Freshwater Native Fish Stocks

Mr MARTIN (Port Stephens - Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for Fisheries) [3.37 p.m.]: I move:

That this House:

(1) notes the considerable increase in stocking of freshwater native fish in inland waters following the introduction of the inland freshwater fishing licence;

(2) supports the Government in its efforts to improve our freshwater habitats; and

(3) calls on the Commonwealth Government to increase its expenditure on the State Government's introduced species reduction program.

This year saw the production and stocking of a record number of bass in New South Wales. Figures provided by New South Wales Fisheries through the research centre at Port Stephens show that 260,000 bass were released this year. One of the final stocking events for the season took place last Saturday, 17 October, when up to 30,000 Australian bass fingerlings were released into the Brogo Dam near Bega. There are several important reasons that this highly significant event took place. Importantly, the achievement was the result of the development of new, very efficient, large-scale breeding techniques.

Australian bass have proved to be a difficult species to culture, and this work caps off decades of bass breeding research. New South Wales Fisheries is working closely with a number of commercial fish breeders to transfer the new technology and have it working as quickly as possible. This will facilitate the expansion of the developing industry and will allow breeders to overcome problems that have significantly constrained their production in the past. The stocking of these wonderful fish into major dams in rural areas is also a very significant event.

Australian bass are a species that cannot breed in dams or other areas because they would be prevented from running to the sea. Honourable members may be interested to know that bass breed in the mouth of estuaries in near-saline waters. In late winter they spawn, they go through a three-week larval stage and then they migrate back up the rivers and streams. In the past hundreds of dams and weirs have been built, which has led to a reduction of the areas in which bass can be found in their natural environment.

Mr SPEAKER: Are they good eating?

Page 8560

Mr MARTIN: Bass are wonderful to eat. As well, they are found in the eastern flowing river systems from the Thomson River in Victoria to the Mary River in Queensland. They are very similar to the barramundi in biology. The only way in which spawning can be induced is by use of a human pregnancy hormone. I could spend a great deal of time speaking on that subject, having been involved in that matter in the past. When the program was put together the environmental pressures facing estuaries and rivers had a major effect on the species. The Government is devoting significant efforts into developing fishways as a means of reducing the impacts of weirs and dams, particularly on this migratory species.

I advise honourable members opposite that it is necessary to use a similar technology on inland species in order for fish to travel up and down the inland rivers. Honourable members will recognise the need for fishways. For the many areas above major dams and weirs stocking will remain the only practical method of returning bass to fresh water impoundments and rivers. In some areas bass cannot migrate, so populations are not coping for a variety of reasons. Experimental stockings carried out in the Manning River have shown that stocking of rivers can provide some useful assistance in reinforcing population numbers. Other impacts on the population can be assessed and, hopefully, resolved. What we have done this year builds on what was done last year, and there is more to come. The number of bass produced this season is more than three times the amount produced last season.

This significant increase has been allowed by the funding provided in anticipation of revenue which will come from the recreational freshwater fishing licence. This motion of urgency relates in part to the inland fishing licence. Last season saw the greatest combined number of native freshwater fish species ever stocked in one year in the State’s history: well over two million native fish were introduced. This bass season builds on those significant achievements of recent years and highlights how fishing licence funds will allow a major increase in the fish population.

Anglers have asked also that licence funds be used to buy fingerlings from private hatcheries to match river stockings of fish purchased by community groups. This would allow increased numbers of fish to be stocked and encourage and assist local groups in their efforts, and, importantly, it would give great financial assistance to the rapidly developing fish breeding industry. Most of the fish produced in government stocking programs go into major dams, and it is now widely recognised that these areas provide world-class freshwater fishing. Major dams such as Glenbawn, Burrinjuck, Copeton and Wyangala are becoming meccas for local and city-based anglers, and it is common to meet Sydneysiders who routinely spend their weekends travelling to fish in these areas. Not only is the stocking good for the vast number of anglers in inland towns, but the resulting tourism is a multi-million dollar industry.

By creating great fishing in these areas we are making a valuable investment in inland New South Wales. Angling is a highly popular recreational pursuit in country areas and involves about 40 per cent of the population. By providing good fishing we are providing new recreational opportunities across vast areas. This is particularly valuable for young people, who make up a very high proportion, about 50 per cent, of anglers. The economic activity based around angling, the tourism it creates, and the social benefits are clearly very real assets for regional communities. New South Wales Fisheries has sought the advice of angling groups to ensure that fish are put to the best use.

By getting a clear understanding of what anglers want, we have been able to provide unique fisheries that are now the recreational focus of tens of thousands of people. This is part of broad approach of forming partnerships with the community. This approach has obvious benefits in the management of natural resources and it is also bearing fruit in many other areas of government. From a fisheries perspective this approach will ensure that the best use is being made of funds derived from the freshwater fishing licence. It is important for the Opposition to make its position clear: does it support this licence or will it abolish it? The appreciation by anglers of this approach is evidenced by their broad acceptance of the licence scheme.

Yesterday the new Federal Minister responsible for agriculture and fisheries, Mr Mark Vaile, make a number of statements on regional radio in New South Wales. In particular, he pointed to the need for co-operation between the States and the Federal Government on fisheries management. I look forward to my first meeting with Mr Vaile, when I can inform him of this Government’s achievements. I also look forward to working closely with and receiving financial assistance from the Federal Government to introduce a carp reduction program.

It is important to realise that in the Darling River system in inland New South Wales the catfish tandanus tandanus has virtually disappeared, for a
Page 8561
variety of environmental reasons: it is virtually non-existent. It is important to get that species back, and to get environmental flows. The tandanus tandanus is one of the rare species that will breed in captivity without flood plain conditions or induced spawns. It is important that we work together on the carp reduction program. Cotton Australia has put $25,000 into the trust fund. We have a very important task ahead of us: to get rid of the carp. It is not a matter of paying forever, it is about establishing businesses and making sure that we work well on them.

At the end of 1988 the former Government wiped out licences for a political ideology and not for the betterment of the people. In 1958 the freshwater licence was introduced and was in existence until 1988. Pensioners, the young and Aboriginals were exempt from that licence, as they are today. Since the abolition of the licence the Australian Labor Party had been constantly lobbied to reintroduce it. Labor came to government on the promise that if it could be proved that the fishing fraternity wanted it we would reintroduce it. We have honoured our side of the promise.

After three months the Government has $600,000 in the trust account, as well as the money promised by the Premier for the carp reduction program, which will be $1 million over three years, and the money from Cotton Australia. The fund is going extremely well. I defy anyone to take it apart for crazy ideological reasons. It is important to know that fishing in inland New South Wales is a very vital part of the pastimes, the economy and the wellbeing of inland New South Wales. It is important that carp numbers are reduced, that stocking continues, that we have licence fees, and that we have a better river system. It is important that this House supports what inland anglers in this State want: a better fishery, owned and paid for by them, of which they can be proud.

Mr J. H. TURNER (Myall Lakes) [3.47 p.m.]: It took the Minister almost 9½ minutes to finally say how much he has received from this fund. The Opposition suspected it was about $600,000. I have not verified, audited or checked the figure, but I take the Minister’s word for it. I imagine it would have cost about $500,000 for the extra eight inspectors, so the Government is about $100,000 ahead at this stage. By the time administration costs and extras are taken into account, the fund will be in debit. An article in the north coast Daily News entitled "Fisheries to target favoured locations" stated:

NSW Fisheries warned freshwater anglers that several favoured fishing locations across the Tweed would be targeted as part of the newly introduced licensing scheme.

This is becoming a revenue raiser. The Minister’s zealousness with regard to this ill-founded tax will cause fishermen to become criminals. The Minister said that only $600,000 has been collected and that the Premier had to advance money towards this recreation fund. Where did those funds come from and how did they happen to be put into a trust account? I presume they were advanced from Treasury. Will they have to be repaid out of that trust account, and, if so, what provision does the trust account have to repay those funds?

From my reading of the trust account conditions, it would be illegal to repay those funds to Treasury. Why were the funds advanced? The Government expected people to rush in and pay money to be able to fish in places where they had fished free of charge for many years. However, the Minister has not kept his word, and Treasury, through the Premier’s Department, has rescued him. The Minister referred to the resultant record stocking, and his press release of 28 June stated that the expected record of six million fish would be a taste of things to come. That is wonderful, but when the coalition is in government the situation will be much better.

That press release was issued before this fund was established. If the Government can fund a record six million fish without a licence fee, why does it need one? The Government has been funding that scheme for the past 12 months and believes it is excellent. The licence fee may increase the Government’s coffers, but not by much. It has collected only $600,000 to date, and indications are that the Government will not get much more. Out of that amount it has had to pay for at least eight additional inspectors, the licence issue fee, commission in some instances, processing fees, the costs of banking and administration, computerisation, and the cost of printing the licence on paper or plastic. Frankly, the Minister is behind the eight ball: he does not have the money, and that is probably why he is being propped up by the Premier and outside sources.

The Opposition is committed to restocking our waterways with native fish and will give ownership to inland fishing groups and organisations. That ownership will not come with a price tag but with giving responsibility to fishermen without the middle man and without the department zealously targeting favourite locations to raise revenue. Each weekend tens of thousands of fishermen would break this law, because they do not agree with it. They do not have a licence and will not get a licence, because they have been fishing at their favourite locations for years without a licence. This legislation has turned
Page 8562
tens of thousands of people into potential criminals at risk of possible prosecution. It is inherently unfair.

The Minister spoke about buying fingerlings from private groups. Why does the department need to involve itself in that process? Why not have a scheme whereby inland angling groups can do that directly? Again the middle man will be used, but at what cost? How much will it cost for the department to interfere in this scheme? This proposal was last considered with the Booma hatcheries, which is a protracted matter that may not yet have concluded. That is indicative of the way the Minister deals with private enterprise. That ill-fated exercise could easily have resulted in 45,000 endangered eastern freshwater cod being tipped on hot cement because of the Government’s ineptitude and inefficiency in handling the matter.

The Minister sought to rely on all sorts of dodgy figures. Some people said that the Department of Fisheries told them to ring me about the licence. The Minister, or members of his staff, should not have directed people to make those calls. I received phone calls from people who said that the majority of people wanted the licence. The Minister said in his second reading speech that 500,000 people from interstate and overseas come to New South Wales to fish. I stated that the figure would be 250,000. On those figures, of the 3,840 responses to the Minister’s 1997 survey, 75 per cent, or 2,880, supported the proposal for an inland fishing fee. That is 0.38 per cent of people in New South Wales who, according to the Minister, fish in New South Wales.

It is nonsense to say that the majority of fishermen want a licence, because it is simply not true. The Opposition has been overwhelmed by complaints about the licence. A short time ago the Minister referred to tens of thousands of people having a licence. What happened to the hundreds of thousands? Did the Minister mislead the House when he said in his second reading speech that 500,000 people from interstate and overseas - not counting New South Wales - travel to New South Wales to fish. That statement indicates that the scheme has not worked. This cumbersome Minister and his cumbersome proposal have fallen foul of the general public. This is simply a tax on country New South Wales; it is the bed tax of country New South Wales.

If people want to fish in country New South Wales they will have to pay $10, $30 or $75. To demonstrate the stupidity of the situation, fishermen could throw out a line in front of the Minister’s home and would not have to pay, but if they throw out a line in the Grahamstown Dam, in his electorate, they will have to pay. This is a revenue raiser to increase the bureaucracy in his department and to ensure that he drives people away from country New South Wales, which desperately needs an influx of people and money.

The Minister said in a press release that $2.9 million will be raised from the licence fees, but how many people is he scaring away? How many hotel beds are empty; how many restaurants and fish shops need customers? Families will fish at the beach at no cost, because it would cost them an extra $30 or $40 to fish in fresh water. The Minister is turning people away from country New South Wales. He may have a ministerial salary, but most people have a limited income. One way people can maximise their income is to have a free day at the river bank where they can fish - but they cannot do that under this Government.

Mr ANDERSON (St Marys) [3.57 p.m.]: The introduction of a fishing licence fee from 1 July was a bold step for the Carr Government. It was a step that was desperately needed to assist native fish to re-establish in our rivers and waterways. There are no successful biological means of controlling carp in our river systems. This experimental program is the next best thing: to see if carp numbers can be reduced using commercial fishing and the carp replaced with native fish. It needs to be proved before the Government will expend large sums of money on the program. The aim has always been to subsidise commercial fishers to encourage them to catch as many carp as they can. The Government set a target of 1,000 tonnes of carp in the first year. The program will cost $1 million each year, over three years.

Mr J. H. Turner: It's $1 million over three years, not each year.

Mr ANDERSON: It is $1 million over three years. The money will come from New South Wales Fisheries and a proportion of freshwater fishing fees, as well as from contributions by the Department of State and Regional Development, the Environment Protection Authority, the Department of Land and Water Conservation and the National Parks and Wildlife Service. So that many people and organisations are contributing to this experiment. It is not possible to eradicate carp completely. This Government will not throw huge sums of money at the problem without establishing the worth of a reduction program.

Page 8563

The experiment is supported by recreational anglers, who have indicated they want some portion of the money collected from the freshwater fishing fee to go towards carp reduction. The program is spread over three years, with the main effort coming from the inland commercial fishing sector, which is being offered a bounty of 25¢ a kilogram on carp caught in the first year, with the sum reducing over the following years. This will make it financially viable for commercial fishers to take three to four million kilograms of carp from our waterways over three years. It will allow them to develop markets for fertiliser, fishmeal, bait and pet food, and improve fishing and transport methods.

Money from the fee for the freshwater fishing licence will allow New South Wales Fisheries to stock our waterways with native fish at the same time as carp are being removed. Hopefully, native fish once again will become dominant in our environment. This is a good theory. It could dramatically reduce the number of carp, see native fish re-established as dominant species, and provide jobs, investment and better angling in the regions. I support the comments of the Minister for Fisheries about the lack of Federal support for the carp eradication program. It is high time that the stunned mullets in Canberra recognised the benefits for the bush of important programs such as this and supported this Government in achieving what it has set out to do, rather than just sitting around and doing nothing about such an important program.

Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [4.02 p.m.]: If this motion is more urgent than a motion on New South Wales country health, I am a monkey’s uncle.

Mr Martin: I think you could be right.

Mr SLACK-SMITH: No doubt the Minister has been given the fisheries portfolio because he is used to telling whoppers in the House. This motion is no exception. Did I hear the Minister correctly? Did he say that freshwater fish in inland rivers have increased in number, or was that comment directed to just the number of carp? I am not sure whether the Minister was saying that the number of native freshwater fish - cod, yellowbelly, and silver and golden perch - in our inland rivers had increased. The Minister did admit that carp are posing a big problem. There is no doubt about that. But what has the Government or the Minister done to eradicate carp? The answer is absolutely nothing.

Several New South Wales companies have tried hard to get the Minister’s endorsement to harvest the carp. However, something always happens, and those companies have not been able to get their harvesting operations going. The inaction of the Minister has allowed carp to flourish. The Minister spoke about releasing fish into our riverways. I will speak about inland rivers because I come from inland New South Wales. The Bingara, Inverell, Moree and Narrabri fishing clubs have been releasing freshwater fingerlings into our rivers for years. That is nothing new.

I am looking at a list of New South Wales Fisheries stockings. It is all well and good to put fish in our dams, but apart from stocking the Murrumbidgee with trout cod, nothing in the list indicates that any other variety is being released into any of our inland rivers at all. That is a disgrace. The biggest concern of those in inland New South Wales is that although carp are devastating our river systems the Government has been doing nothing about it. What really irks those who live inland is that they have to pay for a licence to fish inland streams while the people of Sydney fish the harbour for nothing. Fish have almost disappeared from Sydney Harbour. Twenty years ago fishermen could catch enough fish from the harbour to provide quite a few good meals. Today they cannot catch enough for one meal.

The Minister should address the position with regard to fishing in Sydney first, and ask the fishers of this city to pay a licence fee before asking freshwater fishermen to pay their share. Then we would not mind so much paying for a licence fee. It irks inland fishers that they are being discriminated against. We are being told that we cannot fish our rivers or dams without a licence when people up and down the coast and around Sydney Harbour can fish as much as they like without paying a fee. Inland anglers are being discriminated against. All of the fishermen to whom I have spoken are very annoyed. Many have said, "As far as this Minister is concerned, I won’t even bother getting a licence." Therefore the Government is losing money, and the fishers disregard the fact that they are breaking the law because they do not like being discriminated against simply because they live in an area of New South Wales that does not have salt water.

The Minister has blown it. This $1 million eradication program, to be carried out over three years, involves a levy of 25¢ a kilogram to collect funds to eradicate carp. Eradication of carp is a good move, but nothing has happened yet. After the first year the levy will reduce to 15¢ a kilogram, and for the third year it will be 10¢ a kilogram. If the program is to work, the incentive should be greater for the third year, because that is when operators harvesting carp might be finding their catch a bit lean.

Page 8564

Mr Martin: Another National Party subsidy. Here we go!

Mr SLACK-SMITH: That is exactly what the Minister is doing under this program. This is yet another tax on country New South Wales and on those who choose to live inland in this State. They will pay what is in effect another tax when the people of Sydney and those living along our coast do not have to pay a tax on the same activity. This discrimination is disgraceful. The sooner the Minister gets his act together, the better off New South Wales will be.

Mr ROGAN (East Hills) [4.07 p.m.]: I support the urgency motion moved by the Minister for Fisheries. I will begin by referring to one or two matters raised by the Opposition spokesman and the honourable member for Barwon. The Minister referred in his second reading speech to environmental flows. This Government is to be commended for its whole-of-government approach to inland waters and their stocking with fish, because if the flows are inadequate the fish will not spawn and breed. The second reference made by the Opposition related to licence fees. An assurance has been given that the licence fees will be returned to fishermen by way of stocking of our waterways with fish.

My experience over the years has been that when people see value for their money they will not complain about contributing. Nobody likes parting with money for nothing, but when they see value for their money they really do not mind. The Opposition spokesperson spoke about what the coalition would do if it were to be returned to government. The coalition was elected to office in 1988 on a lot of promises it had made. Instead of meeting those promises, it took a slash and burn approach to administration. I would treat with great scepticism and caution - as I know the public will - any promises made by the Opposition on what it will do if returned to government.

The question was posed about whether tourists and others would go to our inland to fish. All I can say is that it is a well-known fact of life that if the fish are there, fishers will turn up to try to catch them. This Government is putting in place policies and implementing measures to make sure that that can happen. The Carr Government is going from strength to strength in providing world-class freshwater fishing for local and tourist anglers. The Minister for Fisheries indicated that throughout the State a total of 2,122,550 native fish were stocked in the 1997-98 financial year. That is tangible evidence of the value for money that we are receiving from those fish stocks. In stocking the fish, the Government is making a valuable investment not only in regional New South Wales but in areas close to the metropolitan area.

For example, bass have been introduced into Fitzroy Falls in the Illawarra, Tallowa Dam in the Shoalhaven and Lake Wallis near Lithgow - all of them an easy drive into the nearby countryside for fishing families. I find it particularly pleasing that the Government is making a special effort to re-establish the dominance of native species such as Murray cod, golden and silver perch, and Australian bass in our river systems. That answers the question of members opposite about the fish species that have been introduced. I understand that fisheries officers, with the co-operation of local anglers, have stocked a record 83,000 trout cod, an endangered species, in the southern Murray-Darling Basin. I am sure that will be of particular value to the honourable member for Barwon. That is almost three times the 28,000 trout cod stocked last year, and it is especially pleasing as I understand that research by the Department of Fisheries indicates that previous trout cod stocks are showing excellent signs of survival.

Anglers are now reporting good stocks of the cod, especially in the Murrumbidgee River between Wagga Wagga and Narrandera. It is clear that the recovery program is starting to restore species to their former status. For those positive and tangible reasons, I am delighted to support the Minister’s motion. Of all fisheries Ministers, especially those who have been in office during the time I have been a member of the Chamber, none is more qualified and dedicated to the task than this Minister for Fisheries, given his background as a fisheries officer.

Mr MARTIN (Port Stephens - Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for Fisheries) [4.12 p.m.], in reply: At the outset I must say that I was disappointed by the response from Opposition speakers. The two Government speakers, the honourable member for East Hills and the honourable member for St Marys, made constructive contributions to debate on this urgent motion. Members opposite talked about matters of substance for only 2½ minutes; they spent the rest of their time on waffle. If as many licences are sold this year as were sold in 1988, $2.9 million will be collected. The Government has received an assurance that every cent of that will go into the trust account. In addition to the trust account, Cotton Australia is providing $25,000. The Premier has committed an additional $1 million to the carp reduction program, and the Government will be providing further funding for carp reduction.

Page 8565

Mr Fraser: What does administration of the fund cost?

Mr MARTIN: Less than 10 per cent will be spent on administration. When the coalition took office in 1988 it wiped out eight inland inspector positions. The Government is now re-instating those positions. The honourable member for Myall Lakes referred to debt. The trust account will total $2.9 million. At the end of the first three months of this year the account had a balance of $600,000. I remind honourable members that July and August are non-fishing months; no licences are issued for those months and some fishing stocks are closed. The Murwillumbah Daily News has given fair warning to people not to fish in non-tidal waters. The allegation that the Premier has had to advance funds is nonsense. The Premier has deposited funds in the account to get rid of carp, not for the reasons suggested by the poor, hopeless member opposite.

The licence fee is set out in the legislation. Members opposite said that tens of thousands of people fished in New South Wales waters. The statistics for people fishing in New South Wales show that 38 per cent are women, just under 500,000 are under the age of 14, just under two million are over the age of 14 and nearly 500,000 come from overseas or interstate to fish in New South Wales. Those figures are put out through three different groups. The honourable member for Barwon spoke extensively about the carp reduction program. The coalition did nothing about reducing carp during its seven years in government. The Government is trying desperately to get rid of carp. It needs assistance from the Commonwealth because carp are a problem in Queensland, Victoria, South Australia and New South Wales. If carp is removed from one place it must be removed totally. Only this week I received a letter from an eminent person in the fishing industry, Mr Bill Classon, which stated:

Just a quick letter to congratulate you and your Fisheries personnel on your achievements over the last twelve months.

The freshwater licence and the commitment of those funds directly to recreational fishing is a credit to you personally.

On behalf of all freshwater anglers in Australia -

Thank you

Bill Classon

I table that letter for the information of honourable members. Members opposite do not want inland jobs. They do not want fishing to be enhanced, they do not want better inspection and enforcement, and they do not want the habitat repaired. They do not realise that I could enhance inland fishing, clean up the habitat and provide better policing. Technology does not exist on the coast of New South Wales to introduce snapper, mulloway, whiting and bream, but the Government is working towards that. Until that happens the charging of a saltwater licence fee cannot be justified.

In Victoria, Jeff Kennett has done a deal to take all the fishers out of Port Phillip Bay in return for imposing a saltwater licence. However, nothing has been heard about that for 10 months. I will do the honourable thing in New South Wales. I will adjust the fishing. I am trying to remove inland fishers so that carp and yabby licences can be issued. The Government is taking positive action. New South Wales will have a fishing licence and better fishing. Members opposite do not want inland jobs. They should be ashamed of the way they are treating the people of inland New South Wales. The House should support my urgency motion.

Question - That the motion be agreed to - put.

The House divided.

Ms Allan Mr McManus
Mr Amery Mr Markham
Mr Anderson Mr Martin
Ms Andrews Ms Meagher
Mr Aquilina Mr Mills
Mrs Beamer Ms Moore
Mr Carr Mr Moss
Mr Clough Mr Neilly
Mr Crittenden Ms Nori
Mr Debus Mr Price
Mr Face Dr Refshauge
Mr Gaudry Mr Rogan
Mr Gibson Mr Rumble
Mrs Grusovin Mr Scully
Mr Harrison Mr Shedden
Ms Harrison Mr Stewart
Mr Hunter Mr Sullivan
Mr Iemma Mr Tripodi
Mr Knight Mr Watkins
Mr Knowles Mr Whelan
Mr Langton Mr Woods
Mrs Lo Po’ Mr Yeadon
Mr Lynch Tellers,
Dr Macdonald Mr Beckroge
Mr McBride Mr Thompson

Page 8566

Mr Armstrong Mr O’Farrell
Mr Beck Mr D. L. Page
Mr Blackmore Mr Peacocke
Mr Brogden Mr Photios
Mr Chappell Mr Richardson
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Rixon
Mr Cochran Mr Rozzoli
Mr Cruickshank Mr Schipp
Mr Debnam Ms Seaton
Mr Ellis Mrs Skinner
Ms Ficarra Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Glachan Mr Small
Mr Hartcher Mr Souris
Mr Hazzard Mrs Stone
Mr Humpherson Mr Tink
Mr Jeffery Mr J. H. Turner
Dr Kernohan Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Kerr Mr Windsor
Mr MacCarthy
Mr Merton Tellers,
Mr Oakeshott Mr Fraser
Mr O’Doherty Mr Smith

Mr Nagle Mr Collins
Mr E. T. Page Mr Kinross

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.