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
Thursday, 6 September 1928


Mr DUNCAN-HUGHES (Boothby) . - The Prime Minister spoke of what he declared to be the intention of Parliament when this tariff item was dealt with last year, and his remarks were supported by the Leader of the Opposition. A hasty glance at Hansard, which is all that there has been time for since this matter was introduced, fails to disclose that this committee intended that redwood was to mean any particular kind of timber. Obviously the meaning of redwood was never considered until the Supreme Court of South Australia declared that it meant' both Californian and Baltic redwood. The only speech from the Ministerial bench in regard to the matter was that of the late Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Pratten), who spoke in opposition to the inclusion of redwood, and the whole Ministry voted with him. Now, on an unfounded presumption as to the intention of the committee on that occasion, members are asked to reverse their previous decision. We have already debated the general subject of timber duties, and my views having been emphatically rejected, I do not wish to re-open the matter; but so far as I know there was no understanding or intention that redwood should include any specified kinds of timber, and I can see no reason why any member of the committee should believe, after a decision which nobody anticipated that certain kinds of timber which were not defined, were intended to be included.







Suggest corrections