Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Wednesday, 8 June 1904

Mr WATSON - In regard to all the officers enumerated in subdivision 1 of division 34 - expenditure in the State of Queensland - it has to be explained that full provision was not made on the original Estimates for the payment of their salaries, because it was anticipated that they would beretired under the age limit provided by the Public Service Act. As they have been retained in the service, provision has to be made in respect of their salaries for a certain period. So far as the finances of the States are concerned, this does not necessarily mean any increased expenditureEach of these officers would have been entitled on retirement to some form of compensation, but as they retained their positions an actual saving, taking all the circumstances into consideration, has been effected. As no provision was made on the original Estimates for, their 'salaries in respect of part of the year, we have now to make this provision for them. There are no new appointments in the ordinary sense of the word. I have only to add that I accept the statement of the honorable member for North Sydney that it is not to be taken for granted that because the Committee agree to pass these items they approve of any new appointments, if, as a matter of fact, any new appointments have been made.

Mr DUGALD THOMSON (NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES) - The late Treasurer said he would consult the House before making permanent appointments. The Treasurer will not regard the bringing; of this matter before the Committee as equivalent to consulting the Committee?


Mr Mcwilliams - There are certain items which will have to come before us again ?

Mr WATSON - Yes, on next year's. Estimates.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 31A {Other). £1,310.

Mr. DUGALDTHOMSON (North Sydney). - I desire to know if the officers in the Patents Office have been taken from the Patents Offices of the States?

Suggest corrections