["The Balla Balla Jetty", Daily News (Perth, WA), Thursday 25 September 1913, page 6]
THE BALLA BALLA JETTY.
The member for Roebourne moved "That in the opinion of this House it is desirable that the contract entered into between the Government and the Whim Creek Company for the lease of the Balla Balla, jetty be cancelled." The motion gave rise to a considerable amount of discussion, and was plainly not relished by the Minister for Works and the Honorary Minister (Mr. Angwin). During his speech Mr. Gardiner fired in some solid inferences, such as when he said that the Minister for Works had gone back on the nationalisation principle after making promises to the Whim Creek electors, and when he roundly asserted that he was surprised at the attitude of the Colonial Secretary (Mr. Drew), a gentleman "who had sold his political principles for a £1,300 per year job."
Mr. Gardiner said, in moving the motion, he thought the principle of nationalisation was involved. Tho Minister for Works had pointed out at Whim Creek at one time that that community were laboring under a great disadvantage by having the jetty leased privately, and he had made a tentative promise that the Government would take it over. Since then, however, the Balla Balla jetty had again been leased to the manager of the Whim Creek Company for £150 a year. Replying to Mr. George, Mr. Gardiner said the jetty was worth at least £1,000 a year. He quoted figures to show the amount of commerce passing over the jetty in support of his estimate. He found that the squatters and others were laboring under great disabilities through the jetty being under private control. The company made what charges they liked, and the public were compelled to submit to any conditions imposed.
Mr. Angwin: The charge? are fixed in the agreement.
Mr. Gardiner: That's all very well, but what check can be kept on the company's charges? The Minister for Works, said Mr. Gardiner, was once a staunch supporter of his in this matter, but had evidently gone back on his opinion. This led Mr. Johnson to assert that such was not the case. When he spoke at Whim Creek he was not referring entirely to the jetty, but to general matters.
Mr. Gardiner: Perhaps you did not, but you certainly spoke of the jetty, and I can produce a short-hand report of your speech at Whim Creek. Continuing, he said that the tonnage going over Balla Balla jetty was 2,000 tons greater annually than the third most important jetty in the State. The Minister had had the audacity to say that it was impossible to place the jetty under Government control, because there was no goods shed there. Well, sheds could be erected at a small cost, but they were not neces sary. Another thing, in leasing the jetty tenders had not been called in a legitimate manner. Had such been the case it could have been leased for £1,000 a year. In fact, he was prepared, in the House, to offer £1,000 a year for it now. The present lessees had a tenure of 12 months, but the Government had the power to cancel tho agreement at three months' notice, and he demanded that this should be done in the interests of 200 residents at Whim Creek. Under present conditions they had to pay exorbitant charges for their goods and whilst the jetty remains under present control they would continue to do so. The principle on which the present Government was elected was nationalisation, and it should stand to it. If the Government took the jetty over a reduction of one shilling per ton on all cargo passing over it could be made, and still a handsome profit could be shown.
He was confident that in all fairness, the Minister for Works would support the motion as moved. The Hon. Minister, Mr. Angwin, explained that in leasing the jetty it was recognised that the Whim Well Mining Company was responsible for most of the cargo passing over it. Moreover, all goods were passed over the company's tramway line – a private line – and they had to bear the cost of that. He maintained that the public were honestly treated by the present lessees. They were restricted in making charges. Mr. Gardiner, he said, must not think he was going to revolutionise things, in a few moments. It was a strange thing that no dissatisfaction had been expressed and no complaint made previously concerning the leasing of the jetty.
Mr. Gardiner: Complaints were made last January.
Continuing, the Honorary Minister said that a departmental report had been made in connection with the jetty, and it had shown that it could be worked profitably enough by the State, but extraneous conditions were unfavorable to such a course, and the report, therefore, recommended a continuance of the present system of control. If the Government did take control it would cost a considerable amount of money. He did not know of anyone who would pay £1,000 per year for the lease.
Mr. Gardiner: I'm prepared to put up a deposit to-morrow. The Minister would admit, he said, that if tenders had been called, a greater amount of rent might have been obtained, but he did not think it would have gone to £1,000 a year.
The Minister for Works accused the member for Roebourne of not having given the House the full facts of the case, and that was to be regretted, more especially as Mr. Gardiner was in full possession of them. He admitted having said at Whim Creek that he sympathised with the residents for the conditions by which they were obsessed. The company certainly had them under its thumb and took advantage of the fact. Therefore he had promised to place the facts before the Government, and consider what was the best thing to be done. He was willing to admit that if the private railway line was not at Balla Balla, and if the Government couid compel the company to give all the cartage to teamsters, it might be good enough to take the Jetty over. But there was difficulty in these things, and also in the impossibility of securing adequate labor to handle cargo. If the hon. member for Roebourne had confined his motion to the assertion that the amount being received for the lease was too small, and that more could be obtained, he might have been doing the State some service. But under present conditions State control would prove of no benefit whatever to the public. To be of any use the Government would have to also get control of the railway line. It was nonsense to say the company's monopoly in stores, etc., could be broken up. Government control would merely prove a burden on the public, and nobody would benefit. Labor would have to be maintained there for months in the year doing nothing.
Mr. Gardiner: Nothing of the sort. There is plenty of labor available at all times.
Mr. Underwood: That is so. More than would be required.
The Minister for Works: The hon. member knows perfectly well such is not the case. The only employers of labor in the district are the Whim Well Co., and they would never allow their men to assist the Government if the jetty was taken from them.
Mr. George roundly condemned the attitude of the Minister for Works, and quoted numerous letters and telegrams concerning the Balla Balla jetty. He twitted the Minister for having gone back on his nationalisation principles.
Mr. Underwood deprecated the manner in which the tender for the Balla Balla jetty was accepted. He was of opinion that it he matter was fixed with some officials by Mr. Sleeman over a bottle of wine.
Mr. George: Did he send for the wine by wireless?
Mr. Underwood: Well, he might have had it down in the old incubator where the hon member used to go when he had anything to hatch.
Mr. Taylor said he would move an amendment to the motion, as follows:--"That after the word cancelled the words 'and jetty be controlled by the Government' be added. He thought the member should have applied his motion to all jetties in the State. In perusing the file, lie found that as far back as January 22 Mr. Sleeman had wired to the Minister asking for a renewal of the lease. Later on the agreement was arranged. But the only agreement he could find was one dated 1907, which was signed for two years.
Mr. Angwin: That is the only agreement in existence, but there was a right of continuance from year to year, with certain provisos.
Mr. Taylor: Then under what conditions are the company operating? There must be some understanding between Sleeman and the Government. Therefore we are asked to cancel an agreement which does not really exist There could not be any doubt that the residents of the district were laboring under a grievance, and they approached their member. In a straightforward and manly way he took up their cause. That was all he did.' The Minister had made promises to the Whim Creek residents – he had read them – concerning the jetties, and in this case had not kept his pledge. The Miners' Union had stepped in and tried to bring the Government to book over this Balla Balla jetty and failed. The A.L.F. were next appealed to, but even they could do nothing, in spite of strenuous protests against this leasing. Every union in the State supported Mr. Gardiner's action in vigorously protecting and advocating Government control. That is why he moved his amendment, which placed the whole thing in a nutshell. He did not believe that any member who believed in private enterprise could vote for it if he was true to his principles.
Mr. Monger: Then, in other words you want your amendment to be defeated?
Mr. Taylor: No, I don't. For I know that only a small minority in this House believes in private enterprise.
On the motion of Mr. Heitmann the debate was, on a division, adjourned.
