought to have stood alone in theEstimates, without having attached to itthat of Parliamentary Draftsman.

Mr. HENRYWILLIS (Robertson).The sum of £750 should be the entire salary of this officer. At an early period of the session, I was under the impression that this salary was to be £500.


Mr Deakin - What ! For the Chief Parliamentary Draftsman?







Suggest corrections