Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

TUESDAY, 7 SEPTEMBER 1943

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Art Union Regulation, &c., Bill. [7 SEPTEMBER,] Questions. 279

TUES:OAY, 'i SEPTEMBER, 1943.

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. E. J. Hanson, Buranda) took the chair at 11 a.m.

QUESTIONS.

CONDITIONS IN l\fiLITARY DETENTION CAMPS.

Mr. J. F. BARNES (Bundaberg) asked the Premier-

'' In view of the statement by the hon. member for Warwick regarding alleged cruelty in the Warwick Deten­tion Camp, will lbe ascertain the true l'0sition in respect to other detention camp''

280 Questions. [ASSEMBLY.] Questions.

in Queensland, in particular the Chmchill Detention Camp at Ipswich; and, if true, will he take the matter up with the l<'ederal Government on behalf of our ill-treated soldiers~''

The PREMIER (Hon. F. A. Cooper, Bremer) replied-

((The hon. n1cn1bcr is surelv r'.·cli a1v~n·e that the State Government l~Hs no im·is­diction in the al1ministratiou or d~·i'cnee matters, and 110 Commission of Inqu;ry conltl effectively be established bY th,_. RtDlL· Government to investigate conc11tions olJtain­ing at n1ilitary detention can111~~.' ·

UsE oF Go\'ERNMEN'l' CARs BY Hox. W. FORGAN SMITH.

ltlr. J. F. BARNES (Bundaberg) asl;:ed the Premier-

'' 1. Does ex-Premier William Forgan Smith, as chairman of the Cane Prices Board, and his family have the use of Government motor cars for conveyance of himself and family to and from his home to business and for social engagements~

'' 2. What number of gallons of petrol are allowed monthly by the Liquid Fuel Board for the use of Government motor cars by ex-Premier William Forgan Smith and his family~

'' 3. What amount, if any, is charged by the State to William Forgan Smith for the use of Government motor cars for convey­ance of himself and family~"

The PREMIER (Hon. F. A. Cooper, Bremer) replied-

'' 1 to 3. ~fr. Forgan Smith, as ~hairman of the Central Sugar Cane Prices Board and deputy chaiTman of the Sugar Board, and in common with other State officials, has the use of a motor car. The cnr is also used for other departmental purposes.''

OPERATIONS OF GOLDEN INVESTMENTS COMPANY.

Mr. J. F. BARNES (Bundaberg) asked the Attorney-General-

1. On what date was Golden Investments given permission by the Home Secretary to conduct operations for the sale and dis­posal of Golden Casket Art Union tickets outside the State of Queensland~

'' 2. On what date did Mrs. Doreen Grey, wife of Leslie Grey, manager of Golden Investments, obtain a half share or other substantial interest in Golden Investments¥

'' :3. vVhat amount, if any, \ras pnid hy Mrs. Doreen Grey for sueh substantial interest in Golden Investments~

"4. Were the investigations and inquiries made some years ago into the financial affairs of Golden Investments, which dis­dosed that the Hon. Edward Michael Hanlon had no connection whatever with Golden Investments, conducted by the pre­sent Auditor-General, Mr. John David Rossf

'' 5. Does the latest balance-sheet of Golden Investments indicate that some thousands of pounds of Golden Investment funds are at present in New Zealand, unable to be transferred to Queensland, because the operations carried on by them in New Zealand on behalf of the Goiden Casket Art Union were illegaa

'' 6. Has Golden Investments, through its illegal operations as regards the sister Dominions of New Zealand and Canada, and our ally, the United States of America, broken flagrantly the laws of those countries by reason of sales of Golden Casket Art Union tickets to residents in those countries'?

"7. Why .vas the ministerial control of the Golde11 Casket Art Union transferred from the Department of Health and Home Affairs to the Justice Department some months ago¥

'' 8. Does he assert that the Secretary for Health and Home Affairs is not in any way co11cerned in the financial affairs or profits of Golden Investmentsf

'' 9. Why was the agreement entered into between the Secretary for Health and Home Affairs and Golden Investments for a period of five years not renewed~

'' 10. Is Mrs. Doreen Grey the wife of Leslie Grey, manager of Golden Invest­ments, acting as trustee for the Hon. Edward Michael Hanlon in the financial operations of Golden Investments'

'' 11. What amount of commission has been paid by the Golden Casket Art Union to Golden Investments from its inception to 30 June, 1943 ~ ''

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Hon. D. A. Gledson, Ipswich) replied-

'' 1. Prudence Trust and Finance Com­pany, which subsequently became Golden Investments, were appointed on 8 Novem­ber, 1932, agents ·for overseas business with Golden Casket Art Union. This company was appointed on 7 April, 1933, agents for Mammoth Casket business outside Queens­land, and from· 4 .July, 1933, all business with the company was transacted through the firm of Golden Investmc11 ts.

"2. 1 July, 1934.

'' 3. This question should be addressed to :Mrs. Doreen Grey.

'' 4. On 7 October, 1937, the Hon. W. F. Smith laid on the table of this House a report by the Deputy ~\uditor-General on the operations of the Golden Casket and Golden Investments.

"5. No.

''G. I know of no illegal operations being ~onducted by Golden Investment.~.

'' 7. The transfer of control of the Golden Casket Art Union to the .Justice Department was decided on to adjust the work of several departments.

"8. M v information is that the Hon. the Minister for Health and Home Affairs

Questions. (7 SEPTEMBER.] Questions. 281

is not concerned in any way with Golden Investments.

'' 9. The agreement entered into between the manager of the Golden Casket and Golden Investments was not renewed, as Golden Investments were appointed as agents in a similar manner to that of other agents.

'' 10. This question contains a foul insinuation which is unworthy of any hon. member of this House.

'' 11. £202,765 15s. 2d., on bu&iness written on sales of about £2,062,657 lls. sa. This includes Prudence Trust and Finance Company and Golden Investments, anl1 involves all costs, printing, advertising, exchange, &c.''

ROAD TRANSPORT, NORTH QUEENSLAND.

Mr. L. J. BARNES (Cairns) asked the Secretary for Public Works-

'' In view of the acute transportation problem in North Queensland, especially Innisfail and South J ohnstone, in refer­ence to essential civilian commodities, will he consider easing the Testrictions at pre· sent placed on road transport~''

The SECRETARY l<'OR PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. H. A. Bruce, 'rhe 'l'ableland) replied-

'' The question of restrictions of road transport services is not a matter coming under my jurisdiction.''

CoMPENSATION oF CoTTON-GROWERS, BuRDEKIN DELTA.

Mr. NICKLIN (Murrumba) asked the Premier-

'' 1. What is the estimated loss suffered by canegrowers of the Burdekin delta through being compelled to grow cotton~

'' 2. Does the Government propose to compensate these growers~ If so, on what basis~

The PRE~IIER (Hon. F. A. Cooper, Bremer) replied-

'' 1 and 2. The matter is still under consideration, and the Government's decision will be announced in due course and will be communicated to the hon. member for Bowcn, who has made strong representations on this subject.''

STATE SCHOOLS CLOSED, 1941-1943.

Mr. PLUNKETT (Albert) asked the Secretary for Public Instruction-

'' 1. How many State schools have been closed in the Albert electorate in the years 1941, 1942, and 1943 ~

'' 2. How many State schools have been closed in Queensland during the same period~

The SECRETARY I<'OR PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. H. A. Bruce, The Tableland), for

THE SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC IN­STRUCTION (Hon. A. Jones, CharterlS Towers), replied-

" I. Hl'n, nil; HJ42, :3; 1943 (to ilate), 1. "2. 1941, i51; 1942, 44; 1943 (to date),

:1ti.''

::\IAN·POW~m, DITTMER GOLDMINE.

lUr. LUCKINS (Maree) asked the Secre­tary for Mines-

'' In view of the facts, stated in the 1 C+overnment Mining Journal' of 20 August, 1943, that, although the number of m3n in the goldmining industry has been re<iuced from 2,120 to 350, 'the decrease in man-power available for the production of metals and minerals vital to existing war needs has placed the metalliferous mining industry in QueeJtsland in a precarious p6sition,' will be kindly explain why 40 men are still employed in connection with the goldmining operations on the properties of Dittmer Gold Mines Pty. Ltd., as stated in answer to my question on 29 July lasU"

The SECRETARY :FOR MINES (Hon. V. C. Gair, South Brisbane) replied-

'' The allocation of men employed in industries is not within my province. It is the responsibility of the man power authorities.''

SHO!tTAGE OF NAILS AND HARNESS.

1Ir. EDWARDS (Nanango), for Mr. l\IAHER (West Moreton), asked the Secre­retary for Agriculture and Stock-

'' 1. Will he be good enough to make urgent representations to the appropriate l<'ederal authority for the release of nails of various sizes and types to the primary producers throughout the State, as the greatest difiiculty is being experienced in securing even odd packets of this most necePsary farm and station requirement?

' 1 2. In order to assist farmers in the

production of crops, will he also bring under the nrgent notice of the appropriate li'ederal authority the acute shortage of plough collars, plough chains, back band hooks, and buckles?''

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Hon. D. A. Gledson, Ipswich), for THE SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE ANn STOCK (Hon. 1'. L. Williams, Port Curtis), replied-

'']. l•'requent representations during the last 12 months hav<c been made to the }'etlcral authol'ities i'ol' the release of nails to meet l'Pr]uirements of primary producers, and these representations aTe continuing at the present time.

'' 2. The acnte shortage of haTness has been brought to the notice of the :B'ederal authorities on more than one occasion. The problem is largely one of man-power, and at my request the Department of Commerce and Agriculture is at the present tim<> investigating the position with u vie11· tro ascE'rtaining whether the required relir,f e:cn be I;rovicl ec1. ''

282 Succession Acts and [ASSEMBLY.] AnothM· Act Amendment Bill.

SrCCFJSSLON ~\CTS A:\' U ANOTHER ACT AMEL\D:MENT BILL.

INITIATION IN COMMITTEE.

(The Chairman of Committees, JI/Ir. Brassing­ton, Fortitude Valley, in the chair.)

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Hon. D. A. Gledson, Ipswich) (ll.!J a.m.): I move--

'' That it is desirable that a Bill be intro­d need to amend the Succession Acts, 1867 to 1942, and the Public Curator Acts, 1915 to 19±2, each in certain particulars.' '

'fhis is a very important Bill in that a depar­ture is being made from principles that were placed in the Succession Act in 1867 and that actually date back to the period of the Roman law, to the time ot the Roman Emperor Justinian, when people did not take the same vie>v of man'y thin;::s as Trc do, when, for instance, ·wi-, JS were not loo keel upon ·with the same respect as they are now. Even as recently as 1867, i11 laws such as the Succession Act, provision >nts matle only for the male, and the wife, v;as often not pro­vided for at all. Certainly she was never pro­vided for as she is now.

Last session we brought dO>I'!l the. Testa­tors' Family Maintenance Act Amendment Bill, under which illegitimate children were en a bled to enjoy the benefits of the principal Act of making application· to the court, just as a legitimate child could, for a share of the estate of a testator. When that Bill was being considered it was suggested that a similar provision should be applied to intestate estates. It was argued that if the principle was a good one in its application to an estate the subject of a will, it was also good in its application to an intestate e-state. I intimated at the time that I was in accord with the idea and that steps would be taken to give it legislative effect at the earliest possible moment in the next session of Par­liament. However, when we came to con­sider the matter we discovered that there. were quite a number of anomalies in connection with what is called the Statute of Distribu­tions that needed amendment to hrin~ it into line with modern requirem•cnts. \Ve haYP endeavoured to remedy those anomalies Rs far as we can, so as to bring the Succession Aet, the sections entitled the Statute of Distribu­tions in particnlar, into line with n'oden1 requirements ,-_nd practice. In a numhcr of instances >Ye h. H~ had no precelicEt to 7nifle ns, and so we haYe aded purely on the basis of equity, justice, ana good sense. The Bill provides that both husband and wife sh;lll have equal rights in an intestate estate, and that they shall have equal rights concerning the distribution of the estate. In the olden days it was provided that only the fat!lC'r or a male person had a right to the estate, but it is now proposed to provide that the mother or the wife shall hay e. equal rights with the father in such an esbte. The Statute of Dis­tributions, which is a rather interesting docu­ment, provides that in :m in+e~ta+c rwtatc. the widow is entitled to onr,-t!Jirrl DJH1 the chil'l nr chilrlren to two-thiril.s. Th:1t proportiP'l j,, to be altererl to provide thnt. a widoJY

shaH receive one-half and the thild or children of such child one-half. The Statute of Dis­tributions also provides that the first £500 shall go solely to the widow, and the rest of the estate shall be distributed in the pro­pOTtions I have just mentioned. That amount is now increased to £1,000, so tlwt the iirst £1,000 shall pass to the widow solely and the remainder be distributed, one-half to tho widmv and onc-lwlf to the child or children of such child.

Mr. J, F. Barnes: There are no pro­visions for various types of widows~

T1u~ ATTORNEY-GENERAL: No. We are not getting away from the wid0w provided for in the existing law. \Ye think it would lJe wry unwise to do so.

Mr. Massey: Will the children of the first wife come into the same category as the children of the second wife~

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I do not thin!; so. If tlwrc :n-e twu thnc has been a divo1·ce.

Mr. :i)Iassey: The first wife may have died.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: The law does not mcoguise two living wives. The Bill does not provide for de-facto wives. Perhaps I have not understood the interjec­tion by the hon. member for Toowong. I understood him to ask if provision is being made for the iirst wifc--

Mr. JI'Iassey: No. I said the children of the first wife. I wanted to know if the children of the first wife would rank equally with the children of the second wife in an intestate estate.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Yes, they are all children of the deceased parent and entitled to a share in the intestate estate.

Mr. Luckins: They are all in together.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: They are all in together. All the progeny of a deceased parent, by the first, second, or third wife, are entitled to share in the estate. They are all equal in that respect.

'fhe Bill also provides that illegitimate children shall have the same rights as legiti­mate children, that is to sny, we arG extend­ing the principle we incorporated in the Testator's Family Maintenance Act in the Succession Act so that illegitimate children may apply for assistance from the intestate estate.

Provision is also made whereby the Public Curator will be able to distribute small estates among the beneficiaries and thus save expense. If that provision is not made the beneficiaries would have to go through the ordinary court procedure, although the estate may be only £10, or £20, or up to £200.

It has been frequently pointed out that there are ncmcrous instnnces in Y.hic!t a deer~ 'Pd person, an illeRitimatc, leaves small smns only, say of £30, £40, or £50, and dies intestate. The Crown has the right to

Succession Acts and [7 SEPTEMBER.] Another Act Amendment Bill. 283

the whole of such an estate. There is a pro­vision in another Statute that the Crown, through the Attorney-General, may waive this right of escheat and allow the estate to pass to the mother. This Bill takes that dis­cretion awav from the Crown. 'rhe Govern­ment do no"t think it right that the Crown should have the right to escheat the estate of an illegitimate child, and that his or her offspring, or mother, should not possess the sam·e rights as. _that of the ,progeny or mother of a legitimate child.

We are also providing that an illegitimate child may inherit an estate or part of an estate in the same way as a legitimate child. Any discretion in this matter should not be left to the Attorney-General for the time being. As the law is at present, the Attorney­General may recommend that a part of the estate only should be paid to an illegitimate child, or to the mother of an illegitimate child and the balance escheated to the Crown. I can see no reason why the Crown should retain such money. vVhile I have occupied the position of Attorney-General all such money, to which the heir~ have a moral right, have been paid over to them. In future, if this Bill is passec1, the lav· will provide tlwt the illegitimate children shall share in an estate. Of course, this is subject to the widow's rights in the first instance.

We are providing also that where a testa­tor dies leaving a father and also a mother and no widow or children the estate shall be divided equally between the father and mother. That is, if a single boy or single girl dies his or her estate, instead of being escheated to the Crown as previously, it shall be inherited by thee mother or f~ther.

considered to be a lawful motJ1er and th•c child a lawful chiH for the purpose of the distribution of the illegitimate's intestate <•state. The Public Curator, on being satis­fied as to evidence of parentage, is empowered to distribute the estate so that the whole of it, no matter of who7 value. shall go to the mother. Previously there 11·as an escheat to the Crown. The C.'o\m in those eases usually gave the estate to the mother, so that in fact this amendment thces in the law an existing practice.

Mr. J. 1<'. Barnes: After the deductions of the expenses of probate?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Yes, the probate expenses are deducted. In most eases it is verv seldom that a child's estate is a eonsiderable one where a will i< not left.

Mr. Kerr: Where would the money in the estate of an illegitimate child go toW

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: At present it is escheated to the Crown. vVe are now making provision that it should go to th<> mother.

Mr. Kerr: The father does not enter into it?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: No, we are not going to be mixed up with the joh of <leciding as to the father of the child.

M,r. ,J. F. Barnes: The mother bears the burden.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: There can he uo question about it. ancl the mother should get the whole of the estate.

I haw outlined the provisions of the Bill, which ho11. members will see seeks to estab­

The fourth principle of the Bill provides lish some Yery important principles. In order that where an illegitimate child, being a widow that the\' nwv be better able, to understand or widower, or an unmn.rrie,d person, dies them, I "should like to give them an outlino without a will and without leaving: any chil- of the Statute of Distributions, which i~ \'81":V

dren (legitimate or illegitimate), but leaves succinctly set out in ButterForth 's Ln> her or his mother surviving, the mother is List. It reads as follows:-

" Distribution of Estate of an Intestate under Succession Acts. "A person dies intestate leaving as kin- Estate divided thus :-" 1. Widow or widower and children Widow or widower, one-third ; children, two-thirds

equally divided among them."

The alteration I propose is-Widow or widower, one-half np to the first £1,000; remainder equally divided among the children.

The outline goes on:-" 2. Widow or widower and one child. Widow or widower, one-third ; child two-thirds."

We propose to alter that so that the widow will get one-half and the child one-half. " 3. Widow or widower and children and children

of deceased children.

" 4. Widow or widower and no child or grandchild.

" 5. Widow or widower and father but no child or grandchild.

" 6. Widow or widower, mother, brothers and sisters but no children or grandchildren or father.

"7. Widow or widower, mother, brothers, sisters, and nephews and nieces (children of deceased brothers or sisters), but no child, grandchild, er father.

"8. Widow or widower, mother, nephew, and nieces, the children of deceased brothers or sisters, but no child, grandchild, father, brother, or sister.

" 9. Widow or widower and mother, but no child, grandchild, nephew, niece, brother or sister, or father.

Widow or widower, one-third; children and grand­children, two-thirds divided among them, as to children per capita, as grandchildren as per stirpes.

Widow or widower, a half ; next-of-kin, a half, equally divided among them, but see note.

Widower or widow, a half ; father, a balf, but see note.

Widow or widower, a half ; mother, brothers and sisters, a half, divided equally among them, bnt see note.

Widow or widower, a half ; mother, brothers, sisters, nephews, and nieces, a half, equally divided among them ; mother, brothers and sisters, per capita ; nephews and nieces, per stirpes, but see note.

Widow or widower, a half; mother, nephews, and nieces, a half ; but see note.

Widow or widower, a half ; mother, a half, but see note.

284 Succession Acts and [ASSEMBLY.] Another Act Amendment Bill.

A person dies intestate leaving as kin- Estate divided thus-" 10. Father but no widow, widower, or children. Father, the whole. " 11. Father and child or children, but no widow or Child or children, the whole ; if more than one, equally

widower. divided. " 12. Father and grandchildren or grandchild, but no Grandchild or grandchildren, the whole ; if more than

widow or widower or children. one, equally divided. "13. :Father and children and grandchildren, but no The whole among children and grandchildren.

widower or widow. Children per capita, grandchildren per stirpes. Note.-In cases where a person leaves a widow or widower, no children and no widowed mother, the

widow or widower is entitled to £500 as first charge on the estate and her or his share of the balance as provided in the Statutes of Distribution. That is, half remainder to wife or husband, balance to next-of-kin.

"14. Mother, but no widow, child, grandchild, father, Mother the whole. brother, or sister or children of latter.

" 15. lVIother, brothers, and sisters, but no widow, The whole equally divided between them. father, child, or grandchild.

" 16. Mother, brothers, sisters, nephews and nieces The whole among mother, brothers, sisters, nephews (the children of deceased brothers or sisters), and nieces. Mother, brothers, and sisters per but no widow, &c. capita, nephews and nieces per stirpes.

Note A.-The right of representation does not go beyond brothers' and sisters' children-that is to say, the right of taking a deceased parent's share.

Note B.-Children of the half blood take equally with children of the whole blood. Note C.-If a child be advanced during the lifetime of the intestate, he must bring the amount of the

advancement into hotchpot. Note D.-If the death of a wife occurred before 1906, the above distribution may not apply."

Anv moneys that thev 1·~ceive o~'t ui tlh' estate shall be paid o ,,r to them by way of loan and that goes into what is known as hotchpot.

Mr. Edwards: Suppose it took place a long time before.

The ATTORNEY-.GENERAL: That would have to be considered by the comt, if any considerable amount of money was involved, and each party would l1ave an opportunit;v to put .his case before the court.

Adopted children come umler the same pro·dsion as legal children. 'rhere is 110 need to have any special pro,-i.sion for them because they become legal when adopted.

'l'he provisions in the Bill are a big depar­ture from the present law, but I think they will meet with the commendation of hon. members inasmuch as they are only fair.

You will also notice, Mr. Brassington, that there is an amendment of the Public Curator Act. It may appear strange that although we have a Public Curator Act Amendment Bill on the business-sheet we are also amend­ing that Act by this Bill. That is purely for the purpose of amending the sections that affect the Succession Acts and it is being clone in this way because if the other principles of this Bill are not adopted by Parliament there will be no necessity to amend the Public Curator Act in the way proposed in this Bill. We could not have included such amendments in the Public Curator Acts Amendment Bill now on the paper because this Bill may not be passed.

Mr. NICKLIN (Murrumba) (11.32 p.m.): 'l'he Attorney-General has said that the mea­sure he proposes to bring forward this morn­ing is not only a very important one but is also very interesting. It touches a subject that this Parliament dealt with to a certain extent earlier in the year, and I take this opportunity of thanking the hon. gentleman for carrying out the undertaking he gave us on the occasion of the amendment of the Testator's Family Maintenance Act that he would. !ook into the point raised by the O]~posibo;I •;·hether the rights of illegitimate dnldren m mtcstate estates of their parents 'honld not be the same as those they now

have under the Testators' Family Maintenance Act. Appm·ently the inquiries the hon. gentle­man nL de hai'C led to the amendments now prcjloscd in the Succession Act, and judging by the information given this morning these amendments are derJirable and will make for the better working of a very important statute.

I am glad the Attorney-General explained the reason why there should be two proposed amendments of the one Act on the business­sheet at the same time. After hearing his explanation hon. members can readily under­stand the position; if the amendments to the Succession Act arc not agreed to there will be no necessity to proceed with the conse­quential amendments of the Public Curator Act.

The fact that the legislation dealing with succe~sions passed in 1867, a long time ago, has stood the test of time is a tribute to the lawmakers of those days and to the soundness of their judgment and the wisdom of the Act passed on that occasion. Unfortunately we do not find th<J same soundness in many later Acts, which are introduced one session and ha,-e to be amended the next. We must admit that some of the older Acts under which we work were very sound and have stood the test of time. Of course we realise that since 1867 there have been many changes an~ na~urally we should, if necessary, amend leg1slabon passed many years ago. That is our function, but it is also our job to see that amendments that we do make are sound and will. be of benefit and, if possible, will stand w1thou t further amendments for as long as this Act has stood.

The Statute of Distributions as outlined by the A~torney-.General this morning is certainly very mterestmg. A considerable amount of ~hought .must have been given to it, consider­mg the mstances dealt with by the document.

'l'his amending Bill makes specific provision for the distribution of intestate estates, where the~e are no children, instead of leaving it, as m the past, to be dealt with by judges under their discretionary power. The Bill lays do>Yn exactly whnt c·brll be done in specific circumstnnees, and that should be more satisfactory to all. It should be especially satisfactory to the judges who will

Succession Acts, &c., Bill. [7 SEPTEMBER.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. 285

have something definite to work on instead of having to use their discretion and perhaps having their judgments challenged in a higher court. It should help to overcome many difficulties and mean a consequential saving of legal costs, so that instead of having estates rlistrihuted in the long run among the lawyers the beneficiaries ·will receive something from them.

Another modern principle-the equal rights of husband and wife-is being recognised. In the old legislation the wives and female section of the community did not get the same recognition as husbands or males. By this proposed Bill the equality of the. rights of husbands and wives is being recognised and after all that is a good principle that is recognised univCTsa!ly to-day.

The provision that a wife shall receive the first £1,000 of the estate instead of the first £500 is also found necessaq by the change in conditions since 1867, especially the change in v-alue of money. I suppose in 1867 500 sovereigns would be worth more than £1,000 to-day, but if the Bill does not give the pre­cise modern equivalent of the £,500 of 1867 it does recognise the right of the wife to a fair share of the estate, as in the good old days when it was thought that £500 was enough for the wife.

.Another principle that I think will meet with the approval of most people is the alteration of the provision that a wife shall get one-third. of an estate and the child or children two-thirds. The estate. is to be divided equally between the wife on one hand and the child or children on the other.

In addition the rights of illegitimate children are being recognised. This principle was established by this Parliament earlier in the year when the amendment of the Testator's Family Maintenance Act was put through. Here it is proposed to include the same principle as was agreed upon then, that is, that the court may, in its discretion-and it is important that the court shall have this discretion-make an order to provide for the maintenance and support of an illegitimate child if it is under 21 years and if over 21 years of age that child has helped to build the estate that is in dispute. As that principle. was agreed upon unanimously when the Testator's Family Maintenance Act was being amended, I think it will receive the unanimous support of hon. members on this occasion also.

I shall reserve any further comnwnt on the measure until the second rending, but I can see that it will improve the la1v that it seeks to amend.

lUr. I;UCKINS (Maree) (11.43 a.m.): I should like to know whether the Public Cnrator is to be the only administrator of intestate estates under the law.

'l.'he Attorney-General: The Bill mal;:es provision that the Public Curator shall dis­tribute estates up to a certain amount. hut arrangements may be made wherebv outside persons may distribute estates, too. The Public Curator is not the sole administrator in intestate estates.

Mr. KERR (Oxley) (11.44 a.m.): Has any limit been fixed for the small estates that may be administered by the Public Curator~

The Attorney-General: The limit is fixed at £200.

Motion (Mr. Gledson) agreed to.

Resolution reported.

FIRST READIKG.

Bill presented and, on motion of Mr. Gledson, read. a first time.

HOSPI'l'ALS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND HEADING.

Tl!e SECRETARY l'OR HEALTH ANn HO~IE Al<'l<'AIRS (Hon. E. M. Hanlon) Ithaca) (11.46 :i.m.): I move-

'' That the Bill be now read a second time.''

The main principles of the Bill to which consideration should be directed are those providing for the taking over of an increased share of the cost of hospital services by the Crown and the extension of the field of hos­pital activities. 'l'he other amendments in the Bill are purely machinery amendments that do not affect the main principles in any way whatever.

The present system of hospital finance and administration in Queensland, which began some 20 years ago, arose out of the complete inadequacy of hospital accommodation for the people of the State. 'l'he other States of the Commonw0alth, and most countries of the world. as a matter of fact,' are finding that Yoluntaq effort is inadequate to provide the hospital serYices of the community. Indeed, the southern States to-day a're really in a desperate position, because of the shortage of hospital accommodation. That is natural, because, first of all, the public are seeking a wider field of service from Government instrumentalities to-day than they did in years gone by, and secondly, because the advance of medical science and improvements in hos­pital accommodation and equipment make the job of supplying them much more costly.

ltir. JUassey: And more difficult, too.

The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND :UOME Al<'}'AIRS: Medical science is find­ing nc>w drugs, and new equipment and new 1nethods of treatment are continually being developed. Consequently, hospitals have had to be modernised. This means the incmring of continual expense to provide new treatment, new drugs, alteration of theatres, and so on, in order that hospitals may be kept up to date.

When the present ~ystem was adopted in Queensla'nd the Government of the day had to face the alternative of continuing the old order, which limited the service to the sick to the amount of money collected from the charitably disposed, or providing the service required at a cost to the public. The Govern­ment of the day adopted the second alter­native in order to preserve the health of the people and restore, if possible, health to the

286 Hospitals Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

sick and injured. The question of costs and how they would be met then arose. The decision of the Government was that the cost should be met by the Crown and local authorities in certain proportions. In older countries the maintenance of hospitals is almost entirely a matter for local authorities. The hospitalisation of a pa'rticular town is regarded as the care of the people in that town. In older countries, of course, the popu· lation is not as fluid as in newer and less developed countries. The bulk of the people of Europe rarely leave the city where they are lJorn and consequently their communities are more self·contained, and so ea'ch municipal eentre there accepts the responsibility for its own sick. In Australia the people are more migratory. They do not remain in the place where they were born. They seek new places.

Mr. Luckins: You would not say they were nomads.

The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND HOME AFFAIRS: They approach more to nomads than the people in older lands. I know as a young man-and the same applies to many young people to-day-I felt an urge not so much to get away from the place where I >vas born as to see other parts of the country. That is not a bad fault, as we must travel to see, learn, and understand.

When we were faced with a decision on the question of altering our hospital system the Government decided that they would pay 60 per cent. of the total cost of hospital service, leaving the balance, 40 per cent., for local authorities to find. I frankly admit that local authorities here are not in the same position as local-governing bodies of Europe. In the the fi·rst place the local-governing bodies of England and Europe have their development work done. They have not the incessant demand for the creation of new services or new communications such as there is needed for the development of a young country such as Australia. Some of the roads laid down by the Romans in Europe are still in use, whereas in Australia we are faced year by year with the task of providing more and more new communications and more and more new services for the people. Therefore, the burden in Australia is heavier than in older countricR. The Government, therefore, decided that the right thing was for them to take an increasing share in the cost of hospital services. Hos­pitals boards were created. The demand for hospital service began to grow. When a bon\·d was .created it had the power to survey the reqmrements of the district and the dutv to supply them. It probably decided that n~anv of the old buildings and much of the old equipment were not up to the requirements of such an important public service. It, therefore improved its hospitals by building ne11' ward~ and improving equipment. It put attractive beds in the wards as well as bedding. It abolished the grey blanket and unbleached sheets together with the ugly numbers on the bedspreads. It took the ''pauper'' notices off the wards. It did away with the old chipped enamel ware, used for the patients' meals, introducing in its place chinawne. It made the wards generally more attractive. It

paid doctors and introduced a better nursing service. Instead of having to depend on the charity of nurses to work excessive hours for small pay, it increased the number of nurses and their salaries.

lUr. Massey: It is not too high yet.

The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND HO:i}IE AF.FAIRS: That not only increased the cost of hospital services to the com­munity, but it makes ~he hospitals more attractive. People who m the days before the new svstem was introduced would not go into a public hospital beg:an to fin~ that t?ey could get better service m a publ~c hospital than in their own homes under a pnvate prac­titioner. People who often ruined themselves in 1>aying private .fees to priva!e hospitals accepted the serviCe the hospitals board offered.

It is interesting to note the development that took place in a comparatively short period after the introduction of the district system in our hospitals. In the first place let us talte into consideration the building done in the last 12 years since the present Govern­ment came into power. By means of loans, of which up to now 60 per cent. was borne by the Government and 40 per cent. by the local authority, a ratio that has now been ,, !'Pred to 75 per cent. and 25 per cent., the hospitals boards have spent £1,999,459 during that period. 'rhe grants from the 'l'reasury, from the Casket funds to hospitals boards for special purposes have been £328,333 for general hospitals and £372,965 for maternity hospitals, making a total in building in the last 12 yeaTs of £2,698,757. Yet, with all that building there is a great deal more to be done before we can put our hospital service in (~necnsland on the standard that a decent and civilised community should provide for its sick. The figures I have quoted, however, give an illustration of the sudden urge to improve the conditions. Then let us have a look at the gTowth in the daily average of patients in hospitals. In 1931-32 it was 2,961. It grew year by year, and in the last year the daily average was 4,156.

Mr. Luckins: Is that the general hospi­tals in Queensland~

The SECRETARY l<'OR HEALTH ANn HO.lliE AFFAIRS: That is the daily average of in-patients in public hospitals in Queens­land. 'rhere are peak periods, particularly in the conntTy places and especially where seasonal industries operate, wllen the. peaks go up and down violently. The daily average in some areas requires accommoda­tion for 20, but bed accommodation is pro­Yidcd for 40 or 50 on account of the peaks reached when seasonal industries are working. I quoted the figures to hon. members to illus­tr:!~c hem- th·.c firp,t ncecl \Yrts to ;provide sound finance for the service. and to show that with sound finance came the urge to give a better service, and with that better service came the urge for more people to use the service so we have had the cumulative effect in thi~ State that by providing better and more up-to-date equipment and buildings more people have desired to make use of our hospital accommodation.

Hospitals Act [7 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill. 287

In recent years we developed the private blocks in our public hospitals. We found ourselves in this position-that the best service available in the State was available to the poorer section of the community, but well-to-do people, \Yho, after all, are taxed to vay the costs oi hospitals, \Yere left to the tender 1ncrcies of pri,~ate hospitals. X o priYate hospital can afford to install the equipment and give the services that hospitals financed from public funds ran afford. So the people who are taxed to maintain the hospitals have found that they were cut off from the very best service in the State. We therefore developed the policy of special private blocks attached to public hospitals, so that the expen­sive equipment available to a public hospital might be available to the private patient at a minimum fee. In that way the taxpayer received a return for the money he was pay­ing for the maintenance of hospitals to serve the community. For example, we built a medical block in Brisbane for private patients. There is a low fee of £4 4s. a week for the private patient, which includes nursing, dress­mg, and bam1ages. There are no extras of :my kind. Of course, a patient has to pay his own doctor. 'rhat provides cheap hospi­talisation. At the time we built that block there was a great deal of opposition on the g:round th_at it would be a white elephant. However, 1t was no time after it was erected until it was overcrowded, and now there is a long waiting list of patients wanting to get into it. Had it not been for the development vf the war in 1939, we should have had another private block at the Brisbane Hospital and probably two.

~i.r. Luckins: Why not decentralise?

The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH ANH JIOME A:I<'F AIRS: That is altogether apart from the pomt_ I am now making. The demand for pnvate accommodation in our public hospitals is growing to such an extent that vvilly-nilly, whether hon. members like it _or not, national hospital services are now bemg demanded by the public. It is no long~r :;t matter merely of Labour policy; the pubhc m th1s State arc now demanding full and complete hospital services from the Crown and are determined to have them, and as soon as man-power and materials are avail­otble the building programme will be continued.

_Furt?er developments are contemplated by tlns B1ll. As I pointed out in Committee there is the proposal to widen the field of opemtions of hospitals by making provision for them to care for the aged and the incur­;1 ble. That was a natural deYelopment in a zoommnnity such as this. 'l'here are Jmmber of directions in which ho•Jpitnl administra­tion must denlop in the future inasmuch as there is need for complete 'co-ordination between the hospital authority, the loral authority, the Department of Public Health, the school medical service, and all thr health services of the State. Hon. members will lTme•nber that when the Hospitals Act was hefore the House son1e years ago provision "·ns made for the co-operation of lwspibls bonrr!s with local authorities in the prevention "f disease. 'l'he suggestion has HO\Y been

maLic l:y some loc.1l anthorities thut they be allowed to appoint the hospital superintendent as their medical officer, so that there will be instantaneous action in the area on the admis­sion of any cao;e of in i eetious disease into _the lwsrita 1. In the same way the school med1cal service lmd the school dental service have Lccn liukcrl <Cl; \Yith the hospicnl service a' far ; s possible. :B'or instance, in cities where there is a dental clinic in the hospital the sr:hool dental oflicm·s do not perform operative work on the children. 'rhey examine the teeth of the child and give it a chit or £ report to the dental clinic in the city hospital, and consequently the operatives of the school dental service ar-e able to de'.'ote more of their time to outside areas in which as yet no dental clinic has been provided. That is quite a natur-al development of co-oper-ation 1Jetween the hospital authorities and the ser­vices of the Depar-tment of Pnblic Health. Similar remark'· can be made of the school medical ser-vices. Some years ago when going cite round of the State examining the opera­tions of the department, I \Yould, having arrived in a town and having a look at the children see a number who I thought were in need of' medical inspe::tion. In response to Ill)' inquiries the head teacher might say that the school medical officer had not been ther-e for- 12 or 18 months. 'l'he children required attention, anil naturally I would ask, ''Why not send them to the hospital~'' Perhaps it was in a slack period and neither the doctor nor the hospital was being overworked. The headmaster would inform me that he had no authority to do that.

Then in com'cTsation with the doctor I would mention that when things were slack he might have a look at the school kiddies. His reply perhaps would be, ''I should be glad to do that if I had the authority to enter the school.'' Hon. members can see the absurdity of the thing-on the one hand children needing inspection and attention to have some little troubles corrected and on the other a doctor, who was there at a cost to the Crown, and yet ther-e was no means of bringing the patients and the doctor together. We are getting over that now. We are co-ordinating the activities of the various dcpa,·bnents so that where there is anyone in need of assistance assistance shall be there. It seems ridiculous that because a person has been appointed a medical officer in the school h·ali.h ,,en·ices nobody but he must go near a school. anr! the children must not be sent to anyb(,dy but him. 'rhese things must be <·uJ"cd and we are cming them as opportunity offers.

I must say that in the emergency of the war our hospital services were a godsend to the community. There is no doubt about that. On the impact of the war, before the a nny had time to build its own hospital and medical senices, our splendid network of hospitals throughout the State was of great ac-;istauce to the fighting services generally in providing hospitalisation. The weight has been largely lifted by the p1·ovision of hospitals for the army, mlYy, and air force, lmt we have a number of cases in our hospitals that cannot economically be cm·cd for in military institutions.

288 Hospitals Act [ASSEMBLY. J Amendment Bill.

Having our hospitals organised as a public service it was a s1mple matter to build up the magnificent first-aid and emergency transport organisation that was built up in this State to meet the event of enemy attack.

The remarkable display that some hon. members may have seen on Saturday last was due to the fact that the hospital authority was a statutory authority with officers who could be directed to undertake certain work. An organisation was built up right through the danger areas of the State, in every town, by the hospital authorities. It was done efficiently, it was done well, and it was done economically, because we had a Public Service Department, as you might call it, with officers who were able to see to it that the skill necessary in this service was available.

The extension of the services to the aged anil incurable is a natural development of our hospital services. As time goes on, our hospital authorities must go much further than they have gone to-day. For instance, we have <leveloped a system of regional hospitals with the objective of keeping the cost of these services down to the minimum. We do not desire to fall into the mistakes that have been made elsewhere by having competitive hospitals side by side. We have prevented private individuals from raising money to start hospitals indiscriminately, as they were able to do in the old days, the idea being to provide a hospital service and give benefits throughout the State in such a way that there would be no duplication and the best of equipment could be provided, instead of having two or three bodies trying to raise funds and, because of paucity of funds, none of them being able to give the service that >ms really required.

As a result of this system of establishing hospitals in key centres, quite a number of towns have no hospital. In many of them it is impossible for a doctor to make a satis­factory income in private practice. 'rhose people in the smaller centres are beginning to ask, "what arc we going to get out of the State's hospital service~ vVhy should we be left out?" and they are quite entitled to ask it.

In the outer suburbs of Brisbane we have developed out-patients' clinics where the Ioc~ 1 people who are far away from the city hospit:'J and who do not want to come to the hospital unless they are compelled to do so can consult a doctor, nurse or dentist at stated times during the week. A mobile unit with a dew­tor, nurse, medicine, equipment and so on, visits places like Cribb Island, Redcliffe, Sanclgate, Caboolture and vVynnum on certain days of the week, and out-patim1ts can see the doctor there. We have found that it has been a good investment because people, especially those with children who may be just a little sick, not bad enou;rh to justify their dressing and making the long journey to Brisbane to consult a doctor, can COJlsult a doctor there without anv inconvenience. Thus very often a child has be-:n caught in the early stages of what may have developed into a serious illness.

That system has worked economicallv in the ~UbUI'bS of Brisbane and it mllqt he e~tenilPcl

to the smaller country centres where the1·e is no hospital. 'l'here are many places ill Queensland where, although a doctor cannot make a satisfactory income now from private practice alone he could do so if he received a retainer from the hOspitals Board. If he received a set figure as a salary from the hospitals Board to conduct an out-patients· department for the poorer section of the community, that salary from the hospitals Board, together with what he could make in private practice, would be enough to encourage a really good medical man to have his home and make his living in such an aren.

We have not enough doctors in this State. When we survey the State and the population, when we take a map and fill in the YariouH eentres with a given density of population where there are no doctors, we see that the people of this State have not anything near an adequate medical service, not the service a Go,·emment should desire to give to the people if they desire to keep them well. If we are going to be satisfied just to treat them when they are seriously ill, if we are going to l.JE' ~atisfied to take in the wrecks ancl Te-eqmp them for service, if we are going to be satis­fied merely to use our hospitals as repair ~hops to re-fit the human unit and restore 1t to c·eryiel', then the present system is going far enough, but if we are going to take ~t. as our duty to the community to make proYJswu !<n· the prevention of sickness and the [ll'P\ l'lltJOll 0 £ death, then we have to extend our medical services a great deal further than they ha\·<' gone to-clay. It is not a bit of good hon. members saying that this service to the aged and incurable is bringing too much of a lnndcn upou the community. It is not. I contencl-:­and I think other hon. 1:Jembcrs \'<ho \nil look at it dispassionately 1vill agree y,j_rit ;J'l'~­that it is not a matter of our not bemg al>ll' to afford this service but a matter of our not being able as a decent con~mm;ity to do 1rithout it. While it is the obhgatwn of the department and the hospitals board to provide these services, however, they also have the obligation of providing them wit!! a.s little cost as possible. They are not JUstified in merely spending money extravagantly.

There have been instances in which extra· vagance has been unearthe~ _in. hospital nclmini."tTation, but I suppose 1t :s 1n;poss1ble to get 100 per cent. of perfectwn m e:'ery hranch of administration in the serv1ces. H owevor a careful check is now kept on expenclit{uc by hospital authorities and _an endeavour is made to see that the serv1ce required by the community is provided, that there is no extravagance or waste, and that the community is taxed as little as possible in on1er to provide these services.

~Ir. NICKLIN (Murrumba) (12.13 p.m.) : 'l'hc mn in princi~les contained in _the _Bill are an increase in Government contnbutwns for the maintenance of hospitals and the extension of the field of services given by hospitals boards. _\s the Minister said in his speech, there has been a consiclemble development of hospital services in recent years not only in this State but throughout the Commonwealth. That is in keeping with modern times and

Hospitals Act (7 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill. 289

requirements and the demand by people for a proper and more extensive medical service. However, one of the bugbears in this very necessary extension of hospital services has always been finance, and considerable thought, discussion, and investigation have taken place in connection with it. In this State we have adopted the principle of having contributions by the Government and by the local autho­rities, but we as an Opposition have always contended that the principle of asking local authorities to contribute through hospital precepts a proportion of hospital finance is wrong. We think that a more equitable means of providing that proportion of the cost of hospital services could be found. How­ever, that matter was argued fully on the introductory stage of the Bill and will no doubt be further argued on the private member's motion still before the House. Therefore, I do not propose to go into the matter again now.

There is one point the Minister made in the course of his speech on which I join issue with him. He said that the voluntary hospi­tals had not made the same strides in the development of their services as the hospitals under boards had done. I maintain that many of our voluntary hospitals throughout the State have increased the scope and extent of their services comparably with those of hospitals under the administration of boards. The development that has taken place has been a general improvement in hospital ser­vices both under the voluntary system and by those under the control of boards.

The Secretary for Health and Home Affairs: Quite a number of the voluntary hospitals had to receive assistance from the Crown.

Mr. NICKLI_N: Admittedly, some of the voluntary hospitals have received assistance from the Crown, but after all it was cheap assistance so far as the Crown was concerned. It was cheaper to the Crown to give a little assistance now rather than find later on that it would have to give a good deal more if the hospital came under the board system.

The Secretary for Health and Home Affairs: It was exactly the same for both voluntaTy hospitals and board hospitals, that is, 60-40 per cent.

Mr. NICKLIN: It was about the same.

The Secretary for Healtl1 and Home ~ffairs: We endo'Yed ~hem 30s. for every £1, but what I had m mmd was direct grants.

Mr. NICKLIN: The subject of the exten­sion of hospital service is one that is going to come into greater prominence in the near future than to-day. Even before the out­break of war the hospitals throughout the len~th a~d breadt~ of the State were hard up agamst It to provide accommodation and the service the public demanded and to do so they had to increase buildings and staffs both medical and domestic. That cost money. The people of the State must acknow­ledge that in the future more monev will have to be provided for hospital services however it may be found, whether by Government

1943--I.

contribution, contributions by local authorities, or by some new method that may be devised. These necessary hospital services will have to be provided for the community.

In looking over the figures mentioned by the Minister showing the increase in the daily attendance of hospitals from 2,961 to 4,156 one might reasonably ask whet!ter we are becoming a more healthy nat10n or whether we are not. Perhaps the answer may be found in the fact that in the long run we are because more people are taking advan­tage of hospital services to cure their ills and consequently live the longer. We hope so at any rate. That is what we set out to achieve. When we look at the statistics we find that the expectation of life is greater now than hitherto. Doubtless our hospital and medical services have in no small way contributed to this very satisfactory result.

A point to be considered is whether we should not endeavour to avoid creating a hospital consciousness among the people. In the past we have been inclined to encourage it. As a rC'sult many people run to hospitals and very often clutter up the services they give, thus causing a drain on their officials and plant that is not in the interests of the needy sick. In building up our hospital service and making it readily available to the people, we should endeavour to build up among the people a desire to use our hospi­tals wisely and well, not in a way that will hamper the excellent service they are giving. Thei·e can be no questioning the fact that in the majority of cases the hospital doctors and staff are taxed to their utmost. It is our duty to do our utmost to see they are not unduly burdened.

Undoubtedly there has been extension of our hospital service in the intermediate and private sections, as the Minister has said. No doubt those extensions have been availed of by the public and have proved a very important part of the service. As a result those sections are revenue-producing, thus helping to relieve the burden on the Govern­ment and on the taxpayers. By this concen­tration in a modern hospital block hospitals are very often enabled to give a better private service that a privately-run institution can give. That is more particularly so when we realise the harassing restrictions' placed on privately-run hospitals at the present time by inspectors.

lUr. Po1ver: One of the best things ever done was to bring private hospitals under Government inspection.

Mr. NICKLIN: A wise governmental inspection, yes, but very often many private institutions giving a very efficient service to the community-and this more particularly applies in country districts-have been unduly harassed by inspectors. If the hon. member had any knowledge of country districts he would know this to be a fact. Very often hospitals giving excellent service in country districts have been closed because their owners have been unable to fulfil the condi­tions imposed on them.

The Secretary for Health and: Home Affairs: That is private hospitals.

290 Hospitals Act [ASSEMBLY.] AmendrMnt Bill.

Mr. NICKLIN: That is apart from the present Bill, and I know, Mr. Speaker, if 1 pursue that line further I shall get into trouble with you.

This Bill provides for an extension of services by hospitals. It provides that among the functions of hospitals boards shall be the comfort of the aged, infirm, and incurable. The function of a hospitals board under the present Act is the treatment of the sick including maternity and obstetrics and mother~ hood, and child welfare, dentistry, optometry, ;mcl such otller treatment, acts, matters, and Unngs as may be designed or intended to prevent or mitigate sickness, and ambulance transport, and other transport services. That provision is particularly wide and there is no doubt that under it hospitals can under­ta.ke the ne": function contemplated by this Bil~. '!'he Bill places on hospitals boards an obligation to provide these extra services for the comfort of the aged infirm and incur-ahl~ ' '

That obligation b~ing on the hospitals board, exactly what Is the intention of the Minister in regard to the operation of this function~ D~es he intend that all hospitals boards shall give those additional services?

TJ!e Secretary for Health and Home Affairs: We p-ropose to be as helpful as we always have been to hospital authorities.

. Mr. NICK~IN: This is a particularly rmportant pomt. Although the Government have undertaken to provide an additional proportion of the money necessary for the upkeep of hospitals, they also pro­pose to saddle the hospitals boards with ~~. expensive obliga.tion to make pro­viSIOn for the aged, mfirm, and incurable. We have to look at this question from two angl~s-whether it is desirable from the point

· of VIew of the tr·eatmcnt of these cases or whe~her th~ present hospitals can provide those services Without a considerable amount of e:-penditure to themselves. Up to the present time the Government have undertaken the responsibility through their institutions at Dunwich, the Eventide. Home and the Dia­mantina Hospital, as well ' as the other excel.lent institutions for the care of the aged and mfirm and for the treatme.nt of the incur­able. Many of these people-incurables in particular-can receive much better treatment at an institution such as the Diamantina than they could at a~y accommodation provided for them by a hosprtals board. At the Diamantina for example, the patients would receive mor~ specialised and intensive treatment. Most hospital~ f?und ?onsi~erable ~ifficulty prior to the war m copmg wrth reqmrements owing to the shortage of medical men-that was emphasised by the Minister-and the shortage of nurses and domestics. To fulfil this extra responsibility th.ey will have to provide separ­ate accommodation that will mean additional wards .an~ additional expenditure, both from the bmldmg and the servicing point of view. When we take these things into consideration the wisdom of the extension is arguable. N~ matter how desirable it may be from the l:tumane point of view, we have to look at this thing from the practical point of view, too, and see whether it is possible for hospitals

boarus to pr.ovide this accommodation as efficiently and effectively as it is being done at the present time by the excellent institu­tions that I have mentioned. I think that when we look into the matter and take the thing as a whole, we will agree that the institutions we have can do it more effectively than it would be done with the facilities pro­vided by the majority of hospitals boards in the State. Looking at it from that point of view, it is very questionable whether it is right that we should pass this amendment whi~h places an obligation on the hospitals boarus to undertake this duty. If hospitals boards aTe obliged to do it, it will relieve the Government of the expense of maintaining institutions they are now maintaining, and consequently they should inrreaso the contTibu­tion they are making to hospitals boards to a greater extent than is proposed under the Bill.

The other provisions contained in the Bill are merely machinery provisions. The exten­sion of the functions of hospitals boards should be examined very closely before it is agreed to by this House. It should be considered from the point of view whether it will not unduly increase the expenses of hospitals boards and whether it is possible foT hospitals boards to provide as efficient a service as that given by the existing institu­tions specially designed for the purpose.

Mr. POWER (Baroona) (11.30 a.m.) : This Bill makes another step in the improve­ment of social conditions in accordance with the policy of the Government. The Opposi­tion have been contending the local authorties have been called upon to bear too great a proportion of the cost of maintenance of hospitals.

In the Bill provision is made for the Govern­ment to accept a' greater shaTe of responsi­bility, but apart from that the Opposition overlook a very important matter. They say that taxation for the upkeep of hospitals is levied only on property-owners. I would bring to their minds very forcibly the fact that any person who pays rent is also a ra'tepaJ:"er, inasmuch as any property-owner, when fixmg the rent of his premises, takes into con­sideration the amount to be paid for rates, depreciation, fire insurance, and other expenses.

Mr. Massey: Bombing insurance.

lUr. POWER: Yes, that is also included. These expenses are also taken into considera·­tion by the Fair Rents Court when fixing rents. Any person who pays rent to-day is a ratepayer, and, consequently, is bearing his share of the cost of maintenance of the hospital system. Of course, no fair-minded citizen raises any objection to contributing something towa'rds the care of his more unfortunate brothers or sisters who, because of circumstances over which they have no control, are compelled to seek admittance to a public hospital.

We have heard much of the hospital system and the work done by private hospitals. One of the most important actions of this Govern­ment was to bring private ·hospitals under

Hospitals Act (7 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill. 291

the supervision of the Government. It was very important that that should be done, inas­much as it gave the Government an oppor­tuHity of inspecting these institutions and aseertaining what was being done. I have some knowledge of a number of private hospitals and know that some are quite excellent, but as a result of Government supervision many others were called on to have certain alterations effected to bring the institutions up to date. To-day a private hospital cannot be registered unless the building is of fireproof material. The Govern­ment have done an excellent work in creating our hospital system.

Some opposition has been expressed by hon. members on the other side to the greater costs hospitals boards may be called on to bear as the result of the inclusion in the Act of the words, ''the eare of the aged.'' I must say that I am very much pleased by the alteration. As hon. members know, for a long period the Diamantina Hospital in Brisbane was not able to cope with the number of applications for admissions. As a matter of fa'ct, hospitals boards had to maintain patients for months before they could be found accom­modation in the Diamantina. Moreover, we must not look on Brisbane as being Queens­land. People get sick in other parts of the State.

Mr. Clayton: Some of them then come down to Brisbane.

Mr. POWER: As a matter of fact, patients are transported from many centres, and away from their relatives and friends, to Brisbane. Sick and incurable people desire to be as close to their relatives as possible, and relatives also wish to be as near as they can to their sick. An important social service to the State will result from this legislation requesting hospitals boards to make provision where possible for the aged and incurable in the hospital in the town or district in which they live. That will be some comfort to these unfortunate people and to their relatives who will thus have an opportunity of visitinO' them as often as they possibly 'can. Any "person who has been an inmate of a hospital knows how pleasing it is to receive a visit from a friend or relative, perhaps with some small token of kindness. Compare that state of aff~irs with the transporting of a patient to Bnsbane there to be placed in the Diamantina Hospital, in which he will have nothing but the general routine day after day. Of course, the Government make provision for every com­fort that is possible, but people like visits from their own kith and kin.

The Bill is very important as it will give improved social services to the people of Queensland and that is in conformity with the policy of this Government. It is om duty to care for the sick, aged, and infirm and to make their condition, wherever possible, as comfortable as we can. Many of our aged, infirm, and incurable suffer from complaints originating a's the results of the conditions in the industry in which they worked for a number of years before social legislation was introduced compelling mine owners and others

to make adequate provision for the protection of the employees. I welcome the Bill. It is an excellent piece of social legislation that this Government are giving to the people of Queensland, who are thoroughly entitled to it.

Mr. LUCKINS (Maree) (12.36 p.m.): At a previous stage I referred to this proposal as a laudable one, but I objected to the method of financing it. Local authorities should be free.d from any responsibility for the cost of maintaining hospitals. They are ratepayers and taxpayers, and they pay for any hospital treatment they receive. We can follow the old system for too long. I should like this Government to break with the past and pay for this service to the people out of con­solidated revenue. Such a proposal would have far-reaching effects and the Government might give it serious consideration, especially in view of the high taxation we are paying now.

Again, it is debatable whether sickness is the responsibility of the people of the com­munity. The Minister says that it is. I say it is the responsibility of the Government.

I should like the Minister to enlarge on the question of {)ontrol of private institutions which are already playing a noble part in caring for the injured and the aged. As examples I quote Nazareth Home and the Sunset Home. Is it proposed to bring those institutions under the control of hospitals boards, or are the Government willing to allow them to continue to operate as they are now~

'11he Secretary for Health and Home Affairs: There is no intention of inter­fering with them.

Mr. LUCKINS: I also commend to the Minister's serious consideration the ad vis­ability of giving free hospital and medical service to the children of Queensland. Children are essential to our development, and we should see to it as a Government that the parents of children are not saddled with the responsibility of paying for medical care and attention to their sick ehildren.

Mr. TURNER (Kelvin Grove) (12.39 p.m.): I congratulate the ~Iinister on the proposed amendment of the law. I am especially pleased with the part played by that branch of his department that works for the prevention of sickness. It is a silent service, and the community knows little about its work, yet it is achieving excellent results. Other hospital services shout loudly about the work they are. doing and I was surprised to hear the Leader of tlw Opposition objecting to the fad that this Bill will cause private institutions in country centres to increase accommodation. 'l'he department is striving at all times to prevent sickness nm1 the spread of contagious disease, and thi; Bill "ill be one means of achieving that objertive. Should any resident of a country area be stricken with contagious disease and enter a small country hospital, which is usually not much larger that the average city dwelling, it is possible that the disease will sprend through the whole of the institution, whereas if such a person is

292 Hospitals Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

isolated in an adjoining building there will be no spread, for he will not come in contact with the other patients. For that reason it is essential that the Bill contain a provision compelling private institutions to erect some special isolated ac~ommodation for such patients.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! I am afraid the hon. member is getting outside the scope of thr> Bill.

lli. 'l'URNElt: This amending Bill is necessmy, and by introducing it the Minister has proved onee again that his sole desire at all times is to keep our hospitals at the highest pitc·h of efficiency and to do everything possible for the health of the community.

Recently a very important conference was held at Canberra at which representatives of the \' arious religious bodies and the medical prof•·ssion assembled in an endeavour to solve the problem of the terTible scourge of venereal disease, an<l I was very pleased indeed to learn that the conference unanimouslv carried a resolntion congmtulating this State and the :,; illiHter On \dtat has UCCn UOne hero to .combat it. The following is the resolution to which I Tefer :--

''That eonfeTence congratulates the State Government on the splen<1ir1 work being done to minimise the incidcnec of venereal clisease in this State and expresses its appreciation of the organisation which has been dcYelopecl to cheek the spread of this scourge.''

His Grace Archbishop Wand expressed his appreciation of the efforts of that conference, nnd it is set out in this letter from him-

" I am very glad to know that the depart­ment has found itself able to give the help we asked for on behalf of the :1boriginal stuclents at All Souls' School.

''This renewed evidence of the Govern­ment's close interest in the aborigines gives me a very happy feeling as I make my preparations to return to England. Cer­tainly if the question of the relation between the Dominion Governments and the natives under their jurisdiction is raised in London I should have plenty of evidenc~ to give of the very admirable attitude adopted by the Government of Queensland.

''I should be grateful if you would kindly ~onvey my thanks to the Minister. He has always been ready to help our missions, and I am glad he has been able to take this personal interest in our effort to give the most promising of the youth a 1·eally first dass education.

''I am sending a copy of your letter to the Chairman of the Australian Board of Missions. With renewed thanks.''

Anyone who knows anything about the activities of these missions in the North must know how the Department of Health and Home Affairs has helped them considerably. That would enable anyone to understand the feelings that prompted His Grace to express his appreciation to the Minister and his department. The Minister has made hospital services available not only to the ·white people

of Queensland but also to the coloured people, and those services extend to the northernmost point of the State. During the last session the Minister mentioned some of the marvellous work that had been done by a resident doctor at one of the mission stati"ons and I am sure it 11as greatly appreciated by every hon. memLcr. I hope that the Minister will con­tinue his good work and that it will be further cxtende>d in the i'ntcrests of t;he entire t·onmnmity.

Mr. l'\IULLER (Fassifern) (12.45 p.m.): I desire to express my keen disappointment with the Bill. When it was known that the Minister intended to introduce a Bill with the obj, et of reducing the contributions made by local authorities many of us representing countn- (listricts felt that it would be of eou~idera hle help to them. 11 owever, after examining the Bill I am disappointed to find that the proposed reduction from 40 peT cent. to :.'.) ]Wl' cent. is not intended to apply to hospitals eonducted on a YoluntHry basis. Is this a deliberate attempt to destroy whatever volunhn~' effort we have left'! It appears so to mP. Quite a number of hospitals under the voluntary system are giYing quite as good a senice as those provided by hospitals under bo:uds. I refer, for instance, to the Benndcsnrt hospital. It is a wonderful hospital. The people there have <lecided to ~ontinue it under the voluntary system. Now we find, accorcling to the Bill, that it is not to receive the small benefit that will accrue to other districts. I feel that is discriminatioR and that it is quite wrong. I do not refer onlY to the Beaudesert disb·ict. There are oth<Pl'''· hut it will apply to the Beaudesert distrid with the others.

The Attorney-General: How could you providE' that the local authorities there should haw th~ir contribution reduced if they do not contribute at all?

lUr. lliULLER: If it is right in the one instanc·e it is right in the other. This is vicious discrimination and I feel that it is quite below the standard that the Minister usnall.Y aims at. I !10pe that he will review the matter and will not persist in his present attitude.

The reduction from 40 per cent. to 25 per cent. :.tppears at first glance to be a concession to the local authorities concerned, but when one comes to consider the Bill one realises that it contains something more than a reduc­tion in the contribution. After all, that is onl,l' a small matter. Let us suppose that a number of local authorities are going to enjoy a reduction in their contributions by 15 per cent. Supposing, for example, that a local authority contributes £2,000 a year. Wl1en this Bill is passed it will probably find that while its percentage of contribution has been reduced its actual contribution has not been less. The Bill provides that the hospitals boards ran carry on additional services and the services they may be asked to give are tremendous. Under the existing Act it was optional for the hospitals boards to provide the additional services it will now be obligator:· npon them to provide. Therefore,

Hospitala Act (7 SEPTEMBER.} Amendment Bill. 293

the various hospital districts will be asked to establish institutions for the aged the infirm and the incurable. ' '

This Bill looks like a piece of social legis­lation to the city dweller, but to the country dweller it is an added burden. The hon. member for Baroona said it was very good for peop~e to have thei_r aged o~ infirm parents or relatives housed m a building close to them. I submit that children should take an interest in their old, invalid, or infirm parents. That being so, their job is to keep them at home and look after them. If they do not take sui'ficien t interest in them to keep them at home, then they are apparently not very m~ch_ concerned whether they are housed in a b~Ildmg ove_r the ro_ad from them in a city ?I town, or m Dunwich or anywhere else. It It not so. much a point whether the people want theH aged, infirm, or invalid parents housed cm~veni~ntly to them, but whether they take sufficient mterest in them to look after them and avoid their being placed under Government control.

~f'hiR added responsibility of hospitals boards Will become an enormous one. It can be done only at enormous cost. First of all many h_ospita_Is are not conveniently situated to provide th_Is additional service. They have not t_he appliances nor the equipment. Just nuagme the position that will arise in the ~reat_ment of incurable cases. To my mind, 1t Will be _beyond the powers of a hospitals boar? to give these people the attention they requue.. :B~urthermore, is it wise, in a great many mstances, to house aged people in some of our country districts~ Would it ~ot be m?re congenial to them to be housed m or adJaC~nt to a city where they would have somethmg to occupy their minds and where, they could be cared for a great deal better?

I submit the Bill is not going to be the benefit a number of people imagine. It will not _mean a red~ction in local authority contri­butiOns to hospitals boards. It will not mean that the aged, infirm, or incurable will be given any better treatment than at present. It means that this responsibility will be lifted from the Government and , placed on the shoulders of local authorities thus again :'dding to the_ cost of country people. There 1s not the slightest doubt that is the main principle of the Bill. Therefore the reduc­tion in contributions by local authorities that we hear so much about will not be a reality. 'rhe transfer to the local authorities of a se_rvice at ~resent given by the Government will_ mean mr:reas~d contributions by those bodies. _If ~his BI~l were simply to provide some 1:e~Ief ~n hospital contributions by local authontles, It would receive the wholehearted support of all parties. The time has arrived when t~e .~overnment ~hould accept the whole resp~msibihty of mamtaining our hospital service.

The ?nly fair and equitable means of giving protectwn for people needing hospital service 1s for the State to control it. The hon. member for Baroona argued that had already been done because the tenant indirectly through his rent paid his contribution to the local authority precept. That may be true

of the tenant of a dwelling, but to the farmer or the man developing the land it is a tax on his means of livelihood, in other words his tools of trade. That principle is quite wrong. No man's tools of trade, the means by which he earns a livelihood, should be taxed. When· ever I have made the point I am about to make an interjection usually follows ''You did not do it in 1929 or 1932.'' Ther'e is not much in that interjection. The time has arrived when the Government should take over the hospital service. In the 1929-1932 J?eriod the reven~e o~ the State was fright, fully low, somethmg hke £14,000,000 as com pa;ed .with. £~3,000,000 to-day. 1;herefore, It 1s qmte Withm the capacity of the 1'reasurer to find the money for this service. I said previ~usly, and there is no harm in repeating tha~ It does not matter wflether you are in busmess, or whether you are a professional person, or whether you make your living from the land, or what you do, an obligation falls on ench and every one of us to make some contribution towards our hospital seTvice. No more just method of making that contri­bution can be found than on the basis of om income tax. \Vhy not spread the eost of our hospital.service over the whole community on that basrs? \V hen we are looking forward to freedom in our post-war days from something we think falls unduly heavily on a section of our commumty, we should try to foi·get party politics.

Any amendment to the Hospitals Act should be fair to the whole community. We should not endeavour to see how much of the burden we can throw on the other fellow and how much we can escape ourselves. If it is the intention of the Minister to ask the local authority or hospitals board to cater for the aged, infirm, and incurable people-if that duty is going to be delegated to somebody else, it ought to be done in such a: way that each section of the community will make a fair contribution.

Mr. DECKER (Sandgate) (12.55 p.m.) : I agree with the principles of the bill, and I do not think anyone would take exception to providing comforts for the aged, infirm, and incurable, any more than anyone would take exception to the reduction from 40 to 25 per cent. in the contribution by local authorities.

Mr. Power: They want it wiped out altogether.

Mr. DECKER: That would be the idea, to have it wiped out altogether.

We should have some intimation from the Government, however, as to what they intend. Is it the intention of the Government to place homes like Dunwich, Peel Island, and other convalescent homes in our State directly under the control of the hospitals boards1

The Secreta.ry for Health and Home Affairs: Did you read the Bill?

Mr. DECKER: Yes, and that is what I read into it.

The Secretary for Health and Home Affairs: You are reading palms.

294 Hospitals Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

Mr. DECKER: Apart from the treatment of the aged, the infirm, and the incurable, their comfort also is involved under this Bill. The institutions that have been set up for the treatment and care of these people come under the jurisdiction of the hospitals boards, which are State institutions under the direct guidance of the State. If that is so, then the precept will increaHe, not on a percentage basis, but in the total cost to all the contributing local authorities throughout the State. As the State is in a better position now to pay a greater share, and bearing in mind the fact the Commonwealth Government a;e likely to contribute to the hospital expen­diture of the State, I do not think this is the time for the State to throw a greater burden on the local authorities. I think we have tackled this matter in the wrong way. My idea is that the local authorities should not contribute at all; it should be a State matter pure and simple.

I think our system of charging the patient a fee for hospital treatment is wrong. We s~ould h~ve a s):stem whereby the people wrll contnbute whrle they are well for insur­ance against illness and cease to contribute when they are undergoing hospital treatment. Many people are not in a position to pay when they are undergoing treatment. There is nothing more serious to a household than to have the breadwinner struck down by illness or accident, with the resultant reduc­tion in wages, and while he is in hospital, to have to contribute according to his ability to pay. I have had ca'ses-and so has the Minister--:in which men have had property but very httle cash, and after a long sickness the home has had to be sold to meet the hospital and doctor's expenses. They had assets that could be seized. We are reachino­the stage when ev~ry h?n· ~ember is adopting an outlook of natwnahsatron and I think we are fast approaching the stage when we shall have to institute a national insurance scheme covering all these matters and spreading the cost over the whole community.

I have no objection. to increasing the scope of the w~'-!'. of hosprtals boards to provide better facrhbes for the treatment of the sick aged, infirm, and incurable. The only objec: tion. I ha've is to the method of payment to provide for these services. I think the Govern­ment should play a bigger part than they have done.

Mr. ~J?WARDS (Nanango) (2.15 p.m.) : The Mnuster who has introduced this Bill deserves a great deal of credit from the people of Queensland for the keen interest he has always taken in hospital matters. 'When the Hospitals Act became law and hospital boards were first established I had the pleasure, on o?cas_ion, of taking the Minister to my own d1stnct to unravel certain dis­putes that had arisen. The hon. gentleman did very well and things appeared to work well afterwards.

There is no gainsaying the fact that this hospital question is a big and important one in the history of our State. We all must admit that in robust health one's personality is altogether different from his personality

when he is out of sorts, sick, or disabled. I am with the Minister and other hon. members who spoke this morning in their attitude that it is the duty of the community to ensure that the best that is possible be given to people in that unfortunate condition.

The hon. member for Maree made a very good suggestion that if it was at all possible the Bill might be extended to give children free hospital treatment. After all, the children of to-day are the men and women of to-morrow, and it has been stated in this House many times by the Premier, Ministers, and hon. members that a State such as Queens­land must have a greater population than it has had in the past. Everybody will admit that our children, the children not only of Queensland but of the other States of Aus­tralia, are the best people we can have. Children born in Australia are likely to make the best citizens. Certainly, it will be admitted that we desire a certain amount of immigration after the end of this titanic struggle, but the children of Australia will be indisputably our very best citizens. It will be found, particularly in country districts, that rearing a large family is a tremendous struggle to-day, no matter what help may be given to them·. With a family of one or two it is a different thing altogether. Consequently, if we are to have a large population, we must help our people to have large families, and one of the methods by which we can help is by giving free hospital treatment. That would be only balancing things a little, in this way-that parents with one or perhaps two of a family may be able to afford to pay hospital fees, but where there is a large family--

A Government Member: On dairy farms.

Mr. EDWARDS: Yes, and on many other farms. It is true that it does not occur so much in the city, but when a child in a large family becomes ill, the problem is whether the parents can afford the cost of taking the child to a doctor or a hospital.

The Attorney-General: They get free treatment if they are not able to pay for it.

Mr. EDW ARDS: That is quite true, and we should do everything possible along those lines.

The steps that have been taken in connec­tion with erecting hospital accommodation in country districts have been warranted, and a tremendous amount of good has resulted, especially in the backblocks of the State. Here, I desire to pay tribute to those old pioneers who worked on the hospital com­mittees under the voluntary system. They made great sacrifices and often found a great deal more money than the on tsider towards the upkeep of the hospital, because they were interested in the work, and the way in which they carried on is of lasting credit to them. A few are still carrying on quite successfully under the voluntary system.

Mr. O'Shea: You are speaking a line_ from the past.

Hospital$ Act [7 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill. 295

:Mr. EDW ARDS: That is true, but there are some still in existence and they are doing remarkably good work. However, they may not be able to cope with the position that may arise after the war, and the Government will then have to step in. Again, if we can bring comfort to the people in the outback parts of the State, let us do so by all means. I have travelled through every centre in the State and I am convinced that whatever we may be able to do for the comfort of the people, especially those who live in the back­blocks, it will not be enough. That being so, it is the duty of every one of us to consider this matter more seriously than we have done in the past, and I am quite satisfied that the time has arrived when the Government should relieve the local authorities of the whole of their contribution, not merely reduce it to 25 per cent. After all, the people of the local authorities are taxpayers. They are asked to pay a double tax. The time has now arrived for the Government to take over hos­pitals, the hospitals now controlled by boards, and be responsible for the whole of the expense.

liir. Riordan: Nationalisation of hospi­tals?

Mr. EDWARDS: Yes, nationalisation of hospitals. We have reached the stage when we should do that, .because it must be admitted that the man who was asked to con­tribute towards the 40 per cent. of hospital upkeep in the past was a taxpayer like others in the community and, that being so, he was also paying part of the 60 per cent. found by the Government. Health is of tremendous importance in the interests of this country, its people, and its growing children, and the Government should control it on a national basis.

Another important point is that the health of the country is a national question, a matter in which the Commonwealth Government should help. We must all admit that we have never tried in the proper way to cope with infectious diseases, for example. If an epi­demic broke out in a certain centre, then that centre was held responsible for it, and in my opinion that was quite wrong, because there was nothing to prevent a person suffer­ing from an infectious disease from crossing the border into New South Wales or going to any other part of Australia. That being so, it becomes a national question, and the Com­monwealth Government should be interested in it. If the State are to control it-and I hope they do, because they are more conver­sant with the matter than the Commonwealth Government-then the Commonwealth Govern­ment should find a good proportion of the finance both for that and for the general upkeep of hospitals.

I urge the Minister to continue the good w0rk he has been doing throughout the length and breadth of the State. Go where you will, we must admit that the one thing that a family requires, if it is to get anywhere at all, is good health. Education is important, but I think health is more important still. Is there any person with a knowledge of what it requires to rear a big flllllily who would blame

the people living in the remote parts of the country, where they were unable to get medi­cal aid, if they decided to leave those parts and come to others where medical and hos­pital facilities were available for their children~ No matter what we may do for them, it can never be too much. We must give the utmost attention to the health of our people, especially for those who have to live in the backblocks.

Honourable I\'Iembers, Hear, hear!

Mr. BRAND (Isis) (2.29 p.m.): We know that the British Empire has been built on a foundation of justice and mercy, and so it is not unreasonable to expect the parliaments of the Dominions to give consideration to various aspects of mercy, even if they do not always give proper consideration to matters of jus­tice. On the mercy side of our pro blcms, attempts have been made by the parliaments of this Commonwealth to set up a system of public hospitals for the care of the afflicted and the distressed. I do not know that the Minister in charge of hospital administration in this State is entitled to all the encomiums that have been or may be showered upon him. Suffice it to say that such work is expected of him as Minister in charge of that depart­ment. It was acknowledged for many years that something was necessary to maintain the solvency of our hospital system, and so the Hospitals Act was introduced; but it created a division of opinion amongst the people. One section at least felt that they were being harshly treated, because the Act provided that simply because a man owned a few feet of land he was expected to contribute towards the cost of the hospital system, and around that point there have been many political argu­ments. The Minister has now introduced a Bill that will possibly relieve the landowners of some of the contribution they have to make under the Act, and I believe the Minister is making the reduction in favour of the land­owners because he realises that the principle of financing hospitals by way of a land tax is an unfair one. However, I want to know just when he is going to come down and say, "We are going to remove that blot entirely from the Act." I can understand that such relief may be given because of a realisation by the Minister and maybe the hon. members behind him that the present system is an iniquitous one and cannot be continued. I agree w!th the Minister that such relief should be given.

The Secretary for Public Lands: It is a sound principle until you can get something better to put in its place.

Mr. BRAND: The Secretary for Public Lands can tell the people of his electorate all about it, but I know that when he is out on the hustings he keeps religiously clear of the question of hospital taxation and does not talk about it.

Mr. Riordan: The Moo re Government did not alter it.

Mr. BRAND: I am not going back into past history. I am dealing with the present. I want to know from the Minister just when

296 Hospitals Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

the principle of financing hospitals by land taxation is going to be reviewed with a view to its abolititon. It appears to me that the Bill has been introduced for the deliberate purpose of removing some of the disabilities cast upon numberless people who happen to own and live on the land.

These people have had to pay towards the cost of hospitals upkeep without getting any immediate return from them. The hon. niember who has just resumed his seat dealt with the question of the nationalisation of hospitals. By far the greater majority of the people will agree on the question of nationalisation, but there is quite a conten­tious argument in regard to the socialisation or nationalisation of medical services.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! That principle is not included in this Bill. I gave a good deal of latitude to the hon. member for Nanango, but I am not going to give that latitude to every hon. member of the House.

Mr. BRAND: This Bill makes provision for the taxation of the people for the purpose of carrying on hospital services.

Mr~ SPEAKER: It makes provision for certam reductions in contributions.

. Mr. BRAND: It certainly makes provi­sron for the percentage of the contribution that is made. Therefore, there is only one way to lighten that burden, and that is by the nationalisation of hospitals. As you, Mr. Speaker, have ruled that the hon. member for Nanango had some latitude that no other hon. member will have, I will not pursue that line of argument.

I re_co_gnise. that the Government, through the Mimster m control of this Bill, have a very ~eayy du~y to perform, particularly when It IS considered that Queensland is a State of vast distances, wide spaces, and many sparsely populated areas. Consequently, the ~pkeep of ho~pitals is a big burden and Imposes a stram upon the Minister. It is a bigger burden on the people who have to bear the cost implied under this Bill than it would be if that cost were assumed by the Go':'er:rment with their vast surpluses and unlumted nmounts of money which they do not know what to do with. We could at least di~er~ some of that money for the purpose of rehevmg the people called upon to bear this b~rden to-day. There is an indication in this Bill that the Governme11t are satisfied that the _taxat_ion of land for the upkeep of hospitals rs not a sound or fair principle.

'Ifue Seeret.'liry for Health and Home Affairs: Not at all.

llir. BRAND: _Therefore, we can look to the day when thrs system will be wiped out. Throughout the State there is a division of opinio~ on the control of hospitals. I can pay tnbute to the MinistBr in that in the last few years he has endeavoured to abolish party-po_litical control from the management of hospitals by the boards. Party-political control has had a bad effect on hospital management generally.

The Secretary for Public Lands: Your ow11 Govermne11t originated that party spirit.

Mr. BRAND: Oh, no. The Secretary for Public Lands, who is quite new in parlia­mentary life, would try and make us believe what he has just mentioned, but we know that from the commencement of this Act party-political control in hospital manage­ment has been a vexed question. It is quite possible that there were mistakes under the Moore Government's regime, but those mis­takes were continued until quite recently, when there has been an endeavour to correct them. I believe that the Minister does not believe in party-political control of hospitals.

The Secretary for Health and Home Affairs: All appointments made by the Government to hospitals boards are made on one consideration only, that is, the ability of the appointees to do their jobs.

Mr. BRAND: I should like the Minister himself to believe that. I know that the Minister himself desires that what he says should be so.

The Secretary for Health and Uome Affairs: It is so.

Mr. BRAND: Unfortunately, we have had a system in operation by which certain political organisations select names for sub· mission to the Minister so tha't he may make a selection of men so that they shall control the hospitals in that area. T·hat is a yery unfair method of hospital control. For instance, in a district where there are several country hospitals and one town hospital the majority of the submissions from the political organisation come from the town and no respect is paid to the political ideals of those people who live in the countr-y, consequently, we have a Government representation of one political ideal, which is not right.

The Secretary for Public Lands: How are you getting on at Isis?

Mr. BRAND: Quite well. We have a hos­pital of our own there. The "Jfinister has been endea'vouring to break down the party­political influence that was damaging i11 the Bundaberg hospitals district-and the h011. member for Bundaberg can tell a pretty good story about it. I am sure the JHinister would not like me to tell him all about Bundaberg, just why certain men were put off and certain men were put in.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! I must insist on the hon. member's dealing with the principles contained in this Bill. He has departed a long way from them.

Mr. BRAND: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The Minister may be able to reply to those remarks 1 have JUst made. I content myself with saying that I hope we shall make further progress in the system of hospital controL I hope a's time progresses and after the new Parliament assembles next year the Govem­ment-and I believe there will be another Government-will tackle this question, which has been a very sore one with the man on the land for a number of years.

Mr. J. F. BARNES (Bundaberg) (2.42 p.m.): I desire to congratulate the Govern­ment on bringing this Bill forward. As the

Hospitals Act [7 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill. 297

hon. member for Cook said the other day, it was a step in the right direction, but I think that is about all that can be said about it­it is a little step in the right direction. We hRvl' the Government giving consideration to the locRl authority with one hand and taking it back with the other hand. It may happen by virtue of the Bill that the aged, infirm, or incurable will get shelter in their own districts, but the benefits to the local council on the one hand may be wiped out by the extra work they have to do on the other hand.

The Secretary for Public Lands: That is left with the local authority.

Mr. J. F. BARNES.: For argument's sake, suppose Maryborough is in a position to do this for these people a'nd does it. That leaves Bundaberg and Gympie, the two neigh­bom·ing towns, with no alternative but to carry out the same work and so incur this extra cost, too.

Mr. Farrell: Maryborough has always led the other towns.

Mr. J. F. BARNES: That remark is typical of what is happening in this House every day. No-one should be leading. When we legislate Bunc1a berg should be no better off than 'l'oowoomba and no better off than Ipswich or Rockhampton. If the Government are a Labour Government they represent Queensland and not a section. Unfortunately, we get this sort of thing and we hear refer­ences to what happened in 1929-this morning it went back even to the time of Julius Caesar. We arc hon. members of this House and are supposed to legislate in the interests of the people of •Queensland, and that can only be clone by looking at our problems frankly. ~'or instance, some two years or more ago I asked questions about venereal disea'se. Recently I asked for the figures, and I was given the approximate figures for the period before the war and for the period while the war was on, the latter being two or three times larger.

The ~Iinister in reply to a question I asked as to how much quicker and better the treat­ment for venereal disease was to-day as com­v::ued with tlta t of years ago proceeded to tell a lengthy story. Shortlv, it was that the treatment to-day for venereal disease was some five or six or perhaps 10 times better than it was in the past. Despite that fact we find in this country to-clay a colossal amount of Yenereal disease. WhyW One reason is that it is thought infra dig to talk about it. Before I asked the first question in this House a bout it I had perused "Hansard" and found that no other person had asked sueh a question. Members were pre-Victorian am1 thought it was infra dig to talk about such things. Despite the fact that we have the Government to-day boasting of what they have done to stop the progress in Queens­land of venereal diseasP. l mi·rl1t n:ention that if the other States jump down a well we should not jump down the well after them. If thev are far behind us in their methods it does n"ot follow that we also should stop our progress.

I cannot congratulate the Government on their position so far as venereal diseases are

concerned. Our lock hospitals are full. The disease is spreading throughout the country. Only recently I read that unless Sydney was cleaned up of venereal disease it would be declared out of bounds to American soldiers.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! The remarks of the hon. member may be appropriate to some other debate but I fail to see how he can connect his remarks with the principles of this Bill.

Mr. J. F. BARNES: The way in which I was going to link my remarks up with this Bill is to say that it is no use this Govern­ment's providing for these extensions of hospital services unless they do more than talk. That could be easilv done if we were big enough to tackle them: 'rhat is the point. We know that the incubation period is approximately nine clays for gonorrhC£a and tlHee weeks for syphilis.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! The hon. mem­ber is pursuing a subject that I do not intend to allow him to pursue. If he studies clauses 3, 4, and 5 of this Bill he will see the prin­ciples contained in the Bill. Unless he is prepared to link his remarks with those principles he will not be allowed to speak.

Mr. J. F. BARNES: Very well, Mr. Speaker. To be perfectly frank, I thought I could get away with it. Other people have done so.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! That is sheer insolence and I will not allow the hon. member to get away with that. He will resume his seat.

lUr. L. J. BARNES (Cairns) (2.48 p.m.): I cougTatulate the Minister as an individual -his 'effort as a unit is a faithful carrying out of his job-but I do not offer those con­gratulations to the Government collectively. The Minister has used his authority as an individual to bring about the Golden Casket and in some degree thereby finance hospitals so that our people may be properly cared for. Although this is a. form of taxation it is not compulsory.

We hear much about the new order in reference to employment, the caring of the old and the sick, but we hear little of the causes of the trouble. We hear nothing about the important subject of the improved feeding of the people. It is improper feeding that causes all sielmesses. The important subject of feed­ing is not even mentioned. I suggest to the Government that the time has come when they nl'ust edneatc the people in health matters. 'rhey must place the onus where it belongs; we :nE' whnt we ent and drink. Of course, \\·hen people nre ill there must be hospitals for the sick to make them fit, but we should deal \\'ith the basic cause, we should aim at prevention. Vve are not doing so. Comparatively reccntl:v in America a Dr. VI! cston Price spoke to an American Research Committee in those words. We stand in this House as laymen and make sug­gestions for the care of the old and the incur­able. Let us endeavour to find means of preventing incurable diseases. We cannot

298 Hospitals Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

prevent old age-that is something sacred­but there would be more old persons if we launched a campaign to educate the people as to what they should eat and drink. The members of the British Medical Association are unanimous that the feeding of our people to-day is on the wrong lines. We laymen should be allowed to debate only the statistics of these men who have spent 15 and 16 years in scientific research. \Vhy should we laymen crit~ci~e him who is wise~ Let us gather the statistics and study them, and I should like to quote what Dr. "\Veston Price said on these matters. After this research committee had announced its decisions, Dr. W eston Price went back to the primitive -age and proved that the men of that time lived better than we do, that they ate correct food, and had far better health than we in this alleged ultra­modern age have.

Mr. Dev:cles: They had their sicknesses just the same.

llr. L. J. BARNES: Yes, but let me quote the findings of Dr. Price to that research committee in America. They are-

'' Thinking is as biologic as digestion, and brain embryonic defects are as biologic as club feet. Since both are readily pro­duced by lowered parental reproductive capacity, and since Nature, in her large­scale human demonstrations, reveals that this is chiefly the result of inadequate nutrition of the parents and too frequent ?r ~oo. prolonged. child -bearing, the way back IS mdicated. Like the successful primitive racial stocks, we too can make, as a first requisite, provision for adequate nutrition. We, like the successful primitives, can estab­lish programmes of instruction for growing youth,''

whom we have in our gallery to-day, "and acquaint it with Nature's require­ments. This may require a large-scale pro­gramme of home and class-room instruc· tion, particularly for the high school girls and boys. This would be in accordance with the practice of many of the primitive races.''

Hon. members will find that in "Nutrition an~ Physical Degeneration" by Dr. Weston Pnce.

We know that even in this House we are ignorant in matters of diet, and that goes for the hon. member for Cairns too. We walk into our dining room, and b~ause they have meat three times a day we eat it three times a day. Then, because some person decided to mill :flour--

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! I trust that the hon. member is going to associate his remarks with the question before the House and the principles. contained in this Bill. Up to the present his remarks have been entirely irre· levant.

Mr. Clayton: They are interesting.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! I agree that they are interesting, but they are not relevant.

lir. J. F. Bm:nes: Somebodv move thrt the Rt"niling Ori!ers he abolished and then we shall hear a decent speech.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order!

Mr. L. J. BARNES: We propose passing on to local authorities an even greater burden so far as incurable diseases and aged people are concerned. We should do all we can about incurable diseases, but so far we are only cutting pieces off the top of the blanket and sewing them on the bottom, which does not make the blanket any longer. Local authorities can extract only a limited amount of finance from the people, and there are going to be more incurable diseases unless we attack the cause of these things. Accord­ing to statistics, the incidence of cancer alone is going to be unlimited and local authorities will be faced with a' tremendous burden. We laymen debate many things in t~is Hou~e,. but actually we should deal only with statistics and leave the scientfic research side to the medical profession. We can only peruse statistics and see whether the health of the community has improved or retarded. We have proved that incurable diseases can be minimis~d, but we are doing nothing what­ever to avoid them or to deal with the causes of these dreaded ills. Actually, all that the Government. ~re doing is t<? pass on to the local authont~es the responsibility of putting these people mto homes and virtually saying to them, "You are left there to die. " We have made no attempt to tackle the problem and I suggest to the Government that· they should be taking steps to shoulder the whole of the burden themselves, for the l::ltate Govern­ment have more finance than local authorities can ever hope to control.

Much as I appreciate the sincerity of hon. members oppo~Ite when they say t;hat the dear old father Wishes to be near his son or daughter,. I also agree with the hon. member for Fassifern who says that the son or daughter who_ th_inks so much of the parent sh"Ol~ld have h1m m the home to care for. I will admit t;hat at times finances make it impossible to do so. In~urable diseases may develop to a very alarmmg extent, but it is proposed no~ to place the burden of caring for such patients on small local authorities who can ill-afford to do it.

I said on the introductory stage of the Bill that a I?erce~tage of the workers rthrough· out Austraha paid rates directly or by way of rent. If the:y pay rent they pay rates and they are entitled to the same considera· tion as those who pay rates direct. There­fort, by passing on to the local authorities the increased burden for the care and treat· ment of in.curable diseases, we are imposing more taxatwn on the people of Queensland.

Mr. KERR (Oxley) (3 p.m.) : I desire to convey my hearty congratulations to the Government on the splendid way in which they have dealt with hospital matters in this State 3;nd the care they have bestowed upon the ch1ldren and the aged and infirm. I agree with the hon. member for Nanango that free hospital treatment as well as free educa­tion should be given to the children of the Stnte. His was a wise suggestion. It is r.11lY hy nroviding free hospital treatment for 'h~ rllilr1rPn that we can expect to build up !t strong and virile manhood and womanhood,

Hospita~s Act [7 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill.

and we can quite easily supply the facilities free for all chilclTen wit):wut recourse to any means test whatever. Building up the viTilitv of our childTen is the best invest­ment foT the future for any State to pursue. Of couTse, finance is a consideration but "·hat I suggest is the only logical st~p to take in the deYelopment of a nation, and in view of the pTesent buoyant state of the Tevenue, a buoyancy that is likely to con­tinue for a while yet, I see no reason why these free facilities should not be provided for the childTen.

There is another very good feature of the Bill, and that is the care to be given to t):le aged and the infiTm. HoweveT, I must agree with the hon. member for Fassifern that the first consideration should be for the children, and the next for the age.d and the infirm. Of course, the pTesent time may not be propitious for the extension of hospital services. Hos­pital accommodation at present is oveT­taxed. There is a serious lack of material and man-power, but the fact remains that the hospital system is maintained by what appears to be very much like a poll tax.

:Mr. :MASSEY (Toowong) (3.2 p.m.): I do not think that the local authorities will be of the opinion that they are to be re.lieved of their financial obligations in respect of hospitals when it becomes known to them that under the Bill they are to incur further obligations. It is very doubtful whethe-r the hospitals should be expected to look after the old and infirm under the existing system of lwspital administration, although it may have to be done in some small districts where it is not possible to have special homes for the purpose. It is the paramount duty in the minds of most children to care for their aged or infirm parents and relatives, but it is not always possible for the· children to look after them. It is impossible for the ordinary housewife not properly trained to look after an aged parent suffering from, say, creeping paralysis.

The Secretary for Health and Home Affairs: Hear, hear!

:Mr. :MASSEY: That is possibly a disease very few people know anything about. It may be contracted at the age of 50 years or even a great deal earlier. It becomes worse gradually. It is impossible for the children of those sufferers to look after them properly.

We have also been told that children should be treated at hospitals free of cost. I can­not altogether agree that it should be children only that hospitals should treat free of cost. If the breadwinner becomes ill, and is com­pelled to pay for his treatment when he has no income, it is a great deal more serious than when he has a regular income and has to pay for the treatment of a sick child.

:Mr. Dunstan: You are out of step with hon. members of your party.

:Mr. :MASSEY: No-one can be out o! step when an intelligent suggestion can be proffered, and I trust the hon. gentleman will accept it.

My point is that when the breadwinner is able to earn his livelihood he is able to pay tor the treatment of his sick children, but when he is ill himself and has no income he is in a very awkward position, indeed.

This Bill seeks to overcome the financial difficulties of hospitals by reducing the present percentage of the cost found by local authori­ties and increasing the proportion borne by the Government. That is as it should be. I also say that every person whose income does not exceed £500 should receive free hospital treatment.

:Mr. PLUNKETT (Albert) (3.5 p-.m.): As I see it, two principles are involved in this Bjll. One is a reduction from 40 to 25 per cent. in the hospital precepts found by local authorities and the increase of the amount found by the Government from 60 to 75 per cent., and the other is the provision that hos­pitals boards shall make provision for the aged, infirm, and incurable. Before dealing with these principles, I wish to pay a tribute to what we have done in recent year~ in pro­viding hospital facilities. I give full credit to the present Minister for his active associa­tion with that work. I do not know if I am softhearted or not, but if there is one o bliga­tion more than another that should be placed on the whole of the people it is that they should supply the necessary wherewithal to provide for the health of people. That obli­gation is not recognised to the extent it should be. It is for the good of the State that its people should be kept strong and healthy, and in the event of sickness relieved of their suffering. That should be an obligation of the Government. We are building hospitals and improving hospital services until they have reached a stage at which we can be proud of them; but we have not gone far enough. It should be an obligation on the whole of the people to see to the health of the com­munity generally and that is why that obliga­tion should be met from consolidated revenue. It should not be met by a tax on land. It has been said not only to-day but on many other occasions that we discuss this question from a party-political point of view. The sooner we nationalise hospital services, the sooner we raise health matters above party politics, which would be as it should be. I give the Government great credit for reducing the hospital precepts on landowners from 40 to 25 per cent. and commend them for their wisd?m and foresight in recognising the unfanness of that tax, but when I study the provisions of this Bill I am not so sure that the relief indicated is to be actually given. 'fhis Bill certainly provides for increasing the Government's share of hospital costs from 60 to 75 per cent. and reducing that of local authorities from 40 to 25 per cent., but, at the same time, it provides that hospitals boards shall make provision for the comfort of the aged, infirm, and incurable. That is an additional burden to be borne by hos­pitals boards. I should like to know from the Minister whether with this additional respon­sibility the amount local authorities will be compelled to find on the 25-per-cent. basis will be greater than they now find on the 40-per­cent. basis without it.

300 HoBpitala Act [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

The Secretary tor Health and Home Affairs: I am afraid you are a pessimist.

Mr. PLUNKETT: If I have read this Bill rightly, that is the inference I draw. Under the Bill the Government can build a hospital to provide for the aged, infirm, and incurable and the lanilowners in the area will have to pay 25 per cent. towards it. There will be fewer patients in the established Government institutions, because those in the country areas will remain near their relatives and friends. The Bill will not mean any real relief to the hospitals. It is something like the subsidy to the dairying industry-give something with one hand and take it away with the other. If the local authority can be ordN·ed to build hospitals for the agerl, infirm, and incurable under the Bill, the land­owners will find 25 per cent. of a new service.

The Secretary for' Health and Home Affairs: Under the Hospitals Act, we do not compel; we give the task to the local hospitals boa'rds and they do the best in the circumstances as they find them. There are quite a number of hospitals boards that have different services from others; you know that yourself.

Mr. PLUNKETT: The l)'Ower is there. I agTee with the Minister that the aged, infirm, and incurable people can be accommodated with greater comfort in their own districts where their friends and relatives are. I do not think it is altogether an obligation on their families to provide nursing attention­some of them have no families anyhow-but there is an o bliga'tion to find the cost of their hospital treatment. It is desirable that pro­vision should be made for these sick people amongst their own friends wherever possible, but I strongly object to a levy on the land· owner to supply such accommodation, which, as a matter of fact, would relieve the Govern· ment of some expense in the maintenance of their institutions. If the Bill is a'greed to I cannot see that the 15 per cent. reduction will amount to a reduction in reality, because the Bill will impose a greater cost on the landowner.

Mr. O'Shea: Do you suggest the provi­sion of a tin hut for an old man would cost the shire council more tban the 15 per cent. reduction f

Mr. PLUNKETT: No, I did not say that. You relieve the landowner of 15 per cent., but you take power under the Bill to tax him to provide for the aged, infirm, and incur· able, which will amount to a great deal more than the amount represented by the reduction of 15 per cent.

Mr. Devries: Would not that reduction meet the increased cost~

Mr. PLUNKETT: No, it would not. I was interested in what the Minister said

about the country districts where there is not sufficient work to maintain a doctor, and under this Bill it would be possible for the Government to appoint him to some office in that district, the payment for which would enable him to remain in the area and give

medical service to the people. That is one of the most humane things the Minister has referred to. Many people die for the want of medical attention, and if we are to populate the country and expect people to go out and live and rear families in the country areas we have an obligation to provide a· medical service. If it is impossible for a doctor to earn a living in these sparsely populated areas-we had one at Canungra and l1e left and the hospital was closed, because there was no doctor-and if the Government sub· sidise the doctor by making him Government medical officer he will be able to remain in the district and provide a medical service for the people. I strongly support that suggestion of the Minister.

The Beaudesert hospital is a voluntary institution maintained by the generosity of the people of the district. It has given wonderful service; in fact the service is such that there is no person who would hesitate to subscribe to it.

Mr. Devries: But I presume it has assistance from the Government¥

Mr. PLUNKETT: Yes, I was coming to that. T)le Minister has rendered good service to the people in the Beaudesert district. I give him full credit for it. Each time a Bill has been brought down amending the Hospitals Act the Government could have districted that hospital and put it under the control of a board, but they have not done so. They have allowed the subscribers to keep and maintain their own hospital, and the people generally have done it, even in the present difficult period. I hope that under this Bill the same provisions for voluntary hospitals will obtain as in the past.

Mr. YEATES (East Toowoomba) {3.16 p.m.): I disagree with many things_ the Government have done but I feel very satisfied with the work of the Secretary for Health and Home Affairs in regard to health and hospital matters generally. He has taken a real personal interest in the matter, and that is saying a very great deal.

The Bill under discussion is a step in the right direction in many ways, but I can never understand why the landowner, be he the owner of half an acre or 2;3,000 acres, is taxed separately, whereas a large percentage of the people who have no land, not even a house, but board at hotels or boarding houses or travel, are not taxed at all.

Mr. Devrres: But they are ratepayers.

Jir. YEATES: They are not paying the same proportion.

Mr. Devries: They are ratepayers all the same.

Mr. YEATES: It is contended that they pay an indirect tax, but the man on the land is paying all the taxes the other man pays and in addition this direct tax. The sooneY the Government nationalise the service anr1 bring all these other people into line the better. Why are the Government not game to say it-I speak for myself in this-why

Hospitals Act [7 SEPTEMBER.] Amendment Bill. 301

are the Government not game to charge every male elector 1 Os. before giving him a vote 1

Mr. Devries: You believe in a poll-tax?

Mr. YEATES: I am speaking for myself in this. I take all the responsibility.

The Secretary for Health and Home Affairs: It is just as well you said that. Some of them would bite you.

Mr. YEATES: Members of the Labour Party are not game to say anything like that. The traveller, whether he is a commercial traveller or a swagman-and I refer to the swagman with every respect, as I know them and have spoken to them under bridges out West-are the people who make most use of the hospitals. That is why I can never under­stand why the Government shirk their responsibilities and make straight for the land always. I hope the 1finister will see his way clear to exempt those people, and at any rate nationalise the w)lole thing. That is what I hope they they will do, ot)lerwise they are moving along slowly in the direction of nationalisation. I suppose they are doing it bit by bit. 'fhey generally do these things little by little. Probably if they are returned to power the;v will seek a further amendment. The hon. member for Isis disagrees with the idea of their getting back. At any rate, why do it bit by bit? Why not take one bite now, and nationalise hospitals at once~ I urge him to do that. The Parliamentary Draftsman is waiting.

~ir. SPEAKER: Order!

The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH A"SD HOME AFFAIRS (Hon. E. M. Hanlon, Ithaca) (3.21 p.m.), in reply: There is not much in the criticism of hon. members to reply to. As a matter of fact, most have given the Bill their blessing. The main objection appears to be the paying. I am quite con­scious of the fact that tax-paying is not a popular 1pa.stime, but somebody has tu pay.

The word ' 'nationalisation,'' like the blessed word ''Mesopotamia,'' seems to have a fascination for hon. members opposite. It is quite possible for the Government to nationalise hospitals and impose a special tax-a land tax, income tax, or any othe1· tax -in order to meet the cost, so that the mere nationalisation would not remove the difficulty under which they contend they labour.

There is no power in the Hospitals Act for the Government to compel a board to erect a new building or install a new service. Actually, the power is one of moral suasion, in that if the Government are not satisfied with the conduct of a hospitals board they can remove the board and replace it \vith a board that will give the service the Government think should be given. The idea that the Government are going to go round telling boards to build old people's homes and wards for incurables immediately is not right. \Ve have never yet done that in our hospital work. We have found that it is quite easy, if hospitals boards are ever dilatory, to show the boards the lines they should take.

Officers of the department are always helpfu, to everybody who is working in association with it. I do not think any hon. member in this House can denv that no matter what authority is dealing ;vith my department the offieers of the department nre a I ways happ;v to giYe any help and advice they possibly can.

'fhere has never been any need to take up the axe and threaten any hospital authority before it would provide the service that the Act demands of it. It is always clone by bringing before the notice of the board the desirability of doing it, but as a general rule, before ever the department can bring before the notice of the board the desirability of supplying a service, the people of the district bring it before the board's notice. I want to assure hon. members that there will be no need to compel hospital authorities in the futme to provide for the aged and incurable, bcca use the people in the various areas will iusist that the provision is made.

\V e have no desire to close Dunwich, the EYcntide Home, the Diamantina Hospital, or any such institution immediately. 'l'hey are fulfilling a very worthy purpose indeed, but I still say that they do not give the service that the people of this country are entitled to expect. When some cities establish their incurable-disease section, and perhaps provide homes for the aged of their community it will not be long before the people in other pa.rts of the State will demand the same thing from their hospitals boards. They will not take the view that the hon. member for Fassi­fprn takes-that it does not matter how far away the sick people are from their relatives, or that they do not care. That is not the right attitude. The majority of the people do care about the comfort of their relatives and not merely of their relatives but of their ~riends. I am being bombardeil continually m these days of restricted tTansport with requests from people who wish me to try to get the transport authorities to give priority to persons travelling from different parts of the State to visit relatives who are seriously ill or dyi~g, and they do give priority, because they reahse the urgency of getting relatives to the deathbeds of those they love. I was rDther shocked at the callous attitude of the hon. member for Fassifern when he suggested that i~ does not matter where they are. I ~:m gomg to say that the poor feel their losses Just as greatly as the rich; possibly they feel them more so because they have not so much else to cling to, as a general rule. All they have to cling to is their intimate relatives and their intimate friends, and consequently I believe that, if anything, they feel such losses to a greater extent than the more well­to-do members of the community.

'rhe position will be that the State institu­tions :W~ll be. carried on and the hospital authontles. Will be empowered to provide th.ese services. If they provide them there Will be no need for the State to start new ones,. a.nd it will be. a more economical way of prondmg the servire. Take the position of Dunwich as an example. Down there we hav~ a big Stnte institution that requires engmeers, that reqn1res a pumping plant to

302 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Public Curator Acts.

provide water, that requires an electricity generating plant to provide light, that requires engineers to attend to the freezing of the meat and the milk, that requires a dairy to supply the milk, that requires a boat running backwards and forwards at immense cost to keep supplies going, that requires accommoda­tion for the staff to enable them to live on the place, aad a school for the children of the staff. Recreation has to be provided for isolated staff, medical men have to be kept there, and so on it goes right through-big staffs of nurses and domestics. The number I'equired to be provided for incurables or aged at any district hospital would be compara­tively small.

There are one or two hon. members opposite who seem to think that incurable diseases -cases call for considerable medical attention. They do not. Once a person has reached the stage at which the medical profession marks him as being incurable it merely means that he needs ordinary care and attention while he is still alive. There is nothing more that medical science can do for him. At the Dia­mantina Hospital the doctor always supervised the hospital, but the bulk of his time was spent in child-welfare work. The doctor :filled that dual position until he retired, but his .attention to the hospital was more for the purpose of seeing that everything was spick and span and clean and that the patients were well looked after. He walked through the wards and if a patient had a complaint to make he was there to receive it. He was there to see that everything was kept as it should be kept. That is why I suppose it is one of the :finest institutions in the Common­wealth. I never saw one in the Commonwealth to compare with the administration of the Dian;tantina Hospital. Nursing care is Teqmred, but not the intense nursing that is needed to nurse a patient back to good health. '.rhe nursing care is merely the attention that is necessary for the comfort of the patient. One hon. member suggested that incurable cases should be kept at home, but I think he must have had in mind the home of a person who, could maintain an elaborate staff of se.rvants.. A housewife in a working home With children to .look after with washing cleaning, mending, and so fo;th has not much ~ime to. devote to the nursing of a seriously Ill relative. In many cases, there are dressings to attend to. Most of the incurable cases arise from cancer, and cancer cases call for ~eh dressing. In some cases they are ghastly wounds an~ in other~ they are not, but they call for skilled dressmg and cleaning. They must have regular attention. Some of the patients lose control of their bodily functions and tubes have to be used to effect dis­charges from. the body. These are things that a housewrfe who has not been trained as a nurse does not understand. Therefore, these cases call for some nursing attention and location where the superintendent can keep a sharp eye on things to see the necessary attention is given. Where a person is suffer­ing pain a doctor is able to deaden its effect and by the injection of drugs ease the :final furlong in the race of life for these sufferers.

I have visited every important public hos­pital in the State and I am sure that every medical superintendent, or in the larger cities where there are a number of doctors at least one of them, would pay a daily visit to the wards for aged and infirm people, if required. The food and the drugs are already purchased by the existing hospital staff and the little extra consumed by these patients would not be very much. They would not increase the overhead cost of the hospital to any appreci­able extent. The matron of the hospital would also be the matron of the additional ward. The institution is supplied with the town water supply, the town electricity, the town gas, the butcher, the .baker, the green­grocer-everybody calls daily, and it only means taking the extra little food that these patients would eat. It will not mean the building of large institutions that would be a city in itself. Dunwich is a city of itself and its overhead cost is tremendous. Therefore, I say that the function of attending to the comfort of the aged and incurable would be very small compared with the total cost of hos­pital administration. It would not amount to any increased cost in many instances, and even if there was an increased cost, I think it would be far outweighed by the comfort and ease we should bring to the sufferers and their relatives.

Motion (Mr. Hanlon) agreed to.

PUBLIC CURATOR ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.

SEC'OND READING.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Hon. D. A. Gledson, Ipswich) (3.33 p.m.): I move-

'' That the Bill be now read a second time.''

There is very little I can add to the informa­tion I gave this Chamber on the initiatory stage. It contains several principles. First, it confers powers on the Public Curator to invest certain moneys that come under his control without being compelled to wait for meetings of the investment board, or without having to take up the time of the board in dealing with routine matters. That applies particularly to cases when a person entrusts money to the Public Curator either directly or under a will with a definite direction as to how it shall be invested.

TJ1e second matter deals with cases where the Public Curator is appointed a trustee under an instrument to make a particular investment. The trust instrument is explicit and under it the Public Cur a tor is directed to invest moneys in certain ways. This Bill will enable him to invest those moneys immediately. The investment may be in the purchase of debentures issued by a Crown corporation, or State instrumentality. We ,have in the State quite a number of corpora­tions or authorities whose securities are what is known as trustees securities in which money can be invested through the Public Curator. This Bill enables the Public Curator to invest them pursuant to the directions given to him.

PUblic Curator Acts (7 SEPTEMBER.) Amendment Bill. 303

The Bill also deals with the investment of moneys in estates in the course of adminis­tration. The Public. Curator, as a public trustee., will now have power to invest tllose moneys according to the dire.ctions set out in the will while the estate is being administered.

This Bill also deals with companies holding shares or moneys in any business. These can be invested by the Public Curator in . the interest of the beneficiaries, notwithstanding that it may be an ordinary estate. that is being wound up or an estate that is being reconstructed. This Bill also provides for an estate that is being reconstructed and in which shareholders are given an option to take out shares. The Public Curator is empowered to carry out the wishes of the testator and carry the business to its logical conclusion in the interest of the beneficiaries or company.

The last provision provides for the inve~t­ment of unclaimed moneys that may come into the hands of the Public Curator, such invest­ment to be according to the direction of the Governor in Council. That will ensure that these moneys will be invested in :1 certain manner. When a claim is made for this money the Public Curator must satisfy himself that the claim is genuine and that the claimant is a legal beneficiary. When he has done so he proceeds to make a recommendation to the Attorney-General who then makes an order for the payment of the money. It is not left to the Public Curator of his own responsibility to pay out any money in an unclaimed estate to a claimant. This clause provides, to, for the investment of these unclaimed moneys according to the Act.

A further provision empowers the Public Curator to deal with matters arising under the will of deceased persons. Some years ago the Public Curator was appointed a trustee, or next friend or representative of people who were not able to look after themselves, such as those confined in mental hospitals.

The Public Curator is their guardian or manager of the estate and looks after their interests and sees that their estates, if they have any, are looked after. In some cases he has to make arrangements for the carrying on of those estates and in others for wind­ing them np and disposing of them. He also acts as public trustee for people who are outside the State and not able to act for themselves. The Bill provides that he shall have power in connection with wills to look after the interests of the people he represents, and look after the interests of the general public. It gives him power to require a caveat to be lodged in the court in estates where delays sometlmes take place. It seems that no-oi1e had t11e power to see that such estates are brolll:rht into court and administered ncrorcl­ing to the will, instead of being dissipated because no attempt was made to bring about finality. It will also give him the power when a grant of probate has been made to apply to the court upon notice to the executor or administrator for an order directing the executor or administrator to bring the grant into the registry.

Before administration is taken out, certain advances can be made out of an estate. There may be objection to these. The ·Public Curator can see that these are registered in the court so that the people who are concerned will know what has been paid and the neces­sity for it. That is a very important matter. A case has just gone through the court ih which the Public Curator was able to bring a matter before the court and have it deter­mined as to who was the proper b~neficiary, because he was trustee under a previous will; other persons could not have moved the court to get a determination because they were not legally interested parties. The Bill will give the Public Curator the right to move the court in any case where there is any appear­ance that things have been done that were ~ot ~ight, or where there has been any dis­Sipation of an estate, or where any question should be determined in the interests of the public.

Another clause provides that unclaimed money left in the care of a hospital must be handed over to the Public Curator and dealt with by him under the provisions under which he now deals with other unclaimed moneys. He ha~ ~he power, even after some years, of dete!nnnmg whether a claimant should receiye th() money. At the present time hospitals Iiave no means of disposing of the money that is left with them, and they often do not know whether a claimant is the right one. ~h.e Public. Curator has the means of determmmg who Is the rightful claimant and after h~ determines that he can make a r~com­mencla~wn that. the money be paid over. If ther~ IS no claimant. the unclaimed money is put mto a fui!-d and mvested according to the law as to the mvestment of unclaimed moneys.

Mr. ~ICK~I~ (Murrumba) (3.45 p.m.) : The mam prmciples contained in the Bill are desir:'ble. It will be an advantage in admini­st!ation .. The first principle of the Bill deals With the mvestment of money by the Public ~nrator. Last year this House, by an amend­mg Act, created a board consisting of the Insurance Commissioner, the Public Curator and an official of the Treasury Department t~ approve of all investments by the Public ~urator. Since the passing of that measure It has been found that the principle of havin to refer all investments of the Public Curato~ to that board has hampered business· hence the necessity for this amending Iegisl~tion.

A .subsection of the Act dealing with the appomtment of the board and its powers reads-

'' In addition to investments made or pro­posed to be made from the Common Fund this section extends to all funds whatsoeve; inves.ted or proposed to be invested by the Public Curator and whether invested or pro­posed to be invested by him as trustee or as agent or in any other capacity what­soever.''

It states definitelv that ~.tll investments of the Public Curator must be :referred to the boaro. At .that time. that principle was agreed to unammo~sly by the House. We thought it very desirable. Apparently, in practice it has been found that in so;-,;,. instances it is not

304 PUblic Gurato1· Acts [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

altogether desirable, in that it holds up the work of the Public Curator and causes unnecessary delay in awaiting meetings of the board. The Bill allows the Public Curator now to invest certain moneys without refer­ence to that board, such moneys being those as to which he has a specific direction from the interested party or parties, as has been explained by the Attorney-General, or moneys in the unclaimed moneys fund. They shall be invested in Government securities or stock and as directed by the Governor in Council in accordance with section 24 of the Act.

On the introductory stage of this Bill the Attorney-General was not quite clear in his explanation of the amendment proposed, and at that time the Opposition viewed with a eertain amount of suspicion the idea of taking from the Public Curator's Investment Board this power of dealing with the investment of money. On a study of the Bill, however, we find that no objection can be offered to the amendments under consideration. It appears only reasonable that the Public Curator should have powers to invest moneys as required by the persons interested, and investments from the unclaimed moneys fund have ahvays been controlled by the Governor in Council. No objection, therefore, can be made to the powers given by this amendment.

As to the unclaimed moneys fund, I would point out that until 1937-38 the Governor in Council could direct the investment of the whole or part of this fund in Government securities of the State or Commonwealth. You \Yill remember, ::\fr. Speaker, that in 1938 an amendment of the Public Curator Act was sandwiched into an Appropriation Bill, which caused a stir in the House at the time. That amendment gave power to the Public Curator to direct investment in any class of invest­ment from time to time approved of by the Governor in Council by Order in Council published in the "Gazette." The words, "bv Order in Council published in the 'Gazette' i' are a protection in the investment of these moneys. We find the investments of tlwse unelaim('d moneys at 30 June last were-

£44,000-Australian Consolidated Stock;

£245,000-State Advances Corporation Debentures;

£16,000-Loans, Chinchilla Hospitals Board.

It is scarcely likely that the Governor ill Council will by Order in Council published in the ''Gazette'' direct an unjustifiable invest­ment, and that is a safeguard. The reason why the Opposition were a little suspicious on the introduction of this Bill and hearing the explanation given by the Attorney-General was that in the past, investments made by the Public Curator have not always been of the wisest. There is the instance of £40,000 lent to the Windsor Hotel under the direction of the Minister of the time.

Mr. Mole, who was then Public Curator, said when questioned, that political pressure hRcl been brought to bear upon him against his better judgment in connection with the

investment of those moneys. I mnst admit tlmt beyond one or two exmnples the Public· Cttrator has invested his funds wisely. When we look at the losses on inYestments that have been w1·itten off we find they do not amount to a very great sum. As a general rule the Public Curator has invested the moneys soundly, and with the safeguards we have now-the investment board and the amendments in this measure-! think it can be said with safety that all funds handled and invested by the Public Curator will be invested wisely and well. This amendment does not make the position worse in any way so far as the investment of funds by the Public Curator is concerned.

'l'he other principle, which allows the Public Curator to intervene in connection with a will and cause an executor or administrator to prove validity of a will, may be all right 1n some circumstances. It puts the Public Curator in much the same position as the Attorney-General in connection with divorces, but I think that the governing words in c-onnection with this power of the Public Curator to intervene ''if he considers it is just and reasonable to do so,'' are too wide. 'l'hat power could be abused, and an executor or administrator put to unnecessary expense. We have had the example quote·d by the Attorney-General, the Devoy will case, in which the Public Curator intervened. He intervened in an endeavour to destroy the Yalidity of the last will of Mrs. Devov. Had he been successful the will of which· he was executor would have become operative, but the %Urt decided otherwise. I should like to know under what existing law the Public C'nrator intervened in that case when we have this measure before us to give him that power now.

The Attorney-General: You will find that he was an interested party, he being a trustee under the previous will. That gave him the power.

Mr. NICKLIN: I should like that point eleared up, because this legislation does give very wide powers and they should be exer­cised judiciously. They should not be used to intcTVene in a case merely in order to cause unnecessary expense to estates.

The last principle, t]wt which provides that a hospitals board must hnnd unclaimed moneys that come into its possession to the Public Cnrator, is wise and reasonable. We know that hospitals hoards have been embar­rassed by these funds in that they did not know exactly .,-hat to do with them. When this legislation goes through the Public Curator will have the responsibility of deal­ing with them and this certainly will help hospitals hoards and other publir bodies into whose possession unclaimed moneys may come.

As I said at the outset, I think that in the main this legislation vvill be of benefit and is desirable.

Debate, on motion of Mr. Muller, adjourned.

The House adjourned at 3.57 p.m.