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, 2 September 1902


Mr GLYNN (South Australia) - This afternoon I asked the Acting Minister for Defence whether the salaries of the drill instructors who have been sent to South Australia are to be regarded as new expenditure, since the officers in question have been transferred from New South Wales to South Australia without being re-enlisted under the laws of the latter State. As a matter of constitutional principle I wished to know whether the salaries of these drill instructors are to be debited to South Australia as the salaries of transferred officers or as new expenditure. The Minister replied that the salaries were to be regarded not as new but as transferred expenditure, and were to be debited, not to New South Wales, but to South Australia, although the officers have not been reenlisted under the South Australian Act. The view I hold is that if the officers have not been re-enlisted under the South Australian Act, they remain under the New South Wales Act, because there is no Federal Act. If they do not remain under the New South Wales Act, they are not enlisted at all, because they have not been re-sworn under the South Australian Act ; but if they remain under the New South Wales Act, and the expenditure is not 'new expenditure, it must be debited to New SouthWales. If they have been transferred to South Australia without being re-enlisted, and the expenditure is not to be debited to New South Wales, it must be regarded as new expenditure, because it is expenditure, not for the maintenance of the department as it existed in South Australia at the time of its transfer to the. Commonwealth, but expenditure in addition to that. I do not know how the Minister came to the conclusion that the expenditure is not new expenditure, or that, if transferred expenditure, it can be debited to South Australia instead of to New South Wales. I mention the matter because I am not satisfied that the opinion given by the Minister is correct in law.







Suggest corrections