Evidence from the Parliament of South Australia

  • Slide2
  • Slide3
  • Slide4
  • Slide5
  • full screen slider
  • Slide1
image carousel by WOWSlider.com v7.4
 

There was a long association with the occupational pension trust established on the 23 December 1913 and the Parliament of South Australia.

There have been two enactments associated with this pension trust:

The consolidation Deed of Variation dated 6 May 1958 was vetted by a Select Committee of the legislative Counsel of the Parliament of South Australia.

The following evidence from the Parliament of South Australia has been provided to the Australian Crime Commission and to the Australian Federal Police, as well as to ASIC.

SA Evidence

Introduction

There is a remarkable history to an employee benefit trust established in South Australia on 23 December 1913 known as The Provident Fund. This Fund and related funds were established by acts of personal generosity by “Adelaide Gentlemen”. Yet these acts of personal generosity were to be followed decades later by acts of sheer greed by “Melbourne Asset Strippers”.

The name of The Provident Fund was changed to the Elders IXL Superannuation Fund in 1982.

One of the “Adelaide Gentlemen” was Robert Barr Smith, the co-founder with Sir Thomas Elder, of Elder Smith & Co Limited in 1888. Robert Barr Smith was also concerned about the number of cases of widows being swindled by dishonest lawyer and accounts after the deaths of their husbands, so with the assistance of the Parliament of South Australia, Robert Barr Smith established a reputable Trustee and Executor company that the widows could turn to with confidence.

It was to be a cruel turn of fate that resulted in the widows of both the male employees of the Trustee and Executor company, as well as its parent company, to themselves be the victims of dishonest lawyers and accountants many decades later, when their survivorship pensions were stolen from them to fund the “get rich plans” of the “Melbourne Asset Strippers”.

This document covers some of this remarkable history.

Legislative Council

The Legislative Council of South Australia has a long association with The Provident Fund, an employee benefit trust established on 23 December 1913 in Adelaide.

There has also been a long association with The Advertiser {Advertiser Newspapers Pty Ltd}.

This Fund was the most prestigious private trust administered in South Australia for seven decades.

The Fund is a trust and this trust has not been wound-up, however unlawfully attempts are being made to wind-up this trust by a purported Trustee not lawfully appointed to the office of Trustee.

There have been two enactments associated with The Provident Fund approved by the Legislative Council and there have been Members of the Legislative Council directly associated with The Provident Fund. There have also been Chairmen of Advertiser Newspaper Pty Ltd who have been Trustees of The Provident Fund. Lloyd Dumas, one of these Chairmen, was a strong supporter of Sir Thomas Playford, South Australia’s longest serving Premier.

A notable former Member of the Legislative Council was Sir John Downer (1843 – 1915) who was elected to the Legislative Council as a representative of the Southern Districts in 1905 and remained a member until his death in 1915.

Sir John was also a former Premier of South Australia and Sir John co-drafted the Australian Constitution {Attachment A}.

Sir John also drafted the founding Trust Deed of The Provident Fund as confirmed by the minutes of the first Trustee meeting in the Minute Book now held by the Noel Butlin Archive in Canberra.

The Hon Alexander Downer AC , the grandson of Sir John by his second marriage to Una Stella Haslingden Russell, has advised that to the best of his knowledge, his grandfather’s legal practice was absorbed by the Adelaide firm of solicitors, Finlaysons.

Finlaysons drafted later Deeds of Variation for The Provident Fund from 1931 to the late 1970s.

{It is of interest to note that file copies of these Deeds of Variation held by Finlaysons were obtained under false pretences and destroyed so as to prevent the beneficiaries gaining access to them}.

Another Member of the Legislative Council was Alexander John Melrose (1884-1962) who was also a Trustee of The Provident Fund. Alexander was a member of the Legislative Council from 1941 to 1962.

Alexander attested a consolidation Deed of Variation dated 6 May 1958 {Attachment B}.

The Elder Smith & Co Ltd Provident Funds Act 1963 (SA)

The first enactment approved by the Legislative Council was the Elder Smith & Co Limited Provident Funds Act 1963. A Select Committee was established by the Council to review the Elder Smith & Co. Limited Provident Funds Bill, 1963. The Attorney-General, the Hon Colin Rowe M.L.C., was the champion of this Bill.

This enactment was necessary for two reasons:

  • Sir John Downer had drafted very protective “Authorised Purpose” and “Power of Amendment” clauses, and
  • Sir John had made an oversight in drafting the 1913 Trust Deed.
 

Sir John had made provision in his Trust Deed for the male employees of companies acquired by Elder Smith & Co Ltd to become members of The Provident Fund, however no provision had been made to what would happen if Elder Smith & Co Ltd was itself acquired by another company.

Yet this is what happened half a century later when Elder Smith & Co Limited was acquired by the South Australian holding company Elder Smith Goldsbrough Mort Ltd, which also acquired the shares of the Victorian company Goldsbrough Mort & Co Limited.

Because of the protective “authorised purpose” and “power of amendment” clauses contained in Regulation 50, an Act of the Parliament of South Australia was required to amend the terms of the trust {Regulations of the Fund} to allow employees of the new company to become members of The Provident Fund.

This enactment also confirms that a separate trust was established in 1938 to pay retirement benefits to female employees of the company. This was a non-contributory fund and did not pay equivalent benefits as did The Provident Fund which was a contributory fund.

This enactment also confirms that the Trustees of The Provident Fund would commit a Breach of Trust if they paid retirement benefits from the Trust Estate of The Provident Fund to female employees. The Trustee would then become personally liable for such payments.

The Legislative Council vetted a consolidation Deed of Variation dated 6 May 1958, which consolidated the 1913 Trust Deed with later Deeds of Variation.

This Deed confirms that the retirement benefit for qualifying male officers is a pension for life and that their wives have an entitlement to a survivorship pension under certain conditions.

These conditions were made more liberal in a Deed of Variation dated 20 November 1974.

It is very important that the Legislative Council vetted the 1958 Deed, since this puts the providence of this Deed beyond doubt.

There is a serious defect in the law regarding large superannuation fund. No Government has made it compulsory to register superannuation Trust Deeds with a public authority. It is assumed that trustees will act honestly, but there is no “Plan B” if they do not. If the Trust Deeds have been registered with a public authority such as the Adelaide General Registry Office, then they cannot be concealed from the beneficiaries by a dishonest trustee.

Fortunately in The Provident Fund case the Parliament of South Australia has acted as a de facto “General Registry Office”.

This is what the Hon. G. O’H Giles M.L.C. stated in the Minutes of Evidence  for the Select Committee on the Elder Smith & Co Ltd Provident Funds Bill 1963 on 3 September 1963 following a question from the Attorney-General, the Hon Colin Rowe M.L.C.:

“ The present fund – that is, Elder’s Provident Fund – was established 50 years ago. It is one of the oldest Provident Funds in Australia. It is a pension fund, and not a Provident Fund in the lump sum sense. It provides pensions after 15 years of service. It provides death benefits, equal to three years’ salary, immediately after entry to the fund. The fund is designed to provide an attraction to people to join the company’s service, an encouragement to them to remain, and security for those officers who belong to the company and the fund”.

Mr Giles continues:

“ At present, there are 1,099 members of the fund and 106 pensioners, including two widowed pensioners. The only reason why there are only two widowed pensioners is that until comparatively recently the fund only provided a pension during the life of the officer after retirement. However, that was altered some little time ago to enable them to opt to have a survivorship pension in favour of their wife if they so wished. The fund has assets of £2,838,000”.

The Provident Fund was established in 1913 with initial assets of £50,000 – £30,000 donated by the company and with personal donations of £10,000 each from Peter Waite and Robert Barr Smith, referred to as “Adelaide Gentlemen” in Sir John Downer’s Trust Deed.

{Note: The South Australian electorate of “Waite” is name in honour of Peter Waite}.

In 1913 the average salary was £100 per annum.

In a meeting of the Select Committee held on 10 September 1963, the Chairman, the Hon Colin Rowe M.L.C. confirmed:

“If a man had been 15 years in the company’s service and was retired, say, for redundancy he would be entitled to a pension under these rules, but if he left of his own accord, say to go to another job he would simply get back his own contributions plus interest”.

The Hon S.C. Bevan M.L.C then confirmed an important point in response to a question on the pension entitlement:

“Where he had been there for 15 years or more and the company retired him because they did not want him for some reason he would immediately become entitled to a pension”.

The Chairman interrupted:

“Irrespective of his age?”

The Hon S.C. Bevan M.L.C:

Yes. That is covered by paragraph (d)”.

 

In his book “The Elder Smith Goldsbrough Mort Merger” {Australian National University Press Canberra 1970} G.A Manning who was a Trustee of The Provident Fund noted that one of the consequences of the merger was there were a number of long serving officers (about twenty in all) under the age of 60 whose roles became redundant.

G.A. Manning states on page 45:

They received from their actual retirement date the normal retirement benefit, reduced for their actual age at retirement in accordance with the appropriate deed.”

This confirms what the Hon. S.C. Bevan M.L.C. stated in the Select Committee and is in accordance with the pension formula discussed further below.

Copies of the 1958 and the 1974 Deeds have now been provided to the Australian Crime Commission.

Both of these Deeds had been criminally concealed from the widows and other beneficiaries of The Provident Fund by a purported Trustee who was not lawfully appointed to the office of sole Trustee {Refer to subsection 1017C(5) of the Corporations Act 2001 and related Regulations}.

Palmer J in Chang  v Tjiong & Ors [2009] NSWSC 122 stated at [45]:

“ It is the duty of a trustee to ensure that beneficiaries are made aware of their rights: see In re Emmet’s Estate (1881) 17 Ch D 142, at 149; Hawkesley v May [1956] 1 QB 304, at 322

The Elder’s Trustee and Executor Co Ltd Provident Funds Act 1971 (SA)

In 1910 Robert Barr Smith decided to establish a reputable Trustee and Executor company to protect widows from being the victims of dishonest lawyers and accountants after their husbands had died.

{It is most ironic that the widows of the male employees of company Robert Barr Smith established with Sir Thomas Elder would seven decades later again become the victims of dishonest lawyers and accountants. The acts of personal generosity of Robert Barr Smith and the Chairman of the company would later be followed by acts of personal greed by a later generation of company management. }

The name of the company was the Elder’s Trustee and Executor Company Ltd. This company was partially owned by Elder Smith & Co Limited.

The Parliament of South Australia enacted Elder’s Executor Company’s Act 1910 to enable the company to carry out its role as an executor and trustee company.

A Provident Fund for the male staff members was established in 1921 in South Australia and a Provident Fund for female staff members was later established in 1947. These funds were established with the assistance of a bequest from Robert Barr Smith.

In the early 1970’s the parent company Elder Smith Goldsbrough Mort Ltd decided to acquire full ownership of the Trustee company and it was then decided to transfer the membership of male officers to The Provident Fund and to transfer the membership of the female officers to the Elders-GM Women’s Provident Fund as shown in the following diagram.

Transfer of Members

{Note: The Elders-GM Women’s Provident Fund and its assets subsequently completely “vanished”}.

The Trust Deeds of these Funds had “authorised purpose” clauses similar to that drafted by Sir John Downer for The Provident Fund, which prevent the Trust Estate of the Trustee company funds being transferred to the Trust Estate of any other Fund.

This was the case even though the parent company funds offered superior benefits to the trustee company funds.

To overcome this protective clause an enactment of the Parliament of South Australia was required.

This led to the Elder’s Trustee and Executor Co Ltd Provident Funds Bill 1971. It was a select committee established by the House of Assembly that reviewed this Bill.

At the Select Committee Meeting on 23 March 1971, Chaired by the Attorney-General, the Hon L.J. King Q.C., M.P., Mr A. R. Curren M.P. stated with respect to entitlement under The Provident Fund:

The retiring pension currently paid is almost to the maximum allowed by the Taxation Commissioner, which is 70 percent of the average of the last three years’ salary, according to the service of the member of the fund.”

The pension is determined according to the following formula for male officers who have completed at least 15 years of service:

[Years of Service]/[Age when leaving Service ] times [Final Average Salary]

Where “Final Average Salary is averaged over the last three years of service.

For example a male offer who had completed 35 years of service and was compulsory retired at age 55 due to redundancy with a final average salary of $100,000 per annum  would be entitled to an immediate pension of $63,636 per annum.

Mr Curren noted that there were 1410 male members of The Provident Fund and 132 pensioners and six widow pensioners.

Trustee Act 1936 (SA)

Although this enactment is not specific to The Provident Fund, it nonetheless forms part of the “governing rules” of The Provident Fund.

The “trust” as a legal concept is the creation of the courts of equity and as such the court always has an inherent jurisdiction in the administration of all trusts. In the case of trusts established in South Australia, the Supreme Court of South Australia has that jurisdiction.

It is a maxim of equity that a trust will not fail for lack of a trustee and the Court can appoint a Trustee if necessary.

Furthermore if a recalcitrant Trustee refuses to execute a Trustee the court can execute the trust instead and/or replaced the Trustee.

The Trustee Act 1936 requires Trustees of trusts established in South Australia to be resident in South Australia and can only leave the State on a temporary basis for up to 12 months, except if on military service.

There is a good reason for this restriction. Trustees in one sense can be considered “Officers of the Court” and a Trustee can at any time seek advice and directions from the Court {Refer to Section 91 of the Trustee Act 1936 (SA)}.

If a Trustee is in doubt about how to interpret the terms of the trust, the Trustee should seek advice from the Supreme Court of South Australia so as to be protected by Section 56 from a subsequent Breach of Trust action by the beneficiaries.

Section 35B of the Trustee Act 1936 (SA) and the Trustee Regulations 2011 prescribe what “trust documents” that a Trustee must make available for inspection to persons who have a beneficial interest in the trust that has been established in South Australia.

Separation of Powers Doctrine

The High Court of Australia derived the Separation of Powers doctrine for the Australian Constitution co-drafted by Sir John Downer. This doctrine prohibits Chapter II agencies, such as the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal,  from exercising Judicial Power.

The Superannuation Complaints Tribunal is a “complaint-handling agency” that must deal with are complaints that are within jurisdiction.

The ability of the Tribunal to intervene in a “decision” by a Trustee that:
  • (a) was in excess of the powers of the Trustee; or
  • (b) was an improper exercise of the powers of the Trustee
  • Has been taken away from the Tribunal by the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Legislation Act 1995 No. 144, 1995 so that the Tribunal could not exercise Judicial Power.

     

    The Tribunal only has jurisdiction to deal in complaints where a Trustee has acted lawfully and within power, but has made a decision that may be impugned on the grounds that it is “unfair or unreasonable”. A Chapter III Court does not have this power.

    The Tribunal cannot assist the widows.

    The “Regulators”, APRA and ASIC are not “complaint handling agencies” and they refuse to deal with “complaints”. As the recent Senate Inquiry into ASIC has demonstrated these agencies only act when forced to do so by the media and/or by politicians. That is when a matter has become a matter of “Public Interest”.

    The same applies to the Australian Crime Commission and the Australian Federal Police as well as the South Australian Police who have refused to investigate the theft of the file copy Deeds from Finlaysons, the Adelaide Solicitors who drafted all the Deeds of variation from 1931 to the late 1970s.

    That is why the widows need  the support of both the Members of the Legislative Council of South Australia as well as the Senators from South Australia.

    Why should “white collar criminals” who “rob with a pen” be treated differently to “blue collar criminals”, especially when in most cases there are far more victims and the losses much greater?

     

    General Principles of Law

    The basic principles of the law of trusts have been articulated by Lord Browne-Wilkinson in the House of Lords:

    “The basic right of a beneficiary is to have the trust duly administered in accordance with the provisions of the trust instrument, if any, and the general law”

    • Lord Browne-Wilkinson (Target Holdings and Redferns [1995] UKHL 10)

    Where the “trust Instrument” is the founding Trust Deed as lawfully amended if the Trust Deed included a Power of Amendment.

    “The basic equitable principle applicable to breach of trust is that the beneficiary is entitled to be compensated for any loss he would not have suffered but for the breach.”

    • Lord Browne-Wilkinson (Target Holdings and Redferns [1995] UKHL 10)

    Neuberger J stated in Bestrustees v Stuart [2001] PLR 283, [2001] Pens LR 283, [2001] EWHC 549 (Ch), [2001] OPLR 341:

     

    “I bear in mind that a pension scheme is likely to continue for a substantial period of time and that those most affected by them and entitled to protection from the trustees, the employer and indeed the Court, will be people who are comparatively poor, who will not have easy access to expert legal advice, and who will not know what has been going on in relation to the management of the Scheme. In those circumstances, it seems to me that protection of the beneficiaries requires the Court to be very careful before it permits a departure from the plain wording and plain requirements of the trust deed”

     

    By “trust deed” Neuberger J is referring to the founding Trust Deed as lawfully amended.

     

    “It is the Trustee’s plainest duty to obey the terms of the trust.” {A-G (UK) v Downing (1767) Wilm 1 [97] ER 1] Wilmot LCJ at 23; Davey v Thorton (1851) 9 Hare 222 [68 ER 483].

    This strict duty was described in the High Court of Australia as the duty “to adhere to the terms of the trust in all things great and small, important, and seemingly unimportant{Youyang Pty Ltd v Minter Ellision Morris and Fletcher [2003] HCA 15; (2003) 212 CLR at 498, quoting Augustine Birrell QC in The Duties and Liabilities of Trustees, 1896, p22}.

    In the case of large employee benefit trusts the Coalition Government promises compensation of at least 90% for losses incurred due to a fraudulent Breach of Trust. This is in accordance with the principles of law articulated by Lord Brown- Wilkinson.

    More information on PROMISED compensation can be found here.

    Summary

    The Legislative Council of South Australia has a long connection to The Provident Fund.

    The Advertiser also has a long connection to The Provident Fund.

    It was the support of Sir Frederick Lloyd Dumas, a Trustee of The Provident Fund and Chairman of Advertiser Newspapers Pty Ltd, that enabled Sir Thomas Playford to become South Australia’s longest serving government leader. Sir Thomas Playford held office longer than Sir Robert Menzies our longest serving Prime Minister.

    Sir Robert Menzies, who appeared as the Attorney-General for Victoria in a superannuation fund case in the High Court of Australia { Metropolitan Gas Company v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1932] HCA 58; (1932) 47 CLR 621},  has confirmed that the right of the widows to a survivorship pension cannot be abrogated.

    The widows have a powerful ally in Sir Robert Menzies as well as Sir Frederick Lloyd Dumas, a personal friend of Sir Keith and Dame Elizabeth Murdoch and a mentor to Rupert Murdoch.

    An attempt has been made to cover up the fraud against the widows and other beneficiaries by transferring some members against their will to another fund.

    This attempted transfer is being undertaken by a purported Trustee, resident in Victoria, who has not been lawfully appointed to the office of Trustee (ie a Trustee de son tort).

    The Transfer of the Trust Estate of The Provident Fund to the Trust Estate of another fund would by analogy require another enactment of the Parliament of South Australia to amend the terms of the trust {Regulations of the Fund}. Otherwise any such transfer would be in Breach of Trust and the Trustees would become personally liable unless excused by the Supreme Court of South Australia pursuant to Section 56 of the Trustee Act 1936 (SA).

    The Legislative Council would need to review the proposal and then enact legislation to amend the terms of the trust {Regulations of The Provident Fund } to allow the transfer to proceed so that the Trustees would not be held by the Supreme Court of South Australia to have acted in Breach of Trust.

    Remember The Provident Fund is legally considered to be a “creation” of the Supreme Court of South Australia and that is why the Supreme Court has an inherent jurisdiction in the administration of this employment benefit trust (as well as the Parliament of South Australia).

    Additional provisions also apply under Commonwealth Legislation requiring the Trustees of the fund receiving the Trust Estate agree to the proposed Transfer as well as a two-thirds majority of all of the Trustees of the Transferor Fund being in agreement. Commonwealth legislation has not replaced the laws of South Australia {Refer to s 350 of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993}.

    In the case of an employer-sponsored fund the corporate Trustee or natural person Trustees must comply with the “equal representation rule”, with an equal number of member –elected representatives as there are employer- nominated representatives.

    There has been an extended period of maladministration of The Provident Fund since the administration was moved from Adelaide to Melbourne in breach of the provisions of the Trustee Act 1936 (SA) and the general law of trusts. There has been no attempt to seek the advice of the Supreme Court of South Australia so at to protect the welfare of the members and beneficiaries.

    Male officers are not being paid a pension for life, but merely a token lump sum benefit equal to around four years of a pension and their widows receive absolutely nothing  -because they are the easiest targets for “white collar criminals” and those who protect them.

    Widows have no ready access to the law and this fact is exploited by well educated “white collar criminals” who understand the “justice system” and its limitations as well as major legal defect in the law related to large superannuation trusts.

    Female employees are also paid token lumps sum benefits in Breach of Trust from the Trust Estate of The Provident Fund instead of from the Trust Estate of the Elders-GM Women’s Provident Fund.

    The assets of the Trust Estate of the Elders-GM Women’s Provident Fund have simply “vanished”.

    An attempt has been made to cover-up this fraud by transferring the Trust Estate of The Provident Fund to the Trust Estate of another Fund, without obtaining an enactment to from the Parliament of South Australia to allow such a transfer to occur without the Trustee committing a Breach of Trust.

    There have been no member-elected Directors of the purported sole corporate Trustee for the last four years in breach of the “equal representation rule”, introduced after Robert Maxwell and his sons raided the employees’ pension funds of the Mirror Newspaper Group in the United Kingdom in the early 1990s {Note: Robert Maxwell and Rupert Murdoch were arch rivals in the 1980s and News Limited was established in South Australia in 1922}.

    The widows and other beneficiaries are seeking the assistance of both the Members of the Legislative Council as well as the Senators from South Australia.

    Sir John Downer was a Member of the Legislative Council as well as being a Senator from South Australia in the first Commonwealth Parliament.

    I am sure Sir John would wish to see the integrity of his 1913 Trust Deed for The Provident Fund upheld by a later generation of MLCs and Senators.

    Alick Downer concludes the Chapter on Sir John Downer in his book “The Downers of South Australia” somewhat prophetically by stating:

    “..his name is enshrined in Australian’s history, and his shadow lengthens with the passage of the years.

     

    Appendix A

    Legislative Council

    Select Committee on the Elder Smith & Co. Limited Provident Funds Bill, 1963

    Extracts from Minutes of Proceedings of the Legislative Council Wednesday, August 28, 1963

    Select Committee on the Elder Smith & Co. Limited Provident Funds Bill, 1963 – Minutes of Evidence Tuesday, September 3,1963 at 9.30am at Parliament House, Adelaide {Chairman Colin Rowe,  Attorney-General}

    Anstey Wynes, Parliamentary Draftsman, Flinders St, and Henry Norman Giles, General Manager, Elder Smith Goldsbrough Mort Limited, Curries St, Adelaide, called and examined.

    Select Committee on the Elder Smith & Co. Limited Provident Funds Bill, 1963 – Minutes of Evidence Tuesday, September 10, 1963 at 10.00am in Committee Room No.1 of the Legislative Council {Chairman Colin Rowe,  Attorney-General}

    John Felix Astley, QC, Barrister and Solicitor, 16 Pirie St, Adelaide, called and examined.

    Select Committee on the Elder Smith & Co. Limited Provident Funds Bill, 1963 – Minutes of Evidence Thursday, September 12, 1963 at 10.00am in the Attorney-General’s Room, Legislative Council {Chairman Colin Rowe,  Attorney-General}

    In attendance Dr W.A. Wynes, Parliamentary Draftsman.

    Report of the Select Committee of the legislative Council on the Elder Smith & Co. Limited Provident Funds Bill, 1963

    Laid on the table of the Legislative Council, 1st October 1963, and order to be printed, 1st October 1963.

     

    Hansard – Elder Smith & Co Ltd Provident Funds Bill 1963

    Legislative Council – 21 August 1963

    Second reading – The Hon C.D. Rowe (Attorney-General)

    The Government considered it would materially assist all concerned if the Government introduced the Bill, which does not in itself benefit the company but, on the other hand, is designed to protect the superannuation rights of the company’s employees

    • The Hon C.D. Rowe

    Second reading – The Hon K.E.J. Bardolph (Central No.1)

    Second reading – The Hon Sir Arthur Rymill (Central No.2)

    House of Assembly – 24 October  1963

    Second reading – The Hon G.G Pearson (Minister of Works)

    Second reading – Mr Jennings (Enfield)

    A copy of the Hansard extracts can be found here.

    Appendix B

     

    House of Assembly

    Select Committee on the Elder’s Trustee and Executor Company Limited Provident Funds Bill 1971

    Report dated 11 March 1971

    Minutes of Proceedings dated 23, 24, 25 and 30 March 1971

    Minutes of Evidence dated 18 and  23 March 1971

    Hansard – Elder’s Trustee and Executor Co Ltd Provident Funds Bill 1971

    House of Assembly – 11 March 1971

    Second Reading – The Hon L.J. King (Attorney-General)

    Legislative Council – 6 April 1971

    Second reading – The Hon T. M Casey (Minister of Agriculture)

    A copy of the Hansard extracts can be found here.

    Appendix C

    Company Information

    Elder Smith & Co Limited was registered in South Australia on 13 July 1882 (ACN 007 869 294)

    Elder’s Trustee & Executor Co Limited was registered in South Australia on 10 May 1910 (ACN 07 869 794)

    Elder Smith Goldsbrough Mort Limited was registered in South Australia on 19 April 1962 (ACN 007 620 886) The company name was changed to Elders IXL Ltd in 1982 and the company is now known as Foster’s Group Pty Ltd.

    Advertiser Newspapers Pty Ltd was registered in South Australia on 18 January 1929 (ACN 007 872 997)

    News Limited was registered in South Australia on19 July 1922 (ACN 007 871 178)

    James Frederick Downer was the first Chairman of Advertiser Newspapers Pty Ltd until he died on 29 May 1942 and (Sir) Frederick Lloyd Dumas was Managing Editor and Director from the early 30’ and became Chairman on 9 June 1942 until retiring on 1 August 1967 {As confirmed in a lettered from Mr Ian Philip, Chief General Council, News Limited, dated 15 October 2013}.

    Fred Downer and Lloyd Dumas were also Directors of Elder Smith & Co Limited as well as Trustees of The Provident Fund.

     


    facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather