330 PARLIAMENTS OF THE DOMINIONS [PART III
§ 3. TASMANIA
In Tasmania the Upper House likewise has maintained an
attitude of full equality of power with the Lower House, and
it does not appear that there is any prospect of the relations
between the two Houses being altered. In its financial
relations to the Lower House the Upper House in practice
goes beyond the principles laid down in the case of the Upper
House of South Australia. That is to say, the ordinary
estimates for the year will not be passed without question,
and the power of amending may be used ;! and anything
except the most normal exercise of the power of the Lower
House is a matter of question and examination, nor does the
House restrict itself to suggesting amendments, but amends.
The Upper House has rejected Appropriation Acts, and no
successful attempt has been made to deal with the rejection.
As regards matters of ordinary legislation, thanks to the
activities of the Upper House, Tasmania is by far the most
backward state of Australia in respect of legislation for social
needs. Every year Bill after Bill, if deemed too advanced,
is rejected by the Upper House. Workmen’s Compensation
had to wait until 1910; land settlement and even Factory
Acts are not appreciated, and the state had also until 1910
the distinction of having no system of wages boards or other
means of controlling industrial conditions; in 1910 both
a Factories Act and a Wages Board Act were passed. More-
over, the situation is complicated in Tasmania by the
plated a dissolution of both Houses after a Bill had been twice rejected
(after a three months’ interval in the same or the next session), and there-
upon if the Bill were passed again a joint session should be held, whereupon
any Bill would be presented for the royal assent if passed by a majority.
In the Bill of 1911 no joint session is required : if the Bill is passed a third
time it becomes law.
* Legislative Council Journals, 1877, pp. 39, 40, 117, 119; Votes, June 3,
10, 11, 1879. In 1879 the Upper House amended the Supply Bill, and
eventually only agreed, on the refusal of the Assembly to accept the amend-
ment, to a grant for eight months, of which six were over before the Bill
was assented to. They justified their action by the financial difficulties
due to faulty finance on the part of the Government. See also Rusden,
Australia, iil, 479, 480.
