Senate Official Hansard No

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

Senate Official Hansard No. 2, 2004 THURSDAY, 2 DECEMBER 2004

FORTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FIRST PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE

INTERNET The Journals for the Senate are available at http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/work/journals/index.htm

Proof and Official Hansards for the House of Representatives, the Senate and committee hearings are available at http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard

For searching purposes use http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au

SITTING DAYS—2004 Month Date February 10, 11, 12 March 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31 April 1 May 11, 12, 13 June 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24 August 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 30 November 16, 17, 18, 29, 30 December 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9

RADIO BROADCASTS Broadcasts of proceedings of the Parliament can be heard on the following Parliamentary and News Net- work radio stations, in the areas identified.

CANBERRA 1440 AM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM GOSFORD 98.1 FM BRISBANE 936 AM GOLD COAST 95.7 FM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 747 AM NORTHERN TASMANIA 92.5 FM DARWIN 102.5 FM

FORTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FIRST PERIOD

Governor-General

His Excellency Major-General Michael Jeffery, Companion in the Order of Australia, Com- mander of the Royal Victorian Order, Military Cross

Senate Officeholders

President—Senator the Hon. Paul Henry Calvert Deputy President and Chairman of Committees—Senator John Joseph Hogg Temporary Chairmen of Committees—Senators the Hon. Nick Bolkus, George Henry Bran- dis, Hedley Grant Pearson Chapman, John Clifford Cherry, Patricia Margaret Crossin, Alan Baird Ferguson, Stephen Patrick Hutchins, Linda Jean Kirk, Susan Christine Knowles, Philip Ross Lightfoot, John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) Macdonald, Gavin Mark Marshall, Claire Mary Moore and John Odin Wentworth Watson Leader of the Government in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the Opposition in the Senate—Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate—Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Manager of Government Business in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Christopher Mar- tin Ellison Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate—Senator Joseph William Ludwig

Senate Party Leaders

Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the National Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Ronald Leslie Doyle Boswell Deputy Leader of the National Party of Australia—Senator John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) Macdonald Leader of the Australian Labor Party—Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Deputy Leader of the Australian Labor Party—Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Leader of the Australian Democrats—Senator Andrew John Julian Bartlett

Printed by authority of the Senate

Members of the Senate State or Terri- Senator tory Term expires Party Abetz, Hon. Eric Tas 30.6.2005 LP Allison, Lynette Fay Vic 30.6.2008 AD Barnett, Guy (5) Tas 30.6.2005 LP Bartlett, Andrew John Julian Qld 30.6.2008 AD Bishop, Thomas Mark WA 30.6.2008 ALP Bolkus, Hon. Nick SA 30.6.2005 ALP Boswell, Hon. Ronald Leslie Doyle Qld 30.6.2008 NATS Brandis, George Henry (2) Qld 30.6.2005 LP Brown, Robert James Tas 30.6.2008 AG Buckland, Geoffrey Frederick (4) SA 30.6.2005 ALP Calvert, Hon. Paul Henry Tas 30.6.2008 LP Campbell, George NSW 30.6.2008 ALP Campbell, Hon. Ian Gordon WA 30.6.2005 LP Carr, Kim John Vic 30.6.2005 ALP Chapman, Hedley Grant Pearson SA 30.6.2008 LP Cherry, John Clifford (3) Qld 30.6.2005 AD Colbeck, Richard Mansell Tas 30.6.2008 LP Collins, Jacinta Mary Ann Vic 30.6.2005 ALP Conroy, Stephen Michael Vic 30.6.2005 ALP Cook, Hon. Peter Francis Salmon WA 30.6.2005 ALP Coonan, Hon. Helen Lloyd NSW 30.6.2008 LP Crossin, Patricia Margaret (1) NT ALP Denman, Kay Janet Tas 30.6.2005 ALP Eggleston, Alan WA 30.6.2008 LP Ellison, Hon. Christopher Martin WA 30.6.2005 LP Evans, Christopher Vaughan WA 30.6.2005 ALP Faulkner, Hon. John Philip NSW 30.6.2005 ALP Ferguson, Alan Baird SA 30.6.2005 LP Ferris, Jeannie Margaret SA 30.6.2008 LP Fifield, Mitchell Peter(7) Vic 30.6.2008 LP Forshaw, Michael George NSW 30.6.2005 ALP Greig, Brian Andrew WA 30.6.2005 AD Harradine, Brian Tas 30.6.2005 Ind Harris, Leonard William QLD 30.6.2005 PHON Heffernan, Hon. William Daniel NSW 30.6.2005 LP Hill, Hon. Robert Murray SA 30.6.2008 LP Hogg, John Joseph QLD 30.6.2008 ALP Humphries, Gary John Joseph (1) ACT LP Hutchins, Stephen Patrick NSW 30.6.2005 ALP Johnston, David Albert Lloyd WA 30.6.2008 LP Kemp, Hon. Charles Roderick VIC 30.6.2008 LP Kirk, Linda Jean SA 30.6.2008 ALP Knowles, Susan Christine WA 30.6.2005 LP Lees, Meg Heather SA 30.6.2005 APA Lightfoot, Philip Ross WA 30.6.2008 LP Ludwig, Joseph William QLD 30.6.2005 ALP Lundy, Kate Alexandra (1) ACT ALP Macdonald, Hon. Ian Douglas QLD 30.6.2008 LP ii

State or Terri- Senator tory Term expires Party Macdonald, John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) NSW 30.6.2008 NATS McGauran, Julian John James VIC 30.6.2005 NATS Mackay, Susan Mary TAS 30.6.2008 ALP McLucas, Jan Elizabeth QLD 30.6.2005 ALP Marshall, Gavin Mark VIC 30.6.2008 ALP Mason, Brett John QLD 30.6.2005 LP Minchin, Hon. Nicholas Hugh SA 30.6.2005 LP Moore, Claire Mary QLD 30.6.2008 ALP Murphy, Shayne Michael TAS 30.6.2005 Ind Murray, Andrew James Marshall WA 30.6.2008 AD Nettle, Kerry Michelle NSW 30.6.2008 AG O’Brien, Kerry Williams Kelso TAS 30.6.2005 ALP Patterson, Hon. Kay Christine Lesley VIC 30.6.2008 LP Payne, Marise Ann NSW 30.6.2008 LP Ray, Hon. Robert Francis VIC 30.6.2008 ALP Ridgeway, Aden Derek NSW 30.6.2005 AD Santoro, Santo (6) QLD 30.6.2008 LP Scullion, Nigel Gregory (1) NT CLP Sherry, Hon. Nicholas John TAS 30.6.2008 ALP Stephens, Ursula Mary NSW 30.6.2008 ALP Stott Despoja, Natasha Jessica SA 30.6.2008 AD Tchen, Tsebin VIC 30.6.2005 LP Tierney, John William NSW 30.6.2005 LP Troeth, Hon. Judith Mary VIC 30.6.2005 LP Vanstone, Hon. Amanda Eloise SA 30.6.2005 LP Watson, John Odin Wentworth TAS 30.6.2008 LP Webber, Ruth Stephanie WA 30.6.2008 ALP Wong, Penelope Ying Yen SA 30.6.2008 ALP (1) Term expires at close of day next preceding the polling day for the general election of members of the House of Representatives. (2) Chosen by the Parliament of Queensland to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. Warwick Raymond Parer, resigned. (3) Chosen by the Parliament of Queensland to fill a casual vacancy vice John Woodley, resigned. (4) Chosen by the Parliament of South Australia to fill a casual vacancy vice John Andrew Quirke, resigned. (5) Appointed by the Governor of Tasmania to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. Brian Francis Gibson AM, resigned. (6) Chosen by the Parliament of Queensland to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. John Joseph Herron, resigned. (7) Chosen by the Parliament of Victoria to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. Richard Kenneth Robert Alston, resigned. PARTY ABBREVIATIONS AD—Australian Democrats; AG—Australian Greens; ALP—Australian Labor Party; APA—Australian Progressive Alliance; CLP—Country Labor Party; Ind—Independent; LP—Liberal Party of Australia; NATS—The Nationals; PHON—Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Heads of Parliamentary Departments Clerk of the Senate—H. Evans Clerk of the House of Representatives—I.C. Harris Secretary, Department of Parliamentary Services—H.R. Penfold QC

iii

HOWARD MINISTRY

Prime Minister The Hon. John Winston Howard MP Minister for Transport and Regional Services and The Hon. John Duncan Anderson MP Deputy Prime Minister Treasurer The Hon. Peter Howard Costello MP Minister for Trade The Hon. Mark Anthony James Vaile MP Minister for Defence and Leader of the Govern- Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill ment in the Senate Minister for Foreign Affairs The Hon. Alexander John Gosse Downer MP Minister for Health and Ageing and Leader of the The Hon. Anthony John Abbott MP House Attorney-General The Hon. Philip Maxwell Ruddock MP Minister for Finance and Administration, Deputy Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the Government in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry The Hon. Warren Errol Truss MP Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Senator the Hon. Amanda Eloise Vanstone Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs Minister for Education, Science and Training The Hon. Dr Brendan John Nelson MP Minister for Family and Community Services and Senator the Hon. Kay Christine Lesley Patterson Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Women’s Issues Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources The Hon. Ian Elgin Macfarlane MP Minister for Employment and Workplace Rela- The Hon. Kevin James Andrews MP tions and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service Minister for Communications, Information Tech- Senator the Hon. Helen Lloyd Coonan nology and the Arts Minister for the Environment and Heritage Senator the Hon. Ian Gordon Campbell

(The above ministers constitute the cabinet)

HOWARD MINISTRY—continued

Minister for Justice and Customs and Manager of Senator the Hon. Christopher Martin Ellison Government Busines in the Senate Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation Senator the Hon. Ian Douglas Macdonald Minister for the Arts and Sport Senator the Hon. Charles Roderick Kemp Minister for Human Services The Hon. Joseph Benedict Hockey MP Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs The Hon. Peter John McGauran MP and Deputy Leader of the House Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer The Hon. Malcolm Thomas Brough MP Special Minister of State Senator the Hon. Eric Abetz Minister for Vocational and Technical Education The Hon. Gary Douglas Hardgrave MP and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister Minister for Ageing The Hon. Julie Isabel Bishop MP Minister for Small Business and Tourism The Hon. Frances Esther Bailey MP Minister for Local Government, Territories and The Hon. James Eric Lloyd MP Roads Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Minister As- The Hon. De-Anne Margaret Kelly MP sisting the Minister for Defence Minister for Workforce Participation The Hon. Peter Craig Dutton MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Fi- The Hon. Dr Sharman Nancy Stone MP nance and Administration Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Indus- The Hon. Warren George Entsch MP try, Tourism and Resources Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health The Hon. Christopher Maurice Pyne MP and Ageing Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for De- The Hon. Teresa Gambaro MP fence Parliamentary Secretary (Foreign Affairs and The Hon. Bruce Fredrick Billson MP Trade) Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister The Hon. Gary Roy Nairn MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer The Hon. Christopher John Pearce MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Trans- The Hon. John Kenneth Cobb MP port and Regional Services Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the The Hon. Gregory Andrew Hunt MP Environment and Heritage Parliamentary Secretary (Children and Youth Af- The Hon. Sussan Penelope Ley MP fairs) Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Educa- The Hon. Patrick Francis Farmer MP tion, Science and Training Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agri- Senator the Hon. Richard Mansell Colbeck culture, Fisheries and Forestry

SHADOW MINISTRY

Leader of the Opposition Mark William Latham MP Deputy Leader of the Opposition and Shadow Jennifer Louise Macklin MP Minister for Education, Training, Science and Research Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Shadow Minister for Social Security Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Shadow Minister for Communications and In- formation Technology Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Op- Julia Eileen Gillard MP position Business in the House Shadow Treasurer Wayne Maxwell Swan MP Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Stephen Francis Smith MP Industrial Relations Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Interna- Kevin Michael Rudd MP tional Security Shadow Minister for Defence and Homeland Se- Robert Bruce McClelland MP curity Shadow Minister for Trade The Hon. Simon Findlay Crean MP Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Re- Martin John Ferguson MP sources and Tourism Shadow Minister for Environment and Heritage Anthony Norman Albanese MP and Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House Shadow Minister for Public Administration and Senator Kim John Carr Open Government, Shadow Minister for Indige- nous Affairs and Reconciliation and Shadow Minister for the Arts Shadow Minister for Regional Development and Kelvin John Thomson MP Roads and Shadow Minister for Housing and Urban Development Shadow Minister for Finance and Superannuation Senator the Hon. Nicholas John Sherry Shadow Minister for Work, Family and Commu- Tanya Joan Plibersek MP nity, Shadow Minister for Youth and Early Childhood Education and Shadow Minister As- sisting the Leader on the Status of Women Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Senator Penelope Ying Yen Wong Participation and Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility

(The above are shadow cabinet ministers)

SHADOW MINISTRY—continued Shadow Minister for Immigration Laurence Donald Thomas Ferguson MP Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries Gavan Michael O’Connor MP Shadow Assistant Treasurer, Shadow Minister for Joel Andrew Fitzgibbon MP Revenue and Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services Shadow Attorney-General Nicola Louise Roxon MP Shadow Minister for Regional Services, Local Senator Kerry Williams Kelso O’Brien Government and Territories Shadow Minister for Manufacturing and Shadow Senator Kate Alexandra Lundy Minister for Consumer Affairs Shadow Minister for Defence Planning and Per- The Hon. Archibald Ronald Bevis MP sonnel and Shadow Minister Assisting the Shadow Minister for Industrial Relations Shadow Minister for Sport and Recreation Alan Peter Griffin MP Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs Senator Thomas Mark Bishop Shadow Minister for Small Business Tony Burke MP Shadow Minister for Ageing and Disabilities Senator Jan Elizabeth McLucas Shadow Minister for Justice and Customs, Senator Joseph William Ludwig Shadow Minister for Citizenship and Multicul- tural Affairs and Manager of Opposition Busi- ness in the Senate Shadow Minister for Pacific Islands Robert Charles Grant Sercombe MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of John Paul Murphy MP the Opposition Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence The Hon. Graham John Edwards MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education Kirsten Fiona Livermore MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Environment Jennie George MP and Heritage Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Infrastructure Bernard Fernando Ripoll MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health Ann Kathleen Corcoran MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Catherine Fiona King MP Development (House) Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Senator Ursula Mary Stephens Development (Senate) Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern The Hon. Warren Edward Snowdon MP Australia and Indigenous Affairs

vii CONTENTS

THURSDAY, 2 DECEMBER

Chamber Notices— Presentation ...... 1 Notices— Withdrawal ...... 3 Withdrawal ...... 3 Business— Rearrangement...... 3 Notices— Presentation ...... 4 Postponement ...... 4 Committees— Finance and Public Administration References Committee—Reference ...... 4 Foreign Affairs: Ukraine...... 4 Iraq: Humanitarian Aid ...... 5 Tangentyere Council: 25th Anniversary ...... 5 Foreign Affairs: West Papua ...... 5 Military Detention: Australian Citizens ...... 6 Trade: US-Australia Free Trade Agreement ...... 7 Aviation: Passenger Ticket Levy ...... 7 International Day of People with a Disability...... 7 Human Rights: Burma ...... 7 Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2004— First Reading ...... 8 Second Reading...... 8 Schools Assistance (Learning Together—Achievement Through Choice and Opportunity) Bill 2004 ...... 9 States Grants (Primary and Secondary Education Assistance) Legislation Amendment Bill 2004— First Reading ...... 9 Second Reading...... 9 Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2004...... 13 Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2004— First Reading ...... 13 Second Reading...... 13 Committees— Finance and Public Administration References Committee—Reference ...... 14 Family and Community Services and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (2004 Election Commitments) Bill 2004— In Committee...... 28 Third Reading...... 34 Workplace Relations Amendment (Agreement Validation) Bill 2004— Second Reading...... 34 In Committee...... 63 Third Reading...... 67 Ministerial Arrangements ...... 67 Questions Without Notice— Regional Services: Program Funding...... 67

CONTENTS—continued

Distinguished Visitors...... 68 Questions Without Notice— Foreign Affairs: Law Enforcement...... 69 Regional Services: Program Funding...... 69 Forestry: Policy ...... 71 Regional Services: Program Funding...... 72 Abortion ...... 73 Regional Services: Program Funding...... 73 Immigration: Asylum Seekers ...... 75 Distinguished Visitors...... 76 Questions Without Notice— Fuel: Prices...... 76 Immigration: Detainees ...... 77 Regional Services: Program Funding...... 78 Education: Higher Education ...... 80 Vet er a ns’ Affairs: Audit ...... 81 Health: Disability Services ...... 81 Questions Without Notice: Additional Answers— Federal Election: Member for New England...... 82 Questions Without Notice: Take Note of Answers— Regional Services: Program Funding...... 83 Committees— Reports: Government Responses...... 89 Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee—Report: Government Response...... 99 Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—Report: Government Response...... 101 Joint Standing Committee on Treaties—Report: Government Response...... 103 Committees— Membership...... 104 Assent ...... 105 Health Insurance Amendment (100% Medicare Rebate and Other Measures) Bill 2004— Second Reading...... 105 In Committee...... 126 Third Reading...... 127 Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2004— Second Reading...... 127 Committees— Membership...... 131 Documents— Australian Electoral Commission...... 132 Australian Law Reform Commission...... 133 Australian Customs Service ...... 135 Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs...... 136 Consideration...... 136 Committees— Consideration...... 144 Documents— Consideration...... 146

CONTENTS—continued

Adjournment— International Volunteer Day...... 146 International Day of Disabled Persons ...... 149 Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom ...... 149 Eureka Stockade: 150th Anniversary ...... 152 Windimurra Mine ...... 152 AUSTRAC ...... 153 Documents— Tabling...... 154 Questions on Notice Superannuation: Small Business—(Question No. 76)...... 156 Superannuation: Small Business—(Question No. 77)...... 156 Superannuation: Small Business—(Question No. 78)...... 156 Superannuation: Small Business—(Question No. 79)...... 157 Superannuation: Small Business—(Question No. 81)...... 158 Superannuation: Small Business—(Question No. 82)...... 158 Superannuation: Small Business—(Question No. 83)...... 159 Environment: Endangered Species—(Question No. 86)...... 160

Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 1

Thursday, 2 December 2004 sary part of the technical process of using a copy ————— of a work or other subject matter. The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. The bill places a time limit on the application of Paul Calvert) took the chair at 9.30 a.m. and the transitional provisions relating to the extension of the term of copyright protection. read prayers. Finally, the bill clarifies provisions that limit the NOTICES remedies available against carriage service pro- Presentation viders. Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Reasons for Urgency Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.31 The US FTA is expected to enter into force on a.m.)—I give notice that, on the next day of 1 January 2005. Prior to entry into force, both sitting, I shall move: Australia and the United States must exchange letters confirming that domestic processes have That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (8) of been completed. Minor clarifying and miscella- standing order 111 not apply to the following neous amendments are required to be enacted bills: urgently to remove any doubt that Australia’s Copyright Legislation Amendment Bill 2004; obligations under the US FTA have not been im- James Hardie (Investigations and Proceed- plemented before letters are exchanged. ings) Bill 2004; (Circulated by authority of the Attorney-General) National Water Commission Bill 2004. JAMES HARDIE (INVESTIGATIONS AND I also table statements of reasons justifying PROCEEDINGS) BILL the need for these bills to be considered dur- Purpose of the Bill ing these sittings and seek leave to have the The bill facilitates a comprehensive investigation statement incorporated in Hansard. of matters arising from the New South Wales Leave granted. Special Commission of Inquiry into the Medical Research and Compensation Foundation (the The statements read as follows— James Hardie Special Commission of Inquiry) COPYRIGHT LEGISLATION AMEND- and any proceedings that may arise from those MENT BILL investigations. The bill expressly abrogates legal Purpose of the Bill professional privilege in relation to certain materials, allowing their use by the Australian Securi- The bill amends the Copyright Act 1968 (the Act) ties and Investments Commission and the Com- and the US Free Trade Agreement Implementa- monwealth Director of Public Prosecutions in tion Act 2004 (US FTA Act) to further implement investigations of James Hardie and any related obligations under the Australia-United States Free proceedings. Trade Agreement (US FTA) in respect of criminal offences, temporary reproductions, internet ser- Reasons for Urgency vice provider liability and compensation for the Over coming months, a detailed investigation into extension of the term of copyright protection. the issues raised in the James Hardie Special The bill amends the Act to broaden the scope of Commission of Inquiry will be conducted. It is some criminal offence provisions added by the expected that claims for privilege will be vigor- US FTA Act so that a prosecution is not required ously maintained in the context of this investiga- to establish that a person committed those of- tion. If the bill is to assist this investigation, it fences ‘with the intention of obtaining a commer- would need to be passed in the Spring 2004 sit- cial advantage or profit’ in addition to ‘by way of tings. trade’. The Report of the James Hardie Special Commis- It also narrows the scope of the incidental copies sion of Inquiry was handed down to the New exception to temporary copies made as a neces- South Wales Government on 21 September 2004.

CHAMBER 2 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

The Report identified a number of complex issues ing Committee on Regulations and Ordi- relating to the conduct of the James Hardie group, nances, Senator Tchen, I give notice that 15 its directors and officers, and its advisers. A thor- sitting days after today Senator Tchen shall ough investigation of the conduct of James Har- move: die, with proceedings brought where misconduct is found, is essential to maintaining community That the following delegated legislation be confidence in the Australian corporate regulatory disallowed. regime. 1. Air Navigation (Aviation Security Status (Circulated by authority of the Treasurer) Checking) Regulations 2004, as contained in Statutory Rules 2004 No. 207 and made un- NATIONAL WATER COMMISSION BILL der the Air Navigation Act 1920. Purpose of the Bill 2. Crimes Amendment Regulations 2004 The bill establishes the National Water Commis- (No.1), as contained in Statutory Rules 2004 sion as a Commonwealth statutory authority. No. 164 and made under the Crimes Act Reasons for Urgency 1914. At its 25 June 2004 meeting, the Council of Aus- 3. National Health Amendment Regulations tralian Governments agreed to the establishment 2004 (No. 2), as contained in Statutory Rules of a National Water Commission. 2004 No. 186 and made under the National Establishment of the Commission is a key plat- Health Act 1953. form of the National Water Initiative Agreement 4. National Health (Private Health Insurance (NWIA) signed by the Australian Government Levies) Regulations 2004, as contained in and the Governments of New South Wales, Victo- Statutory Rules 2004 No. 187 and made un- ria, Queensland, South Australia, the Northern der the National Health Act 1953. Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard a While the Commission is being established ad- short summary of the matters raised by the ministratively pending passage of the bill, the committee. NWIA commits parties to establishing the Com- Leave granted. mission as an independent statutory body by the end of 2004. Passage of the bill in the 2004 The summary read as follows— Spring sittings is required for the Commonwealth Air Navigation (Aviation Security Status to meet this commitment. Checking) Regulations 2004, Statutory Rules The NWI Agreement sets out a number of key 2004 No. 207 tasks for completion by the National Water These Regulations provide for background checks Commission in its first year, including the evalua- to be made on applicants for flight crew licences, tion of state and territory implementation plans permit the Secretary to declare a person to have for the Initiative by mid-2005, and the scheduled adverse security status, and make other related 2005 assessment of National Competition Policy amendments. water-related reform commitments. New regulation 7 provides that CASA may pro- The Commission will also provide advice and vide information, including personal information, recommendations to the Government on projects to certain other Commonwealth organisations for to be funded under the Australian Water Fund, a the purposes of carrying out background and se- major Australian Government investment in security checks. The Committee wrote to the Minis- curing Australia’s water future. ter seeking advice as to whether the Privacy (Circulated with the authority of the Prime Minis- Commissioner was consulted with respect to this ter) provision. Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (9.31 The Minister advised on 31 August 2004 that the a.m.)—On behalf of the Chair of the Stand- regulations were put in place in an urgent manner in response to legal advice. The Attorney-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 3

General’s Department and the Australian Gov- Insurance Administration Council. The Explana- ernment Solicitor were consulted in the process of tory Statement indicates that legal advice has developing the regulations. The Privacy Commis- been received about this matter. It is not clear, sioner’s input was not sought. however, whether any action is required to vali- The Committee considers that the response an- date the imposition of levies that have been col- swered the question but has written to the Minis- lected prior to these amendments. The Committee ter seeking further information on why the Pri- has therefore written to the Minister seeking ad- vacy Commissioner was not consulted. vice on this matter and requesting a copy of the legal advice referred to in the Explanatory State- Crimes Amendment Regulations 2004 (No. 1), ment. Statutory Rules 2004 No. 164 NOTICES The Regulations prescribe periodic detention orders under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Withdrawal Act 1999 (NSW) and the Periodic Detention Act Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (9.32 1995 (ACT) for the purposes of subsection a.m.)—I withdraw business of the Senate 20AB(1) of the Crimes Act 1914. notice of motion No. 1 standing in my name These amendments commence retrospectively for today. (from 1 September 1995 for periodic detention orders in the ACT—Schedule 1, and from 3 April Withdrawal 2000 for periodic detention orders in NSW— Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) Schedule 2). The Committee wrote to the Minis- (9.32 a.m.)—I withdraw business of the Sen- ter seeking advice as to whether any persons have ate notice of motion No. 3 standing in my been subject to periodic detention orders for rele- name for today. vant crimes in the ACT or NSW during the relevant periods and if so, what the legislative author- BUSINESS ity for such orders was. The Committee also Rearrangement sought advice on the reason for the lengthy delay in clarifying the position of periodic detention Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— orders in the ACT and NSW for the purposes of Manager of Government Business in the the Crimes Act. Senate) (9.32 a.m.)—by leave—I move: The Minister’s response on 17 November 2004 That the routine of business from not later than argues that the retrospective operation of the 4.30 pm to 6 pm shall be government business amendments is beneficial because the alternative only. to periodic detention orders would be full time Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (9.33 custody. The Committee considers that if that is a.m.)—I do not understand what the situation the only alternative, then it appears that this is will be after 4.30 p.m. The government is beneficial. However, it is not clear whether this is now proposing that government business the only alternative and the Committee has written to the Minister seeking further advice on this only be debated from 4.30 p.m. onwards. I matter. understood that during the period from 4 p.m. there would be no quorums and no National Health Amendment Regulations 2004 (No. 2), Statutory Rules 2004 No. 186 divisions. I think the matter should be de- ferred unless the minister can confirm that National Health (Private Health Insurance there will be no divisions or quorums called Levies) Regulations 2004, Statutory Rules 2004 No. 187 during that period of time from 4.30 p.m. onwards. The Committee notes that these regulations respond to concerns raised by the Australian Na- Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— tional Audit Office about the Constitutional valid- Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.34 ity of certain levies imposed by the Private Health a.m.)—The rule is that after 4.30 p.m. there

CHAMBER 4 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 are no divisions. Quorums can still be called. FOREIGN AFFAIRS: UKRAINE That stands. Senator Harradine’s understand- Senator CHAPMAN (South Australia) ing is correct except that quorums can still be (9.37 a.m.)—I move: called. That the Senate— Question agreed to. (a) notes that: NOTICES (i) international observers, including the Presentation International Election Monitoring Mis- Senator CROSSIN (Northern Territory) sion of the Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe have re- (9.35 a.m.)—by leave—I give notice that, on ported that the recent presidential elec- the next day of sitting, I shall move: tion in Ukraine has fallen well short of That the following matter be referred to the international standards, Employment, Workplace Relations and Education (ii) reported irregularities include suspi- References Committee for inquiry and report by ciously high voter turnout in several 12 May 2005: regions, the fraudulent use of absentee The implications for the Government’s voting, intimidation of voters at some proposed changes to the funding arrange- polling stations, abuse of state re- ments for targeted assistance in Indigenous sources and overt media bias, education. (iii) in such circumstances the officially Postponement declared results of the election cannot Items of business were postponed as fol- be taken to properly represent the will lows: of the Ukrainian people, and General business notice of motion no. 27 (iv) a resolution to the current political cri- standing in the name of Senator Lees for sis in Ukraine can only be achieved today, relating to Asian elephants, post- through a new election, which is con- poned till 7 December 2004. ducted in a transparent manner that meets international standards; COMMITTEES (b) calls on the Government of Ukraine to: Finance and Public Administration Refer- (i) ensure the safety and welfare of all its ences Committee citizens, including those taking part in Reference peaceful demonstrations as part of the Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- exercise of their democratic rights, tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- (ii) hold a new presidential election based ate) (9.36 a.m.)—I, and also on behalf of on democratic principles that: Senators Bartlett, Brown and Lees, ask that (A) ensures absentee ballots are cast in a business of the Senate notice of motion No. 2 free and democratic manner, and are be taken as formal. not subject to abuse, The PRESIDENT—Is there any objec- (B) allows both presidential candidates tion to this motion being taken as formal? equal and unbiased access to the mass media of Ukraine in the period Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (9.36 leading up to the new election date, a.m.)—I would like to hear stated in the Sen- and ate the reasons for this motion. (C) ensures that international observers The PRESIDENT—There is an objec- participate at all levels of the election. tion process to achieve a result that is acceptable to all parties;

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 5

(c) requests the President of the Senate to TANGENTYERE COUNCIL: 25TH transmit this resolution to the outgoing ANNIVERSARY President of Ukraine, Leonid Kuchma, the Parliament of Ukraine and the Ukrainian Senator CROSSIN (Northern Territory) Ambassador to Australia; and (9.38 a.m.)—I move: (d) urges the Australian Government to make That the Senate— further representations to the above effect. (a) congratulates the Alice Springs Aboriginal Question agreed to. Housing Organisation, Tangentyere Coun- cil, on celebrating 25 years since its incor- IRAQ: HUMANITARIAN AID poration; Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (9.37 (b) notes that Tangentyere Council is one of a.m.)—by leave—I move the motion as the largest Aboriginal organisations in amended: Central Australia, incorporating 18 Abo- That the Senate— riginal housing associations; (a) notes the release of the report The endur- (c) acknowledges the organisation was ing effects of war: health in Iraq 2004; formed in the 1970s by Aboriginal people like Geoff Shaw and Eli and Wenten (b) notes that the report finds: Rubuntja; (i) that the risk of death from violence in (d) recognises that Tangentyere Council has the 18 months after the invasion was 58 played a key role in providing basic ser- times higher than in the 15 months be- vices, such as running water and shelter, fore the invasion, while the risk of to Aboriginal people living on the fringes death from all causes was 2.5 times of Alice Springs and has ensured that there higher, are now special purpose leases and per- (ii) 32 per cent of children are chronically manent housing for their members; and malnourished and 17 per cent are un- (e) congratulates the members and executive derweight, of Tangentyere Council, its Executive Di- (iii) since April 2003, at least 400 women rector, William Tilmouth, and staff for and girls, some as young as eight, have their ongoing commitment, dedication and been raped during or after the war, and work. (iv) in 2003 over a quarter of primary care Question agreed to. centres closed, over half of primary FOREIGN AFFAIRS: WEST PAPUA care facilities no longer provide family planning services and between 30 per Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (9.38 cent and 40 per cent of women deliver a.m.)—I move: their babies without qualified help; and That the Senate— (c) calls on the Government to: (a) notes that 1 December 2004 was West (i) support a comprehensive, investigation Papuan National Day, the 43rd anniver- of casualties and the state of health in sary of the 1961 West Papuan Declaration Iraq, and of Independence from Dutch colonial rule; (ii) increase humanitarian aid to Iraq to and address health needs, in particular the (b) calls on the Australian Government to re-establishment of safe, accessible urge the Indonesian Government to lift the primary health facilities. ban on the flying of the Papuans’ morning Question agreed to. star flag. Question put: The Senate divided. [9.43 a.m.]

CHAMBER 6 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

(The President—Senator the Hon. Paul (a) notes the report of the International Red Calvert) Cross into the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the report’s Ayes………… 9 conclusion that interrogation techniques Noes………… 50 amounted to torture; Majority……… 41 (b) expresses concern that such techniques, which contravene international standards, AYES may have been used on Australian prison- Allison, L.F. * Bartlett, A.J.J. ers, David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib, Brown, B.J. Cherry, J.C. who are being held at Guantanamo Bay; Greig, B. Lees, M.H. and Murray, A.J.M. Nettle, K. (c) calls on the Government to act immedi- Ridgeway, A.D. ately to return David Hicks and Mamdouh NOES Habib to Australia. Abetz, E. Barnett, G. Question put: Bishop, T.M. Bolkus, N. Boswell, R.L.D. Buckland, G. The Senate divided. [9.48 a.m.] Calvert, P.H. Campbell, G. * (The President—Senator the Hon. Paul Carr, K.J. Chapman, H.G.P. Calvert) Colbeck, R. Collins, J.M.A. Coonan, H.L. Crossin, P.M. Ayes………… 9 Denman, K.J. Eggleston, A. Noes………… 53 Ellison, C.M. Evans, C.V. Majority……… 44 Ferguson, A.B. Ferris, J.M. Fifield, M.P. Forshaw, M.G. AYES Hogg, J.J. Humphries, G. Allison, L.F. * Bartlett, A.J.J. Hutchins, S.P. Johnston, D. Brown, B.J. Cherry, J.C. Kirk, L. Knowles, S.C. Greig, B. Lees, M.H. Lightfoot, P.R. Ludwig, J.W. Murray, A.J.M. Nettle, K. Lundy, K.A. Macdonald, I. Ridgeway, A.D. Macdonald, J.A.L. Marshall, G. McGauran, J.J.J. McLucas, J.E. NOES Minchin, N.H. O’Brien, K.W.K. Abetz, E. Barnett, G. Patterson, K.C. Payne, M.A. Bishop, T.M. Bolkus, N. Ray, R.F. Santoro, S. Boswell, R.L.D. Brandis, G.H. Scullion, N.G. Stephens, U. Buckland, G. Calvert, P.H. Tchen, T. Troeth, J.M. Campbell, G. Carr, K.J. Vanstone, A.E. Watson, J.O.W. Chapman, H.G.P. Colbeck, R. Webber, R. Wong, P. Collins, J.M.A. Coonan, H.L. * denotes teller Crossin, P.M. Denman, K.J. Question negatived. Eggleston, A. Ellison, C.M. Evans, C.V. Ferguson, A.B. MILITARY DETENTION: Ferris, J.M. * Fifield, M.P. AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS Forshaw, M.G. Heffernan, W. Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) Hogg, J.J. Humphries, G. (9.46 a.m.)—I, and also on behalf of Senator Hutchins, S.P. Johnston, D. Brown, move: Kemp, C.R. Kirk, L. Knowles, S.C. Ludwig, J.W. That the Senate— Lundy, K.A. Macdonald, I. Macdonald, J.A.L. Marshall, G.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 7

Mason, B.J. McGauran, J.J.J. (i) the valuable and willing contribution McLucas, J.E. Minchin, N.H. made by people with disabilities to the O’Brien, K.W.K. Patterson, K.C. development, strength and diversity of Payne, M.A. Ray, R.F. the Australian community, Santoro, S. Scullion, N.G. (ii) that people with disabilities continue to Stephens, U. Tchen, T. experience barriers to employment, Troeth, J.M. Vanstone, A.E. education, premises, technology, trans- Watson, J.O.W. Webber, R. port, accommodation, support and ser- Wong, P. * denotes teller vices that diminish their access to full participation in the community, and Question negatived. (iii) that many people with disabilities and TRADE: US-AUSTRALIA FREE TRADE their carers live in poverty with in- AGREEMENT creasing concern about the adequacy of Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) future income and social support; and (9.51 a.m.)—I move: (c) calls on the Government to address barriers to participation by leading an active That there be laid on the table by the Minister response to unmet need, reviewing fund- representing the Minister for Trade, no later than ing arrangements through the Common- 4 pm on Tuesday, 7 December 2004, the final wealth-State/Territory Disability Agree- letters and any attachments and annexures ex- ment, providing increased access to edu- changed between the governments of Australia cation, employment and training options, and the United States (US) of America to finalise reinstating a permanent Disability Dis- the free trade agreement between the Australia crimination Commissioner, and expediting and the US. the completion of standards under the Question agreed to. Disability Discrimination Act 1992. AVIATION: PASSENGER TICKET Question agreed to. LEVY HUMAN RIGHTS: BURMA Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (9.52 Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) a.m.)—I move: (9.53 a.m.)—I move: That there be laid on the table by the Minister That the Senate— representing the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, no later than 5 pm on 6 (a) notes: December 2004, any determinations made by the (i) ongoing concern about the political Minister under subsections 22(1) and (2) of the situation in Burma, Air Passenger Ticket Levy (Collection) Act 2001. (ii) the continued detention of Daw Aung Question agreed to. San Suu Kyi and reports that this detention has been extended by the mili- INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PEOPLE tary regime in Burma, and WITH A DISABILITY (iii) the recent release of student leader Senator GREIG (Western Australia) Minko Naing and his call for urgent ac- (9.52 a.m.)—I, and also on behalf of Senator tion to pursue democratic reform and McLucas, move: national reconciliation; and That the Senate— (b) calls on the Government: (a) notes that Friday, 3 December 2004, is (i) to urge the Burmese junta to fully en- International Day of People with a Dis- gage with the United Nations (UN) Ability; Secretary General Kofi Annan and the (b) further notes: UN Special Envoy Tan Sri Razali Is-

CHAMBER 8 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

mail in their work to find a political so- The speech read as follows— lution to Burma’s problems, AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FORESTRY (ii) to reiterate Australian demands for the LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) release of the National League for De- 2004 mocracy’s Vice-Chairman, U Tin Oo, In October 2003 the Government commissioned a and all the remaining political prison- broad-ranging review of Australia’s livestock ers, and for the immediate and uncon- export industry, with particular reference to the ditional release of Daw Aung San Suu circumstances surrounding the MV Cormo Ex- Kyi, press incident. The Keniry Review recommended (iii) to support the Committee Representing that industry should be responsible for research People’s Parliament mandate as the le- and development and management of quality gitimate body to convene a democratic assurance systems to support its members achieve Parliament in Burma, according to the best practice outcomes; and that these activities 1990 election result, and should be funded by a compulsory customs (iv) support the Burmese National League charge. for Democracy’s call for the UN Secu- The Government concurs with this view and be- rity Council to convene a special ses- lieves that the livestock export industry should sion to consider what further measures also receive funding raised under the new statu- the UN can take to encourage democ- tory arrangements to help maintain its capability ratic reform and respect for human and continued viability. rights in Burma. The Government supports the livestock export Question agreed to. industry submission that channelling the funds AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND directly to its service delivery body would enable FORESTRY LEGISLATION the industry to carry out marketing and R&D activities and improvements to animal welfare AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) 2004 practices in a clearly accountable and transparent First Reading manner. Bill received from the House of Represen- However, the Australian Meat and Live-stock tatives. Industry Act 1997 currently limits the red meat industry to a single industry marketing body and a Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— single industry research body as the recipient of Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.54 levy or charge funds. Meat and Livestock Austra- a.m.)—I move: lia Ltd is currently that body. This arrangement That this bill may proceed without formalities does not allow disbursement of compulsory levies and be now read a first time. or charges to any other body. Question agreed to. The bill amends the Act to allow the Minister to Bill read a first time. determine more than one red meat industry organisation to be a marketing body and a research Second Reading body and to receive revenue derived from com- Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— pulsory levies and charges. This will allow for a Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.55 livestock export marketing body and a livestock a.m.)—I move: export research body. The intention of the Act, whereby Meat and Live- That this bill be now read a second time. stock Australia Ltd (MLA) is the industry re- I seek leave to have the second reading search body and the industry marketing body for speech incorporated in Hansard. the whole of the red meat industry, remains. Leave granted. The Government will continue its dollar for dollar matching of payments to the industry research

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 9 body, that is, to MLA, in respect of industry re- cies and facilitating improvements in the live- search expenditure. As was envisaged by the stock export system and animal welfare practices. Government under the restructuring arrangements Ordered that the resumption of the debate introduced in 1998, this will preserve the incen- be made an order of the day for a later hour. tive for the provision of research services to be provided by the industry research body, while SCHOOLS ASSISTANCE (LEARNING allowing for the live export industry sector to TOGETHER—ACHIEVEMENT have ownership and control over its own R&D THROUGH CHOICE AND funds. OPPORTUNITY) BILL 2004 The bill was first introduced to Parliament last STATES GRANTS (PRIMARY AND June and was referred to the Senate Rural and SECONDARY EDUCATION Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Com- ASSISTANCE) LEGISLATION mittee in August. The Committee recommended the bill be amended to tighten the accountability AMENDMENT BILL 2004 arrangements for the livestock export industry. First Reading As recommended by the Committee the bill now Bills received from the House of Repre- includes a statutory requirement for the Minister sentatives. to table in Parliament the livestock export service company’s annual report, the funding agreement Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— between the Commonwealth and the company Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.56 and an annual statement of the company’s com- a.m.)—I move: pliance with the funding agreement. That these bills may proceed without formali- The bill also includes amendments relating to the ties, may be taken together and be now read a definition of “meat”, “live-stock” and “edible first time. offal” to avoid the unintended regulation of meat Question agreed to. and edible offal as a result of the broader range of Bills read a first time. live-stock species being regulated following the Keniry Review into Live-stock Exports. Second Reading The bill does not change the Act’s broader inten- Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— tions of viewing the red meat industry as one Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.56 industry while providing for autonomy and self- a.m.)—I move: determination for the sectors within and for reve- That these bills be now read a second time. nue disbursement arrangements. Rather it responds to the specific needs of the I seek leave to have the second reading livestock export industry and the criticisms and speeches incorporated in Hansard. concerns about the continued viability of the in- Leave granted. dustry. The speeches read as follows— The bill is aligned with other sets of amendments SCHOOLS ASSISTANCE (LEARNING to the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry TOGETHER—ACHIEVEMENT THROUGH Act 1997 and the Export Control Act 1982, which CHOICE AND OPPORTUNITY) BILL 2004 relate to licensing issues that will introduce tighter regulation across all aspects of the live- This bill renews the government’s commitment to stock export trade. school education for the next four years. This funding package delivers $33.0 billion for schools Together these amendments represent an impor- over 2005-2008. This is an increase of $9.5 bil- tant step in the Government’s reform of the live- lion over the current quadrennium and represents stock export industry. They are part of a range of the largest ever funding commitment to Austra- initiatives aimed at overcoming current deficien- lian schools.

CHAMBER 10 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

The bill secures funding for Australian govern- cent increase over the current four-year period. ment programs of financial assistance to the states The system of ‘funding maintenance’ will con- and territories for government and non- tinue and a funding guarantee mechanism will be government schools. It succeeds the States Grants introduced to ensure that when schools’ SES (Primary and Secondary Education Assistance) scores are updated, no school will have its fund- Act 2000 which authorised funding and arrange- ing reduced. ments for the 2001-2004 funding quadrennium. Election Commitments This bill reflects the government’s policy deci- This bill implements several important election sions related to the 2005-2008 school funding commitments, to provide additional funding for quadrennium. It is built on the principles that capital infrastructure for schools and to provide every student will be financially supported re- funding for non-government school term hostels. gardless of the school that the child attends and Capital Infrastructure that no school will have its funding cut. The environment in which school children work State Government Schools and play and the standard of school infrastructure Over the next four years the Australian govern- can have a marked bearing on the process of ment will deliver $10.8 billion in supplementary teaching and learning in schools. The Australian funding to state governments for their schools— Government already contributes very signifi- an increase of $2.9 billion over the current quad- cantly to school infrastructure funding in both rennium. This represents a 39 per cent increase State owned government schools and in non- over the current four-year period in general recur- government schools as a means of improving rent grants. educational outcomes for Australian children. The generous average government school recur- This bill continues that commitment by providing rent cost method of indexation will also be re- $1.5 billion in schools capital funding over the tained as the basis for determining the increases 2005-2008 quadrennium, which represents a 15% of Australian government funds to state schools, increase over funding provided in the previous and also to non-government schools. quadrennium. Importantly, it includes an addi- SES funding tional amount of $17 million over the quadrennium to provide specific capital grants for non- The socioeconomic status (SES) funding model government schools in isolated areas and com- will be more deeply embedded as the basis for munities in the Northern Territory. Australian government funding for non- government schools in Australia. From 2005 In addition, this bill implements the election every non-government school, regardless of de- commitment by providing a further $1 billion to nomination, will attract funding according to the restore and build Australia’s school buildings and socioeconomic status of the communities that the grounds. Of this additional funding, $700 million school serves. will be provided directly to government schools. Each government school community will deter- Catholic Schools mine its priority projects, but examples of pro- A major feature of this package is the provision of jects that will be funded include: classroom im- general recurrent funding of $12.8 billion over provements, library resources, computer facilities, 2005-2008 for Catholic systemic schools, an in- air-conditioning and heating, outdoor shade struc- crease of $3.7 billion or 41 per cent over 2001- tures, playing fields, sporting infrastructure, play 2004. This includes an additional $368 million equipment, floor coverings, security measures which will flow to Catholic systemic schools as a and amenity refurbishments. Projects of this na- consequence of their joining the SES funding ture are often desperately needed by school com- arrangements. munities, but never seem to make it on the prior- Independent Schools ity list of state education bureaucracies. Delivery Independent schools will receive a total of $7.8 of the $300 million for non-government schools billion in general recurrent funding—a 50 per will be administered through Block Grant Au-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 11 thorities using the same arrangements in place for ernment funding, which will reinforce the link mainstream capital grants funding. between the funding provided under Australian This new $1 billion initiative will restore and government programs and improved outcomes for build Australia’s schooling infrastructure— all Australian students. These requirements will infrastructure that is needed for current and future underpin the Australian government’s national generations and brings the total commitment to priorities in schooling, and include: school infrastructure funding to $2.5 billion over • Greater national consistency in schooling, the next four years. requiring implementation by 2010 of a com- Non-government School Term Hostels mon school starting age and implementing common testing standards, including common This Government is determined to ensure that all national tests in English, maths, science, civics students have equitable access to schooling and it and citizenship education, and information and provides substantial funding to help rural and communications technology. isolated families with the additional costs of edu- cating their children. • Better reporting to parents by ensuring that school reports are written in plain language This bill also provides additional funding in rec- and that assessment of the child’s achievement ognition that it is becoming more and more costly is reported against national standards—where for families in isolated and remote areas to edu- these are available—and is reported relative to cate their children. This Government will provide the child’s peer group. non-government school term hostels across Aus- tralia with a grant of $2,500 per child per year • Transparency of school performance so over the next four years. This additional funding schools publish school performance informa- will support rural communities by providing an tion to provide parents with objective data and affordable alternative to boarding school or dis- information. tance education for rural and isolated families. • Greater autonomy to school principals so that The grants will assist these hostels to provide a school principals have a significant say over high standard of care to rural primary and secon- staffing issues in their own schools. dary school students residing at the hostels and • Creating safer schools by the implementation contribute toward the viability of individual hos- of the National Safe Schools Framework in all tels. schools. Special Purpose Grants • A common commitment to physical activity. This bill continues the Australian government’s • Making values a core part of schooling includ- commitment to improving literacy and numeracy ing requiring schools to fly the Australian flag. for all Australian students. Students who are most in need of additional learning assistance will This bill represents a major investment in the benefit from an estimated $2.1 billion for a new future of our society. We remain committed to overarching targeted programme—the Literacy, quality schooling for all Australian students re- Numeracy and Special Learning Needs pro- gardless of the school that they attend, and we gramme. will continue to provide record funding to all Australian schools and schoolchildren. If we are The bill also includes $117.0 million to assist to develop the skills and knowledge for Austra- geographically isolated children, $245.8 million lia’s future then we need a genuinely national to assist newly arrived students of non-English ÇÃPLOOLRQÃWRÃL education system, proper recognition of quality speaking backgrounds and m- teaching, greater freedom for schools at the local prove learning outcomes of students learning level, schools that are safe and are committed to languages other than English. teaching values, educational justice for Indige- Conditions of Funding nous Australians, and a commitment to do some- A key feature of this bill is the strengthening of thing about schools that are not performing. the performance framework for Australian gov-

CHAMBER 12 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

This legislation will strengthen all schools and When I announced this initiative, only four build national consistency. Through improved states—Victoria, Western Australia, the Northern accountability and outcomes this bill will ensure Territory and the Australian Capital Territory, the health of the education sectors and the growth reported to parents their child’s performance of our nation. against the national benchmarks. Other States that I commend the Bill to the Senate. have now reported to parents their child’s performance against national benchmark standards, ————— will also be included in the trial. STATES GRANTS (PRIMARY AND In order to expand the number of states included SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSISTANCE) in this trial initiative, additional funding is re- LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2004 quired under the National Literacy and Numeracy The purpose of the Bill is to amend the States Strategies and Projects programme for 2004. Grants (Primary and Secondary Education Assis- The 24,000 children across Australia who have tance) Act 2000, to provide funding for the Tuto- not attained the minimum reading skills deserve rial Credit Initiative and to correct a technical the opportunity to receive additional tutorial as- defect in the Act. sistance offered by the Tutorial Credits Initiative, Tutorial Credit Initiative funding and their parents are entitled to comprehensive Literacy and numeracy are the most important information about their child’s progress. foundation skills our children need during their Technical defect—SES funding phasing in ar- education. When this Government came to office rangements there was no national reporting of literacy and This Bill will also correct a technical defect in the numeracy standards. We have now introduced Act. national literacy and numeracy testing and benchmarking at years 3, 5 and 7. These have The Act gave effect to the new socio-economic now become a critical part of the schooling sys- status (SES) based funding arrangements for non- tem and a key indicator of academic performance. government schools for 2001-2004. This historic The Australian Government is also committed to reform has provided a more transparent, objective ensuring that States and Territories provide in- and equitable approach to funding non- formation to parents about their child’s perform- government schools. General recurrent funding is ance against the national literacy and numeracy distributed according to need and schools serving benchmarks. the neediest communities receive the greatest financial support. This Government is also taking steps to assist those students who do not meet the national liter- Under the Act, schools with an SES funding level acy benchmarks. I recently announced the Tuto- received increased funding phased in at the rate of rial Credits Initiative, to provide up to $700 to 25 per cent of the increase each year. The inten- parents for tutorial assistance for children who tion of the original legislation, as passed by this have not attained the minimum reading skills as Parliament in December 2000, was to fully fund measured by the Year 3 national reading bench- schools at their new funding level by 2004. mark in 2003. There is, however, a technical defect in the SES The Tutorial Credits Initiative will provide $700 funding phasing in arrangements as set out in the worth of tuition to students on a one to one basis Act. This means that over 700 non-government out of school hours by appropriately qualified, schools, including schools which enrol some of screened and vetted tutors. Parents will be able to the most disadvantaged young people in this redeem the tuition credit to choose the most ap- country, cannot receive their correct entitlements propriate type of assistance for their children. under the General Recurrent Grants programme Brokers will be appointed through an open tender in 2004. process to assist parents and assess and appoint The proposed amendment in this Bill will enable tutors. the current Act to fulfil its original intent, so that

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 13 schools receive their correct funding entitlement I seek leave to have the second reading for 2004. speeches incorporated in Hansard. Conclusion Leave granted. The Howard Government is committed to im- The speeches read as follows— proving the literacy and numeracy standards of all Australian children and ensuring that all parents SUPERANNUATION LEGISLATION receive information on their children’s literacy AMENDMENT BILL 2004 and numeracy achievement against the national This Bill proposes amendments to the Superannu- benchmarks. This Bill confirms the Government’s ation Act 1976 in respect of the Commonwealth commitment to a strong school sector which of- Superannuation Scheme (CSS) and the Rules for fers high quality outcomes to all students and the administration of the Public Sector Superan- choice to parents. Quality education is vital to nuation Scheme (PSS). Australia’s future. The purpose of the Bill is to make specific provi- I commend the Bill to the Senate. sion for the superannuation salary for Departmen- Ordered that the resumption of the debate tal Secretaries and certain Australian Government be made an order of the day for a later hour. office holders who are members of the CSS or the PSS. SUPERANNUATION LEGISLATION The CSS and the PSS currently allow superan- AMENDMENT BILL 2004 nuation salary for some office holders to be de- CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, termined by the Remuneration Tribunal where the FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) Tribunal also determines the remuneration or AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) 2004 other terms and conditions of the office holder. First Reading The amendments contained in the Bill are designed to allow superannuation salary also to be Bills received from the House of Repre- set in a broader range of remuneration determina- sentatives. tions. This includes determinations made by a Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Minister or a Presiding Officer of the Senate or Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.57 House of Representatives in respect of a person a.m.)—I indicate to the Senate that these who is appointed under one of various Acts of Parliament or a determination of remuneration bills are being introduced together. After de- made under the Remuneration Tribunal Act 1973. bate on the motion for the second reading has been adjourned, I will move a motion to The Bill validates some such determinations of superannuation salary that have been made in the have the bills listed separately on the Notice past while also ensuring that no benefit that has Paper. I move: been paid or is continuing to be paid will be re- That these bills may proceed without formali- duced because of the amendments in the Bill. ties, may be taken together and be now read a The Bill was originally introduced into the House first time. of Representatives on 11 August 2004, but lapsed Question agreed to. when Parliament was prorogued for the general Bills read a first time. election. The Bill that is being re-introduced today is essentially the same as the lapsed Bill, ex- Second Reading cept that it now extends to all determinations Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— made under the Remuneration Tribunal Act and Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.58 validates certain determinations of superannua- a.m.)—I move: tion salary already made under that Act. That these bills be now read a second time. —————

CHAMBER 14 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS There is no legitimate reason why a person should AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT be able to escape prosecution, conviction and BILL (No. 2) 2004 punishment for a serious child pornography of- The Classification (Publications, Films and Com- fence in those circumstances. puter Games) Amendment Bill No 2 (the Bill) The Bill also removes any doubt as to the validity will make minor technical amendments to the of decisions made or any later action taken by the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Board, the Review Board or the Director in re- Games) Act 1995. spect of the decisions validated by the Bill. The amendments are designed to remove any The full rigour of the classification decision mak- doubt as to the validity of classification decisions ing process will remain unchanged. made by the Classification Board or the Classifi- The Government is committed to the elimination cation Review Board in response to deficient or of child pornography and this Bill will ensure that defective applications for classification by law a person cannot avoid prosecution or conviction enforcement agencies, or (in the case of applica- based on a technicality. tions for review) applications by persons entitled to made such applications under section 42 of the Debate (on motion by Senator George Classification Act. Campbell) adjourned. The Bill is designed to ensure that prosecutions Ordered that the bills be listed on the No- for child pornography and related offences do not tice Paper as separate orders of the day. fail for technical reasons related to applications COMMITTEES for classification. Finance and Public Administration Refer- While the Government is of the view that deci- ences Committee sions made by the Classification Board and the Classification Review Board are valid even where Reference there has been a fault in the application process, Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- the Bill addresses a potential legal argument that tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- a decision made in response to a defective appli- ate) (9.58 a.m.)—I, and also on behalf of cation is invalid. Senators Bartlett, Brown and Lees, move: The Bill is designed to ensure that applications That the following matters be referred to the for classification from law enforcement agencies Finance and Public Administration References that have not met all the technical requirements of Committee for inquiry and report by 15 August the Act will not result in a subsequent classifica- 2005: tion decision being invalid. (1) The administration of the Regional Part- The amendments contained in the Bill will apply nerships program and the Sustainable Re- to classification decisions made before the com- gions program, with particular reference mencement of these amendments, and are in that to the process by which projects are pro- sense retrospective in their operation. posed, considered and approved for fund- However, it is clear that this retrospectivity is ing, including: appropriate and justified and will not lead to any (a) decisions to fund or not to fund particu- substantive injustice. lar projects; Any errors that may have been made in the appli- (b) the recommendations of area consulta- cation process were purely technical and cast no tive committees; doubt whatsoever on the correctness of the classification decision, which rested on the examina- (c) the recommendations of departmental tion of the relevant product not the formalities of officers and recommendations from the application. any other sources including from other agencies or other levels of government;

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 15

(d) the nature and extent of the respective goodwill we have tried to gain support for roles of the administering department, this motion. It is supported by Senator Bart- minister and parliamentary secretary, lett, on behalf of the Democrats; by Senator other ministers and parliamentary sec- Brown, on behalf of the Greens; and by retaries, other senators or members and Senator Lees. We have tried to come up with their advisers and staff in the process of selection of successful applications; a reference which will deal with the public concern that has arisen regarding the opera- (e) the criteria used to take the decision to tion of the Regional Partnerships program, fund projects; with some of the decision-making processes (f) the transparency and accountability of that seem to have underpinned it and with the process and outcomes; the lack of transparency of some of those (g) the mechanism for authorising the decision-making processes. It is very much funding of projects; the case that the parliament and the Senate (h) the constitutionality, legality and pro- have a legitimate interest in this issue, in the priety of any practices whereby any way that public money has been expended, members of either House of Parliament are excluded from committees, boards particularly as it has been expended under or other bodies involved in the consid- discretionary programs like the Regional eration of proposed projects, or coerced Partnerships program. There are a lot of or threatened in an effort to prevent questions about the operation of that pro- them from freely communicating with gram that need to be answered, and so far we their constituents; and have not been able to get a lot of those an- (i) whether the operation of the program is swers. consistent with the Auditor-General’s We propose to ask the Senate Finance and ‘Better Practice Guide for the Admini- Public Administration References Committee stration of Grants’, and is subject to to examine some of those issues. We think sufficient independent audit. that is the appropriate committee to look at (2) With respect to the future administration issues of public administration and the ad- of similar programs, any safeguards or guidelines which might be put in place to ministration of particular programs. All Aus- ensure proper accountability for the ex- tralians share an interest in making sure their penditure of public money, particularly the taxes are used responsibly, that those funds appropriate arrangements for independent are accounted for properly and that the audit of the funding of projects. proper mechanisms are in place to account (3) Any related matters. for any grants that are made. There is a deal I will speak briefly to the motion to outline of public concern about some of the ways the case for the reference of these matters to that some of these grants have been made, the Finance and Public Administration Ref- and it is appropriate that the finance and pub- erences Committee for inquiry and report. lic administration committee take on the re- Senators would be aware that this is an issue sponsibility of inquiring into these matters. I that has been debated in the parliament and would point out that this committee last year in the public arena for a couple of weeks. examined the operation of the Dairy Re- gional Assistance Program, with particular During the last week or so I have at- reference to one grant to a steel profiling tempted to negotiate a suitable reference plant. The report made a number of findings with other senators who have an interest in and recommendations. It reads: these matters. With a lot of cooperation and

CHAMBER 16 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

The Committee recommends that Commonwealth and had not been made available for mem- funding to address regional disadvantage be dis- bers of the public to understand and evaluate tributed on the basis of objective funding consid- is of serious concern. These are matters that erations and that mechanisms be put in place to can be properly inquired into by the Finance support intended policy outcomes. and Public Administration References Com- It continues: mittee. We have sought to give the commit- The Committee recommends DoTARS adopt tee appropriate terms of reference and allow transparent and systematic assessment procedures it to inquire into all of those matters. for regional program grants, incorporating an improved documentary record of assessment pro- I would stress two things. Firstly, the cedures. committee will not in any way seek to deal with the allegations that have been made This is an issue that the committee has been regarding criminal conduct; that is not its following. This is an issue that has been of role, that is not part of the terms of reference concern with respect to previous programs. and that is not the role of the Senate. It will This is an issue the committee reported on. I look very much at the administration of gov- might say that, despite the fact that the government programs, at the accountability ernment opposed the referral of that refer- mechanisms that govern them and at whether ence at the time, it accepted all of the rec- those have been properly applied. Secondly, ommendations of the report when it deliv- Senator Harradine expressed some reserva- ered its response. The government in its re- tion and concern that this might be best done sponse said it—and I quote: during the budget estimates committee proc- ... ensured these have been addressed in the pol- ess. I would say this to him. The point he icy and processes for the new Regional Partner- made to me only a week or so ago was that ships Programme. there was some concern about the shortness The government accepted the logic of the of the estimates process. We have only a report of the committee. It said that these week in the February round of estimates to sorts of concerns would be addressed in the cover all of the committees. While this may Regional Partnerships program. There is be a matter people can pursue at estimates, I enough evidence and there are enough ques- think the case is pretty clear that the Finance tion marks over that program now so that it and Public Administration References Com- is appropriate that we see whether or not the mittee is the best committee to inquire into government has properly adopted the rec- these issues. It will have the time and the ommendations of the finance and public ad- resources to do that properly. As I say, this ministration committee about proper proce- will be a continuation of the work it started dures being applied. This reference will al- last year on the Dairy Regional Assistance low the committee to continue its work to Program. ensure that public funds are accounted for in I think this is the appropriate response a proper way, that proper checks and bal- from the Senate. It is the appropriate role of ances are in place and that governments are the Senate to hold the government to account spending money not driven by political con- to ensure that taxpayers’ funds are being ex- siderations but based on proper assessments pended properly and that proper accounting with established criteria. Yesterday’s revela- procedures are in place. I note that the Dep- tion that one of the main criteria used in uty Prime Minister, Mr Anderson, indicated making these grants had not been made pub- that he had no problem with the Senate hav- lic, had not been published on the web site ing an inquiry and that he thought it was part

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 17 of the proper process of the parliament and left, they are going to get absolutely deci- of the Senate. He declared he had nothing to mated. I say to the Democrats: if you are hide and that therefore he had no problem supporting this proposed resolution, you with us having this inquiry. I would be sur- have not learnt your lesson from the last prised if the government were to oppose it, election. It is your proposed resolution too. given that they support those sorts of ac- You tried to go out to the left. You tried to countability measures. Without labouring the outflank the Greens to the left. There is only point, I think this is an appropriate response room for one far left party in Australia. That from the Senate to the public concern about is not what you guys were designed to do 25 these issues. years ago. You were designed to put some Senator BOSWELL (Queensland— sense into the Senate. But all you have done Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) for the last three years is to play second fid- (10.06 a.m.)—The Senate today is debating a dle to the Greens. You got what you de- motion to refer the administration of the Re- served—annihilation. That is what has hap- gional Partnerships program and the Sustain- pened. Senator Murray—I refer to you be- able Regions Program to the Finance and cause I think you have more sense than the Public Administration References Commit- rest of the people over there combined— tee. In other words, rural Australia is to feel surely you could have given some wise the pain of Labor’s defeat at the last federal counsel and said, ‘Hey, let’s not go there, election. Labor has no leadership, no policies because all we’re trying to be is “me, too” and no confidence. They do not have support with the Greens.’ for any of those things from the electorate so Labor wants to stop locals identifying they resort to using rural Australia as a their own solutions. Labor wants to punish whipping boy. This is a move designed to local rural leaders who come up with ideas attack the self-determination of rural com- for local communities to survive and prosper. munities who come up with plans to diver- As former Labor senator Peter Walsh pointed sify and broaden their economic base so they out in today’s Australian, Labor’s idea of can future-proof themselves against bad sea- helping the bush is for Australia to sign the sons, poor commodity prices or changes. Kyoto protocol. The National Party is to be I have said this in the Senate before and I persecuted because it does the job it was will say it again: when John Anderson took elected to do—that is, represent the interests leadership of the National Party, his first of regional and rural Australia. We are to be public statement was that there are two Aus- persecuted for doing what in many cases the tralias. The economy is moving at a rapid Labor Party has come to us to do. After all, pace in the cities and suburbs of Australia 76 per cent of all projects in Labor elector- but it is not moving that fast in rural and re- ates have been approved, as opposed to 79 gional Australia. He wanted to put programs per cent for coalition electorates. There is not together that could give equality of job and a significant difference there. The inquiry is economic opportunities to the electorate. going to stymie the ongoing work of these This was the way he proposed to do it. important programs. There are approvals coming through all the time. Just yesterday, I I am particularly disappointed by Senator was asked to make an announcement in Andrew Murray. I just want to make some Rockhampton, which is in the Labor Party reference to the Democrats. As long as the electorate of Capricornia. It was a very good Democrats try to outflank the Greens to the program. Obviously Kirsten Livermore, the

CHAMBER 18 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 federal member for that electorate, would front up before a Senate committee out for have been supporting it. But I wonder if I political blood? This motion is a terrible dis- should put that program on hold now. incentive to rural and regional communities Senator Carr—Was she invited? and to political leaders to ever devise innovative and flexible programs to help their con- Senator BOSWELL—I imagine she stituents. Well done, Labor! What a Christ- would be invited. I do not blame some sena- mas present to farming families who have tors for taking some actions, but is Labor survived through drought, low commodity saying that I should do that? Is that what La- prices, high dollar values and oil prices, only bor is saying—that the government should to be hit with a low blow by a force that can- hold off because there is something amiss not face up to their own lack of leadership about these programs? That would be letting and their defeat. down a lot of people, including the local member, who, I would presume, asked for This is a very sad indictment of the Sen- this program, perhaps in writing to the minis- ate—a particularly sad indictment. We ex- ter. The National Party is to be persecuted in pect that from the Labor Party and the a witch-hunt because it listened to represen- Greens but we thought wiser counsel would tatives of rural Australia at the Regional Aus- have prevailed in the Democrats. I know tralia Summit who wanted innovative and Senator Murray must be embarrassed about flexible programs designed to meet the vari- this. I expect that he was defeated in his ety of circumstances facing regional com- party room, because I know that he would munities. The National Party is to be perse- have the decency not to put up this sort of cuted because it listened and it delivered. proposed resolution. I know that he does have concern for rural and regional Australia, Why are Labor so bereft of leadership and which is more than anyone in the Labor policy that they are reduced to picking up the Party has. If you ever want to see the error of modus operandi of an Independent who is your ways, just examine the Senate result in upset because he did not get invited to a gov- Queensland, where the conservative vote ernment tea party? The reason is pretty obvi- went up by around 58 per cent. That was the ous. If you are part of a government that lis- conservative vote. It was probably a bit tens and delivers then you are part of a local higher. victory. If you only carp from the sidelines, chances are you will always be a gatecrasher, You have neglected rural Australia. You never an invited guest. Labor pin their hopes have paid the price out there and you will on the ways of an Independent. That is pa- wear the consequences in the Senate when thetic. The worst of it is that rural Australia you come back in July. You are not scoring will be the loser. any political points. You are driving away the very little remaining support that you have in After this committee gets through with its rural Australia. The National Party has put witch-hunt, who will ever stand up in a local these programs up and you have attacked it rural community again and say, ‘We need on Dairy RAP and you are now attacking it government to help our community’? Who on the Sustainable Regions Program and the will ever put up his or her hand and apply for Regional Partnerships program. All you ever funding in case they get put through the mill do is attack anything that goes on out in rural of a Senate inquiry? Who will ever follow and regional Australia. No wonder you got through on a local job creation idea to keep such a miserable, depressed vote out there— young people in country areas if they have to eight or nine per cent in some electorates. I

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 19 do not know how you can look yourselves in spend money to help you, you want to be as the face when you put up these sorts of reso- confident as possible that the money is allo- lutions to score mean political points. You cated in the most effective way and that it is are not scoring them against the government. not affected by political calculations, by You have tried that for the last six years and pork-barrelling or by all of the other sorts of you have failed. You keep doing it and you things that everybody in the Australian keep failing. All you are doing now is con- community continually suspects are behind tinuing your vendetta and taking out your public or government grants. We all know vengeance on rural and regional Australia. that every time a grant is given the entire You should be absolutely ashamed of your- community wonders about whether there has selves and so should the Democrats—I know been a wink or a nod or a nudge involved in that Senator Murray would have been de- somebody getting it and somebody else not feated in the party room—and the Greens. getting it. Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— That does not help any of us. It does not Leader of the Australian Democrats) (10.16 help democracy when that public suspicion a.m.)—I know that the National Party is a is there. It is human nature to suspect that little bit sensitive about this issue but that has and it is human nature sometimes for that to got to be the most feeble defence or feeble happen. The general community suspects attack—I am not quite sure what it was—that that that is involved some of the time and all I have heard in a long time. Senator Murray of us here know that it is involved some of can speak for himself but I am sure that the the time. But we should be trying to elimi- only fight we had in the party room was who nate it as much as possible. When you have got to put their name on the motion. I know clear-cut public allegations on the public that I am not leader for much longer but record that this has clearly been a factor in while I am leader my name goes on the mo- the significant allocations of public money in tion, though as a certain fact Senator Murray an important program then of course you had a lot more to do with shaping the content should investigate it. To suggest that investi- of it than I did. gating it is somehow an attack on rural Aus- I can just see it now. To all people in re- tralia and on their self-determination is just gional Australia the word will go out: Senate sophistry at its worst. As for trying to portray to inquire into government funding of Re- it as some sort of attempt to out-flank the gional Partnerships program. There goes Greens to the left, what is left wing or right Christmas, they will all say. Our life is ru- wing about trying to ensure public money is ined. What a farce! To portray an attempt to properly spent? All of us support that. These inquire into whether or not taxpayers’ money are the most ridiculous comparisons I have to rural Australia is being properly spent and ever heard. allocated as an attack on the bush is just ri- I know that the Democrats cannot talk diculous. If anything, a party that pretends to about whose votes went down in the last defend the bush should be happy to make election but, for all of their trumpeting in sure that every last cent of money that is Queensland about winning a seat, the Na- supposed to go to the Regional Partnerships tional Party’s vote in Queensland in the Sen- program is spent as effectively and as trans- ate went down—again. Much as it might gall parently as possible. Whether you live in the them to acknowledge it, they got in on the city or the country, I have no doubt that, if tail of a huge increase in the Liberal Party you are aware of a program that is meant to vote in Queensland. I know that Senator

CHAMBER 20 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Brandis and Senator Boswell are best of bear fruit. Independents too, like Mr Windsor friends again these days, but the fact is that and Senator Harradine, must have been ap- they managed to get that extra seat because proached for help many times. Senator Har- of the Liberal Party surplus, and the National radine has survived here as an Independent Party vote went down again. in the Senate longer than anyone else in our But I do not care about all that. I do not history. I am sure he has been approached care about The Nationals and Liberals fight- many times, and I am sure he has been suc- ing for the rural vote. I do not care about the cessful many times and many other times obvious tension between The Nationals and not. But if you get to a stage where a group some of the rural Independents, like Mr in the community is told that potentially they Windsor or Mr Katter or Mr Andren. I am are not going to get funding if they have the not interested. There is obviously a long his- support of a member of parliament from an- tory there and it is obviously bitter and per- other party or of an Independent, that is get- sonal. That is why having an independent ting far beyond anything that is acceptable. inquiry in the Senate that looks at the facts I do not know if that has happened. But if and the details as outlined in these terms of it has happened, if it might happen, if there reference is the way to go. This inquiry is not becomes a general expectation amongst the going to second-guess what the Federal Po- community that it is a reality, then it will lice did or what the public prosecutor’s deci- affect the ability of members of parliament sion was in relation to the allegations that Mr across the political spectrum to do their job Windsor, the member for New England, and it will affect the ability of community made. The Senate is important and it can do organisations to be able to work with mem- lots of very valuable things but it should not bers of parliament. In my view—and it is not replace a court, particularly in matters that one that is shared by everybody—the key are clearly political and party political or that role of political representatives is not just to impact on members of parliament and their get in and try to whack through the policies political arguments. We can investigate the that you put forward at election time; the key process of that inquiry by the Federal Police role is to facilitate the ability of the entire through estimates or other committees if we community, people who voted for you and choose, and I suspect that people will do people who did not, to be able to connect that. This inquiry is not about that and the effectively with the political process. That terms of reference clearly distinguish it from should be the approach we take regardless of that. our ideological views on any particular issue. This is about expenditure of taxpayers’ If people in the community get a percep- funds and it is also, I might say, about how tion that being seen to be associated with members of parliament are able to conduct particular members of parliament, with their themselves. I am sure that all of us— own local member, will be detrimental to government, opposition, smaller parties and their being able to get taxpayers’ support that Independents—are regularly approached by they would otherwise be entitled to, that their constituents asking for support to get gov- community will lose out on support because ernment assistance. That is part of our role; they associate with their elected member of people expect us to help them to do that. And parliament, then that becomes a serious per- obviously if you are in government or if you version of the democratic process. Even for- are a minister you would naturally expect to getting about whether it is wasting taxpayers’ have a better idea about how that support can money, it corrupts the democratic process

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 21 and some would argue it contravenes parlia- properly giving out grants into whatever area mentary privilege and breaches the law. That it was—I think it was sports. That inquiry is where it gets beyond the day-to-day spats was not seen to be an attack on the self- of competing political candidates and where determination of sporting clubs around the it gets to a situation where the public can nation. They were not all saying, ‘Our believe that they will lose out on support for Christmas is ruined because the parliament is their community in areas that they believe going to inquire into this area.’ It is just ri- are important purely because they associate diculous. It was not a left-wing conspiracy; it with their elected representatives—and that was not part of an attempt by the Liberals to does get serious, and that is why I am con- outflank the Democrats on the left back in cerned about it. those days. How absurd! The Democrats have said all along that we Any time you get significant allegations did not believe the specifics of the allega- on the public record of major distortions in tions, the so-called bribery suggestions, were the way public funding is distributed, par- appropriate for a Senate committee, because ticularly when it gets to the extent of elected we are not a court, we are not a police force members of parliament being seen as a det- and it is too politicised. But there are aspects riment to getting support for grants, of of the process that we can look at. The course you should be examining it. It is not broader allegations that have come to light just a sophistry. I think it is absurd, it is an about allocations of funding, not just in one insult, to suggest otherwise. If that is a sign particular case but in some other issues that of the sort of attitude we are going to get have now come to the fore, are such that they from this government when they do have the are appropriate to examine. They could be numbers in the Senate from July next year looked at through the estimates process. then I think we should all be worried. For a Given the continuing growth of allegations, government that got elected way back in it is appropriate to look at them in a focused 1996 on this laughable slogan ‘For all of us’, way with a focused committee over quite a more and more there is the in crowd and the period of time—and let us note that this out crowd: if you are in the know, if you are committee would have a reporting date right with the elites in the government, then you through to 15 August next year, so that are right: you will get your appointments, would enable a proper examination of the you will get your ambassadorships, you will whole program. get your grants; but if you are seen as on the We are all aware that the whiteboard saga outer, part of the mob that will just be con- has gone down in political folklore. Peter tinually smeared by this government, then Costello, the current Treasurer, partly built you can forget about it, you will be left out in his political reputation on being the incisive the cold. We are getting more and more of Liberal Party interrogator in that particular that over time. Perhaps that is just inevitably inquiry. Nobody suggested at that time— what happens whenever a government is in perhaps the Labor Party, as the government power for a long time. But if that attitude at the time, might have suggested it was an gets to be entrenched once the government inappropriate inquiry; I do not know, but gets control of the Senate then I think it will they certainly would not have wanted it— be a very dangerous development. that it was inappropriate and an assault on Of course there are political undertones to the self-determination of the community to this inquiry but, as the terms of reference inquire into whether or not Ros Kelly was show, the inquiry is clearly about the alloca-

CHAMBER 22 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 tion of funding and it also deals with the personally. I understand that they do not like concerns that have been raised about whether the focus on this. I understand it can have an or not practices are influencing the ability of impact on their families—that is one of the members of parliament to do their job of unfortunate side effects. I do not like that supporting and facilitating the engagement of side of these sorts of issues. I think the abil- our community in the political process and in ity to look specifically at the funding pro- community life. We all repeatedly bemoan gram and the way the program operates, to the growing community cynicism about par- look at that side of things rather than just liamentary politics and about party politics. targeting fights between individual members We all bemoan the fact that people feel that of parliament, is a better way to go. I recog- they cannot make a difference. There is noth- nise the impact it can have on them, particu- ing that is more guaranteed to make them larly on their families, and that is unfortu- cynical and make them feel like there is no nate. point than if they get a belief that even being But if the Senate does not do this inquiry seen to be associating with their local mem- the issue is not going to go away. I think it is ber of parliament is going to ruin their actually better for issues to be looked at in a chances of getting support. And I am not proper and well thought through way and to saying that that allegation is true. What I am be examined in detail, rather than just having saying is that unless that allegation and those allegations being made that become head- broader allegations are properly investigated, lines the next day and are seen through the people will assume they are true. In many distorting prism of the media. That can often ways I hope this is able to demonstrate that be a lot worse than a Senate inquiry. When a those allegations and those concerns are not Senate inquiry gets into detail, into facts and true, because I would prefer the public to be into substance, it usually means the media able to be confident that there is not that de- are not interested anymore because substance gree of distortion in these sorts of funding is too hard, and I think that would actually decisions. I would prefer people’s cynicism make life a bit better. to be proven wrong. I would prefer people to I also have to say—not in relation to Mr be able to feel more confident in the way Anderson personally—that this is a govern- they go about things. ment this has given free rein to smearing As Mr Anderson said—and I have no rea- people and groups across all parts of the son to doubt him—he has nothing to fear community. A specific example I can think from this. If the Senate wants to do it, it of is this government being openly told that should do it. Frankly, I hope that in doing making a range of allegations would cause this the Senate can demonstrate that there is tremendous suffering to somebody’s family no significant political corruption of this par- but it went ahead with the smears anyway, ticular program—I do not know about others despite knowing that it would cause a lot of but, from my point of view, it would cer- distress to the person’s family. So it is a bit tainly make me feel better—but if there is hard. The Deputy Prime Minister has been then we need to fix it up. Either way, to say Deputy Prime Minister for quite some time that investigating it is inappropriate is just and a senior member for a long time in a ridiculous. I fully understand why Mr Ander- government that has smeared a lot of people son, the member for Gwydir—and I have in this country—individuals and groups— heard him speak a number of times on this— without having any concern about what it and Senator Macdonald are affected by this might mean to them or to their families. It is

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 23 a government that has not concerned itself Senate that at least goes part way to address- with natural justice—another concern that ing that. So I think the best way forward is to Mr Anderson expressed. It is a government try to clear the air one way or the other and that has actually supported removing natural try to determine whether or not things have justice from a number of our laws, not least been done appropriately, whether or not of which is the Migration Act. So you have members of parliament are being impeded in to recognise that this government is far from the way they do their job and the community clean when it comes to smearing people left, is being short-changed by the ability to use right and centre without any concern for the their elected members of parliament and, distortions in how that is portrayed through above all else, whether or not taxpayers’ the inevitable media coverage and debate, money is being used as effectively as possi- and it has facilitated, encouraged and partici- ble to deliver the aims it is supposed to pated in that repeatedly in a whole range of achieve or it is being used to buy votes. This areas. That does not detract from my under- is a government that has quite openly been standing and sympathy for some of the dis- willing to spend millions and millions of tress that individual members might be feel- dollars of taxpayers’ money on advertising to ing now, but it does temper it somewhat to buy votes—everybody knows that—so it is recall the very many incidents in which vari- not surprising that there is a suspicion that ous people within this government have been perhaps they are willing to use other taxpay- involved. I do not say that of Mr Anderson or ers’ money in the same way. Let us find out. Senator Macdonald as individuals but of the Let us look at it. Let us put it all on the pub- government they are part of. lic record and let everybody choose for But let us accept all that and pull it all themselves on the basis of the evidence. back to what the motion is about. It is about How that is an assault on regional Australia looking at the administration of the Regional is beyond me. Partnerships program and the Sustainable Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.36 Regions program, with particular reference a.m.)—There is a clear need for an inquiry to the process by which projects are pro- by the Senate Finance and Public Admini- posed, considered and approved for funding. stration References Committee into the ad- That is what it is about. It is something that ministration of the Regional Partnerships could be done through estimates anyway, but program and the Sustainable Regions Pro- putting it as a specific stand-alone inquiry gram, and the evidence for that grows every will enable there to be the sort of focus that I day. Senator Harradine did move for esti- believe is now needed, given the range of mates hearings this week, and that was op- allegations that have now been made and are posed by the government and the opposition likely to continue to be made. It is the best and supported by the Greens. The opportu- way to clear it up once and for all, for better nity for that is now gone until February, and or for worse, in a process that will deliver it is limited, as earlier speakers have seen. some natural justice, give people a chance to But there is a need for an inquiry as, day by respond to allegations on the public record day, information comes out about the gov- and get things corrected. ernment’s manipulation of this program in People can make all the allegations they the way in which the moneys have been allo- like in the House of Representatives without cated in rural and regional Australia. I will any scope for people to correct the record in read the first few paragraphs from Lenore the parliament. We have a process in the

CHAMBER 24 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Taylor’s article in today’s Australian Finan- “the department uses it as a mechanism to provide cial Review: the government with flexibility in relation to nationally significant projects, emerging needs or The federal government has spent $36.3 million significant events,” the departmental document of its $308 million regional partnerships program says. under a previously unpublished guideline allowing it to fund projects which don’t fit the regular So we have got a minister with ‘flexibil- guidelines, but are judged to be in the national ity’—off the record, secret—pulling the rug interest. from under the public perception that there is Among the 12 projects funded under this so- a set of guidelines that make it fair for eve- called Strategic Opportunities Notional Allocation ryone. That is outrageous. That is simply not (Sona) guideline are the dredging of a creek, a acceptable. This is government manipulation Slim Dusty museum and a national sugar industry and the debasing of a project which, on the assistance package. face of it, seems to be fair to everybody. Talk According to a department brief released by the about looking after the interests of the bush! government yesterday, Sona guidelines can be How come Senator Boswell did not make used for projects which “may fall outside the ad- sure that that guideline was known to the ministrative constraints of regional partnerships” people in the bush who were approaching the but are nevertheless judged to be “of national or cross-regional significance” or projects which are government to get funding for their particu- responding to a “significant event such as a re- lar projects according to a set of published gional economic or social crisis.” guidelines? Was Senator Boswell privy to What we are seeing here is a secret guide- this secret guideline used by the government line, outside those guidelines on the public and, if so, why did he cover up on it? If not, record, giving the government—the minister how could it be that the leader of the Na- of the day—the ability to make decisions tional Party in the Senate did not know what which are not under those published, public the Deputy Prime Minister knew in the guidelines. In other words, anything goes. House of Representatives? I would ask Sena- The article, quoting from the departmental tor Boswell to come back in here and explain document, goes on to say this: this secret guideline, because I believe he knew about it and did not tell his constitu- ‘‘Sona is not an advertised element of the pro- ents. If that is the case, he has a case to an- gram and applications cannot be lodged under it—” swer. So we have this secret guideline—this catch- He comes in here and talks about ‘gate- all allowing ministers to do what they like— crasher Independents’. Let us look at the im- which is not advertised and not known to plication in that, because it was aimed very applicants in the bush. And Senator Boswell squarely at the very popular Independent says that this is hard on the bush! You are member for New England, Mr Windsor. telling me it is! Here is a government deceiv- ‘Gatecrasher’ indeed! What an affront to the ing the bush—fraudulently leaving the appli- voters of New England that term by Senator cants in the bush to believe that there is a set Boswell is—the people of New England of guidelines, that it is fair for all players, elected a member with a 20 per cent majority while, no, the minister has got another guide- on 9 October and the leader of the National line under the desk which allows him to fund Party comes in here and calls that member a projects which are outside the guidelines that ‘gatecrasher’. That is an indication of how the public and the people in the bush know little Senator Boswell thinks of not only vot- about. The article continued:

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 25 ers in New England but voters in the bush in coming months one way or another under general. this government. Senator Boswell and the National Party There is a pall of questions hanging over have let the bush down. They are so thick the administration of the Regional Partner- with the Liberal government, and indistin- ships program and the Sustainable Regions guishable from it, that in his own rhetoric the program. There is, on the face of it, political leader in the Senate pours scorn on voters in patronage interfering with those programs, regional areas like New England—in Tam- advantaging some projects and disadvantag- worth, in Armidale, in Glen Innes and in ing others. That means disadvantaging the Tenterfield. They have elected a gatecrasher, honourable people out there who put a lot of he says. What an impudence and what a way work into putting forward their projects un- to talk about people who hold the view that der guidelines and who are being deceived their Independent has a full right not only to by this government, which has another secret take part in programs funded by the govern- guideline under its desk which says, ‘No, this ment but to be able to fairly represent them program can be manipulated for the political and be represented when the time of the advantage of the government of the day.’ payment of those programs comes about. We Was there ever a better reason for the Fi- go back to the Financial Review article. It nance and Public Administration References has revealed that one of the projects which Committee to have a look? I think not. These apparently got funding under this secret matters demand further inquiry—and who is guideline but outside of the guidelines as going to make that inquiry? Certainly not a published was in the marginal Liberal seat of government dominated House of Representa- Dobell and was for the dredging of a creek. tives. We in the Senate have an obligation to The article says this: look into this matter. The Deputy Prime Min- Tumbi Creek got two regional partnerships ister says he has no worries—even though he grants totalling $1.4 million in the lead-up to the will not come before the inquiry. That being federal election, despite the local area consulta- the case, the inquiry should proceed so that tive committee’s judgement that dredging the we can clear the air over what has become a creek was a low priority for the region. The fed- very odious process of what should be the eral government has said the second grant was delivery of moneys in prioritised, sensible necessary for the work to proceed because the and publicly accountable and transparent state government had refused funding. The state ways to projects in the bush. government favoured a different solution to the problem. Since the election, heavy rains have Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) partially cleared the siltation in the creek. Only (10.48 a.m.)—The motion that we are con- one of the federal grants appears to have been sidering now is a motion to refer to the Fi- funded under the Sona guideline. nance and Public Administration References If that is true, here we have the federal gov- Committee for inquiry and report by 15 Au- ernment overriding the local area consulta- gust 2005 a list of matters relating to the Re- tive committee’s judgment. Where, here, is gional Partnerships program and related pro- Senator Boswell standing by the rights of grams. I am concerned that the question of people in the bush? No, instead of that he is public moneys being expended should be- part of a cabal of ministers who override the come very clear indeed. My concern is that, judgment of the people in the bush. Witness if we adopt this proposal, it could degenerate what is going to happen with Telstra in the into an exercise of trawling the murky waters of alleged political patronage—and some of

CHAMBER 26 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 the debate thus far has confirmed my con- tion that was adopted here, the department, cern—and that all of this could be done un- in this case, will need to provide the answers der parliamentary privilege. My fear is that by 31 January. You can proceed from then on then the credibility of the Senate processes because, so far as I can recall, there are some could come under great stress. I know that if estimates committee hearings in the early that happened the Senate could handle that part of next year. At that time you will be and the officers could handle that. But there able to analyse what responses you have got. are processes already available, through the In the estimates committee hearings you can estimates committees. question the public servants and the minister Clearly, the estimates committee proc- or the minister’s representative in the Senate. esses are most important in determining this Again, the estimates committee is a better particular question—that is, the alleged lack way to go, normally speaking. That is my of transparency over the expenditure of pub- proposal. I would like to exhaust all of those lic moneys. We want to know how much was options before we proceed to the next step. spent in certain programs, how much was Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- spent in others, what the processes were, tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- what the criteria were, what the evaluation ate) (10.54 a.m.)—I will make a short reply. was and who was on the committee that did I think it is fair to say that Senator Boswell’s the evaluation—all regular things that are contribution was unhelpful. He had no ra- discussed at estimates committee hearings. I tional argument to oppose the formation of a am obviously concerned about and interested committee; he just made some character as- to find out, as all of us are, where public sessments of the Greens and the Democrats. moneys have been spent, what criteria were He failed to answer the key questions as to used and in fact what were the evaluation why the public and the Senate should not processes and the like. First of all, we have inquire into these very important matters to seek and obtain the facts. Unfortunately, using the proper processes of the Senate. I the Labor Party opposed my proposal for the think the only substantive arguments put estimates committees to meet this week. We against the reference have been by Senator should be meeting as estimates committees Harradine, and I know he takes a keen inter- this week. The question of the Regional est in these issues. Partnerships program and the other programs In response to Senator Harradine, I would would be under the spotlight now—today— say first of all that all week we have sought if my proposal had been agreed to by the to gain his support, by corresponding with opposition, but unfortunately it was not. and contacting his office about the terms of Most years at about this time we have an reference and trying to involve him in the examination, through the estimates commit- process of what we think is a very important tees, of the expenditure of particular gov- inquiry. I would be very disappointed if ernment departments and instrumentalities. Senator Harradine did not support this refer- That is important but, unfortunately, it has ence. It seems to me that it represents the gone by. But, if you want the pure facts of sort of important work that the Senate has where the money has gone and why, you done over a long period of time. It is part of have got until tomorrow evening to put all the role of the Senate which Senator Harrad- this in writing—and I presume the opposi- ine has played an important part in develop- tion has done it—to the particular estimates ing over the last 20-odd years he has been committee secretary. Because of the resolu-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 27 here, and particularly in recent years in terms this week does not affect his judgment on of the committee process. these matters. The argument that you can just leave it for This is an important part of the Senate’s the estimates process is not sustainable. Es- work. The terms of reference are perfectly timates will provide a useful addition to the balanced and have been done in consultation work, but the reality now is that we have a with as many of the senators as possible. wide range of issues regarding these pro- They concentrate on the issues of the programs that require proper examination. An gram and on the proper accountability estimates committee will not hear from wit- mechanisms. Senator Harradine has some nesses, travel out to rural and regional Aus- concerns about the motivation of some of the tralia, examine the issues on the ground, and senators, about trawling through the murky hear from those people affected and from waters of political patronage. I am sorry, those people who participated in the proc- Senator Harradine, but the issues which are esses. All the estimates inquiries will do is thrown up by this matter include whether or hear from the public servants, who will come not proper public processes and proper ac- along to explain the government’s position. countability measures have been followed. That is a valuable part of any process the The finance and public administration com- Senate follows in trying to track down and mittee have a good reputation, and their examine issues, but the reality is that the work will be a continuation, if they accept Senate Finance and Public Administration this reference, of the work they did last year. References Committee is charged with the Quite frankly, referring this matter to this responsibility of monitoring these issues on committee is a proper expression of the behalf of the Senate. Part of its central char- processes of the Senate and a proper expres- ter is to inquire into the proper finance and sion of the practices developed over the last public administration of these sorts of pro- 20 or so years, where the Senate has sought grams. to act as a check and balance on government, The point I made in my opening remarks to inquire into whether, and to ensure that, was that this is a continuation of the dairy proper accountability measures are followed. scheme work that was started last year by the That is very much what I see as part of the committee, which followed through and role of the Senate, I think it is very much made recommendations to the government— how Senator Harradine has seen the role of which the government said it accepted and the Senate, and I think most senators have which it now appears to have breached. This seen it as one of the proper and primary roles is a continuation of their work. I would make of the Senate. This motion to refer the matter a very strong argument that this is the appro- to the finance and public administration priate way for the Senate to deal with the committee reflects that proper function and matter. I accept Senator Harradine’s argu- role of the Senate, one that I hope continues ment that part of the work should be done beyond 1 July next year. Nevertheless, it is through the estimates process. But we will an important part of our current function. I not be able to hear from witnesses, we will urge the Senate to support the motion. not be able to travel out to the regions af- Question put: fected, and we will not be able to get the That the motion (Senator Chris Evans’s) be other parties involved in the inquiry if we agreed to. rely on estimates alone. I hope that his frus- The Senate divided. [11.03 a.m.] tration that estimates hearings did not happen

CHAMBER 28 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Question agreed to. H.G.P. Chapman) FAMILY AND COMMUNITY Ayes………… 32 SERVICES AND VETERANS’ AFFAIRS Noes………… 29 LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (2004 ELECTION COMMITMENTS) BILL Majority……… 3 2004 AYES In Committee Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. Consideration resumed from 1 December. Bishop, T.M. Bolkus, N. Brown, B.J. Buckland, G. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN Campbell, G. * Carr, K.J. (Senator Chapman)—We are dealing with Cherry, J.C. Collins, J.M.A. Democrat requests for amendments (4), (5) Conroy, S.M. Crossin, P.M. and (6). Denman, K.J. Evans, C.V. Forshaw, M.G. Greig, B. Senator GREIG (Western Australia) Hogg, J.J. Hutchins, S.P. (11.08 a.m.)—After we left off on this yes- Lees, M.H. Ludwig, J.W. terday Senator Evans chatted to me infor- Marshall, G. McLucas, J.E. mally about some questions he might put to Murphy, S.M. Murray, A.J.M. me about this. I wondered if he wanted to Nettle, K. O’Brien, K.W.K. pursue those. Ray, R.F. Ridgeway, A.D. Sherry, N.J. Stephens, U. Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- Webber, R. Wong, P. tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- NOES ate) (11.08 a.m.)—I would like to indicate Abetz, E. Barnett, G. that Labor will be opposing the Democrat Boswell, R.L.D. Brandis, G.H. requests, and I will outline why in a second. I Chapman, H.G.P. Colbeck, R. indicated to Senator Greig that I had some Eggleston, A. * Ferguson, A.B. concerns about the technical wording of the Ferris, J.M. Fifield, M.P. amendment, which I want to clarify—and I Harradine, B. Heffernan, W. know these issues come up periodically. My Humphries, G. Johnston, D. concern is that the requests for amendments Kemp, C.R. Knowles, S.C. Lightfoot, P.R. Macdonald, I. seem to encompass a much broader range of Macdonald, J.A.L. Mason, B.J. relationships than what we have understood McGauran, J.J.J. Minchin, N.H. to be same-sex couples. I made the point that Payne, M.A. Santoro, S. the definition seemed to include father and Scullion, N.G. Tchen, T. son relationships et cetera because it was Troeth, J.M. Vanstone, A.E. talking about interrelationship. I wanted to Watson, J.O.W. be clear as to the intent of these—whether it PAIRS is, in effect, meant to be a same-sex couple Cook, P.F.S. Tierney, J.W. amendment and whether you could clarify Faulkner, J.P. Hill, R.M. that. That is a minor point. I wanted to indi- Kirk, L. Coonan, H.L. cate on behalf of Labor why we will not be Lundy, K.A. Calvert, P.H. supporting those amendments on this occa- Mackay, S.M. Campbell, I.G. Moore, C. Patterson, K.C. sion, but I thought there might be a technical Stott Despoja, N. Ellison, C.M. flaw as well so I wanted to raise that. It is not * denotes teller a huge point, but if Senator Greig has something to say that might help with that then

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 29 that would be useful. Otherwise we will take way of amendment does not attract majority that matter up privately. support in the Senate. So I will not take up Senator GREIG (Western Australia) any more time by moving an amendment to (11.09 a.m.)—In answer to Senator Evans’s exchange my verbal definition for the written observations, he is quite correct. The defini- one. I think senators understand where I am tion of an interdependent relationship which coming from. Senator Evans’s point is cor- has been circulated would probably be too rect. broad for what we are trying to achieve here. I guess, more broadly, I would be inter- The reason it appears the way it does is ested to hear from Labor—they have com- partly due to some clumsy communications mented on this once before—what formal between myself and the clerks. What has process and what policy position they will happened here is that the definition that has take to the next election perhaps, if they did been brought forward is the one which we not to the last, in terms of how they might have been working with within superannua- address the issue of pensions paid to veter- tion legislation. There is a difference of ans, specifically same-sex couples and par- process in terms of death benefits and what ticularly in the wake of the Edward Young we are dealing with here, which is effectively decision and the criticism from the United a pension or a reversionary pension in terms Nations Commission on Human Rights. of the payment of pensions to surviving part- While it is clear that I will not have success ners, in this case veterans. The interdepend- here today in the Senate with this request for ence definition, whilst effective and adequate amendment, I would be keen to hear from for superannuation, would—and I think both the government and the opposition Senator Evans is right—perhaps not be the about where they really do stand on this and best one to be used here. It might mean, for what kind of policy framework they would example, that a pension of this nature could either adhere to or advance. be extended to a father and son, two maiden Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- aunts, a neighbour or so on. This is, in fact, tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- what does happen under the definitional ate) (11.12 a.m.)—I thank Senator Greig for processes of superannuation through the use his comments. I think there is a technical of interdependence. difficulty with his amendment, but I do not What we really need is a tighter, more want to hide behind our concern about that specific definition. Perhaps a better one I because, quite frankly, we were not going to could have circulated would have read some- vote for it even if it was technically correct. I thing like ‘partner in relation to a person have been very straight with Senator Greig means a person who is living with, or ordi- about that. I was also a bit surprised that the narily lived with, another person on a bona amendment was limited to a particular subset fide domestic basis whether or not legally affected by this bill—it is not a sort of gen- married and includes opposite and same-sex eral same-sex amendment but is limited to a couples’. I think that would be a better defi- particular group. It has become clear that nition. I will not take the opportunity now to Senator Greig is pursuing an outcome fol- move an amendment as such on the floor lowing Mr Young’s court case and its impact because it is clear that, while the principle on veterans. has some loose support from Labor although I want to put on the record that Labor they are not voting in favour of the motion went to the last election with a policy specifically, the principle I am advancing by

CHAMBER 30 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 framework which involved a commitment to issue that has to be addressed and my per- undertaking a comprehensive review of sonal view is that it ought to be. same-sex law reform—a commitment that In terms of dealing here today with the we were going to audit all Commonwealth Democrat amendments, firstly we have the legislation with a view to trying to remove technical problem. Secondly, we have always discriminatory provisions. I agree with Sena- opposed trying to deal with this issue on a tor Greig’s comments yesterday that dis- piecemeal basis in legislation. Thirdly, Labor crimination is unsupportable. We have al- is committed to passing the bill. We are not ways opposed the piecemeal approach of going to hold up the bill by sending it back trying to amend a particular bill at a particu- to the House of Representatives because we lar time. I know that provides frustration for know the government has not changed its Senator Greig, but we think that if the Com- position—unless the parliamentary secretary monwealth is going to change its position on is going to leap up and suddenly change gov- the issue of same-sex couples and their enti- ernment policy. He certainly would make a tlements under social security, tax and other name for himself in his debut as a parliamen- laws then it needs to do it in a comprehen- tary secretary if he changed the govern- sive and consistent way. That is not an at- ment’s position, so perhaps I should not pre- tempt to hide from the issue, but one thing empt his contribution. But I suspect that the we all know about social security legislation government’s position has not changed and I is that one minor amendment has numerous suspect that the change will not be led out of flow-on implications and generally creates Tasmania if it does occur. Nevertheless, our more trouble than it is worth. Particularly in view is that there is an important issue here the area of social security, I know that same- of discrimination which we do not support. sex law reform will be both beneficial and But we are not going to support the Democ- disadvantageous for various couples—it will rat requests for amendments on this occasion depend on how they are affected by that for the reasons I have advanced. change—because of their current living ar- In terms of Labor’s longer term position, I rangements. think it is fair to say we are still coming to Certainly we took to the last election a terms with our electoral loss and we have not policy that in government we would under- got our heads around how we are going to take a full audit of Commonwealth legisla- deal with this issue over the next three years. tion and that we would not support piece- I think the current policy is to maintain the meal amendments but try to deal with the policy we took to the last election, but issue in a comprehensive and proper way. I clearly there will be a lot of reassessment was very strongly committed to that. I cer- inside the Labor Party about how to respond, tainly was aware of the discrimination in the given that the prospect of government for us defence forces against same-sex couples. My is now at least three years away. The policy personal view was that that was unsustain- that we took to the election sustained us able in terms of a whole range of measures— through these debates in the year or so lead- transfer allowances, superannuation, living ing up to the election. Whether we continue allowances, et cetera. A number of Defence with that for another three years or look at Force personnel had raised with me what some other policy is a matter for considera- they thought was unfair discrimination on tion by the Labor Party over the next little the basis of their sexual preference. It is an while. For the reasons I have outlined Labor

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 31 will not be supporting the Democrat amend- Senator Evans is correct to say that that ments. means that there is a whole raft of discrimi- Senator GREIG (Western Australia) nation in a range of areas. Veterans’ affairs is (11.18 a.m.)—I thank Senator Evans for his but one of them. I include superannuation. response. It is worth looking at what is hap- We must acknowledge that all the discrimi- pening internationally in this area. In the last nation there has not been removed. Key ele- two weeks alone Britain, under the Labour ments have, but there are still some problems government of Tony Blair, has passed the with it. I understand it does not, for example, Civil Partnership Act recognising same-sex follow through to reversionary pensions but couples and de facto couples—a significant is quarantined only to death benefits. There jurisdiction to have done so. So a compara- are still issues within the defence forces. ble jurisdiction—another Commonwealth There is still discrimination within social country, another Westminster formed gov- security. Immigration is particularly prob- ernment and another Labour Party—has pro- lematic. I have recently had an approach—I gressed civil relationships, a terrific and understand other senators have, too—from overdue move and one I would encourage an academic who is, I think, based at the Senator Evans and his colleagues to consider. University of New England and who is try- At the same time, just in the last few days, ing to bring his partner out from New Zea- our near neighbour New Zealand has intro- land. He is to teach; I forget his particular duced the Civil Union Bill, proposing to area of expertise. He has been highly sought adopt a very similar system to that which I after by that university but his entry into this understand is now law in the UK. Within the country is being hampered because of his last year we have seen Canada, another com- relationship. I find that extraordinary in this parable jurisdiction, move to full marriage day and age. equality. It is clear that that does not have There are other areas of discrimination. major party support in Australia, but we have Senator Evans raised the question: why had nothing to replace it. quarantine this particular reform to veterans’ Regrettably, our parliament has snuffed affairs and not apply it more broadly, to so- out the opportunity for same sex-couples to cial security? It is worth touching on that for have a civil marriage, or for civil marriages a moment. Social security is perhaps one of between same-sex couples solemnised over- the only areas in which there exists an ele- seas to be recognised here. That is no longer ment of what we might call positive dis- possible—or not unless that law is to be re- crimination in that, because of the failure of pealed, and I do not believe it will be. There government to recognise same-sex relation- is now a vacuum; there is nothing that re- ships, where there is a same-sex couple places that. We are one of the very few West- where one partner is working full-time the ern countries that have no national anti- other partner, who may be unemployed, is discrimination laws on the grounds of sexu- entitled to the full amount of unemployment ality and one of the very few countries in the benefit. This situation does not apply to a Western world—indeed including Eastern heterosexual couple where one partner is Europe and Latin America—that has no working full-time and the other is unem- partnership recognition for same-sex cou- ployed. They would receive a reduced bene- ples. fit because they are rightly seen as having a partner who is partly supporting them. But because of the wilful blindness of this gov-

CHAMBER 32 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 ernment and previous Labor governments in Mr McClelland, who was then the shadow not recognising those relationships, a curious attorney before Ms Roxon, announced some benefit accrues there. months out from the last election, in an in- The question to me, quite rightly, is then: terview to the gay press in Melbourne, that why am I not addressing that? To that I the Labor Party would be committed in gov- would say that, as an individual and as a ernment to national antivilification laws, na- party, I am not going to stand here and argue tional antidiscrimination laws and partner- that the first reform for same-sex couples ship laws along a de facto model. I was de- should in an area where a benefit is removed. lighted to see for the first time that kind of I will argue that only when there is equality unequivocal support in black and white. I across the board. The gay and lesbian com- wrote to Mr Latham in response to that and I munity—which does not speak with one said, ‘This is a terrific policy. It doesn’t go as voice, I must say, and nor does the hetero- far as we Dems would have liked, but it is a sexual community—broadly understands that significant step forward for the alternative equality means equality across the board and government.’ I made the point to Mr Latham that will mean for some people a paring back in my letter that all of the things which Labor of benefits under future reform for the pur- was now proposing in a policy sense were poses of social security. But let us not make contained within the Spindler bill—the bill that the first reform. That would stick in my to which I referred. They are already there in craw. our bill. I asked if I could have his support, if for nothing else just to bring that bill on for Senator Evans also made the point that debate. I effectively called on Mr Latham to Labor is not comfortable with or committed demonstrate his bona fides on this by having to reform on a piecemeal basis. That is not some kind of debate on this before the elec- entirely true, with respect, Senator, because tion. Regrettably, I never had the courtesy of we have now done that with superannuation. a reply. As a portfolio area, that was excised from the broad range of other issues of discrimination I am a little cynical about Labor saying and it was dealt with separately. I was able to one thing but doing another, and that other prove, with my persistence, that that was being resistance. But I also take hope, when I possible even under a conservative govern- focus internationally, in the extraordinary ment. I take some pride in the role that I reforms that are happening in this area in so played in doing that. I would also say to many other countries. Spain—a Catholic Senator Evans—and I am not saying this for country—is moving to full civil marriage. I the first time—that I wholeheartedly agree understand also that France has just done that sweeping, comprehensive national re- what Australia has done—that is, to extin- form is the way to go. Let us do it all in one guish civil marriage for same-sex couples— piece. I would be very happy to support any but it is now advocating civil unions for motion to do that this afternoon. But the fact same-sex partners. I was staggered when is that we Democrats have had a bill on the President George Bush—a fervent cam- Notice Paper in one form or another for nine paigner in opposition to same-sex mar- years to do exactly that, but there is not the riages—stated during the US election cam- support in this chamber to bring that bill on paign that he personally was committed to for debate, let alone to support it. civil unions for same-sex couples. That is a policy position that is now more progressive

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 33 than that which is held by the Australian La- ought to look a bit closer and talk to a few of bor Party. us a bit more as well. Obviously, the gov- In closing, I have made my point. I have ernment will not be supporting the requests raised the issue once again of discrimination for amendments moved by the Democrats. I within veterans’ affairs. I accept that it needs note that the Democrats have moved similar to be dealt with more broadly in superannua- requests for amendments to previous veter- tion, but it ought to be done in a much more ans’ affairs bills, most recently the Veterans’ wholesale way in regard to all Common- Entitlements (Clarke Review) Bill 2004 and wealth legislation that discriminates. I make the Military Rehabilitation and Compensa- the point again that my efforts to do that tion Bill 2004. have been frustrated by this chamber. If and The Veterans’ Entitlements Act does not when we are to have a Labor government discriminate regarding the sexual preference committed to this—and I would welcome of a veteran when granting benefits. How- that in advancing the policy—then it needs to ever, the legislation does not recognise the look more closely at what is happening in partner of a veteran in a same-sex relation- comparable jurisdictions such as the UK and ships as being a dependant who may claim New Zealand. I ask the government to rec- benefits such as war widow or widowers ognise that it really is quite extraordinary pension or partner service pension. The pro- that Australia has fallen so far behind in this posed amendments impact on existing pen- area. Even many conservative governments sions and benefits under the Veterans’ Enti- in other countries are moving towards part- tlements Act, not just on the proposed utili- nership recognition and civil union for same- ties allowance and seniors concession allow- sex couples. It saddens me that our governance, and the government does not accept ment cannot or will not do that and that the that there is significant support in the veteran policy position of Labor is still more regres- community for any change to existing ar- sive than that of similar countries. rangements. Senator COLBECK (Tasmania— Senator GREIG (Western Australia) Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for (11.28 a.m.)—I want to respond to the con- Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (11.26 tribution from Senator Colbeck. I really take a.m.)—I first note the comments of the offence—I know he did not mean it person- Leader of the Opposition in the Senate. ally—at this argument coming from the gov- While he makes nice warm and fuzzy com- ernment that there is no support for this from ments about not discriminating, he does the veterans community because in my ex- show in his comments the discrimination that perience that is not only untrue but also ir- many north islanders display against my relevant. I have spoken to and worked with home state of Tasmania. He might look at many in the veterans community, including history to see how much our state has con- RSL members and more recently Vietnam tributed towards the very positive progress of veterans, who have no difficulty with this this country. whatsoever and scratch their heads in disbe- Senator Chris Evans—It was an attack lief that the government does not progress it. on the Tasmanian Liberal Party, not on Tas- It is untrue to say that but, more importantly, mania. it is utterly irrelevant. We do not defer to a particular section as to how we should ad- Senator COLBECK—I still think his vance government policy in human rights discrimination is unfounded and perhaps he areas like this. It is a matter for government

CHAMBER 34 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 leadership. It is too convenient for the gov- decision, the bill could allow that uncertainty ernment to say that a section of a particular to continue because many clauses of collec- group is opposed because that is simply an tive agreements are yet to be tested before opportunity to hide behind its own prejudice the full bench of the Australian Industrial and to try to project that prejudice onto oth- Relations Commission or by another authori- ers. If it were the case that the veterans tative court and may not be tested for some community were overwhelmingly in favour time. The bill also leaves uncertain whether of this reform, the government would still be industrial action previously taken in support opposed to it. I think it is important that we of certified agreements which contain mat- have that on the record. ters not pertaining to the employment rela- Question negatived. tionship in protected action would thus render those certified agreements not be able to Bill agreed to. be the subject of further legal action. Bill reported without amendment; report The Electrolux decision has been the adopted. cause of a great deal of uncertainty in rela- Third Reading tion to certified agreements. The govern- Senator COLBECK (Tasmania— ment’s bill does not completely address that Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for uncertainty. For these reasons the opposition Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (11.31 will move amendments to the bill which pro- a.m.)—I move: vide for greater certainty. I turn first to the That this bill be now read a third time. provisions of the bill. The bill amends the Question agreed to. Workplace Relations Act 1996 to validate agreements which were certified, approved Bill read a third time. or varied prior to the decision of the High WORKPLACE RELATIONS Court in Electrolux of 2 September 2004. AMENDMENT (AGREEMENT This judgment was based on section 170LI VALIDATION) BILL 2004 of the Workplace Relations Act, which pro- Second Reading vides that collective agreements can be certi- Debate resumed from 17 November, on fied by the Australian Industrial Relations motion by Senator Ian Campbell: Commission only if all matters contained in the agreement pertain: That this bill be now read a second time. ... to the relationship between: (Quorum formed) (a) an employer ... and Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (11.34 (b) all persons who, at any time when the a.m.)—We are now considering the Work- agreement is in operation, are employed in a sin- place Relations Amendment (Agreement gle business, or a part of a single business, of the Validation) Bill 2004. The Labor opposition employer and whose employment is subject to the supports the purpose of the bill in providing agreement. certainty for those certified agreements ren- The High Court found that, for an agreement dered potentially invalid as a result of a deci- to be of the nature described in section sion of the High Court in the Electrolux case. 170LI, it must be wholly about matters per- However, the Labor opposition believes the taining to the relationship between the em- way in which the bill goes about providing ployer and the employees in their capacity as that certainty could be improved. Far from employees other than provisions that are in- resolving issues created by the Electrolux cidental or ancillary to the employment rela-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 35 tionship or machinery provisions. The major- tions and Education Legislation Committee. ity judgments in Electrolux suggest that ex- A hearing took place in Melbourne on isting agreements which contain provisions Thursday, 25 November. The report of the that do not pertain to the relationship be- committee was tabled on Monday, 29 No- tween an employer and employees may not vember. be valid because the commission did not The decision of the High Court in Elec- have power to certify them. trolux has created uncertainty in the applica- Prior to the Electrolux decision, there tion of many existing certified agreements. were conflicting precedents in the commis- The High Court ruled that an enterprise sion and the Federal Court about the nature agreement could only be certified by the of this requirement. Some agreements were commission if all of its provisions related certified, although they contained matters directly to the employment relationship be- that may not now meet the test in section tween the particular employer and its em- 170LI, as subsequently interpreted by the ployees. If any provision offended that test, High Court in Electrolux. The bill applies to the whole agreement is rendered invalid. agreements which were certified, approved While the decision itself was largely con- or varied on or before 2 September 2004. fined to a particular provision relating to The bill provides that, where an agreement bargaining fees, the decision has much wider containing matters that do not pertain to the ramifications. There has since been consider- employment relationship were certified, ap- able speculation and debate as to which pro- proved or varied prior to the Electrolux deci- visions commonly included in enterprise sion, these matters are not to be considered agreements might fall foul of those provi- as affecting the validity of the agreement. In sions of the Workplace Relations Act that effect, the offending provision or provisions limit the matters that may be so included. will not stand but the balance of the agree- Because many enterprise agreements ment will. which have previously been certified by the The bill validates, firstly, certain agree- commission are likely to contain a provision ments made under division 2 where the em- that potentially does not pertain to the employer is the Commonwealth or a constitu- ployment relationship, many agreements tional corporation; secondly, certified agree- may now be technically invalid. As a matter ments made under division 3 in relation to an of general principle and a starting point, em- individual dispute or industrial situation; ployers and employees should be entitled to and, thirdly, Australian workplace agree- freely and voluntarily reach agreement on ments, AWAs. The bill will not validate those whatever matters they want to, provided it is parts of an agreement that do not pertain to lawful to do so. That should be able to occur the employment relationship. Nor will the without unnecessary legal hindrance or bu- bill remedy other defects in the certification reaucratic complexity. Because of this, the process. If an agreement is invalid as a result capacity post Electrolux for ongoing hair- of some other flaws in its making, certifica- splitting by courts and tribunals in relation to tion or approval, this bill will not render it what might be and what might not be matters valid. Nor does the bill validate any pro- pertaining to the employment relationship is tected industrial action that was taken in rela- an unwelcome development. As for Elec- tion to matters not pertaining to the employ- trolux, it is imperative that uncertainty ment relationship. The bill was referred to caused by the decision be resolved before the Senate Employment, Workplace Rela- parliament rises this year. A ‘do nothing’ ap-

CHAMBER 36 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 proach is not a viable option. The real ques- pertaining to the employment relationship. tion is: what form of validation should take Given the considerable uncertainty in rela- place? tion to which matters may and may not be The government’s bill proposes to resolve included in collective agreements and the the uncertainty by retrospectively validating serious penalties that apply to lack of unpro- all those parts of certified agreements that tected action, it is appropriate that certainty pertain to the employment relationship, but is provided in relation to protected industrial only those parts. The problem with the gov- action already taken. Unions and their mem- ernment’s bill is that for some time there will bers who took industrial action in good faith, remain considerable uncertainty as to which believing on reasonable grounds that it was provisions of certified agreements remain protected, should have legal protection from valid and which do not. This is because any action which might, however unlikely, many provisions are yet to be considered subsequently be taken against them. During authoritatively by the full bench of the Indus- the committee stage of the legislation, I, on trial Relations Commission, by the Federal behalf of the Labor Party, will move Court or, indeed, even by the High Court. amendments to provide certainty in relation Until each contentious provision is properly to protected industrial action that has already and authoritatively considered, it will remain been taken. unclear which parts of certified agreements In conclusion the Labor opposition sup- are enforceable. Employers and employees ports the purposes of the bill in providing will know that the agreement stands but not certainty for those certified agreements ren- necessarily know which clauses are in and dered potentially invalid as a result of the which are out. Labor believes that the better decision of the High Court in Electrolux. approach would be to validate the whole of However, the Labor opposition believes the existing certified agreements, allowing each way the bill goes about providing that cer- provision to continue to have effect until the tainty contains shortfalls and could be sub- expiry date of the agreement. stantially improved. In the event that Labor’s Agreements already certified by the com- amendments, which I will move in commit- mission have been made in good faith be- tee, are not accepted, Labor will support the tween employers and employees. In approv- bill. ing these agreements, employers and em- Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) ployees have agreed on the entirety of their (11.44 a.m.)—The Workplace Relations terms. If there is to be any validation—and Amendment (Agreement Validation) Bill the arguments in favour of providing cer- 2004 attempts to deal with the uncertainty tainty in this area are compelling—then par- and possible legal consequences concerning liament should give effect to the whole of the the validity of certified agreements under the agreements reached voluntarily between the Workplace Relations Act 1996. That uncer- two parties on the basis of the substance that tainty and possible legal consequences arose each is considered reasonable and appropri- directly from a decision of the High Court in ate for their individual circumstances. Electrolux Home Products Pty Ltd v. the The bill also fails to give certainty in rela- Australian Workers Union and others, tion to the legal status of industrial action HCA40, on 2 September this year. As I un- taken in support of claims in certified agree- derstand it, the High Court’s decision in ments that may subsequently be ruled as not Electrolux determined three main issues: firstly, that industrial action is not protected

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 37 action if taken in support of claims where laration of a bargaining period. This is a sen- one or more of those claims does not pertain sible approach given that the life of a certi- to the employment relationship; secondly, a fied agreement is relatively short, at only claim for a bargaining fee to be paid to a un- three years. Why deliberately agree to cut ion does not pertain to the employment rela- that maximum period of three years short? tionship; and, thirdly, an agreement cannot The purpose of this government’s bill is to be certified if it contains a provision that provide legal validity to certified agreements does not pertain to the employment relation- and Australian workplace agreements certi- ship unless it is machinery in nature or is fied, approved or varied on or before 2 Sep- ancillary or incidental to a matter which per- tember 2004. Rather than validate the whole tains to the relationship. agreement, the statutory validation is only While the High Court’s decision is wel- with respect to matters that are permitted come in that it has reinforced the original matters—that is, matters pertaining to the intent of the law with respect to section employment relationship or which are ma- 170LI of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 chinery matters or incidental matters or an- that certified agreements must pertain to cillary to matters which pertain to the em- matters pertaining to the employment rela- ployment relationship. Matters that are not tionship of employers and employees, it has pertaining to the employment relationship also led to considerable uncertainty. While will be rendered void. not directly determined by the court, the The Democrats accept the High Court de- High Court’s decision with respect to certifi- cision as clarifying and confirming what the cation of provisions not pertaining to the existing law means. We accept that it is rea- employment relationship has led to the belief sonable that existing contracts should not be that certified agreements and AWAs, Austra- invalidated as a whole just because a minor- lian workplace agreements, which include a ity of some contract clauses in some agree- matter which does not pertain to the em- ments are now rendered invalid by the High ployment relationship could now be void as a Court’s decision. We also accept that legisla- whole. One school of legal thought is that the tion to ensure that does not happen can rea- court’s invalidation of even a peripheral or sonably be classified as urgent to address the minor part of a certified agreement makes uncertainty that employers and employees the whole agreement void. The effect of this are currently facing. We have, however, uncertainty is that employees and employers questioned the mechanism chosen by the do not know for sure whether their currently government and, after the Senate hearing and operating certified agreements are enforce- on reflection, believe that it would have been able or if their agreements are valid in whole easier to validate the whole of the agree- or in part. ments warts and all until the agreements ex- While some unions have begun to ap- pire, a maximum period of three years but proach employers to renegotiate agreements, undoubtedly much less for the vast majority and some in the electrical contracting indus- of certified agreements. This is not uncom- try have already negotiated new agreements, mon in commercial practice and in other leg- many employers are reluctant to undertake islation. A transitional period in those cir- another negotiating process earlier than an cumstances is usually allowed before the agreement’s current expiry date due to the new regime applies. costs involved and concern that early protected action could be initiated with the dec-

CHAMBER 38 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Of course the government argue that it is have had agreements that they will continue to not a new regime. Those clauses in the certi- honour the terms of those agreements, notwith- fied agreements, they say, should never have standing questions about validity. been certified in the first place. But that is Mr Anderson went on to give a recent exam- not the fault of the parties to the agreements. ple where this had occurred: It is the responsibility of the certifying au- A very good example is one of the first agree- thority, the Australian Industrial Relations ments that came before the commission in the Commission, to ensure that a certified weeks following the Electrolux decision—the agreement conforms to the law. The evidence Franklins-SDA agreement before SDP Hamber- to the hearing last week was that the Indus- ger. It was identified in the proceedings that there trial Relations Commission may not have was a provision in the agreement which was ar- been as rigorous in this regard previously as guably not pertaining and the union and the company agreed to remove that from the agreement, they apparently have now become. The to continue to apply that as a matter of obligation commission also has the problem of defining between themselves and to reach a private com- those employment matters that may be con- mon-law agreement in those same terms to do sidered marginal or at the periphery. The that. The agreement was, therefore, resubmitted to evidence—again, at the Senate hearing last the commission in terms which would unques- week—was that we can expect a test case to tionably allow for its certification, and it was be run as soon as practicable to clear up as certified. many areas of doubt as possible, and that Mr Anderson was, of course, unable to give would be welcome. an undertaking that all their members would Several concerns have been raised by in- behave in this manner, nor do I expect he dustrial relations practitioners and unions. would or should. Nevertheless, despite this The first issue is with respect to those real-world solution to what is at best a me- clauses which have been in operation but dium-term problem, uncertainty will still will not be validated and will therefore be remain, particularly for employees and un- unenforceable. The employer is not obliged ions, as to what will happen with the offend- to honour them. Employees could therefore, ing clauses. There will also be a cost in- in theory, lose aspects of the agreement that volved to all parties who wish to negotiate they had negotiated. I say ‘in theory’ because and establish an alternative agreement. the real world practice will be that such an The other issue relates to protected indus- occurrence looks highly unlikely. Evidence trial action. It has been argued that, by not received at the Senate inquiry into this bill validating the whole bill, previous protected confirmed that agreements through common industrial action could be challenged as law—for example, deeds, contracts or unlawful because it was in pursuit of clauses memorandums of understanding—can be now deemed as invalid. The government, the made outside of the certification process, and Australian Industry Group and the Australian in fact already do occur. We heard evidence Chamber of Commerce and Industry have from Mr Anderson, who is very experienced said that, while it is theoretically possible, it in this field, from the Australian Chamber of is not only undesirable but highly unlikely. I Commerce and Industry at the Senate inquiry also believe that it would be highly unlikely, into this bill. He said: undesirable and foolish if an employer chose The overwhelming position of employers and to pursue such a course of action. Linda Australian industry following Electrolux was to Rubenstein from the ACTU, in giving evi- indicate to the unions with which they deal and

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 39 dence to the Senate inquiry, disagreed. She non-pertaining matters—something quite at said: odds with the intention of the parliament for ... there would be no barrier that I can see to an many years and quite at odds with the whole employer seeking to sue a union for damages in tenor of the High Court decision. Once relation to unprotected action taken on an earlier again, this argument does not address the occasion relying on Electrolux. I do not know scale of clauses affected. The High Court whether they would succeed or not but the directly identified but one non-pertaining CFMEU recognises, as I am sure all of us do, that matter—a claim for a bargaining fee to be to ordinary people and ordinary workers the paid to a union does not pertain to the em- threat of that kind of legal action is very frighten- ing indeed. It would be a very strong bargaining ployment relationship. Everything else was chip. left as a general commentary. The ACTU is probably directly reacting to Certainly the High Court clearly sig- the High Court’s view that industrial action nalled—to the commission more than to any is not protected action if taken in support of other, I suspect—that non-pertaining matters claims where one or more of those claims do must not be certified. The court said that an not pertain to the employment relationship. agreement cannot be certified if it contains a provision that does not pertain to the em- In my view, experience shows that that ployment relationship, unless it is machinery should be taken as a warning for the future in nature or is ancillary or incidental to a rather than a harbinger of punitive action for matter which pertains to the relationship. I past deeds or misdeeds. I asked at the hear- admit that, by validating whole agreements, ing if there was a record of any individual or one identified non-pertaining matter would organisation ever being punished—note I use be given ‘temporary’ legal validity—and the word ‘punished’ in the sense of being perhaps a few others not so far identified. jailed or fined—for taking protected indus- This would only be for those agreements that trial action later found to be unprotected, and contain a matter that was previously thought the evidence was that that had never oc- to pertain to the employment relationship. At curred. The eventualities that the unions en- the very least that specific clause was uncer- visage in this regard therefore look ex- tain and has only recently been ruled as not tremely unlikely. But just because they are pertaining to the employment relationship. extremely unlikely does not mean they should be dismissed, and there are certainly We must always remember that any mat- rumours reaching my ears that some em- ters in question were previously considered ployers are trying to muscle some unions in by employees, employers and the commis- this respect. I believe that the threat of pro- sion, who certified the agreements, as ‘mat- tected action taken in the past being success- ters pertaining to the employment relation- fully challenged at law is so unlikely that this ship’ and therefore wholly within the law. It point is minor, but it is one which will have struck me during the Senate inquiry that no- to be attended to in this debate. one had identified any negative consequences of validating agreements in full that Turning to validation of the whole agree- were presently operating, so I asked repre- ment, including the clauses not pertaining to sentatives from the department what would the employment relationship, the ACCI and be the negative consequences if the bill sim- the government have argued that parliament ply stated that, where the Industrial Relations would then be extending for the first time the Commission had previously formed the view content of industrial instruments to include that the clauses did pertain to the employ-

CHAMBER 40 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 ment relationship and a court had subse- would have thought would have been the quently overturned them, agreements which better approach and we will be prepared to were previously certified could simply stand support the government’s approach. With the until they ran out—and that is a maximum of exception of union bargaining fees, the High three years, as we know. Rather than read out Court’s decision left unresolved what matters the whole interchange between me and the on the margin or periphery do not pertain to department, I will refer to the concluding the employment relationship—and that is remarks. I said to Mr Smythe: why a test case with the commission will be Let me conclude in this way: you are not so much necessary. Of course we should remember saying that there were obvious negative conse- there is a wealth of jurisprudence which says quences; you have drawn up the bill in this way what does pertain to the employment rela- because you do not want to breach a principle as tionship, and I think that point was made to the way in which these matters should be re- very clearly in the government’s evidence, solved. both in the written form and by Mr Smythe. Mr Smythe replied: This bill does not attempt to address this What the government is doing with this bill is issue, and there was no support from unions confirming what the original legislative intent or industry groups to have the government was. As Mr O’Sullivan has just said—and I think dictate through legislation an exhaustive or Mr Anderson from the ACCI also said it—to go even a non-exhaustive list of matters that do further would be to make lawful what was not intended to be lawful in the first place. not pertain to the employment relationship. I think the government, quite properly, has I responded by saying: taken the view that it remains the function of So it is an issue of principle? the commission and courts to determine what Mr Smythe responded with a yes. I have does or does not pertain to the employment come to the view that validating all clauses relationship. All the government has effec- until the agreement has expired would have tively said, which we agree with and, I alleviated uncertainty and would have been a gather, Labor agrees with, is that matters cleaner way to do things. It would have pre- which are found not to pertain to the em- vented unnecessary costs in constructing a ployment relationship just simply cannot be common-law agreement for the invalidated in those agreements, and I think that is right. clauses to run parallel with the certified Mr Smythe, from the department, told the agreement—which is, I assume, what many committee: employers and employees will now do. Giv- My view is that 100-odd years of litigation have ing effect to the full agreements which were settled a pretty reasonable core, so that most par- voluntarily agreed to by both parties is a rea- ties operating in the industrial arena—unions, sonable public policy position that is practi- employers and lawyers working in that area— cal, cost effective and, as I established in the know for the most part the things that pertain. The inquiry, has no negative economic conse- Electrolux decision has excited a little bit of in- quences. terest about a few matters at the periphery. But, for the most part, 100 years of litigation have The government has chosen another route given the parties a pretty good idea of what per- that achieves the same end, and the govern- tains and what does not. ment is determined on its view. Given that It was generally the view from the unions the Democrats strongly support the govern- and industry groups that parties would prefer ment’s intent to achieve certainty, we are to use the commission in the first instance certainly not going to insist on what we

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 41 and the courts to continue to determine non- to take protected industrial action, including pertaining matters. However, there was a the protections from being hauled in front of view that it would be better for all parties if the courts for what would otherwise be activ- this were done sooner rather than drawn out ity that could be frowned on, and if you also over a number of years. As I alluded at the want to rely on the Trade Practices Act, Senate inquiry, and as I have said before in which gives you relief from some of the these remarks I am making now, I would competition principles which would other- encourage the government to make recom- wise apply, then under the Workplace Rela- mendations to the Australian Industrial Rela- tions Act, in my view, the quid pro quo is tions Commission to conduct a test case on that you will be limited as to the kinds of this matter. In the end the Democrats support contracts, arrangements and agreements that the element of certainty and the intent of the you can arrive at. You cannot have it both bill. In the committee stage we will, of ways. You cannot have the protections of the course, be dealing with Labor’s amendments Workplace Relations Act and the Trade Prac- and I will have an amendment which will tices Act given to you as collective bargain- circulate shortly. ers and, at the same time, have the freedom Before I conclude my remarks I want to which you would have under common law. say that I was a little puzzled at quite a lot of There has to be some limitation and some media attention in this area, because it is a restraint. I thought that was a very interesting relatively confined, limited matter that we topic that emerged at the inquiry. are determining here. It is the question of Senator BARNETT (Tasmania) (12.04 making sure that contracts which are already p.m.)—I speak in support of the Workplace in play continue to have force, and there is Relations Amendment (Agreement Valida- nothing unusual about the Senate considering tion) Bill 2004. As chairman of the Senate that. But I think that maybe—and maybe I Employment, Workplace Relations and Edu- am giving them too much credit—they cation Legislation Committee that held an sniffed that at the heart of this were some inquiry into this bill just recently, I want to serious issues that were being explored. One commend and congratulate Kevin Andrews is the continuing determination of all par- for his swift action to bring this bill forward ties—unions, employer groups, government and into the parliament for passing, because and other political parties—to stay away it will validate existing agreements and it from defining matters which form valid em- will also provide assurance and, I believe, ployment matters and to continue to leave it peace of mind to the employers, the employ- to the commission and the courts. That flexi- ees and the organisations that made those ble and pragmatic approach, as I have said agreements in good faith. previously, is very important. This bill validates matters in certified But the other issue emerged in the evi- agreements and AWAs that pertain to the dence from the ACTU, who essentially were employment relationship. Contrary to La- arguing that there should be no limit to what bor’s proposal, if the bill were to validate can be agreed between parties—employers those matters that do not pertain to the em- and employees—and, of course, there are no ployment relationship it would go against the limits, because you can agree to what you intent of the Workplace Relations Act; it like at common law. But if you want to have would go against the long-held principle the protection which is provided by the about what may be included in industrial Workplace Relations Act, which allows you instruments. The High Court ruling was con-

CHAMBER 42 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 sistent with many years of legal precedent I want to highlight not only the govern- requiring industrial instruments made under ment’s position but also Senator Marshall’s, the federal workplace relations laws to con- Senator Wong’s and Labor’s position in this tain only matters pertaining to the employ- inquiry and in their report, because it is dif- ment relationship. This has not just been ferent from Stephen Smith’s comments of something that has happened since 1996 just a few days ago, where he said: when the government introduced that par- ... it is imperative that the uncertainty caused by ticular bill, but it has been happening for a the Electrolux decision be resolved before Par- century in this country, where the boundaries liament rises this year. The “do nothing” ap- of the Australian government’s workplace proach is not a viable option. relations framework have been set with ref- That is what he said. Senators in the minority erence to matters that pertain to the employ- report—Senator Marshall and Senator ment relationship. So the High Court’s inter- Wong—have said that in their view there is pretation of this part of the act is consistent no reason for the urgency. At 2.29 on page with High Court and other long-established 23, it says: legal precedents that apply to awards. It con- Opposition senators are not convinced that legis- firms the government’s original, continuing lation in response to the High Court’s decision is and current legislative intentions. The bill required as a matter of urgency. validates those agreements which were certi- Not only that; the minority senators in this fied, approved and varied under the Work- report have a whole slab in their section on place Relations Act prior to the High Court why they believe the bill is flawed. A matter Electrolux decision. It also avoids the confu- of days later Stephen Smith, their relevant sion and potential turmoil if nothing was shadow minister, said that we need to deal done. with this and get it sorted out and passed The unions that appeared before our in- prior to Christmas. Here we have a political quiry—and indeed the Labor members of party with two heads. On the one hand they that inquiry, and I will come to them in a are saying one thing and on the other they minute—proposed to have the bill amended are doing something else totally to the con- to validate all clauses in all agreements certi- trary. They are duplicitous. Senators Mar- fied by the commission prior to Electrolux. shall and Wong are actually puppets of the My view is that that would turn on its head ETU and the CFMEU. The CFMEU ap- our industrial relations system as we know it. peared before our committee and the ETU’s It would be retrospective legislation and views were put to our committee and they cause uncertainty and chaos across the coun- opposed the bill. Senators Marshall and try in the business community. I asked these Wong have made it very clear that they want questions of the department, and the amend- to kowtow to and support their union mas- ment that is being proposed by the Labor ters—the ETU and the CFMEU. Party is in fact retrospective legislation of the Senator Ian Macdonald—I don’t think worst kind. The government members on this they would disagree with you even. committee rejected that proposal on the Senator BARNETT—Of course they will grounds that it would be retrospective validation of an unknown number of Industrial not disagree with me, Senator Macdonald, Relations Commission decisions which were but Stephen Smith disagrees with them. This is a party with two heads. The senators have always contrary to the intentions of the act. That is totally unacceptable. obviously been rolled and their views have

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 43 been overtaken. There is a lot more that I Senator MARSHALL—It is not an out- could say. Clearly the Labor Party are split rageous statement. To support that, the press on this issue and they have been duplicitous. release put out by the Minister for Employ- I would urge the Senate to pass this bill as a ment and Workplace Relations says this: matter of urgency. The Government is determined to ensure agree- Senator MARSHALL (Victoria) (12.10 ments entered into by business are upheld and p.m.)—The Workplace Relations Amend- enforced. Unions in the electricity and construc- ment (Agreement Validation) Bill 2004 be- tion industry have tried to take advantage of un- fore us today is a response from the govern- certainty caused by the Electrolux decision by pressuring businesses to renegotiate agreements ment to accommodate the Electrolux deci- which contain clauses which are union friendly sion. The Electrolux decision clarified— and bad for business. The new legislation will from the High Court’s point of view any- remove the need for businesses to renegotiate way—that all matters in a certified agree- their agreements. ment must only pertain to the employee- The real issue here is that the need for busi- employer relationship; that any certified nesses and employees to renegotiate their agreement which contains matters that do not agreements was created by the High Court. It pertain is questioned and made void if it con- was the High Court that determined that tains those provisions and the agreement agreements containing matters that did not would fall away as if they did not exist, as if directly pertain to the employee-employer the agreement was never made at all. One of relationship were void, as if they were never, the further consequences of the Electrolux ever made. There is nothing wrong with un- decision is that any industrial action that was ions seeking, as a consequence of the Elec- taken at the time in pursuit of a certified trolux decision, to provide certainty for their agreement is therefore potentially deemed members by seeking to enter into a new legal illegal because the Industrial Relations bargaining round within the framework pro- Commission did not have the power, accord- vided for by the Workplace Relations Act. ing to the High Court, to certify those That is a responsible course of action. No- agreements in the first place. where in any of the submissions was it indi- The government claims that this bill is de- cated that anything the unions were doing signed to provide certainty for the parties in was illegal or inappropriate, because it was industrial relations. It does no such thing. not. They were actually following the proc- This bill is fundamentally flawed and needs esses laid down by the Workplace Relations substantial amendment to provide any cer- Act. tainty at all for both employees and employ- There are a number of flaws in this bill. ers. I will go through the reasons why the bill The first flaw is this: far from providing cer- is flawed in a moment. We clearly know the tainty, this bill actually provides uncertainty. real reason the government has put this bill Future agreements which may be certified by up before us today. It was clearly to stop un- a single member of the commission do not ions responsibly providing for their members necessarily mean that all matters pertain, that new agreements to replace those that were they have been properly certified and that made void by the Electrolux decision. any protected action taken to support the Senator Santoro—That is an outrageous agreement is protected. So all we see this bill statement. actually doing, in this window of opportunity, is trying to validate part of the agree-

CHAMBER 44 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 ment. It provides no certainty for any agree- the Industrial Relations Commission or the ments being negotiated or certified from Federal Court—or even the High Court for 2 September last year onwards. We still have that matter—may determine that one of the the situation that, if this bill becomes law, all clauses does not properly pertain to the em- we will be able to say with any certainty ployment relationship and the agreement is about agreements certified before 2 Septem- then void. This bill provides absolutely no ber is that they have been properly certi- certainty in the negotiating processes pro- fied—little else. We will not know which vided under the Workplace Relations Act in clauses are enforceable and valid and which that respect. That is the first significant flaw. clauses are not, because the problem will still It actually identifies quite clearly the dis- arise as the different tribunals and courts de- torted view of the government in this area termine and narrow down the scope of what and only reinforces the real reason that this does pertain to the employer-employee rela- bill has come before the parliament today. tionship. Clauses that have been properly Secondly, the bargain struck between em- certified by the commission may be deemed ployees and employers is disturbed by the by future tribunals in future decisions to be validity of the agreement. If this bill be- invalid. If that is the case, the whole agree- comes law, it will disturb the moral authority ment becomes invalid again. There is no cer- of agreements already validated and will ret- tainty provided in the negotiating process or rospectively remove the informed consent of the certification process. Simply because a employees. It will also mean that persons commission certifies an agreement does not who at the time of voting knew the conse- mean that that agreement will not be chal- quences of giving approval will now have no lenged in the future because some of the certainty about the ongoing consequences of clauses may be a problem. the effect of the agreements entered into in I want to give you an example. It is an ex- good faith. Clauses agreed and genuinely ample given by witnesses from Suncorp- approved may be removed as a consequence Metway, who did appear before the legisla- of this bill becoming law, without the em- tion committee inquiry. They were concerned ployees having any say in the matter. The bill that a number of the clauses in their agree- will also stop the employees going back to ment may not pertain directly to the em- the employer and saying, ‘Now that the ployer-employee relationship and that some package—this agreement—has been dis- of them were similar in nature to clauses that turbed, we want to sit down and talk to you had already been ruled out by different tribu- about a new package.’ So employees ulti- nals. They were concerned about that, but mately end up with a lesser package than this week their agreement was in fact certi- was negotiated. fied by the Industrial Relations Commission The process of negotiation in industrial re- and, on the day that it certified it, the IRC lations is that both parties—the employees, was indeed satisfied that all matters per- their representatives and the employers—sit tained. But future determinations, as I said down and negotiate an agreement. Employ- earlier, may change that, so we will have a ees or employers do not then have an oppor- situation where the parties have negotiated tunity to cherry pick which clauses they an agreement in good faith, the employees would like to agree to or disagree to. It is have voted on it as a package, it has been voted on and approved and certified by the certified by the commission and then, poten- commission as an entire package. Different tially a year down the track, a new ruling by people—both employers and employees—

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 45 will put a different weight on the value of ted matters. Permitted matters include mat- each individual clause when they make up ters pertaining to the employment relation- their mind whether or not to approve the ship. The question of which clauses in agree- package. What this bill does is retrospec- ments already certified do or do not pertain tively go back and renegotiate the bargain to the employment relationship is the same that was already struck in good faith by em- as the one that arises in the certification of ployees and employers. It changes the bar- new agreements post Electrolux. There is no gain. It makes it less because it actually vali- certainty that a particular clause in a pre- dates parts of it and invalidates other parts of Electrolux agreement would be validated by it and takes some clauses out of the agree- this bill until that question is decided by a ment. So the agreement that people voted on tribunal, just as parties to agreements await- as an entire package is disturbed by this bill, ing certification cannot be sure that each and that is unfair. clause within them will ultimately be found This is one of the points that the Scrutiny to pertain. Again, there is no certainty proof Bills Committee identified. It identified vided by this bill at all. that retrospectively this bill is disadvantaging The Department of Employment and persons by changing the structure and the Workplace Relations says that it is simply a nature of the agreement that they entered into matter of drafting clauses in the appropriate in good faith. It says: manner so as to make them pertain. The The Committee draws Senators’ attention to the courts have long held that these types of provisions, as they may be considered to trespass agreements are drafted not by lawyers but by unduly on personal rights and liberties, in breach persons who do not have such a careful eye of principle 1(a)(i) of the Committee’s terms of in such matters. They are drafted by persons reference. who are seeking to reach agreements affect- Senator Barnett is actually a member of that ing their workplace. They are drafted by em- committee. He signed off on this report. He ployees, employers and their representatives, supported this report, yet here he is in the including unions. The ridiculous position that parliament today saying, ‘That doesn’t mat- this government has created and that this bill ter.’ He is slavishly committed to the gov- does not fix is that you can have two clauses ernment’s agenda—and I have mentioned which have the exact same effect but, de- what the real agenda was—and he does not pending on how they are drafted, one may care whether it unduly trespasses on individ- pertain to the employment relationship and ual rights. He simply says, ‘The government one may not. That is what the department has wants to do this. It is an anti-union piece of put to us. That is the ridiculous situation that legislation, so let’s go ahead regardless.’ I this government has created with this bill. think the Scrutiny of Bills Committee has This bill does not go anywhere near address- identified a serious flaw. ing those issues. We need a situation where The third significant flaw in the approach those that are affected in their workplace can of partial validation is that it has at least two freely negotiate those agreements together. important consequences. The first is that, far What you are creating is a lawyers picnic, from providing the parties to such agree- because it is about drafting. If you get a ments with certainty, it creates greater uncer- clever lawyer to draft a clause in such a way tainty. This is because the pre-Electrolux that it will be deemed to pertain to the em- agreements are to be validated only to the ployee-employer relationship, it will get extent of those clauses that deal with permit- through, even though it may have the exact

CHAMBER 46 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 same effect as a different clause drafted dif- held that protected action could be taken in ferently. I am not surprised that the govern- support of non-pertaining matters, it seems ment wants to do that, because it is nearly all more than reasonable to expect that unions lawyers on that side of the chamber, and I adopted a similar view. The full court of the know how lawyers love to create more work Federal Court—a very high authority— for their own. determined that action could be taken in sup- This becomes even more absurd when one port of matters that did not pertain, and here has regard to the relevant principal objects of is the government saying that people should the Workplace Relations Act—the govern- have said, ‘Well, even though the full court ment’s act. Section 3 says: of the Federal Court has said you can do this, we should actually question that, and when (b) ensuring that the primary responsibility for determining matters affecting the re- we are considering whether we should pur- lationship between employers and em- sue our industrial rights under this act ployees rests with the employer and em- through protected industrial action, we ployees at the ... enterprise level; and should somehow ignore a decision of the full (c) enabling employers and employees to court of the Federal Court.’ It is ridiculous choose the most appropriate form of for the government to put that. agreement for their particular circum- The government has indicated, again in stances, whether or not that form is pro- the second reading speech: vided for by this Act; However, the Government considers it would be This bill does not ensure that the primary highly undesirable for parties to exploit uncer- responsibility rests with the employer and tainty in relation to past industrial action by initi- the employees, nor does it enable employers ating or threatening legal action. and employees to choose the most appropri- That is also my aspiration, as I have indi- ate form of agreement. This responsibility is cated. That is why, again, the government taken out of the hands of those persons who and the minor parties should support the sec- are supposed to be entrusted with this re- ond Labor amendment that will be proposed sponsibility—that is, the employers and the in the committee stage. Our amendment does employees. in fact validate that industrial action that was The fourth fundamental flaw is that this taken in good faith, knowing the authority of bill does not clarify the status of industrial the full court of the Federal Court decision at action taken in support of certified agree- the time. Irrespective of our joint aspirations ments prior to the Electrolux decision. I am in this regard, the bill does not give effect to concerned to ensure that unions and their the stated objective. Although the govern- members who took industrial action in good ment believes that legislating to protect past faith, believing on reasonable grounds that it industrial action, to the extent that the action was protected, should have legal protection was taken in support of non-pertaining mat- from any action which might be taken ters, would be complex or practically diffi- against them by employers. This government cult, the reasons for this are not obvious. We states in the second reading speech: will provide the solution to you in the form Parties could not have reasonably expected that of amendments, so you should support those, protected action was available to support claims given that that is one of the stated objectives for non-pertaining matters. in the second reading speech. We will see That, again, is a most outrageous statement. how you perform on that. Given that the full court of the Federal Court

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 47

I will summarise the points I have made. starting again, and the only new clauses be- This bill does nothing to provide certainty. It ing put into those agreements related to is- does not provide certainty for the agreements sues that were already under negotiation with pre the Electrolux decision, and it does not employers and employer groups and that provide certainty for post-Electrolux agree- affected the industry as a whole. They were ments. Until the commission, the courts and the only new issues. Unions were simply other tribunals determine what does and does seeking to provide the certainty which this not pertain and until the ridiculous argument bill claims to do but does not and put in of the department that it is simply a matter of place agreements to provide the foundation drafting is resolved, there will continue to be for the wages and conditions for their mem- uncertainty. bers into the future. We will be speaking on What really needs to happen, and what our amendments in the committee stage. cannot happen through this bill because it is Senator SANTORO (Queensland) (12.30 fundamentally flawed in really providing the p.m.)—In speaking to the Workplace Rela- long-term certainty which we would like to tions Amendment (Agreement Validation) see, is that agreements that were certified at Bill 2004 I note two constants in the Labor that time—and if the commission is of the Party’s contribution to the debate on work- view that all the matters in the agreement at place relations, not just in this place but also the time pertain to the employee-employer in the other place: obstruction and deceit. relationship—should be valid for the life of What we noticed, again, from the contribu- the agreement. That is the best way to tions of the two members representing the achieve certainty. The basis of our first Labor Party opposite were obstruction and amendment is to say, ‘Let’s validate agree- deceit—the sort that has been occurring over ments in their entirety. The commission cer- three parliaments and is occurring again in tified them in the full knowledge of the the fourth parliament of the Howard-Costello Workplace Relations Act, of other decisions government. Forty-one times, legislation of different tribunals and of the courts at the which is pro business, particularly small time. Those agreements were negotiated in business, and which would further incenti- good faith based on the law of the day and vate, if I can use that word, small business to the decisions that were available at the time. put on even more employees has been re- They should be certified in their entirety.’ jected by the Senate after being passed by Only that will give the certainty which this the lower house. Again, the ALP comes into bill claims to be seeking to provide but this place today to obstruct and to deceive. which it does not. This bill is purely there to To illustrate what I mean by ‘deceit’—and try to stop unions quite rightly renegotiating I want to examine in further detail what agreements or replacing agreements that really motivates the Labor Party—there are were voided by the Electrolux decision. headlines such as this in the Sydney Morning There is nothing unlawful or improper about Herald which say, ‘New look Labor’s pitch that. to business’. That is the screaming headline. I know there was a lot of talk that some Another headline says, ‘Latham delivers unions were seeking to put in new claims. wins to business’. My understanding and advice is that no un- Senator Ferris—Where is the evidence? ion sought to do that. Unions sought to roll Senator SANTORO—We have certainly over their existing agreements under a new not heard any evidence in this place today— timetable because the agreements would be

CHAMBER 48 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 particularly in this place—that the Labor out good reason. The Workplace Relations Party is fair dinkum. We had Stephen Smith Act, as I am sure you, Madam Acting Deputy clearly state in yesterday’s Sydney Morning President Crossin, and others are aware, does Herald or one of the other Sydney papers contain provisions where legitimate interven- that this bill needs to be passed before the tion can occur by all sorts of parties, includ- end of the year because business is looking ing unions. The point that I am making here forward to the certainty that this bill repre- is that the Labor Party just do not like small sents. Despite all the talk from the two Labor business. It is hatred of small business. senators who have spoken in this place to- Also specifically contained within the ar- day, their amendment totally negates the cer- gument put forward by members opposite is tainty for small businesses that this bill in- hatred of AWAs. AWAs are one of the great troduces back into the Workplace Relations success stories of the Workplace Relations Act. Act of this government. The statistics speak That is what the Labor Party are all about. for themselves. Because we want to get this They want to deceive the Australian public bill through the Senate before the parliament into believing that somehow they have ac- rises for the Christmas break, if not today, I cepted that their Jurassic Park version of have decided to curtail my remarks. There workplace relations, which was rejected by are some statistics on AWAs, and that is what the people on 9 October, is not going to be we are talking about today—agreements. It is part of the Labor Party’s platform. They want worth while putting on the record how good to convince the Australian public, and par- AWAs have been for Australian workers, ticularly small business, that the lesson of those people who have benefited the most as Jurassic Park style workplace relations has a result of the good representation that they sunk in. So they go out and say that they are get from this side of the house. It is impor- going to deliver for business. They are re- tant to reflect on how good the implementa- ported as saying that because it is such a tion of coalition workplace relations policy radical change to their rhetoric that it has to and our looking after their interests have be reported in this manner. Yet they come in been for them. here and do precisely the opposite. This is a good moment to remind the La- Why? It is all about the agenda of hatred. bor Party that last month nearly 25,000 extra It is hatred of small business. The Labor AWAs were filed with the Office of the Em- Party in this place and elsewhere understand ployment Advocate—an office that Labor and appreciate that small businesses gener- would abolish if they had the chance to do ally do not support the centralist, collectivist so. That was a record figure—up more than philosophical and policy underpinnings of 7,000 on the previous month. It is a fact that the Labor Party’s workplace relations AWAs are proving to be an absolute hit in agenda. They just do not accept those under- Australian workplaces because individual pinnings. Small business people by nature contracts between employees and employers are free spirits and free agents, and they want tailor terms and conditions of employment to to make their own decisions. They do not suit the needs of both parties. It is not an ap- want to be interrupted. They do not want proach that is collectivist based; it is an ap- their workplaces, the flow of production or proach where the two parties, of their own the proper flow of sovereign decision mak- free will, come together and negotiate some- ing in small business to be interrupted by a thing that suits both of them. More than half union official coming in uninvited and with- a million AWAs—569,364 to be precise—

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 49 had been filed since 1997 when the calcula- from the fear of headlines such as the one tion was last made this month. It is instruc- that says, ‘Union fury over Labor moves’, in tive to put on the record that employees on that case relating to tariff cuts. Nobody on AWAs earn on average 29 per cent more than this side is anti-union; but we are anti the those on certified agreements. Women on irresponsible influence that union leaders AWAs earn 32 per cent more than women particularly apply to Labor senators opposite. who are working under certified agreements. I would strongly recommend that, if those No wonder that Labor’s own preferred opposite want to be successful at a future pollster, Rod Cameron, writing in the Age federal election, they abandon those hatreds this month, condemned the ALP’s workplace and those misplaced loyalties, particularly policy as ‘backward-looking and totally out when those loyalties compromise the wellbe- of step with community and work force ing of the very people they claim they seek trends’. I would respectfully suggest to hon- to represent better than anybody else in this ourable senators opposite who belong to the place—that is, employees working within Labor Party that they start paying heed not Australian businesses, particularly small just to Rod Cameron—their preferred poll- businesses. ster, who provides them with a lot of good Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New advice based on reasonable polling within South Wales) (12.40 p.m.)—I want to make the community—but also to the decision that some brief remarks on the Workplace Rela- was made by the Australian public in terms tions Amendment (Agreement Validation) of the future of the government on October Bill 2004 currently before the chamber to 9. draw attention to two particular aspects of This particular bill seeks to provide the the bill, which I think Senator Marshall may certainty that Senator Marshall said it did have already referred to. I want to make the not. The bill seeks to validate agreements point that, despite the claim by the govern- that were made in good faith under the legis- ment that this legislation seeks to remove lation as passed by the parliament. It does uncertainty that has been created as a result not seek to change the agreements, as I be- of the Electrolux decision, that will not be lieve Senator Marshall kept telling this place. achieved by the application of this bill. I also It is not a bill that seeks to introduce new want to take this opportunity to make a cou- material; it simply amends legislation to ple of comments about Senator Santoro’s cope with the effect of the High Court deci- contribution and his use of the words ‘ob- sion which has been referred to abundantly struction’ and ‘deceit’. Those of us who have in this place. been in this chamber since the coalition came to power in 1996 know the way in which the In conclusion, I would suggest that the English language has been distorted in legis- Labor Party take on proper motives when lation which has been brought before this considering debates such as this. They have chamber in the area of industrial relations. It to abandon their hatred for small business; has been deliberately used to create the per- they have to abandon their hatred for legisla- ception that bills on industrial relations are tion which, as I have just demonstrated, somehow achieving something different works very well for the people whom they from what they actually set out to achieve. have stopped representing in the sorts of The classic example of that is the ‘fair dis- policies they have been putting forward. missal’ bill. It went from being the unfair They have to somehow detach themselves dismissal bill to the fair dismissal bill. We

CHAMBER 50 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 have seen a similar use of language in a the past three years in my other role as range of other legislation. So, if there has shadow parliamentary secretary for manufac- been any deceit practised in this chamber or turing—you see that there are no lawyers in this parliament in the area of industrial about. The employers in many of these facto- relations, it has been practised very effec- ries, the bosses, are usually people who have tively by the senators on the other side of the worked with their hands, graduated and set chamber. up their own companies. They then employ On the issue of the validation bill and the people with particular skills who are focused Electrolux decision, there are two issues that on their capacity to repair an engine or build are of real concern in the application of this a boat or whatever else they do. These are law. There is the fact that employees who not people with legal qualifications. They are have entered into agreements in good faith not people who sit down before they start a and who have traded off conditions of em- process of negotiation and read through the ployment in a number of areas for other ele- objects of the Workplace Relations Act to ments in a package on the basis that the total ensure that what they are setting out to nego- package of conditions will apply to them as a tiate complies with the requirements of the result of those negotiations—and who have act. Nor do the employers do so. had that tested against a ‘no disadvantage’ These are people who sit around a table test, which is a critical element of judging and say, ‘What are our problems, and how do the veracity of agreements entered into— we set about fixing them?’ Then they say, may well be disadvantaged as a result of the ‘Let’s do it with this way,’ and they sign off application of this law. In fact they may well on an agreement. There is no way in the have conditions taken away from them that world that those individuals know whether or they entered into in good faith. not they are in conformity with the require- Consistently we have heard those on the ments of the act. It seems to me that, pro- other side of the chamber say in debates on vided the arrangements satisfy the needs of industrial relations, ‘Our objective is to take the individuals in that workplace, any issue the third party out of the relationship.’ They they decide there should be an agreement on say that the relationship ought to be between should be regarded as pertaining to the em- the employee and the employer, and that ployee-employer relationship—in the real both sides ought to be able to sit down and sense of the word and not in the strict, literal negotiate arrangements that satisfy the work sense of the interpretation of the act. If this force in their workplace, reaching agreement government were genuine about fostering on a set of conditions that will make their enterprise bargaining and equity and equality workplace flexible, efficient and effective in in the negotiating process, then it would have competing in the marketplace. It is not pos- sought to amend the act to make it much sible to do that now because at any stage of more flexible with regard to the way those the process the courts may come in and de- negotiations can be carried out. Flexibility termine on a legal basis that there are matters would allow people to genuinely reach that those individuals have negotiated that do agreement on the issues they think are rele- not go to the employee-employer relation- vant to them in their workplace, rather than ship. there being some structure where others are able to intervene in the process and deter- When you travel around this country and mine issues according to a precise legal defi- visit factories—I have visited a lot of them in nition of what is in the act.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 51

In that respect, therefore, this legislation from that point onwards this issue of uncer- will not in my view remove the doubt from tainty can be dealt with in a more construc- the industrial relations environment in the tive way. That may well mean the need to sense of ongoing agreements. The effective embrace changes to the objects of the Work- way of dealing with the validation of existing place Relations Act. agreements would have been as Labor has Senator LIGHTFOOT (Western Austra- put forward: to validate all existing agree- lia) (12.51 p.m.)—In the modest time that is ments that have been entered into good faith available to me I want to speak on the Work- up to their expiry date. At least that would place Relations Amendment (Agreement have removed the uncertainty right across Validation) Bill 2004, particularly with re- the board in respect of these agreements. spect to the adverse position that is created Senator Santoro referred to the promotion of sometimes when mining companies from AWAs. Having seen some of the AWAs that overseas come to Australia. I would like to have been negotiated over recent years, I begin by painting a picture of Xstrata, a would venture to suggest that, if the Em- Swiss company, and their major shareholder, ployment Advocate were asked to go back Glencore, and its Mr Marc Rich—Mr Marc and look at the AWAs he has registered, a very Rich evidently. substantial proportion of them would not One thing that we can be sure of in the meet the test that the High Court applied in proposed takeover of the iconic and highly the Electrolux decision. There would be mat- respected Western Mining Corporation by ters in those agreements which would be Xstrata is that, like all Swiss deals, there is seen to be outside of the employer-employee no social payment, no beneficiaries in the relationship. No-one has suggested that the medium term except the Swiss companies Employment Advocate do that and those involved. They would all tear the guts out of agreements will probably skate through the deer, just to get the kidney fat. The pro- without being under any challenge. posed grab by this unlisted Swiss com- While I understand and accept that the pany—unlisted in Australia at least—of the government is attempting, in a limited way, Western Mining Corporation is because of to address a problem which has been created Australia’s world renowned mineral reserves. as a result of the Electrolux case, I think the There is nothing wrong with that in princi- approach to dealing with it has been inade- ple, except that Western Mining has the big- quate and does not go anywhere near far gest reserves—that is, scientifically deline- enough to create the certainty that employers ated reserves—of minable uranium in the and employer organisations, unions and em- world, plus, as a bonus, copper—perhaps the ployees would like, and are entitled to, in biggest reserves in Australasia—and exciting this environment. What is more, this ap- reserves of gold to boot. And I would re- proach will in my view create a set of cir- spectfully remind honourable senators that cumstances where there will be potential gold values are at their highest levels for 16 disbenefits for some employees in respect of years and Western Mining Corporation has the operations of the agreements which they lots of it. entered into in good faith. I would urge the But the serious actual and potential advan- government to again look at Labor’s pro- tage for the multimetal miner is uranium. posal to validate all of the agreements that Australia, through, significantly, the Western are in existence up until their expiry date and Mining Corporation, has the largest uranium to look at creating an environment whereby

CHAMBER 52 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 reserves in the world. Just as Saudi Arabia acquisition of Western Mining’s nickel op- holds the biggest reserves of oil, Australia erations, uranium, copper and gold. holds roughly the same percentage of ura- If the trend that Xstrata has implemented nium in the world. If the carnivorous global at Windimurra expands to other mining areas predator, Xstrata, gets its incisors around the in the nation, and is picked up or used with throat of Western Mining, jobs will be lost— the perception that it is a bone fide manner of they have already flagged that—particularly maximising profits by restricting supplies of at Western Mining headquarters in Mel- metals or minerals that are currently in de- bourne. If the appalling treatment of the mand, particularly in China, then Australia, small Australian miner Precious Metals, and because of its high wage structure, occupa- their Windimurra mine in central Western tional health and safety laws and reliance on Australia, is an example of the shady global high costs of imported mining machinery, practices that Xstrata is prepared to stoop to could well see a disastrous outcome of any and is anything to go by then we could ex- extension to the Windimurra premeditated pect mine closures or mine staff reduction monopoly. Western Mining is well known to and relocation of mining infrastructure so me—I worked for the company in the 1960s that a mine would be difficult to reopen. when I was studying geology in Kalgoorlie. This is what has happened to the unfortu- It has a global conscience; it is respected— nate Windimurra vanadium mine —the larg- even revered—by its work force. It could not est vanadium mine deposit in the world—in have possibly conceived of a tactic like the central Western Australia’ s outback. Xstrata audacious closure of a mine in Western Aus- bought out the mining rights to the deposit tralia to maximise the return of another mine and then left Precious Metals with only an in another country by the same company. ongoing royalty. The only problem for Pre- There is in Western Australia a disturbing cious Metals is: no vanadium, no money. disquiet with respect to this global hunting Xstrata not only closed the mine shortly after fiscal predator. I trust the company will learn its acquisition and the deal was done but re- that there are certain rules, written and un- moved most of the plant and machinery used written, that it must conform to in this coun- for mining so that it was almost impossible try. We are not a Third World civilisation; we for the mine—as I said, the largest in the will not tolerate wholesale sackings of em- world—to reopen. With it went $30 million ployees, nor the destruction of subcontrac- of start-up money given by the Western Aus- tors, nor the scurrilous and unnecessary clo- tralian government. This commercial ban- sure of our world-class mines. Foreign com- ditry had the effect of not only losing jobs panies are most welcome here—stick to the there, so desperately needed in the outback, rules, forget your Swiss arrogance, Mr Rich, but also boosting the global price of vana- and if you wish to stay here, it will pay you dium, which Xstrata then satisfied from its great dividends. mines in southern Africa. All those jobs were Senator HUTCHINS (New South Wales) lost at Windimurra. In my many decades of (12.57 p.m.)—I wish to comment on both the involvement in mining in Western Australia implications and intentions of the Workplace and other places, this is singularly the worst Relations Amendment (Agreement Valida- act of a foreign company, mining or other- tion) Bill 2004, as they both reflect, once wise, that I have witnessed in Australia. The again, the Howard government’s divisive and same modus operandi could be used for the ill-conceived approach to industrial relations.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 53

This bill is the government’s response to the matters pertain to the employment relation- decision made by the High Court in the Elec- ship and those that do not. Until the High trolux case on 2 September this year. The Court judgment, this decision was working court found that, for a collective agreement well, with parties conducting agreements in or AWA to be valid under the terms of the good faith through the conciliation and arbi- Workplace Relations Act, that agreement tration process. Many of these agreements must solely address matters pertaining to the contained matters ordinary Australians relationship between the employee and the would identify as part and parcel of the bar- employer. This bill thus validates agreements gain struck nearly 100 years ago between made before or on 2 September this year by labour and business. What came in originally validating only those matters in these agree- in most state jurisdictions is the Master and ments pertaining to the employment relation- Servant Act—something that I am sure that ship in line with that finding. the coalition would like to go back to. Labor finds this bill limited in two unfor- What the government has now said is that tunate ways. First, the bill opens up more it will not respect the wishes of employees, legal uncertainty than it resolves, as it allows unions, employers and the jurisdiction of the the possibility that now every aspect of commission to decide what matters should workers’ entitlements will be trawled be allowable matters in certified agreements. through the courts. Second, the bill also de- Rather, the government has run to the courts stroys the good faith that workers and enter- with a restrictive definition of the employ- prise have developed in arbitrarily striking ment relationship and argued that this neces- out parts of agreements that have been nego- sarily invalidates all these agreements con- tiated in good faith. In short, the government ducted in good faith. Far from supporting the has arrogantly said it knows best. commission process, the government has The history of the Electrolux case demon- come in and upturned the trust, confidence strates that the Howard government is once and relationships developed by parties again the odd man out on the issue of work- through the certification process. Far from place relations. Once again, this bill does not respecting the wishes of all parties to have a go nearly far enough in providing the cer- wider view of the employment relationship, tainty that Australians seek in their industrial the government has effectively manipulated relations system. Prior to the High Court’s the courts to pursue its radical degrading of judgment, the Full Federal Court found that the commission’s powers, developed through protected action could be taken over matters decades of industrial relations in this country. that may be included in a future certified The upshot is that the government’s appeal to agreement. The full bench argued that Justice the High Court was motivated not out of a Merkel erred in finding that only matters desire to seek certainty but out of a desire to pertaining, incidental or ancillary to the em- once again complicate matters. ployment relationship could be the subject of So let us now examine the implications of protected action. The full bench found that this bill for the industrial fabric of the coun- this would preclude the judgment of the try. The government has whipped up specu- commission on what matters could rightly or lation that many agreements may now be wrongly be included in any agreement and as invalidated due to the inclusion of matters such would deny the commission its appro- ostensibly outside the employment relation- priate jurisdiction. Since then, the commis- ship. Let us not forget that it was the gov- sion has made numerous decisions on what ernment’s wish to appeal the judgment of the

CHAMBER 54 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 full bench of the Federal Court that has led to It is crucial to understand the significance this uncertainty in the weeks before Christ- of Labor’s proposed amendments to this bill. mas. Let us not forget that it was the then These amendments will rule out the possibil- government’s fault that many workers are ity that every last detail in the numerous cer- now uncertain over whether their rights are tified agreements affected by the Electrolux enforceable in the stressful working hours decision will now be dragged through the leading up to Christmas. Let us not forget courts. The government’s amendments pro- that all the good faith developed between vide no such certainty. Labor’s amendments employers and employees may well evapo- will respect the good faith of employers and rate in these weeks because the government’s employees. The government will undermine meddling has made the provisions of these the trust between workers and enterprise and hard-won agreements legally uncertain. That replace it with uncertainty. Labor’s amend- is why it is important that the parliament of- ments will protect the entitlements of work- fers certainty to Australia where the govern- ers to hard-won gains in agreements. The ment will not. government will allow for those entitlements Labor’s amendments will sustain the good to be stripped away. As always in matters of faith agreements developed over the last few industrial relations, the difference between years. They will sustain the understanding the constructive approach of Labor and the that it is best left to the parties to decide in divisive approach of the government is clear their agreements what constitutes matters in for all to see. their employment relationship, as developed One must wonder why the government by the practice of the commission. They will has led us down this track. Far from simpli- validate those agreements that have been fying the industrial relations system, the previously certified and will allow the ambit government has now forced the parliament to of allowable matters to be decided by parties clean up its legislative mess. The reality is to the agreement. This has a deliberate ad- that we do not have to look too hard for the vantage over the bill proposed by the gov- reason why the government has pursued this ernment, as this bill defaults on questions of agenda. It is there in black and white on page what would be matters directly implied as 2 of the government’s submission to the Sen- part of the employment relationship. Indeed, ate Employment, Workplace Relations and this opens up the fact that almost all aside Education Legislation Committee. It states: from the most basic aspects of the employ- The Government agrees with the High Court’s ment relationship will be decided on appeal decision. The Government does not consider that to the courts rather than through the commis- it is appropriate for instruments that are made and sion process. What we shall then have is pro- enforceable under the workplace relations frame- tracted disputation through the courts over work to contain matters that are extraneous to the many of the aspects of agreements that Aus- employment relationship. tralian workers have long taken as being part The fact is that it is exactly the sorts of mat- and parcel of the bargain between themselves ters that employees and employers have and their employers. That is why the second agreed are part and parcel of the employment aspect of the amendments that we have pro- relationship that will be put in jeopardy by posed will clarify the nature of the employ- this bill. ment relationship and leave it up to the But the agenda of the Howard government commission to decide its boundaries. runs much deeper than this. The effect of this bill is that it will open up a legal nightmare

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 55 over what are allowable matters and what are If this is the flexibility that the govern- not. The secret agenda of the government is ment think Australia needs then they need to to use this piece of rushed legislation as the think again. This bill is only the thin end of velvet glove by which to erode workers’ the wedge that this place will see once the rights in the federal sphere. By stressing this veil slips in July next year. The legislative narrow and ill-defined conception of the em- record of the government is there for all to ployment relationship the government will see. At every stage they have attempted to no doubt argue that a number of matters introduce new divisions into our industrial which have been traditionally considered as relations system. At every stage they have part of the employment bargain struck eroded the rights that were developed by through decades in Australia are now ‘extra- consensus in the commission. Now, in the neous matters’. shadow of the bills lined up before us— It is ironic that the conservatives are including unfair dismissal laws, allowable swimming against the tide in the long and matters and the noxious ‘need for employ- proud history of industrial relations in this ment’ clause—their agenda has been exposed country. We on this side of the chamber are for what it was all along by this bill. That justifiably proud of the extension of social agenda will simply erode the rights of work- welfare through the rights of working people. ers to seek nothing more than a fair day’s pay What is more, most Australians agree that for a fair day’s work, the dignity that comes issues like sick leave, child care, job security, with job security and the promise of a better enterprise based training and dismissal rights future for their children that comes with so- are not extraneous matters. It is not an extra- cial mobility of enterprise based training. neous matter that workers will not be able to Whether it is by lowering wages through the secure full-time jobs because management flawed logic of the need for employment, seeks ‘flexibility’ in hiring and firing casuals. making it easier to sack employees without due process or by taking away the ability of I know senators opposite might have to workers to better themselves, the agenda strain to imagine life as a casual worker, but remains the same. I encourage them to imagine life for just one moment as one of Australia’s 2.4 million That agenda has been revealed in this working poor. The working poor are those place today with this unfortunate but neces- who are classified as in poverty, despite hav- sary bill to clean up the legislative mess. We ing one adult in the family in employment. could never plunge Australia into industrial They are casually employed, often in low- disputes in the weeks before Christmas, but skill, low-wage service industries. They the government has used this opportunity to struggle to upgrade their skills, mainly due to cut away the legal basis for the long history the Howard government’s award stripping of of workers’ rights in this country. It has de- enterprise based training entitlements. Often cided against the right path of certifying they find themselves at the mercy of the those agreements conducted in good faith by Howard government’s failing Job Network, the parties; rather, it will open up new divi- being churned from one employment ser- sions. With these divisions the government vices provider to another. In fact, the only will no doubt ram through its agenda to strip certainty that many of them face is that, once away the rights and conditions of workers, again, through no fault of their own they will and the good faith delivered through enter- struggle to make ends meet before their next prise bargaining and the unions. It has pay day. swapped consensus for convenience in driv-

CHAMBER 56 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 ing its narrow agenda to determine issues Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) such as sick leave, holiday leave, enterprise (1.11 p.m.)—The Workplace Relations based training and job security as extraneous Amendment (Agreement Validation) Bill issues. How can we say that the social mobil- 2004 is the government’s response to the ity of workers, now jeopardised by the sec- High Court’s decision in the Electrolux case, ond highest rate of casualisation in the but the bill fails to adequately address all the OECD, is a callous extraneous matter? uncertainties that that decision has raised. In fact, in last week’s edition of the The government could do more to address Catholic Weekly in Sydney, the front page these uncertainties, but it has decided to referred to a speech by the Catholic Bishop leave these decisions and the sorting out of of Parramatta, the Right Reverend Kevin these matters to the courts and the Australian Manning, attacking the idea that we need to Industrial Relations Commission. The sort- have a change in the industrial relations sys- ing out of these uncertainties could take tem and attacking the fact that there is this many years. rapid growth of casuals in our society. The High Court’s decision in the Elec- Bishop Manning’s speech indicated that he trolux case in September this year raised believed—and I think I am correct in saying three significant questions about the scope of this—that the only way to prevent this certified agreements and what they may con- growth of the working poor is to have a tain. The Workplace Relations Act provides strong system to allow for proper regulation that an agreement can be certified only if it is of wages and conditions. We see by this bill ‘about matters pertaining to the employment today that that is being stripped away. As we relationship’ between employers and em- know too well, on 1 July next year, we will ployees. The court found that a provision for have more and more legislation come before employers to collect bargaining fees on be- us that will rip away the rights and the dig- half of a union is not a matter pertaining to nity of men and women who work for a liv- the employment relationship. ing in this country. It will be a sad day when The court also ruled that any certified that starts to occur. I hope that the men and agreement that contains a matter that does women who will inevitably lose the security not pertain to the employment relationship is that they once had will remember that at the invalid, and that any industrial action taken next election. in support of a proposed agreement which Senator LIGHTFOOT (Western Austra- includes these non-pertaining matters is not lia) (1.11 p.m.)—I seek leave to make a very protected industrial action and is therefore short personal explanation. open to civil sanctions. The court did not say Leave granted. exactly what other matters might not be per- missible in a certified agreement—what it Senator LIGHTFOOT—During my con- perceives to not pertain to the employment tribution to the Workplace Relations relationship—although there has been specu- Amendment (Agreement Validation) Bill lation that it could extend to dealing with the 2004, I neglected to have recorded in Han- use of casual workers, labour hire, non-union sard that a company with which I am associ- contract employees, right of entry for union ated is holding some options in Precious officials, deduction of union dues and train- Metals Australia. Those options were bought ing leave for union delegates. This means over the last few weeks. that any number of existing certified agreements may now be invalid.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 57

The government claims to be addressing The Greens support the ACTU’s view, set this uncertainty with this bill, but this is not out in its submission to the Senate inquiry the case. This bill simply guarantees that all into this bill: certified agreements and all AWAs, Austra- Where a union and an employer have reached lian workplace agreements, that were in agreement on matters which they believe are place before the Electrolux decision are relevant, the role of Government should be to valid, but any matters within those agree- ensure that these agreements are valid and en- ments that do not pertain to the employment forceable. relationship are unenforceable. That is mani- In its submission to the inquiry, the CFMEU festly inadequate. People need to know that construction division states that this bill, by all of the provisions in the agreement that validating only part of an agreement negoti- they make in their workplace are valid. Un- ated before the Electrolux decision, effec- ions, employees and employers also need to tively imposes an outcome on parties to a know what issues the government and the negotiation that the parties themselves might courts believe do not pertain to the employ- not have agreed to. This means that the par- ment relationship. ties cannot renegotiate any ‘non-pertaining The government could have brought to matters’ and have them included as part of parliament a list of matters that they believe their agreement with rights of enforceability. do not pertain to the employment relation- This is unsatisfactory in the view of the ship, but they have chosen not to do this. The Greens and it is contrary to the intent of en- failure to specify the scope of non-pertaining terprise bargaining. The Greens agree with matters disadvantages unions and employees the CFMEU, who said in their submission: who may wish to take industrial action in If pre-Electrolux agreements are to be validated pursuit of a certified agreement. This is be- by legislation they should be validated to the full cause such industrial action, as I said before, extent of their existing terms— would not be protected if the agreement con- —that is, the basis on which they were nego- tains non-pertaining matters, thereby opening tiated between the two parties involved. Nor unions up to the threat of legal actions and has the government dealt satisfactorily with penalties. There is no certainty provided for the status of agreements made after the High employees and their unions, and the govern- Court decision. These may be invalid be- ment have offered nothing in this bill to take cause they contain a single ‘non-pertaining the guesswork out of the task in the hands of matter’. The government has offered no those groups. guidance on the scope of such matters. The The government could have ensured that government might think that it is constrain- all action taken in support of claims for a ing unions and employees and further un- certified agreement, whether it contained dermining collective bargaining and the abil- matters pertaining or not pertaining to the ity of working people to protect their wages employment relationship, was deemed legal. and working conditions to the advantage of The government could have, as the Austra- business. But business also appreciates cer- lian Council of Trade Unions has suggested, tainty, and most employers will not welcome amended the Workplace Relations Act to: the continuing uncertainty that this legisla- Remove the requirement for industrial disputes tion creates. and certified agreements to be about matters per- This legislation is a poor effort in dealing taining to the employment relationship ... with industrial relations issues from a gov-

CHAMBER 58 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 ernment that claims industrial relations is its woman, pregnant with her first child, was top priority during its fourth term. It raises represented by the Liquor, Hospitality and the question: what can we expect from the Miscellaneous Workers Union. They took Howard government on industrial relations action open to them at the time before the in the coming years? We can expect the gov- New South Wales Industrial Relations ernment to drag out every ill-conceived in- Commission and were awarded the maxi- dustrial relations bill it has tried and failed to mum 26 weeks pay. In ruling last month, the secure parliamentary support for in the past commissioner, Ian Cambridge, said that the nine years. The list is long because the Sen- fact that the employer was a small business ate has had the good sense to reject much of was no excuse for the company’s conduct. the government’s regressive and divisive He said: industrial relations agenda, such as the now It is difficult to contemplate the prospect that an infamous proposal to permit workers of employer acting with such abhorrent disregard for small businesses to be sacked with no right the circumstances of a pregnant woman might of appeal. This has been rejected 41 times by somehow avoid responsibility for such actions the Senate, yet today we saw the Minister for because it is a small business. Employment and Workplace Relations rein- But, under this government’s unfair dis- troduce this bill. The government’s agenda missal bill, this woman, pregnant with her also includes reducing the number of matters first child and awarded the maximum 26 that awards and agreements can cover, fur- weeks pay by the New South Wales Indus- ther restricting the right of employees to take trial Relations Commission, would be pre- industrial action and abolishing the right of vented from seeking any redress from being small business employees to redundancy pay. unfairly sacked from her workplace. This is Then there are the new proposals that the not the fair and just workplace environment government has flagged, like placing so- that Australians want. called contract workers and small business— The government wants to remove the right the largest employer—outside of the indus- to redundancy pay for small business em- trial relations system. ployees, arguing that small business is a spe- Let us have a look at what these proposals cial case. But the Australian Industrial Rela- would mean for Australian workers. There is tions Commission in its ruling on this matter no case for removing the right to appeal an earlier this year capped the amount of redun- unfair dismissal—the right to appeal having dancy payable at half that for larger busi- been unfairly sacked by one’s boss. Such a nesses—eight weeks pay as opposed to 16 measure would have harsh consequences for weeks—and it retained a provision for small working people. Imagine a young woman businesses in genuine financial difficulty not working in a tearoom who raises an issue to have to pay redundancy pay. If the gov- about being bullied by her boss. She is then ernment’s policy becomes law and an em- sacked and has no right of appeal. Or imag- ployee who has worked for 20 years for one ine a mechanic who turns up a garage to small business employer is made redundant, work one day and is told, ‘You’re sacked.’ they will receive nothing. He is given no explanation, there is no dis- The government also wants to restrict the cussion and he has no right of appeal. Or right of union organisers to enter workplaces imagine the real life example of a child-care to hold meetings and assist workers— worker who was sacked four days after re- meetings about occupational health and questing maternity leave. The 25-year-old safety issues, meetings about a whole range

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 59 of issues that the employees in a workplace comes easier and contractor forms of employment are interested in discussing collectively with are nurtured. Power would also be centralised in their union. The government wants to tighten Federal Parliament at the expense of the states secondary boycott provisions that penalise and tribunals. unions and workers who take action in sup- Business, including small business, is best port of workers in other workplaces. For ex- assisted by an industrial relations framework ample, if there has been a death as a result of that promotes and supports cooperative rela- negligence on one building site and people at tionships with unions and employees—not another workplace want to stand in solidarity confrontation, discrimination and exploita- with the death that occurred across the road, tion. An independent body to help conciliate the government wants to tighten these provi- and, where necessary, to arbitrate disputes is sions so that people are not able to show that in the interests of all players in the industrial solidarity or the need to improve the occupa- relations system. But the Howard govern- tional health and safety issues in their own ment cannot see this because it is distracted workplace so that they do not face similar by its unrelenting desire to crush unions and circumstances. The government also wants to collective bargaining in preference to requir- further restrict the right to strike by outlaw- ing each individual employee to look out for ing strikes in essential services, and we have themselves, most of whom have neither the seen some indication that the government wherewithal nor the bargaining power to intends that to include nurses, academics and strike a fair deal. a range of other members in public service. It The government refuses to accept the piv- also wants to increase the use of independent otal role that unions have played and con- contractors to undermine collective bargain- tinue to play in a fair society and decent ing. working environments. As former ACTU From July next year, the government will president and former Prime Minister Bob control the Senate. The question is: will the Hawke said last week, unions have much to coalition be seduced by big business and be proud of and every working person is in- strident right-wing advocates of an industrial debted to the union movement for their relations free-for-all who are already press- wages and working conditions. In his speech ing for even more obnoxious measures, such Mr Hawke said, ‘No other non-government as removing minimum wage setting from the organisation has made such a lasting contri- commission and allowing parliament to regu- bution as the trade union movement.’ Instead late pay rates? Industrial relations experts of undermining the role of unions, the gov- John Buchanan and Ron Callus of Sydney ernment ought to be directing its efforts to University, wrote in the Sydney Morning addressing the many longstanding, serious Herald on 20 October that employers and problems that beset the employment market managers already have the upper hand in the and working lives, such as the continuing employment relationship. They said: expansion of insecure, low-paid work that Australian employers already have one of the deprives people of basic conditions such as most favourable labour law environments in the sick pay, holiday leave and the opportunity world. Their freedom to choose whether to bar- for advancement, and such as the rise of gain with their employees and to lock them out overwork. An International Labour Organisa- exists in no other industrialised country. Their tion report last month found that one in five power is set to increase as that of unions and in- employees in Australia works at least 50 dustrial tribunals falls, dismissing workers be- hours a week.

CHAMBER 60 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

The government should be addressing is- families and their unions, and at the expense sues such as the poor distribution of paid of constructive relationships between work- work that is leading to whole areas of disad- ers and businesspeople. The government vantage in cities, where many families have feels that it needs to deliver for what it be- no wage earner. The government should be lieves is its constituency, the big end of addressing a taxation system that continues town, regardless of the impact that will have to direct more and more benefits to high- on the rest of the community. income earners instead of tackling the prob- For nine years the Senate has prevented lem of high effective marginal tax rates for the most regressive elements of the govern- people moving from income support to paid ment’s policy from becoming law in indus- work on low wages. It should be tackling the trial relations. From next July this important absence of a proper paid parental leave check on government will cease because the scheme in this country and the insufficient coalition will be able to pass legislation in its child-care places. own right. But the Greens will continue to Instead of addressing these issues, the work in the parliament, in workplaces and in Minister for Workforce Participation is off in the community and with unions and working search for new draconian anti-worker and people to defend the right to collectively anti-union legislation that he can introduce bargain and to defend the right to fair treat- into parliament post July next year. I hope ment, the right to safe workplaces and the that across Australia trade unions are prepar- right to fair wages and conditions. We will ing with other members of the community to work for an industrial relations system which defend the interests of working people from promotes fairness and cooperation over this the government’s attacks. I know that earlier government’s agenda of exploitation and in November the first mass meeting called by confrontation. the Electrical Trades Union in Victoria to Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special discuss the impact of the Electrolux decision, Minister of State) (1.29 p.m.)—I thank hon- this bill that we are dealing with now, and ourable senators for their contributions to the how the union would deal with that issue Workplace Relations Amendment (Agree- attracted around 4,000 people. ment Validation) Bill 2004. The bill seeks to The ETU has negotiated with employers amend the Workplace Relations Act to en- an industry-wide new certified agreement— sure the validity of agreements which were another outcome for fairness of conditions certified, approved or varied under the and certainty for employers that the Howard Workplace Relations Act prior to the deci- government will try to prevent in future by sion of the High Court in the Electrolux case. abolishing industry-wide or pattern bargain- In that case the High Court found that an ing. The community wants fairness and co- agreement certified under the Workplace operation, not exploitation and confrontation. Relations Act must only contain matters Fair-minded business people want coopera- which pertain to the relationship between the tion, not exploitation and confrontation. employer and employees. Working people want fairness and coopera- The government welcomes the long-term tion. But the Howard government is bent on certainty which the High Court’s overwhelm- exploitation and confrontation, as we saw ing decision, a 6-1 decision, has provided to down at the docks during the MUA dispute, agreement making. The Electrolux decision because it wants to deliver for the big end of has most likely meant that agreements certi- town at the expense of working people, their

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 61 fied by the Australian Industrial Relations Union, ably represented in this chamber by Commission which contain provisions which Senator Marshall—and I note his contribu- do not pertain to the employment relation- tion—and the CFMEU, ably represented in ship may now be invalid. The aim of the bill this place by Senator Wong. If I understood is to restore the validity of certified agree- Senator Marshall’s contribution correctly, he ments and AWAs certified, approved or var- was saying that there is nothing wrong with ied prior to the Electrolux decision. unions taking advantage of the fact that the The policy underlying the Workplace Re- enterprise bargaining agreements are void lations Act is that agreements should only and, therefore, pursuing new claims. contain matters that relate to the employment Senator Marshall interjecting— relationship. If there is no restriction placed Senator ABETZ—Yes, Senator Marshall on what matters agreement could be reached is confirming that. I wonder whether he on, agreement making would become seri- thinks it would be appropriate, therefore, for ously burdened by delay and complex nego- employers to similarly say, ‘We can now tiations. Most importantly, the sky could be- pursue new claims and not pay the wage income the limit in relation to the matters that creases that had previously been agreed to.’ I could be involved in these agreements. As a am sure the Electrical Trades Union and result, the government welcomes the High Senator Marshall would see that as an outra- Court’s finding in the Electrolux case that geous breach of the goodwill that may have non-employment related matters cannot form been established between the parties. part of a certified agreement. If you want to run a successful industrial The High Court’s decision has also con- relations regime in this country, it has to be firmed decades of jurisprudence in this area fair to both sides of the debate. That is what and the commission’s application of section we as a government have done so well over 170LI of the Workplace Relations Act. How- the past 8½ years. The Labor Party come in ever, the result of the decision is that agree- here as the advocates for the trade union ments certified by the commission which movement; that is their right. But we come contain provisions which do not pertain to into this place seeking to be an arbiter and the employment relationship may now be the independent provider of laws for the invalid. Employers, employees and unions benefit of trade unions, employers and, most share a common concern that agreements importantly, individual workers. That is why reached prior to Electrolux may now be inva- we as a government take such a different lid and unenforceable. The bill proposes to approach to industrial relations. restore the validity of those agreements. Having listened to the comments of Sena- While the Electrolux decision is concerned tor Nettle, I would say that her contribution with certified agreements and contains no was—to coin a phrase—extreme, not green. I direct reference to AWAs, the government think if the Australian people were hearing a believes that there is an equivalent need to few more of these sorts of speeches they ensure validity and, hence, certainty for the would realise that the Greens are in fact a parties. reincarnation of Leon Trotsky. I thought the The provisions of the bill have been out- Trotskyites had fallen a long time ago, even lined in detail in the second reading speech. before the Iron Curtain had fallen. There has been a union campaign surround- The Greens have resurrected themselves ing this, in particular by the Electrical Trades in this place with quite bizarre, emotive and

CHAMBER 62 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 extreme language. Supposedly this govern- You can see the contrast. The shadow minis- ment has been crushing the trade union ter for workplace relations said that, yet the movement for the last 8½ years. I want to tell other opposition spokespeople, Senator this place that, in the last 8½ years, we have Wong and Senator Marshall, say the bill will had the lowest rate of industrial disputation be of no assistance in addressing the prob- since 1913, which was the first time that re- lems created by the Electrolux decision. So cords were kept in this country. The Howard the problem is not the legislation; the prob- government has presided over the lowest rate lem is the 6-1 decision of the High Court, ever of industrial disputation in this country. which has simply reinforced the jurispru- At the same time, we have presided over a dence that was long accepted as governing $200 per fortnight increase in real wages for workplace relations. ordinary Australians. We have also, at the Here we have the Labor Party rent asun- same time, presided over a 1.4 million in- der yet again by internal factions. I can un- crease in the number of people employed in derstand that the Electrical Trades Union and Australia, where the unemployment rate is the CFMEU have gone on a particular now at 5.3 per cent. course. As the puppet masters they are able Of course, according to the Greens, that is to determine the contributions of Senators a record of confrontation and a record of Marshall and Wong in the committee report. crushing the unions. Despite what the facts But until the Labor Party sheds that approach tell us, despite what workers on the streets to industrial relations and considers being a will tell us, despite what the 3,000 timber party ready for government by taking all as- workers at the Albert Hall in Launceston in pects of the industrial relations equation into Tasmania personally told the Prime Minister, account you will find not only that people the Greens will continue with their Trotsky- will continue to desert the Australian Labor ite type mantra, which went out, as I said, Party at elections but also that people will even before the collapse of the Iron Curtain. continue to desert the trade union movement. I want to compliment two senators. I have The majority of workers these days are of- made some comments about Senators Mar- fended by some of the extreme approaches of shall and Nettle. I compliment Senator people like Craig Johnston and others who Santoro, a former distinguished industrial think that the trade unions can be a law unto relations minister in Queensland. Most themselves. would credit him with being the best ever Most people now believe that you need a Queensland industrial relations minister, and sensible balance. We as a government have I thank him for his contribution. I also thank achieved that sensible balance and that is Senator Barnett for his contribution and the why I said before that we are able to point to point that he made—and it was a very telling a very good record in the area of industrial point—that the Labor Party still do not have relations. The government has introduced the their act together. As he pointed out, the bill to provide certainty to those employers member for Perth, in addressing the ACTU, and employees who have entrusted their said: working agreements to the federal agreement ... it is imperative that the uncertainty caused by making system. I commend the bill to the the Electrolux decision be resolved before Par- Senate. liament rises this year. The “do nothing” ap- Question agreed to. proach is not a viable option. Bill read a second time.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 63

In Committee through the inquiry process and heard the Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (1.40 evidence, the Democrats ended up with the p.m.)—by leave—I move opposition amend- same conclusion as Labor: that it would be ments (1) to (4) on sheet 4427: cleaner and easier to validate all agreements that are currently operating. The agreements (1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (lines 24 and 25), omit “, to the extent only that the agreement have a relatively short life and once they deals with permitted matters,”. were over you would move to the new un- (2) Schedule 1, item 1, page 4 (lines 9 and 10), derstanding. This is particularly so given the omit “, to the extent only that the variation fact that only one specific item was identi- deals with permitted matters.”. fied by the High Court as being invalid and (3) Schedule 1, item 2, page 6 (lines 1 and 2), therefore it is a relatively peripheral matter omit “, to the extent only that the AWA deals for many agreements. It is not peripheral with matters pertaining to that relationship,”. from the point of view of the union people, (4) Schedule 1, item 2, page 6 (lines 22 and 23), who attach a lot of weight to it, but it is pe- omit “, to the extent only that the variation ripheral in the scale of the full agreement. agreement deals with matters pertaining to However, the government have chosen an that relationship,”. alternative route which has its own policy The amendments on sheet 4427 have the integrity and its own philosophical strength. effect of validating the whole of the existing We just think Labor is right. However, both certified agreements and AWAs, allowing the Labor portfolio holder and I are of the each provision to continue to have effect un- view that the matter is urgent and if the gov- til the expiry date of the agreement. Labor ernment are determined to proceed with their believes that the amendments will provide approach—I will not speak for the Labor greater certainty for employers and employ- portfolio holder because his counterpart in ees by giving effect to the whole of the the Senate can speak for him himself, but I agreement previously reached between them. have seen what he has said in print and I If Labor’s amendments are accepted the va- have spoken to him—the Democrats will not lidity of agreements will not depend on the insist on passing these amendments. We outcome of further legal consideration by the think these amendments are better but, be- commission, the Federal Court or the High cause it is an urgent matter, we do not wish Court in relation to whether particular to see a bouncing process go on with respect clauses pertain to the employment relation- to them. So we are going to vote against the ship. As I said in my contribution to the sec- amendments, although we support them, be- ond reading debate, the Labor Party is about cause insisting on them would just be a sym- certainty—but certainty in all its aspects. I bolic act. Accordingly we will vote against commend the amendments to the chamber. the amendments. Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special (1.42 p.m.)—Right from the start the De- Minister of State) (1.44 p.m.)—I indicate to mocrats took the view expressed originally the chamber that the government opposes the by Labor’s portfolio holder—firstly, that this amendments, and opposes them strongly. matter was genuinely urgent and, secondly, The amendments would overturn the agree- that it was in the public interest for certainty ments that are currently in place—all the to be delivered with respect to these matters. jurisprudence that has been in place for about The question then was: what is the best route a century. The boundaries of the Common- to provide that certainty? Having gone wealth’s workplace relations framework

CHAMBER 64 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 have been set with reference to matters (b) all persons who ... are employed in a single that—and this is the important word— business, or a part of a single business, of the pertain to the employment relationship. That employer and whose employment is subject to the is the very important aspect that we are deal- agreement. ing with. Senator Sherry’s amendments say We would have uncertainty writ large. Sena- that, despite that century’s worth of jurispru- tor Sherry says that his amendments would dence and the attempt by some to put things provide certainty, but they would write un- into agreements that are in breach of what certainty into the industrial system in very has been the understood law for a consider- large, bold capital letters. We as a govern- able time upheld by the High Court in a deci- ment see the urgency of maintaining the in- sion of 6 to 1, you should now allow all these tegrity of the system and not by the imprima- agreements to remain in force. In other tur of this place deliberately validating sec- words, you would then have two sets of tions of agreements that were never intended agreements running concurrently with some to be allowed under the industrial system for pertaining and some not pertaining to the a very long time. So we as a government will employment agreement. be opposing the amendments. Why would an opposition party want such Senator MARSHALL (Victoria) (1.48 a circumstance? What sorts of matters are p.m.)—That contribution by the Special not pertaining to the employment agreement? Minister of State shows how ignorant he is What sorts of matters would be validated by about industrial relations and the develop- the Labor amendments? Surprise, surprise! It ment of industrial relations in this country. is all pro trade union—financial benefits to Section 170LI of the act, which is the rele- the trade unions such as bargaining agents vant section that talks about matters pertain- fees and payroll deductions for union dues ing to the employee-employer relationship, that have been found to not pertain to the has been there for some time. It has been up employment relationship. So, once again, we to the Australian Industrial Relations Com- have the Australian Labor Party coming in mission to determine the application of that here doing the work of the trade union section of the act, and they have been doing movement to try to maintain the coffers of that consistently over a period of time. You the trade union movement in the face of the say, Minister, that we are trying to overturn ever-declining membership, which I think is 100 years of jurisprudence, and that is com- now down to well below 20 per cent. Work- pletely wrong. The High Court decision ers in Australia are determining that they do talked about one particular issue—bargaining not want to be involved in trade unions. They agents fees, which have not been around for are leaving them, and so Labor is trying to 100 years; that issue has been around for one fight a rearguard action to maintain bargain- or two years—so it was not seeking to over- ing agents fees and payroll deductions for turn anything in that respect. union dues. All this bill seeks to do is to re- You are saying that we now have a High flect the current state of the law, and the Court decision that says two things. One is Workplace Relations Act clearly states that that it has somewhat narrowed the scope of an agreement must be: what should be determined as a pertaining ... about matters pertaining to the relationship matter and then interpreted by other tribunals between: on what should define the scope of the em- (a) an employer ... and ployee-employer relationship. The decision has then gone on to say that any agreements

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 65 that were certified with those clauses which sense and clearly demonstrates your igno- have now been narrowed become void. With rance of industrial relations. this bill, you seek to overturn one part of the The only genuine way to provide absolute High Court decision while maintaining the certainty is that when the commission certify other. Quite frankly, I think that is a little agreements in the full knowledge and opera- hypocritical, and then to accuse us of trying tion of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 to overturn a 100 years of jurisprudence is they do so based on the decisions of different just stupid. You seek to overturn the part of tribunals and courts at the time. Those agree- the High Court decision which you do not ments run for a limited time—a maximum of like and maintain the part of the High Court three years—and those agreements in their decision you do like. The argument is very entirety should be certified and then main- clear: employees and employers in good tained. No legislation should retrospectively faith negotiated agreements which then made undermine that bargain, which was freely a bargain, a package, and employees and negotiated and agreed to by the parties. employers did not have an opportunity to Our amendments do that in those certified cherry pick. That package was voted on as a agreements that have been caught up be- package. Different people, including em- tween the time they were made and when the ployers, will put different values on all sorts Electrolux decision was handed down on of elements of that package. This bill seeks 2 September last year. I think it is very gra- to renegotiate that bargain retrospectively. tuitous of the minister to continue to run the You delete elements of that bargain by apply- union-bashing line. That is all he wants to ing your bill in the unamended fashion as it do. He is free to do so, but he ignores a sig- now stands. nificant disadvantage that is going to apply You also talked nonsense when you said to a significant number of employees and that the only things that do not pertain go to employers, because many of these provisions the question of things that benefit trade un- which will now be disallowed give benefits ions directly and not employees. That, again, to the employer also. is startling in its ignorance. It goes to a Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (1.53 whole range of things that involve third par- p.m.)—My colleague Senator Marshall is ties—for example, salary-sacrificing ar- correct. I do not know that it was actually rangements are not to be allowed. That does ignorance; I think it was deliberate, ideologi- not benefit any trade union. It is a way of cally based selective bias and incorrect managing a wages structure that generally claims. It is as simple as that. Senator Mar- benefits both the employee and the employer. shall outlined, rebutted and responded well, The other area is health benefit payments. and we do not accept the claims made by These payments will be disallowed by this Senator Abetz. They were simply wrong, and decision, and that is being interpreted by dif- I think he knew it. Time is pressing on, so I ferent tribunals at the moment. Any benefit thank Senator Marshall for his contribution. paid to the family of an employer will not be Question negatived. allowed under this arrangement, because the employee’s family does not have an em- Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) ployee-employer relationship. Minister, the (1.54 p.m.)—by leave—I move Democrat list goes on and on, and for you to try to por- amendments (1), (2) and (3) on sheet 4444 tray this as simply something that the unions revised: have in their own interests is absolute non-

CHAMBER 66 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (lines 7 to 9), In view of the time, I am willing to move omit the heading to Division 10A, substitute: them without covering the issues concerned. Division 10A—Validation of certain pre- I think they were covered in the second read- 2 September 2004 agreements, variations, ing debate, but of course if senators wish me industrial action and lockouts to explain them more I will. What I have (2) Schedule 1, item 1, page 4 (after line 12), done is to adapt Labor’s original amendment. after section 170NHB, insert: My office has discussed with the government 170NHBA Validation of certain industrial and with the opposition the best way to fulfil action and lockouts an end, and my understanding is that there is (1) If: concurrence in the chamber for this ap- (a) a person has organised or engaged proach. I will say more later if it is wished. in industrial action or locked out Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (1.55 employees from their employ- p.m.)—Can I just clarify: are we dealing ment; and with sheet 4444 revised? (b) the industrial action or lockout Senator Murray—For the record, this is would have been protected action within the meaning of Division 8 revised sheet 4444, and amendments (1) to but for the fact that it was for a (3) have been moved together. purpose of, or for a purpose that Senator SHERRY—The Labor opposi- included a purpose of, supporting tion regards it as the second best option, but or advancing a claim made in re- we have debated the issues extensively and I spect of a matter that was not a do not intend to make any further comment permitted matter; on them. then, to the extent that the industrial action or lockout occurred on or before Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special 2 September 2004, it is taken to be Minister of State) (1.55 p.m.)—From the protected action within the meaning of government’s point of view, the Democrat that Division. amendments are not necessary but, having (2) However, subsection (1) does not ap- said that, we will not oppose them. ply, and is taken never to have applied, Question agreed to. to the extent that its application would Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (1.56 have resulted in an acquisition of property within the meaning of paragraph p.m.)—I move amendment (5) on sheet 51(xxxi) of the Constitution. 4427: R(3) Schedule 1, page 6 (after line 26), at the end (5) Schedule 1, page 6 (after line 26), at the end of the Schedule, add: of the Schedule, add: 3 Application provision 3 After Division 8 of Part VIB The amendments made by this Act do Insert: not apply in relation to industrial ac- Division 8A—Validation of industrial action, or a lockout, if, before the com- tion taken in support of certain agree- mencement of this Act, a court has ments made before 2 September 2004 found the industrial action or lockout 170NBA Validation etc. of certain indus- not to be protected action (within the trial action meaning of Division 8 of Part VIB of If: the Workplace Relations Act 1996). (a) industrial action has been taken; and

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 67

(b) that industrial action would have Third Reading been protected action pursuant to Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special section 170ML but for the fact that it was taken in support of claims Minister of State) (1.58 p.m.)—I move: wholly or partly pertaining to mat- That this bill be now read a third time. ters other than permitted matters; Question agreed to. then that action is taken to have been Bill read a third time. protected action. MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS Labor certainly believes it is appropriate that this amendment applies to protected indus- Senator HILL (South Australia—Leader trial action already taken. Unions and their of the Government in the Senate) (2.01 members, who took industrial action in good p.m.)—I inform the Senate that Senator the faith, believing on reasonable grounds it was Hon. Ian Campbell, the Minister for the En- protected, should have legal protection from vironment and Heritage, the Minister repre- any action which might subsequently be senting the Minister for Transport and Re- taken against them. gional Services and the Minister representing the Minister for Local Government, Territo- The Liberal government has omitted such ries and Roads, will be absent from question a validation from its bill on the basis that it time today. Senator Ian Campbell has a long- would be legally complex to do so. Labor’s standing family obligation. During Senator amendment shows that validation can be ef- Ian Campbell’s absence, Senator the Hon. fected quite simply. From opposition, we can Ian Macdonald will take questions on behalf draft that amendment; the government of the portfolios of Environment and Heri- should be able to do it. The amendment pro- tage, Transport and Regional Services and vides that, if industrial action has been taken Local Government, Territories and Roads. and that industrial action would have been protected action but for the fact that it was QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE taken in support of claims wholly or partly Regional Services: Program Funding pertaining to matters other than permitted Senator McLUCAS (2.01 p.m.)—My matters, the action is to be taken to have question is to Senator Ian Macdonald, the been protected action. It is a very, very fair Minister representing the Minister for Trans- approach. It is balanced. I commend the port and Regional Services. I refer the minis- amendment to the committee. ter to the Regional Partnerships funding pro- Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) gram. Can the minister confirm that, prior to (1.57 p.m.)—We will be voting against the the election, the then Parliamentary Secre- Labor amendment. tary to the Minister for Transport and Re- Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special gional Services had delegated authority to Minister of State) (1.57 p.m.)—Ditto. approve certain grants? Did she exceed that authority when she fast-tracked and ap- Question negatived. proved a $1.26 million grant for A2 Dairy Bill, as amended, agreed to. Marketers during the election campaign? Bill reported with amendments; report Senator IAN MACDONALD—I thank adopted. Senator McLucas for that question. The A2 milk program that Senator McLucas refers to operates in her part of the world, in the Atherton Tableland. Senator McLucas will

CHAMBER 68 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 know that the dairying industry in that area is moting Indigenous culture. It is next door to doing it a bit tough. I think all of us are try- the Skyrail, which goes up through the for- ing to find ways to help the dairying indus- est. It is a great project. With respect to those try. The thrust of Senator McLucas’s ques- parts of the question that I do not have per- tion was: did the parliamentary secretary sonal knowledge of, I will refer them to Mr have authority and did she exceed that au- Anderson and see if he wishes to give a re- thority? I do not have any particular brief on ply. that, but I know Mrs Kelly very well. She is Senator McLUCAS—Mr President, I ask a very competent operator. I am quite confi- a supplementary question. Why did the gov- dent that she would not in any way exceed ernment fast-track the grant application from any authority that she may have. I do not A2 Dairy Marketers? Did the parliamentary know that she was delegated the authority— secretary’s decision to approve the grant con- as that is simply outside my knowledge—but tradict the advice the Deputy Prime Minister, I would suspect, Senator McLucas, that if Mr Anderson, gave to concerned dairy farm- you say that then that would be correct. ers and producers in Innisfail on 3 September The Regional Partnerships program really this year when he said that this project does help in country Australia. It is some- ‘would not proceed until all other options thing that we on the government side value. had been resolved’ and that ‘nothing will It is also valued by those of us who live in happen while we’re in caretaker mode’? country Australia, as I do, because it helps to Senator IAN MACDONALD—With due promote country Australia, it provides jobs respect to Senator McLucas, I have long and it ensures the longevity of towns. That is since avoided relying on Labor Party sena- a bit different from the proposal to build an tors’ comments on what particular coalition Indigenous cultural centre in Senator McLu- members may or may not have said. It would cas’s home town of Cairns, which was put be very unwise of me to make further com- forward by the Labor Party without any in- ment on things alleged to have been said by vestigation. I am sure Senator McLucas was Mr Anderson without referring to him. Suf- not consulted about that. If she had been fice to say that I think this demonstrates that consulted, she would not have allowed them the coalition is keen to help in country Aus- to launch this proposal at the Tjapukai cul- tralia. Country Australia appreciates that. I tural centre in Cairns. She would not have have to tell you, Senator McLucas, that many allowed this silly proposal of Senator in country Australia cannot understand the Lundy’s and Senator O’Brien’s to set up continual and continuous attacks by the La- something, using government money, in bor Party on people in country Australia. I competition with the Tjapukai cultural cen- know the rest of your colleagues do not tre. know what country Australia is about, but at Of course, the first one to comment on the least you live in the big city of Cairns, which Labor Party’s quite crazy proposal was the is outside the capital cities, and I would have Tjapukai cultural centre, which said: ‘We thought you might have had a better empathy don’t want this. All you’re doing is using with country Australia. (Time expired) government money to compete with a private DISTINGUISHED VISITORS enterprise operation that has been very suc- The PRESIDENT—Order! I draw the at- cessful.’ Senator McLucas, you know the tention of honourable senators to the pres- Tjapukai cultural centre. It is a great institu- ence in the gallery of a former distinguished tion. It has done a lot of good work in pro-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 69 senator from South Australia, Rosemary forcement. This operation will enhance Crowley. Welcome back. greatly the restoration of law and order in Honourable senators—Hear, hear! Papua New Guinea and follows on from the successful deployment of Australian police QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE in Bougainville some three months ago. Foreign Affairs: Law Enforcement There are reports that that is proceeding well. Senator SANDY MACDONALD (2.07 The Australian Customs Service is also do- p.m.)—My question is to the Minister for ing a very good job in PNG, where it has Justice and Customs, Senator Ellison. Minis- been now for some months. ter, will you update the Senate on the Austra- This program is essential for our relation- lian government’s efforts to help restore law ship with PNG and signifies to the region and order in our immediate region? that the Howard government is serious about Senator ELLISON—This question from committing to assisting in the region in rela- Senator Sandy Macdonald is indeed a timely tion to matters of law enforcement. That is one. Today marks a significant milestone in demonstrated also by our commitment in the the shared history of Papua New Guinea and Solomons, where an outstanding job has Australia. Today, for the first time, uni- been done by the Australian Federal Police formed Australian police will be patrolling and Australian Protective Service, working Port Moresby alongside the Royal Papua with other police forces in the region. Of New Guinea Constabulary. That is a mile- course, there is also the fine record that we stone. That is a result of 15 months hard have of Australian police in East Timor, work and discussion with the authorities in where we have seen over a substantial period New Guinea. Currently there are 44 Austra- of time an outstanding contribution by Aus- lian police officers assisting in Port Moresby, tralian police. with a further 28 due to arrive on 19 Decem- As a result of this commitment to the re- ber. These numbers will substantially in- gion, the Howard government decided early crease during 2005. this year to form an international deployment This policing package forms an integral group. This recognised the importance of part of the enhanced cooperation program policing in our region and recognised that we that we have entered into with Papua New would be deploying police to countries in our Guinea. This policing program will involve region to assist in capacity building and mat- new police vehicles in a repair and replace- ters of law enforcement. This program in ment program for the existing police fleet in New Guinea is good news for the region, New Guinea, a refurbishment of the eight good news for New Guinea and very good Port Moresby police stations, sourcing and news for our relationship with Papua New supply of new uniforms and equipment, and, Guinea, which goes back a very long time. importantly, the development of a standard Regional Services: Program Funding operating procedure program with the PNG Senator MOORE (2.11 p.m.)—My ques- police in relation to internal disciplinary tion is to Senator Ian Macdonald, the Minis- breaches, workplace integration and opera- ter representing the Minister for Transport tional activity. and Regional Services. Can the minister con- The Howard government is totally com- firm that the Regional Partnerships program mitted to assisting in the region in relation to guidelines rule out grants to projects that matters touching on security and law en- compete with existing businesses unless it

CHAMBER 70 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 can be demonstrated there is unsatisfied de- The PRESIDENT—The minister has in mand for the new product or service, or the excess of three minutes to answer the ques- product or service is to be provided in some tion. I remind him of the question. new way? Is it the case that Dairy Farmers is Senator IAN MACDONALD—I do Malanda’s largest employer? How was the want to get on to the question but it just likely impact on Dairy Farmers’ operation at amazes me that the Labor Party would high- Malanda assessed during the assessment of light those sorts of activities when the Labor the A2 Dairy Marketers’ Regional Partner- Party used the venue of a particular facility, ships application? Given that that company by kind permission of those people—I am went into liquidation three weeks after the sure they did not know what the Labor Party $1.26 million grant was announced, how did were going to announce—to announce that a the application satisfy the department’s pro- Labor government would fund something bity and viability requirements? that was in direct competition with the Senator IAN MACDONALD—Again, I Tjapukai cultural centre. This encouraged am surprised that a Labor senator from that centre, I might say, to issue its first Queensland would raise the issue of not giv- comment, which was that this was a pretty ing grants to projects that compete with ex- silly sort of policy. I am told it was abso- isting private enterprises. I said in answer to lutely the worst policy announcement of the Senator McLucas’s question that that is ex- Labor Party in the campaign. actly what the Labor Party did. The Tjapukai Senator Abetz—No, the forestry one was. cultural centre is a very efficient, very good Senator IAN MACDONALD—We will tourist attraction in Cairns and North Queen- check up. sland. It is a private enterprise and attracts a certain clientele. The Labor Party—Senator Senator Chris Evans—On a point of or- O’Brien and Senator Lundy—rock in there der: I again raise the question of relevance. and ask them if they could use their place to After you directed him to answer the ques- make this major— tion, he has now had another minute and he has continued to rave on without bringing Senator Chris Evans—Mr President, I himself to answer the question. If question rise on a point of order. Maybe the minister time is to have any relevance, he has to at is struggling today because he has to repre- least try to address the question. sent another minister but he is representing the government. He was asked a specific The PRESIDENT—Senator, you know question about a specific grant and whether that I cannot direct a minister how to answer the guidelines were met, considering that a a question. I reminded him of the question large amount of taxpayers’ money was in- and I believe that he was coming to giving an volved. Could you ask him to be relevant to answer to that question. the question? If he wants to have a blow-out Senator IAN MACDONALD—I wish on the Labor Party, there are plenty of other that the Leader of the Opposition would not opportunities for him to do so, but this is object, because I have been attacked by my question time and he ought to be relevant to colleagues for misleading parliament in say- the question about what happened to taxpay- ing that that was the worst policy announce- ers’ money. ment. There is a lot of dispute as to whether it was the gold card or the forestry policy. In relation to the application for A2, the application was not progressed by the department

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 71 as it did come to light that the company was strates that the processes put in place do ac- in financial difficulty at the end of Septem- tually work. ber. The application went through the normal Forestry: Policy due diligence assessment and the advice re- Senator MASON (2.17 p.m.)—My ques- ceived by the department was that the new tion is also to Senator Ian Macdonald as the entity would not be viable. Subsequently, the Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conser- A2 Dairy Marketers went into voluntary liq- vation. Will the minister outline to the Senate uidation. It does show that the process the coalition’s approach to forest policy and works. The department always conduct the securing employment and sustaining smaller appropriate due diligence assessments and, communities that rely upon the timber indus- in the course of that, certain things came to try? Is the minister aware of any alternative light. policies? Senator MOORE—Mr President, I ask a Senator IAN MACDONALD—I thank supplementary question. Can the minister Senator Mason. The coalition’s approach to further confirm that the government was forestry policy is to address Australia’s huge aware of pending court action against the A2 trade imbalance in forest and wood products, Dairy Marketers when it awarded the com- to ensure good conservation outcomes and to pany the $1.26 million on 9 September this secure the jobs of decent hardworking Aus- year? If so, why did the government approve tralians and the communities that support the grant before the outcome of the legal ac- them. The Howard government’s 2004 election against the company was known? Can tion policy clearly demonstrated the coali- the minister confirm that the company is now tion’s approach and demonstrated that it can in receivership? I believe he did in his origi- be achieved. One million hectares of the 1.2 nal answer. Is the assessment of the A2 Dairy million hectares of old-growth forest in Tas- Marketers grant an example of the ‘inde- mania will be reserved from logging as a pendent and rigorous’ assessment to which result of the coalition’s policies. Timber he told the Senate on Monday that all Re- workers and timber communities will have gional Partnerships applications are subject? security, and in Tasmania we have reached Senator IAN MACDONALD—I can as- the right balance. The Australian public actu- sure the senator that the government’s proc- ally supported the Howard government’s esses are far better than those employed by approach, which was demonstrated in the the Labor Party with Ros Kelly. You remem- October election when the coalition won two ber the whiteboard? Mrs Kelly used to give additional forestry seats in Tasmania and got away grants in the Labor government by themselves an extra Senate seat in Tasmania. writing on the whiteboard which Labor seat Labor lost those seats because Mr Latham wanted some money. That was their assess- listened to Bob Brown rather than Labor’s ment process. That is how the Labor Party constituency. did it. It was not done by their departments Unfortunately—and Senator Mason, a but done on a whiteboard in the minister’s Queensland senator, will be disturbed by office. I remember the way we had to drag this—Labor has not learned the lessons from that out of them at estimates committees to Tasmania and it would appear that another get the real truth. The coalition does not Labor forest policy disaster is brewing in our work that way. The department conducted home state of Queensland. The Premier’s due diligence tests and came to a conclusion office in Queensland is running the show. as a result of that, and I think that demon-

CHAMBER 72 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Advice from Queensland government minis- abandoning its union base, abandoning these ters is being ignored. The five Beattie gov- decent hardworking Australians in the inter- ernment ministers in the most relevant port- ests of mad forest policy. The coalition has a folios support a transition from state-owned sensible approach to forest policy. Mark hardwood forests to plantations in the west- Latham demonstrated Labor’s incompetence ern hardwoods region. This policy is backed and now, unfortunately, the Queensland by industry and the ACTU. Senator Ludwig Premier is following his example. (Time ex- has conveniently ‘disappeared’ because it is pired) the AWU—and Senator Ludwig’s dad is the Regional Services: Program Funding AWU man and Senator Ludwig is in this Senator O’BRIEN (2.22 p.m.)—My chamber because of the AWU—who want to question is also to Senator Ian Macdonald, help the forest workers but your Premier, the Minister representing the Minister for Senator Ludwig, seems to be ignoring them Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Can the again. The relevant ministers and their de- minister advise whether Minister Truss was partments have been rolled by the Premier’s consulted by Minister Anderson or Mrs George Street latte set on the basis that a Kelly in relation to the decision to grant transition to plantations would involve the $1.26 million to A2 Dairy Marketers under slaughtering of—now wait for this—‘baby the Regional Partnerships program? What trees’! They are against it because it would role did Mr Truss’s department play in the involve the slaughtering of baby trees. I assessment of the A2 Dairy Marketers’ appli- know that they are concerned about old- cation? In particular, what role did the de- growth trees but now we are on to baby partment play in assessing the likely impact trees—I will feel sorry for the teenager trees of the A2 operation on Dairy Farmers’ shortly. Never mind that the green movement nearby Malanda plant? have previously supported the use of smaller logs in this region. Never mind that smaller Senator IAN MACDONALD—Again, logs are routinely used in RFAs elsewhere. Senator O’Brien highlights the concern the The Queensland Premier has swallowed this coalition have for people in country Australia baby trees argument, something that will and the lengths we will go to to try to assist only increase our state’s reliance on foreign people with legitimate projects. In relation to imported timber, and that is something that I the specific question that Senator O’Brien know Senator Mason will be concerned has asked, I do not have any information on about. that and Mr Truss’s brief to me from the De- partment of Agriculture, Fisheries and For- As usual it is the human cost that Labor is estry does not refer to that. I will make an ignoring. Without any consultation at all inquiry to the department, Senator O’Brien, some 300 Queensland jobs are about to be and if there is anything useful I can give you sacrificed by Labor in a dozen towns where I will get back to you. the council and the timber mills are the only major employers. Most of these workers are Senator O’BRIEN—Mr President, I ask AWU workers. It seems that as well as the a supplementary question. Thank you for the CFMEU supporting the Liberals it now looks undertaking to take the question on notice, like the Queensland AWU will be supporting and I look forward to the answer. Whilst in- the Liberals because we care about those quiring about that information, could the jobs in country towns. The Labor Party in minister ask Mr Truss to address this ques- Queensland, as it did with Mr Latham, is tion: given the subsequent collapse of A2

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 73

Dairy Marketers following the company’s Senator HILL—I will refer the question conviction for false advertising, what con- to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and get an sideration has Minister Truss given to com- early response. pensating those dairy farmers who may have Senator ALLISON—Mr President, I ask purchased A2 cows on the strength of the a supplementary question. I thank the minis- government’s decision to grant the company ter for getting back with an early response $1.26 million through the Regional Partner- and ask if he could also advise the Senate: ships program? what is the rationale for limiting the contra- Senator IAN MACDONALD—I under- ceptives that can be purchased using our stand from those media reports that Senator overseas aid funds to those that are registered O’Brien has referred to that some Queen- in Australia? sland dairy farmers are facing financial loss Senator HILL—I will add that to the as a result of the liquidation of A2 Dairy question that I am referring. Marketers. These farmers are reportedly Regional Services: Program Funding owed money for the delivery of milk to the company for which they have not been paid. Senator CARR (2.26 p.m.)—My ques- I am sympathetic to those producers and, tion without notice is to Senator Hill, the indeed, to any individuals who have suffered Minister representing the Prime Minister. I financial loss due to the company’s going ask: with reference to the obligations im- into liquidation. However, the farmers in- posed on frontbenchers under the ministerial volved in supplying milk to A2 Dairy Mar- code of conduct, can the minister confirm keters made a commercial business decision that Mr Ken Crooke was a senior member of to do so, and I am sure they would under- the staff of the former Parliamentary Secre- stand the risks associated with commercial tary to the Minister for Transport and Re- arrangements of this nature. Ultimately, it is gional Services, Mrs Kelly? Wasn’t Mr not appropriate for the government to be- Crooke employed by Mrs Kelly when Mr come involved in legal processes surround- Crooke acted for both her and A2 Dairy ing the liquidation of this particular com- Marketers during negotiations for a Regional pany. Partnerships grant this year? Can the minister advise the Senate on what date Mr Abortion Crooke commenced employment in Mrs Senator ALLISON (2.25 p.m.)—My Kelly’s office? Isn’t it the case that Mr question is to Senator Hill, the Minister rep- Crooke was on the staff of Mrs Kelly when resenting the Minister for Foreign Affairs. I he represented the A2 company at negotia- ask: is the minister aware that 200 million tions with representatives of the Queensland women have no access to contraception in government on 8 July 2004? developing countries? Is the minister aware Senator HILL—I do not like referring that each year around 20 million unsafe abor- questions, but obviously there is detail in that tions take place around the world and lead to question that will require a considered re- 80,000 maternal deaths in developing coun- sponse. I do not know Mr Crooke. Generally tries and many more health complications speaking, though, it is disappointing that the and disabilities? This being the case, Minis- Labor Party, despite a fourth election loss, ter, why does the government prohibit the has still not learnt the importance of rural use of overseas aid funds for training people and regional Australia, has failed to under- in delivering safe abortions? stand the particular challenges and difficul-

CHAMBER 74 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 ties faced by rural and regional Australia and February they can go back onto it again, be- has failed to note the constructive and posi- cause all they are doing is entrenching the tive efforts by the Howard government in perception in the eyes of those from the bush supporting those in rural and regional Aus- that they are hated by the Labor Party. That tralia. And that, of course, is reflected in the will not do the Labor Party any good. What very low electoral support that the Labor the Labor Party ought to do is try to develop Party is getting from outside the cities. some policies that help those in the bush, and Whilst it is legitimate to ask for details of then they would be starting to get onto a con- any particular grant application— structive path. But, of course, you have a Senator Sherry interjecting— Labor Party that are so focused on their own internal disorder that they are certainly not Senator HILL—It is legitimate. Unfortu- going to be addressing issues of constructive nately from the Labor Party’s perspective policy for a very long period of time. So, what it is doing is entrenching the perception with those few general comments, I will re- within rural and regional Australia that this is fer the detail of the question to the minister. a party that has no interest in their issues at all—no concern for their issues at all. There Senator CARR—Mr President, I thank are difficulties in employment, there are dif- the minister for taking that question on no- ficulties in infrastructure, there are difficul- tice and I ask a supplementary question. Is it ties in building economic opportunity in ru- the minister’s contention that people in rural ral and regional Australia, and the public of and regional areas are not concerned with the this country know that this government has propriety and probity of government grant gone out of its way to, in effect, kick-start allocations? I ask further that he take on no- rural and regional Australia so that they can tice—because he cannot answer the rest of then compete fairly with others. We on this the question—to seek advice on whether Mr side of the chamber believe that the respon- Crooke still works for Mrs Kelly. If he is not sibility of national government is not just to still working for Mrs Kelly, on what date did those in the cities but to all in Australia, par- his employment cease? Has the Prime Minis- ticularly those who have not been doing so ter investigated Mr Crooke’s involvement well in rural and regional Australia. They with A2 Dairy Marketers, including any role have had many difficulties in recent years— he had with the company in connection with difficulties from droughts, difficulties in the activities that led to the recent conviction transport and difficulties, as we know, with of that company for false advertising? I fur- the temptation to centralise business within ther ask: can he confirm that on 8 July Mr the cities. At least with the Howard coalition Crooke, as a director of the Asia Pacific Cor- government you have a national government poration, was actually involved in negotia- that recognises these problems and is pre- tions with the Queensland government with pared to do something about it. regard to the A2 company? And what is the response from the Labor Senator HILL—All of that could have Party? It is just simply to knock those efforts, been included in the primary question, but I to undermine the constructive efforts to build will add it to that which I am referring. What a competitive rural and regional Australia. I do know about those in the bush is that they The Labor Party can continue; we do not want a fair go from government. They are mind. We do not mind if they ask these ques- getting it from this coalition government, and tions all next week, and if they come back in that is being undermined by the Labor Party. It demonstrates how little the Labor Party

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 75 has learnt in the last 8½ years. It has had four gin—naturally like to believe the best in oth- election losses and it still wants to kick those ers, but it does sometimes happen that people in the bush in the guts. The Howard coalition form a view that they can say one thing or government will support those in the bush. another and will be allowed to stay in Aus- They deserve a fair go, and they deserve bet- tralia. The short-form answer to you is that if ter than what they are getting from the Aus- it is the matter you are talking about it was tralian Labor Party. tested before the RRT and found to be want- Immigration: Asylum Seekers ing. I should also say that we do not send people back, in any event, to countries where Senator NETTLE (2.32 p.m.)—My ques- we believe they will be at risk, and I am tion is to the Minister for Immigration and pretty sure there have been other removals in Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Is the this sort of context. As to what happened on minister aware that in Iran conversion to arrival, no, I do not have that advice. I will Christianity is a crime that is punishable by seek advice with respect to that matter and the death sentence? Is the minister aware that get back to you. her department recently forcibly deported a young Christian convert asylum seeker from Senator NETTLE—Mr President, I ask a Baxter detention centre back to Iran even supplementary question. Is the minister though he had an application for humanitar- aware that this young asylum seeker, whose ian intervention outstanding? Does the min- bags were packed by DIMIA officials, ister know that on arrival this young man begged whilst on route of representatives of was arrested at the airport by Iranian authori- DIMIA who had packed the bags for the evi- ties and questioned for 48 hours and is now dence in the bags about his conversion to being summonsed to face an Iranian court Christianity to be removed from the bags? Is because of his conversion to Christianity? the minister aware that the department re- Can the minister explain why the Australian fused to do this and that this evidence is now government forcibly deported this man into being held by the Iranian authorities and is what is clearly a very dangerous and possibly undoubtedly forming the basis of the case in deadly situation? which he will face a court and a death penalty? Does the minister plan to deport other Senator VANSTONE—I am familiar Iranian asylum seekers in the same way that with the case to which I think you are refer- she has deported many Iranian asylum seek- ring but, without giving names, I cannot be ers in similar circumstances back to danger certain. If it is the matter that I think you are and possible death in Iran? referring to there were two people who were going to be departing. We received advice Senator VANSTONE—I have not been that one of those people had converted to specifically made aware, but I would assume Christianity, and his claim with respect to that DIMIA officials would in fact pack that matter had not been considered by the someone’s bags. That is a matter of course RRT so that removal did not proceed. In rela- and it happens. With respect to the latter part tion to the other person, the matter had been of your question and the allegations that you considered by the RRT and had not been have put in it, no I am not aware of them. I considered to be a genuine conversion. I might just offer a small piece of advice: if know that sounds harsh in the sense that you have allegations that you regard as seri- we—as in humans generally; I do not mean ous and you want them investigated, you people from the West and of Christian ori- might in future consider raising them privately so that they can be investigated with-

CHAMBER 76 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 out the alleged perpetrators of the actions Senator MINCHIN—I thank Senator understanding what is happening. But, of Lundy for her question. That is more a ques- course, if you want to put a priority on get- tion to me as Minister representing the Min- ting yourself a headline, you are welcome to ister for Industry, Tourism and Resources. I do that. In any event, I will take up your al- am advised by the Minister for Industry, legations. Tourism and Resources that, if you look at DISTINGUISHED VISITORS the price of petroleum in Australia, the average retail price in Australia is relatively The PRESIDENT—Order! I draw the at- low—we are ranked fourth lowest among tention of honourable senators to the pres- OECD countries. It is certainly true that the ence in the gallery of Dr Ibolya David, the price for oil has fluctuated markedly. Petrol Deputy Speaker of the Hungarian National prices have been relatively high and we for a Assembly, accompanied by His Excellency long time have had oil pricing geared to in- Mr Lajos Fodor, the Ambassador. Welcome ternational prices, but the price at the bowser to our Senate and welcome to Australia. I is a function of many things other than the trust that your visit will be both enjoyable price of crude oil. Indeed, if you examine the and informative. margins for petrol retailers—and having Honourable senators—Hear, hear! been the minister for industry, I am familiar QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE with them—they are incredibly thin. You Fuel: Prices will know that independent retailers in particular complain long and loud about the in- Senator LUNDY (2.37 p.m.)—My ques- credibly intense competition in that indus- tion is to Senator Minchin, Minister for Fi- try—competition provided by the likes of nance and Administration and the Minister Coles and Woolworths now entering that representing the Treasurer. Can the minister industry with margins that are incredibly explain why, despite the Australian Institute small. Independent retailers need to bulk up of Petroleum stating that the price of crude their margins because they have lower vol- oil per barrel has decreased from $70.10 on umes and their businesses do not necessarily 1 November to $57.20 on 2 December 2004, have the advantage of being able to rely on the fall in the price of crude oil has had the trade that goes through the retail sector minimal impact on the price of petrol? Why for other products that many of the service is it that, despite this decrease of 18.4 per stations now have. cent in the cost of crude oil, the cost to the consumer at the petrol bowser has dropped in The price of petrol at the bowser at any the vicinity of only four per cent? Minister, one time is influenced by a whole range of given that the price of crude oil represents 90 things, including the marketing strategies of per cent of the product cost before taxes and the major refiners, which cause prices to is a primary factor in influencing refined fluctuate from time to time. Because of these petrol prices, doesn’t it follow that a decrease various influences, you are never going to in crude oil prices should translate to a de- get a translation of the movement in the crease in bowser prices, particularly given crude oil price at any one time directly into the current strength of the Australian dollar the bowser. But it remains the case that Aus- in US terms? Minister, why are these factors tralians do enjoy relatively low petrol prices not influencing bowser prices for Australian in a situation where the retailers of petrol are consumers of petrol products? operating on very thin margins. The refiners themselves operate on thin margins. I recall

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 77 leaving that portfolio wondering why anyone ers? Minister, given your advocacy of the was in the business of refining in this coun- role of the ACCC in your answer, will the try, because they do not make any money out government now follow Labor’s lead and of it. Indeed, one of the issues for Australia is call on the Australian Competition and Con- how to ensure that we retain a refining indus- sumer Commission to investigate the petrol try, because I do think it is of strategic im- prices being passed on to consumers, which portance. are clearly not reflective of the current drop It is an industry that is typified by high in the price of crude oil? competition at the retail level, as evidenced Senator MINCHIN—I reject the asser- by the activities of Coles and Woolworths tions made in your question. If the ACCC and their success in providing discounts. It believes there is any basis on which it should has been a very successful strategy, and the intervene or look at this industry it will do independents are increasingly moving into so. I certainly know from evidence in Ade- that strategy of providing discounts them- laide that petrol prices fluctuate markedly. selves. It is also an industry that is typified They can move 10c in one day. As I say, that by very thin margins at the refining level and is a function of marketing strategies and the is subject to the movement in crude oil intense competition in that industry, and you prices. But I think it is untrue to say that cannot expect an immediate transfer of a anyone is necessarily profiteering. If, indeed, movement in the crude oil price to the daily they are, they will have the ACCC all over price of petrol. them. As you know, the ACCC takes a very Immigration: Detainees keen interest in this industry. Allan Fels cer- Senator BARTLETT (2.44 p.m.)—My tainly did in his time there and Graeme Sam- question is to the Minister for Immigration uel does as well. and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. I am not quite sure what you are alluding My question relates to the group of people in to. If you are alluding to some deficiency in the Baxter detention centre who are report- the regulatory arrangements—the consumer edly engaged in a hunger strike. Can the protection arrangements—I think you should minister detail how many people are in- identify those. We on this side believe that, volved in the hunger strike currently and generally speaking, Australians do benefit how long it has been going? Is it the case from relatively good petrol pricing and that that the hunger strikers have been impris- we do have satisfactory regulatory arrange- oned in immigration detention in Australia ments in place. If you wish to allude to how for over three years so far? Will the minister they could be improved, we are all ears. consider exercising her discretion to enable Senator LUNDY—Mr President, I ask a these people’s claims to be reconsidered supplementary question. The minister did not rather than refusing to consider them while explain the missing net 14.4 per cent de- the wait continues for court decisions to be crease that has not been passed on to con- concluded? sumers. Minister, why is it that oil compa- Senator VANSTONE—Senator, I do nies are continually blaming rising petrol have a brief here. It is just that the number- prices on the rising cost of crude oil and are ing is not making it easy for me to get to always very quick to react to an increase, yet that. In general, I am aware of the situation when the cost comes down the market is so you are talking about at Baxter, of a number slow to pass on those decreases to consum- of people who are allegedly not eating, and

CHAMBER 78 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 of what those people want. The details, how- ously exercised discretion while court cases ever, of their health I do not believe I have. have been under way, is it the case that the In fact, I am sorry; I have been caught by a minister can do that in this situation? (Time bad numbering of my files so I am unable to expired) give you what details I have, but I will get Senator VANSTONE—Senator, I would them for you later. It jumps— not answer even if the brief were here. In Opposition senators interjecting— relation to that part of your question, I would Senator VANSTONE—Opposition not answer it other than with respect to each members can express some dissatisfaction individual, because these matters are consid- about that; I am sorry about that too. It is just ered on a case by case basis. There may be a that I could not find the number at the time. few circumstances—none come to mind, but Senator, the basic proposition I put to you is I am not denying there are any—where, even that going on a hunger strike is not advisable though a matter is still on foot, you would to anybody and it is certainly not a way to give consideration to some alternative claim. get an immigration matter reconsidered. We You say there is no hope; but the people in will not give in to this type of, in effect, brib- Baxter have had their claims heard—and in ery by anybody. People who want their many cases have had them heard and heard claims considered would do well to go off again and again—and are appealing and tak- such hunger strikes and have their matter ing every possible legal mechanism to stay in heard in a sensible and reasonable way. We Australia. The fact that they need to appeal did not give into the alleged hunger strike on again and that they have been there that long Nauru last year, and we will not be setting a is an indication that in previous hearings they practice of doing it on this occasion. have been rejected, so let us just get that perspective on it. I will have a look at the mat- Senator BARTLETT—Mr President, I ter. I will have a look at each of these indi- ask a supplementary question. I acknowledge vidual ones. If there is anything that I think the minister’s difficulty and would appreci- merits them being considered while they ate it if she could provide more detail to the have got a matter on foot, I will of course specific questions that I have asked. Perhaps reconsider it. If there is not, I will not. (Time to ensure that there is no misunderstanding, expired) in asking whether or not the minister would consider exercising discretion in relation to Regional Services: Program Funding these cases I am not in any way suggesting Senator McLUCAS (2.48 p.m.)—My she should do so as a result of the hunger question is to Senator Patterson, the Minister strike; I am merely trying to get an indication representing the Minister for Ageing. Can the from her as to whether or not such a course minister confirm that Senator Sandy Mac- of action is actually possible. When detain- donald was nominated by the Minister for ees are repeatedly told that there is no pros- Ageing as her official representative at the pect of their claims being considered and opening of the Grace Munro centre in Uralla they just have to wait an indeterminate shire? Is the minister aware that Senator length of time for a court process to finish, Sandy Macdonald has made numerous public they can form an opinion that there is no statements this week that it was a decision of hope and no alternative, and they can take the Uralla Shire Council not to include Mr these very inadvisable actions like hunger Tony Windsor MP as part of the official strikes. Given that the minister has previ- opening of the Grace Munro centre in the

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 79 electorate of New England? Is the minister mine. It just happens that when you happen also aware that the mayor of Uralla issued a to be in government—and the Labor Party press release yesterday saying the council will not know that for a very long while— never had a problem including Mr Windsor you have the privilege of going to the open- in the official party and that their decision ing of facilities. I had to go, in opposition, to not to—and I quote the mayor—‘was made the opening of many aged care facilities in light of a request from Senator Mac- where I would have liked to have been in- donald’? Given that Senator Sandy Mac- volved because I had, in some cases, organ- donald at least appears to have made mis- ised and harassed to get them their beds and leading statements about his role represent- some people said, ‘It would be more appro- ing the Minister for Ageing, what action will priate for you to open this than the Labor Minister Bishop take to require Senator Party. They’ve never been here.’ So in gov- Macdonald to correct the public record? ernment you get the privilege of going to Senator Patterson—Mr President, on a open facilities, and I do not know whether point of order: I would say that question re- Mr Windsor was or was not invited. I will flected on a senator and should be ruled out find out from Ms Bishop, and if there is any- of order. thing that I could add to the question I will do so, but I am not really inclined to do The PRESIDENT—I listened to the much about it, given the aspersion that was question carefully. I am not sure whether it is cast on my colleague. in order for a senator to ask about another senator. I think I would have to have a look Senator McLUCAS—Mr President, I ask at that. But there are parts of the question I a supplementary question. Does the Minister think the minister could answer, and I ask for Ageing condone this attempt by the Dep- her to do so. uty Leader of The Nationals in the Senate to pressure the Uralla Shire Council to exclude Senator Chris Evans—Could I say, Mr the member for New England from a public President, on the point of order, that the function in his own electorate? Does this question went directly to Senator Sandy incident of exclusion of the local MP from Macdonald’s role in representing the minis- the opening of the Grace Munro centre indi- ter; the question related to his role in repre- cate a more widespread policy being put in senting her and went to those issues. I think place by the Howard government where it is directly relevant to the minister’s re- funding decisions or public functions can be sponsibility in that Senator Macdonald was manipulated by government representatives asked to represent her, so for that purpose I according to whether the applicants or local think the minister ought to answer the ques- government succumb to political pressure? tion. Senator Hill—Mr President, I rise on a Senator PATTERSON—Mr President, I point of order. Firstly, the point made by believe the question casts an aspersion on my Senator Patterson about the reflection upon colleague Senator Sandy Macdonald. the honourable senator, I think, stands. Sec- Senator George Campbell—It hasn’t ondly, this is not a question relating to the been ruled out of order. minister’s responsibility at all; it is an attack Senator PATTERSON—Even if it is not on Senator Sandy Macdonald. If Senator ruled out of order, I still will say—and it is McLucas wishes to do that, there are proper not in any conflict with you, Mr President— procedures within this place to do so, but not that it cast an aspersion on a colleague of under the guise of a supplementary question.

CHAMBER 80 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Senator Chris Evans—On the point of Department of Finance and Administration order, Mr President: the question goes di- and the Department of the Prime Minister rectly to Senator Sandy Macdonald’s role in and Cabinet. Why has the government de- representing the minister at an official func- cided on an internal review and not an inde- tion. He was sent to represent the minister. If pendent, open and transparent review, which Senator Macdonald feels he is under some would ensure a much greater acceptance by sort of attack, he can provide a personal ex- all relevant parties? planation to the Senate. He has had a week to Senator VANSTONE—My advice in re- do so; he has chosen not to. This is a direct spect of the review of indexation arrange- question to the minister about her responsi- ments in the higher education sector is that bilities representing the Minister for Ageing the review is, as you say, being undertaken and about the Minister for Ageing’s role in by the department in consultation with the opening that facility. Department of the Prime Minister and Cabi- The PRESIDENT—On the point of or- net, the Department of Finance and Admini- der, I believe the minister has already indi- stration and the Department of the Treasury. cated that she will find out what the role was That is clearly understandable. I am advised in representing. I do not think there is any that a written invitation will be extended to need to have any more detail provided. I the Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee cannot see how the minister can know what to provide a submission to the review, that another senator is doing. She has already the review will be completed by February indicated that she will inquire as to what that next year, that the government intends re- action was. If the minister wishes to add any sponding to the review by April, and that it more to that, she may. will give effect to its response when intro- Senator PATTERSON—It is not my reducing the higher education support amend- sponsibility. I represent the minister here. We ment bill in the May sittings next year. That have opened hundreds of nursing homes is the detail I have. since we have come into government. I do Senator Murphy, I understand that you not know who was invited to every opening asked why it will not be done by an inde- of every nursing home. I know there have pendent body. Someone who chooses to re- been a lot of nursing homes opened—more tire from parliament could write a book on than under Labor and of much better quality the value of independent bodies. What oppo- than under Labor. As I said, I will find out. sitions usually mean by that is some people But I do object to the aspersion being cast on that they can try and control. It carries with Senator Sandy Macdonald. it, unfortunately, an assumption that the fed- Education: Higher Education eral public servants who are undertaking this review are not of the highest quality and Senator MURPHY (2.54 p.m.)—My would not do their job well. I go back to question is to the Minister representing the 1996, when we first came into government. I Minister for Education, Science and Train- can assure you that one of the best public ing, Senator Vanstone. It relates to a review servants I worked with was an openly Labor of indexation provided for at section 198 of supporter, who gave us the best advice on the Higher Education Support Act 2003. I how to reform higher education. Public ser- understand that the minister has decided to vants, irrespective of their political persua- conduct an internal government review of sion federally, do a very good job. I am sure indexation, involving his department, the you were not meaning to cast aspersions on

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 81 them, but I am just encouraging you to have Senator HILL—I am having a bad day a little bit more confidence in their profes- today. I will refer that to the Minister for sionalism than your question indicated. Vet er a ns’ Affairs. Senator MURPHY—Mr President, I ask Senator HOGG—You are having a bad a supplementary question. I note your re- day, Minister, so I have a supplementary sponse, Minister. I do not endeavour to cast question which you may well take to the aspersions on any public servants, but, as I minister at the same time. In respect of the said, it would probably provide for a better overdraft, what was the interest rate payable outcome if the review were seen to be more and total interest bill paid for this illegal independent than what is proposed by the overdraft scheme? Why was such an expen- government. I also ask: given that the Aus- sive funding operation entered into? tralian Bureau of Statistics was the depart- Senator HILL—I will obtain an answer ment previously asked to develop an indexa- from the minister. tion model—and, in fact, it did—why hasn’t Health: Disability Services the ABS been asked to conduct the review, or at least participate in it? And can the minister Senator KNOWLES (2.59 p.m.)—My inform the Senate if all universities, not just question is to the Minister for Family and the AVCC, have been invited to participate in Community Services. I ask the minister the review and of the period of time they whether she would inform the Senate how have been provided to present submissions? the Howard government is providing more opportunities and increased assistance to Senator VANSTONE—I do not have the people with disabilities and if she is aware of detail of other invitees. It has been my ex- any alternative policies. perience that when any review is undertaken, while there might be specific departments Senator PATTERSON—I thank Senator that are involved, that does not preclude Knowles for her question and acknowledge them seeking advice from authorities like the her long and abiding interest in issues affect- ABS and others. I am not saying that is going people with disabilities. The Australian ing to happen, but it may well. I will ask the government is committed to a focus on abil- minister if he can give you a list, if he can ity to take the ‘dis’ out of disability. The In- respond to you directly, of the other invitees ternational Day of People with a Disability is to the review. held on 3 December every year—tomorrow. I notice Senator McLucas is wearing her rib- Veterans’ Affairs: Audit bon. We will be wearing ribbons every day Senator HOGG (2.58 p.m.)—My ques- soon. It is a United Nations sanctioned event tion is to Senator Hill, the Minister repre- and a day to celebrate the ability of people senting the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs. I with disabilities. I hope that all members and refer to the Auditor-General’s report No. 15, senators will acknowledge that day tomor- which uncovers massive financial bungling row. by a range of government departments and The Australian government’s vision for entities. Why did the Department of Veter- supporting people with disabilities is to pro- ans’ Affairs operate an illegal operating vide more opportunities for participation in overdraft in 2002-03 in breach of its contract the economic and social life of the commu- with its bank? Did the minister know of nity, and to achieve better outcomes for those and/or approve such an arrangement? individuals. As part of recognising Interna- tional Day of People with a Disability my

CHAMBER 82 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 department has produced a teachers resource week’s cross-jurisdictional meeting accepted kit to raise awareness of disability issues the Australian government’s plan and offer to with teachers and students and an annual help ageing carers plan for the future of their disability calendar, which celebrates the abil- adult sons and daughters with a disability ity and contributions to society of all people who are growing older. The carers are grow- with a disability. The Australian, state and ing older and they are asking questions that territory governments have committed we, as state and Commonwealth govern- around $16.2 billion over the five years of ments, need to be able to answer. They are the third Commonwealth-state and territory not easy questions or easy answers, but it is disability agreement, with the Australian time we faced up to them. We are going a government’s share being nearly $5 billion. I little more slowly at the ministerial meeting recently launched the Australian Federation but it is back on the agenda and I have told of Disability Organisations, which will pro- the ministers that I am serious about it. vide a national voice for people with disabili- In addition, following the Australian gov- ties. ernment’s offer of $72.5 million the state and Since the Howard government’s introduc- territory ministers agreed to negotiate mutu- tion of legislation to maintain pension rates ally acceptable arrangements to meet the at no less than 25 per cent of male total aver- respite needs of carers over the age of 70 age weekly earnings, we have seen increases years who are carers of sons and daughters in payment of both the disability support with a disability. These people have cared for pension and the carer payment by $43 per their sons and daughters for 30, 40 and 50 fortnight. This is more than the increase in years and are asking for respite. They de- the cost of living—$43 a fortnight more than serve it. I have asked the states to work would have otherwise been the case under quickly to ensure that we have this $72.5 the old indexation. The number of jobseekers million for giving respite to those carers. assisted through disability employment assis- The ALP has said that it is committed to tance has increased by greater than 60 per improving disability services but when you cent. Currently, proposed changes to the dis- look at their policy it is about reviews, sum- ability support pension are stalled in the Sen- mits, analysis and targets—there is nothing ate. These reforms are about delivering qual- about real practical help. We need to ensure ity services, greater opportunities and fairer that people with disabilities get the help they wages for people with disabilities. The re- deserve. (Time expired) forms will help those who are able to work Senator Hill—Mr President, I ask that 15 hours or more a week at full award further questions be placed on the Notice wages. These changes will not apply only to Paper. new DSP applicants, and will not impact on people with a severe profound disability. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS The 2004-05 budget included a further $99 million over four years for disability Federal Election: Member for New employment services to strengthen the dis- England ability employment sector, to support ser- Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— vices in moving forward with the reforms Minister for Justice and Customs) (3.03 and to improve the living standards of very p.m.)—I was asked a question on 30 No- vulnerable workers. I am also pleased to say vember 2004 by Senator Kirk in relation to that all state and territory ministers at last

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 83 the Australian Federal Police. I seek leave to ing. It is a series of events that can only be incorporate further details in Hansard. described as bizarre or ridiculous. Leave granted. On 9 September, exactly one month be- The details read as follows— fore the federal election, Mrs De-Anne Kelly, the then Parliamentary Secretary to During Question Time on 30 November 2004, Senator Kirk asked me a question regarding the the Minister for Transport and Regional Ser- Australian Federal Police (AFP) protocols which vices, turned up at Millaa Millaa on the deal with complaints against Federal Members of Atherton Tablelands—a long way from her Parliament. own electorate—and announced a grant of Following further advice from the AFP, I wish to $1.26 million to a company known as A2 inform the Senate that I can confirm the existence Dairy Marketing. You can imagine the sur- of AFP protocols which deal with complaints prise of a number of dairy farmers and of the against Federal Members of Parliament. owners of Malanda milk factory when they The protocols do not require the Australian Fed- heard of that announcement. These people, eral Police to advise the Minister for Justice and who had heard of the proposal, had travelled Customs of referrals from the Australian Electoral to Innisfail some time earlier and paid con- Commission in relation to breaches of the Com- siderable money—Senator Boswell knows monwealth Electoral Act 1918. this—to attend The Nationals dinner to get As Mr Windsor’s complaint involved a direct access to Mr Anderson. They raised the mat- referral from the AEC to the AFP, I was not inter with him and they were assured by Mr formed at the time of the referral of the investiga- Anderson that the project would not proceed tion, however I was advised on 17 November and that nothing would happen whilst the 2004 of the investigation and further advised on 22 November 2004 of its termination. government was in caretaker mode. They were appeased. They were comforted by the On 22 November, I was also advised that Mr Anderson and Senator Macdonald would not be Deputy Prime Minister of this country so interviewed. As previously stated, I do not intend they went back on their merry way. to canvass this matter any further, as this is a mat- They were astonished on 9 September ter for the AFP and Commonwealth Director of when Mrs Kelly said that this project had Public Prosecutions. been fast-tracked. Without prompting she QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: said—and I suppose this is what sparked the TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS interest in this matter—that due diligence Regional Services: Program Funding process had been adhered to. I am sorry! Due diligence, my foot! If you can say that the Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (3.04 events that unfolded after this show that due p.m.)—I move: diligence occurred, I am sorry! That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Con- A company spokesperson from Dairy servation (Senator Ian Macdonald) to questions Farmers’ Malanda milk factory said that it without notice asked by Senators McLucas, would have been prudent for the federal gov- Moore and O’Brien today relating to the Regional ernment to have waited until legal action the Partnerships program. Queensland government was taking against It has been explained today to the people in A2 milk, which was under way in the this chamber and to the people listening that Queensland courts, had been resolved. That in Far North Queensland there has been an case went to the claims that A2 milk had extraordinary debacle with A2 Dairy Market- some special health benefits. It was extraor-

CHAMBER 84 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 dinary that they were then found guilty in Macdonald today and the remarks made by that matter. They were found guilty and fined Senator McLucas is the politics of envy writ $15,000 for false and misleading advertising large on the part of the Labor Party through telling people about these claims about A2 their opposition to government support for milk. On 30 September, following that, the rural areas. That is what this is all about. The government axed the grant. There was a Labor Party are simply completely out of press release from Mr Anderson. There was touch with the needs of rural Australia. That, no comment from Mrs Kelly, she just disap- of course, was reflected very much in the peared off the face of the earth. The result result of the recent federal election. I can was that, on one hand, the Malanda milk fac- only cite the situation in my home state of tory was quite pleased with what had oc- South Australia as an example. Wakefield, curred but, on the other hand, a number of which had become a nominally Labor seat on dairy farmers had gone out in the interim the redistribution, was in fact lost by the La- and, at considerable expense, purchased the bor Party and won by the Liberal Party as a cows that produced this A2 milk—which has direct result of this sort of attitude by the been found by the Queensland courts not to Labor Party, whereby they treat rural areas provide the amazing health benefits that they and rural people with complete disdain. This were told about. is because the Labor Party are dominated by We have heard a lot today about how the the urban elites. coalition care so much about regional com- I suggest that Senator McLucas takes a munities—that they are the only party in this good, hard look at the article in the Austra- chamber who do anything right for the peo- lian newspaper this morning written by for- ple of the bush. It is amazing that they can mer federal Labor finance minister Peter make those sort of comments given that they Walsh. He really puts the finger on the Labor potentially jeopardised the operation of one Party and the way in which they have lost of the largest employers on the Atherton Ta- touch with real people. They have lost their blelands along with their suppliers—and I way and they have lost touch with the real notice that Senator Boswell is nodding—and people of Australia. The way in which they that they have sent mixed messages to farm- have raised this issue in the chamber today ers, who have expended money purchasing simply reinforces the fact that the Labor these cows. Those farmers will take no com- Party are out of touch. They are floundering fort from Senator Macdonald’s comments around looking for issues that do not exist. today that this was made as a completely They are creating fantasies. The central issue commercial decision. This is not about con- is that they are completely out of touch, par- sideration for people who live in the bush; ticularly with regard to rural people. Re- this is about vote buying. This was about gional Partnerships is a very significant pro- shifting votes in the Atherton Tablelands gram as far as rural Australia is concerned. away from the Independent member to their Since that program took effect on 1 July candidate. People in Far North Queensland, 2003, some 440 projects have been approved like those in New England, will welcome the with a total value of $100,493,000. A total of inquiry which was agreed to today. (Time $308 million will be available through the expired) Regional Partnerships Program over the next Senator CHAPMAN (South Australia) four years from 2004-05 to 2007-08. (3.09 p.m.)—What we have really seen in The Regional Partnerships program is the questions that were put to Senator Ian having a positive effect on regional commu-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 85 nities. It is having a beneficial impact. It Senator CHAPMAN—I am talking about funds a range of projects which make an the rural part of that electorate, Senator enormous difference to the ways in which O’Brien, not the overall result. It is because communities function, ranging from restor- Labor completely neglects the needs of rural ing local halls or providing a volunteer bus communities that the bush and rural areas service to major infrastructure investments, will not give their support to the Labor Party. all of which, of course, contribute signifi- In the cases of Wakefield and Kingston, both cantly to economic growth opportunities. seats in South Australia—Labor seats won That is what the government has done in re- from the Labor Party by the government at lation to this issue that the Labor Party have the last election—that was clearly a signifi- sought to raise today. Regional Partnerships cant factor in the result. I know that my col- has also funded a number of projects with a league Senator Ferris has the capacity to re- broad cross-regional or national focus. These inforce that through her own direct experi- include improved skills for rural and regional ence of working in the Wakefield electorate teachers through the National Centre of in support of our very good candidate the Mathematics and Science Teaching at the new member David Fawcett. I have a similar University of New England and the expan- experience in relation to our candidate and sion of the Victorian based rural law online now member for Kingston, Mr Kym web advisory service to all states and territo- Richardson. That simply reflects Labor’s ries. failure. (Time expired) Importantly, every dollar of Regional Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (3.14 Partnerships funding has generated another p.m.)—One would have thought from the $3 of investment from other partners. For government’s contributions we heard in every $17,000 worth of benefits, the gov- question time today in response to opposition ernment has supported the creation of an- questions that the Regional Partnerships pro- other new job in the community. This in- gram deals exclusively with the provision of vestment by the government demonstrates its funds to projects in rural and regional Aus- ongoing commitment to the people of rural tralia. I am sure that is the impression the and regional communities. That is where the government is trying to give. Senator Chap- contrast lies: between the government doing man was trying to say that, because the gov- beneficial things as far as rural and regional ernment focused on rural and regional Aus- committees are concerned and the Labor tralia, there was a much larger vote for the Party simply carping on about issues that do government in rural and regional Australia. not exist. I come back to the results of the There are exceptions to that, but I do not last election. The seat of Wakefield has a want to depart from what this debate is rural element—as, indeed, does the seat of about, which is the way the government Kingston in the southern areas. There was a chooses to fund particular areas of the coun- very strong vote for the government and a try in the government’s own interests and not very low vote for the Labor Party in those in the national interest. I want to talk about areas simply because voters know that the Senator Chapman’s suggestion that the ALP Labor Party does not— is dominated by urban elites. They would be Senator O’Brien—It was a 100-vote dif- the sort of people who live in the seat of ference. I would not call that a very low vote. Wentworth—would they not?—the richest electorate in the country.

CHAMBER 86 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Senator Ferris—What’s that got to do jects in all of these electorates, but why with anything? would they be funded under the Regional Senator O’BRIEN—Have a look, Sena- Partnerships program? Perhaps it is because tor, and you might find out that the seat of when the projects do not fit anywhere this is Wentworth received $221,000 in funding a way the government can throw some under the Regional Partnerships program. money into an electorate where it thinks it The good people of Wentworth, as far re- might have a problem. moved from rural and regional Australia as We will look at the profile of expenditure you can get, received funding—I suspect in these electorates. Compared to some areas unnecessarily— of spending, $221,000 is not a great deal of Senator Ferris—How do you know that? money, but about 80 electorates fared worse than the seat of Wentworth under the Re- Senator O’BRIEN—It’s on the web site gional Partnerships program. In other words, that they received $221,000 in funding. The the majority of electorates fared worse under seat of Wentworth is the richest electorate in this program than the seat of Wentworth— the country. The government has been talk- the wealthiest electorate in the country. Let ing about Labor’s latte connection. I would us do away with the smokescreen that the have thought the most expensive latte in this government has been putting up about this. country would probably be in the seat of When we asked questions today about A2 Wentworth, and yet $221,000 was provided and about the milk industry in Malanda we for a project at Bondi! But let us get back to got the usual malarky from government South Australia, and the $341,000 in funding senators about their credentials in rural and for projects for the seat of Adelaide. I do not regional Australia. When we examine the recall any agricultural pursuits in the seat of expenditure profile for the Regional Partner- Adelaide, unless there a few things growing ships and Sustainable Regions programs it in the parklands outside the mile square. That will be revealed that the government is pork- is not rural and regional Australia. It is a seat barrelling, pure and simple. Electorally sen- that the government knew was in jeopardy. It sitive seats are being targeted by the gov- is a seat that the government sought to pro- ernment for the expenditure of public tect by providing it with funding, just as it funds—funds that are supposed to be the sought to provide assistance to Mr Turnbull subject of the rigorous guidelines published in Wentworth using Regional Partnerships on the department’s web site. funding. Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory) Let us look elsewhere. I have never heard (3.19 p.m.)—I rise to my feet somewhat as- of the seat of Brisbane being considered a tounded. When I came back to this place, I rural or regional seat, yet there is $180,000 looked across at senators on the other side identifiable under the Regional Partnerships and, in my little black chip of a heart, I felt a program for projects in the seat of Brisbane. little sorry. They are all looking pretty de- Mr Deputy President Hogg, I know you are pressed after almost the worst electoral flog- familiar with the boundaries of the seat of ging in political history. Here we are a week Brisbane, and perhaps when this debate con- later and they have already forgotten the les- cludes you will be able to tell me which, of sons. What happened in regional and rural all the rural or regional aspects of Brisbane, Australia, what happened in a couple of the makes it relevant for Regional Partnerships timber seats in Tasmania, is an absolute tes- funding. I am sure there are very good pro- tament to the fact that the Labor Party has

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 87 lost the plot in rural and regional Australia. I tions. They thought about it and they said, cannot believe that I have been sitting here ‘Now this is what we should do—we should listening to more bashing of the bush. Let’s make sure that we get those applications in.’ bash the bush! I do not understand how this But the Labor Party only had 148 applica- can possibly do anything other than further tions—that is, if we chuck in the Independ- insult regional and rural Australia. It totally ents. It should be no surprise that this is not a disrespects their need for this directed fund- conspiracy; this is simply a reflection of ing to help them out with the essential eco- demographics. We have more people out nomic development they depend on. Thank there that care about regional and rural Aus- the Lord rural and regional Australia depends tralia and that is why they are elected. That is on us because it has been up to this govern- why there are electorates that are getting ment to come up with these absolutely excel- more benefits. lent programs. We have been a vital and It is absolutely astounding that we now strong advocate for regional and rural Aus- have a conspiracy theory. This is one of the tralia. We have come up with the Regional greatest partnerships, one of the greatest pro- Partnerships program. It is an excellent programs, for regional and rural Australia. The gram. opposition have just had absolutely the big- As we have heard from my colleague, the gest touch-up of all time and they are going Regional Partnerships program in the first down the road of making exactly the same tranche of 2003 provided over $100 million. mistakes again. We have nine programs in We are about to provide another $308 mil- my own electorate, the Northern Territory, lion. That is not going into major projects, as and those programs have just made so much we have heard from the other side. The vast difference to the people, to their lives and to majority of these projects are ones I have how they go about their business. They are assisted in opening. It is wonderful to look looking forward to making sure that we get around at the smiling faces of the small vol- more programs. They come to see me and unteer fire brigade who have now been pro- they say, ‘Senator, can you assist us a bit vided with a fence, and a shed to put their with the application? Do you think this meets gear in. It might not sound much to the La- the guidelines? Can you supply us with some bor Party; it might be unimportant and trivial information about the application?’ I get a lot to the Labor Party. But I have spoken to of those sorts of inquiries through my office, these volunteer firefighters—because I am principally because I am actually out there in someone who is out there at the coalface— the electorate and, of course, we enjoy a lot and they are delighted with the efforts of this of confidence in the bush. government. But, according to honourable We have a government who, unlike the senators opposite, this is a conspiracy; it is Labor Party, support regional and rural Aus- obviously pork-barrelling! tralia and who support these very good pro- All I have to say is that it is not surprising grams. As I have said, the efficacy of these to me that there are more coalition seats that programs shows in the bush. We are actually had outcomes. Principally, we got the vast doing better. There is a sense of community. majority of the seats because people know We continue to bleed and move towards ur- that we are going to provide better leader- ban Australia and it is these very important ship. Not only that; it should be self-evident projects that deal with and underpin the so- that coalition members are in touch with cial and economic comfort and health of their constituencies: they had 567 applica-

CHAMBER 88 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 these communities. They are just so impor- is need right across Australia. This particular tant. program, as Senator O’Brien has pointed out, I cannot believe that the opposition still is run not only in certain parts of the country will not learn. The term has only just begun. but everywhere. We accept the fact that the It is not too late to change your mind and minister said that we had legitimacy in ask- start supporting the bush rather than carry on ing the question—thank you, Minister—but with these ridiculous stories about pork- we also want to know how this process oper- barrelling. Do you know how to get more ated. Minister Ian Macdonald told us that he stuff into your electorates? Get more elector- was aware, and the government was aware, ates. Impress people in the bush. That is the that people in the dairy industry were ‘doing way you are going to get a little more sup- it a bit tough’. Thank you, Minister; we port. But to lose an election so incredibly know that and the people in the dairy indus- badly and then, in the first set of sittings, try know that. It was people in the dairy income before this place and say, ‘There’s dustry that were asking about the probity of some sort of conspiracy’, is absolutely ri- the process in which it was proclaimed that diculous. (Time expired) there was going to be funding—because the funding was not actually given. It was pro- Senator MOORE (Queensland) (3.24 claimed publicly, with a photo opportunity, p.m.)—I also rise in the debate on the motion that there was going to be a significant allo- to take note of responses given by ministers cation of funding to one particular milk in this place today on specific questions company on the Atherton Tableland. It was about the way a grant was processed. This is the people in the industry that questioned not some sham attack on the bush and I am that. They were concerned about the way this frankly getting quite tired of the government process was run. They were concerned about hiding behind allegations of attack, dislike of the possible competition with a pre-existing the bush and this puerile questioning about company on the tableland. whether people on this side of the house have any knowledge or awareness of re- Senator McLucas has lived in that area; gional issues. she knows the area and she knows how these people fight to maintain their living in that I stand in this place today with a long particular part of the world. So the parlia- family history in the dairy industry. I am mentary secretary goes to the area with great tired of people over there casting aspersions fanfare and announces that there is going to about interest and knowledge. On this par- be a significant allocation of funding to one ticular issue—the particular grant that was particular firm to encourage dairy farmers on being questioned today—we were asking the tableland. That is very noble. But what about the probity and integrity of the proc- we want to know is: what was behind that ess. We were asking the same questions that request? What was the process that led to the the people in the bush are asking because if decision to give that money? Was there due these programs are going to work—if there is process as we have listed in parliamentary going to be an effective partnership—there guidelines and guidelines for departments? must be some trust in the process. That is Was there significant consideration of all the what we are demanding. issues before that promise was made— We are not questioning whether there is interestingly, during an election campaign? need in the community. We know there is What we want to know is what scrutiny was need in the community; we accept that there given to the credentials of the company, to

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 89 the impact of the decision to give that money COMMITTEES to that part of the world and whether those Reports: Government Responses dairy farmers who the government say are Senator HILL (South Australia— ‘doing it a bit tough’ have actually been dis- Minister for Defence) (3.30 p.m.)—I present advantaged by this decision. six government responses to committee re- So much for whether we know about and ports as listed on today’s Order of Business. care for the bush. What we want to know is In accordance with the usual practice, I seek whether the government understands the im- leave to incorporate the documents in Han- pact of its decision. We believe there are sard. some farmers who have now, and I quote the Leave granted. minister, ‘made a commercial decision which is going to leave them in further difficulty’. The documents read as follows— Was that commercial decision made as a di- Government Response to the Report on Aus- rect result of an expectation that a new in- tralian Wool Innovation Limited Application dustry was going to be created on the table- and Expenditure of Funds Advanced under the land? If so, how can those people trust the Statutory Funding Agreement dated 31 De- process? Is that valuing the people in the cember 2000 bush? Is that giving them a true response Introduction from their government or their political rep- Following questioning at Senate Estimates Com- resentatives? mittee on 26 May 2003, this issue was referred to the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Trans- What we on this side of the house want to port Legislation Committee. know, as people who have lived and grown The Australian Government Department of Agri- up in different parts of the world, is: where is culture, Fisheries and Forestry, along with the the due probity in the process? When will we Australian Wool Innovation Limited (the Com- find out exactly what the parliamentary sec- pany), WoolProducers, a former director of the retary, in making this announcement, knew Company and the former managing director ap- about pending legal action in the Queensland peared before the Committee. The Department judicial system? When will we find out also provided a significant amount of material to whether they knew about the credentials of assist the Committee’s deliberations. the people who were lobbying on behalf of The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and For- this particular company? When I tried to find estry (the Minister) and the Company extended out more about this particular company, I the original Statutory Funding Agreement (SFA) found that their web site had disappeared on two occasions. Firstly, it was extended in De- from the Internet. I tried to look up some- cember 2003 for three months to allow time for the Committee to report and it was again ex- thing about A2 and the web site had gone. I tended in March 2004 to allow time for the Gov- say to the government: we have the legiti- ernment to consider its response to the Commit- macy to ask the questions and you have the tee’s report. responsibility to give us the answers, not just Below is the Government’s response to the Re- here but in the wider community. (Time export on Australian Wool Innovation Limited Ap- pired) plication and Expenditure of Funds under the Question agreed to. Statutory Funding Agreement (the report). Recommendation 1. The Committee recommended that:

CHAMBER 90 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

The question whether AWI used company money Government Response: to campaign for sitting directors during the 2002 Agreed. See response to Recommendation 1. Board election, in breach of Corporations Law, should be referred to the Australian Securities and Recommendation 5. Investments Commission. The Committee recommended that: Government Response: Prior to a new SFA being agreed with AWI the Minister should review the effectiveness of reme- Agreed. The Minister will write to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) dies for breaches of the agreement currently available through the Wool Services Privatisation providing a copy of the report and drawing to Act 2000. ASIC’s attention the views of the Senate Commit- tee. Government Response: Recommendation 2. Agreed. The Minister obtained advice from the The Committee recommended that: Australian Government Solicitor (AGS) on this issue and revised the SFA accordingly. AGS has The Statutory Funding Agreement should have a advised that the revised draft SFA “contains the condition that all the company’s expenditure (not remedies exercisable by the Commonwealth that only the expenditure of ‘the Funds’) should be we would expect to see in an agreement of this controlled by the Statutory Funding Agreement. nature”. Government Response: Recommendation 6. Not agreed. The Government accepts that the SFA The Committee recommended that: should cover all expenditure from the Funds The definition of ‘agri-political activity’ should (those being statutory levies and Commonwealth matching payments) and that this should be ex- be amended to explicitly include internal as well as external political activity. tended to monies derived from the Funds. The Government will refine the definition of Funds in Government Response: future agreements accordingly. However, the Agreed. The Government will amend future Government does not consider that the SFA agreements accordingly. should cover expenditure from funds that the Recommendation 7. Company obtains from other industry sources. The Committee recommended that: Recommendation 3 The SFA should incorporate a requirement man- The Committee recommended that: dating that expenditure be consistent with the The Minister should direct AFFA to pursue com- strategic plan, the operational plan and the R&D pliance and other reports pursuant to all Statutory Guidelines. Funding Agreements. Government Response: Government Response: Agreed. Agreed. The Minister wrote to the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and For- Recommendation 8. estry asking that he ensure that all the obligations The Committee recommended that: of Statutory Funding Agreements are being en- The Minister should give consideration to incor- forced. porating conditions in existing and future Statu- Recommendation 4. tory Funding Agreements as suggested by rec- The Committee recommended that: ommendations 2, 6, 7 and other relevant suggestions in this report. The Minister should give consideration to referring any breaches of the Corporations Act by AWI Government Response: to the Australian Securities and Investments Agreed on the basis of the Government’s re- Commission. sponse to Recommendations 2, 6 and 7. The Gov-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 91 ernment will, of course, consider other relevant As the Committee notes, none of the statements suggestions in the report as appropriate. by the Government in the month leading up to the ————— attacks reflected information about Bali or any prior knowledge of a terrorist attack on bars or Senate Committee Report Foreign Affairs, nightclubs. If the Government had had such in- Defence and Trade References Committee Bali formation, it would have acted to prevent the 2002—Security threats to Australians in South attacks. East Asia It is important to note that the Committee has put Government Response to rest claims that relevant information had been General Response to the Report: made available to the Government, or that threat The increased threat of global terrorism since advice was ignored. As the Committee says, 11 September 2001 has changed the international “these reports and allegations were either simply security environment for all Australians. Given erroneous or lacked foundation, or were highly this environment, the Government continues to contestable opinions”. attach the highest priority to the provision of ac- While the Committee comments that the specific curate and properly assessed travel advice about reference to Bali may have inadvertently rein- potential safety and security-related risks. Travel forced what it describes as a prevailing, erroneous advice enables the millions of Australians who view that Bali was a safe haven, it also acknowl- journey overseas each year to make their own edges the clarity of hindsight in coming to this informed decisions about travel. It is incumbent judgment. upon Government to ensure that the advice re- The Government reiterates that the factual state- mains credible in the public mind and is not ment in the travel advice that “tourist services are blunted by a perception that risk is being over- operating normally elsewhere in Indonesia, in- stated. To this end, the Department of Foreign cluding in Bali” was included as a response to a Affairs and Trade (DFAT), together with the Aus- very common question asked by Australian trav- tralian Intelligence Community, will continue to ellers when they saw that civil unrest and violent review the way in which assessed threats are pre- demonstrations were taking place in other parts of sented and disseminated to the Australian travel- Indonesia. It was not intended to detract from the ler. Elements of the report prepared by the Senate first sentence of the travel advice highlighting the Committee inquiry into security threats to Austra- risk of terrorism throughout Indonesia. lians in South East Asia will prove a useful reference point in assisting in this process. Recommendation 1 The Government notes the Committee’s conclu- The Committee recommends that, with a view to sion that ‘there was no clear warning in the form ensuring the country’s future arrangements be- of specific intelligence which, if identified and tween intelligence assessments, threat assess- acted upon, would have provided an opportunity ments and travel advisories are optimal, consid- to prevent the Bali bombings or to act to protect eration should be given to the establishment of an those there at the time’. The Government also independent commission of inquiry with specific endorses the Committee’s finding that the Bali terms of reference to address these and related disaster was not ‘a result of some culpable lapse matters. by Australian Government agencies or individual The Government does not support the establish- officials’. ment of an independent commission of inquiry to The Government also welcomes the finding that consider the relationship between intelligence ‘anyone reading the travel advice, even just the assessments, threat assessments and travel adviso- headline summary … would understand that there ries. The Committee’s report has already ac- was a generic terrorist risk, that bombs had ex- knowledged that ‘in its travel advisories DFAT ploded in the past, including where tourists gath- employed the relevant level of warning and lan- ered, and that further explosions may be at- guage that corresponded to the threat being con- tempted’.

CHAMBER 92 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 veyed by the intelligence agencies’ at the time of Transport and Regional Services, as required, the Bali bombings. the TTCG considers emerging threats and as- Government Senators on the Committee have sists in coordinating the intelligence response already noted that they could not fathom how, to those threats ‘given the extensive evidence canvassed in the • communications arrangements between DFAT Report’, it could be asserted that the travel advice and NTAC allow for immediate notification of (at the time of the bombings) could be considered emerging threats to ensure that travel advice inadequate. can be amended whenever required, regardless A further commission of inquiry would either of the time or day. duplicate work already done or replicate the func- Recommendation 2 tions of existing Senate processes. Questions The Committee recommends that the government, about intelligence before the Bali bombings were in consultation with the travel industry further addressed in the Blick Inquiry and questions con- develop and oversee a code of practice which cerning the travel advice have been thoroughly would, among other things, make it mandatory reviewed by the Senate inquiry. for travel agents/advisers to provide to overseas As the Committee acknowledges, the Govern- travellers, at the time a booking is made, a copy ment has worked, since Bali, to strengthen even of both DFAT’s Travel Advice for the destination further its arrangements for the production and concerned and ASIO’s threat assessment for the dissemination of travel advice. Shortly after the country itself. Travellers must be advised to con- Bali bombings, at Mr Downer’s initiative, the sult the DFAT Travel Advice 24 hours prior to Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) their departure. took steps to strengthen its consultative arrange- The Government acknowledges the importance of ments with ASIO, which produces threat assess- ensuring that travel advice is widely disseminated ments, to provide additional assurance that intel- to Australian travellers. The Government does ligence information is fully integrated into our not, however, support mandatory obligations on public advice. travel agents nor can the Government agree to the Flowing from this initiative, the arrangements public release of classified ASIO threat assess- that now exist between DFAT and ASIO for the ments. These threat assessments are already fully declassification of intelligence material for use in reflected in the travel advice, which constitutes an the preparation of travel advice are well inte- unclassified report on security-related threats in grated. A number of substantial enhancements overseas destinations. have been put in place, including: As part of the Government’s efforts to encourage • a 24-hour National Threat Assessment Centre industry promotion of travel advisories, the Min- (NTAC) has been established, providing rapid ister for Foreign Affairs and the Australian Fed- threat assessments on all intelligence received eration of Travel Agents (AFTA) launched the by Australian agencies Charter for Safe Travel on 11 June 2003. The • where ASIO’s threat level is at high, DFAT’s Charter meets the objectives intended in the advice will, at a minimum, recommend that Committee's recommendation without the cost Australians exercise a high degree of caution. and increased resources required by a legislative NTAC sees and comments on all travel advice approach and mandatory obligations. Market sur- drafts where the threat assessment level is at vey work conducted as part of the smartraveller high campaign shows that approximately 90 per cent • of travel agents already claim to encourage their representatives from all members of the Aus- customers to access government travel advisories. tralian intelligence community as well as the AFP, PM&C and DFAT meet weekly as the Under the voluntary Charter, travel agents recog- Terrorism Threat Coordination Group (TTCG). nise their shared commitment with the Govern- Chaired by the head of NTAC, and involving ment to assist Australians overseas to travel other agencies, such as the Department of safely. While it is the responsibility of the indi-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 93 vidual traveller to prepare adequately for overseas attention through print media, television, and the travel, travel agents who join the Charter recog- internet. The travel advice is available through the nise the invaluable part they can play to assist this internet, an automated telephone service and via preparation. As part of their service to their cli- smartraveller kiosks located at Australian interna- ents and to the Australian public, they commit to: tional airports and passport offices. Market survey • provide travellers with consular travel advice work indicates that 70 per cent of Australians • intend to consult the Government’s advice prior encourage travellers to take out adequate travel to travel. The Government now receives on aver- insurance age 160,000 hits a week on the smartraveller • inform travellers of the preparations they need website and 46,000 Australians are enrolled to to make before travelling receive travel advice updates by email subscrip- • work together in partnership with Government tion. and other travel professionals to promote safe Travel advice is kept current and, where the situa- travel. tion at a destination is fluid, frequently updated. The Charter currently has more than 1,600 mem- While viewing the travel advice 24 hours before bers and the Government remains focused on departure is a useful measure, Australian travel- heightening the Charter profile and increasing its lers are encouraged to subscribe to the travel ad- membership. In July 2003, the Australian Federa- vice on the internet and to register their presence tion of Travel Agents (AFTA) made partnership overseas through the on-line registration process. with the Charter a requirement of AFTA accredi- In this way, significant changes to travel advice tation, which will see all members of AFTA (cur- can be brought to the attention of Australian trav- rently 2,223) joining the Charter by the end of ellers. 2005. The Government has made it a priority to Recommendation 3 work closely with AFTA in order to spread The Committee recommends that DFAT subject a awareness of travel advisories and safe travel representative selection of its Travel Advice to messages. This includes regular editorial contri- examination by an independent assessor with butions to the AFTA Traveller magazine and ac- qualifications and experience in linguistics, liter- tive participation in the AFTA General Confer- acy and communication. The assessor shall report ence. to the minister on the intelligibility and accessi- Since the launch of smartraveller, DFAT officers bility of the language in which information is have participated in sixteen holiday and travel conveyed in travel advisories. expos in capital cities across Australia to work The Government recognises the importance of with industry to promote travel advisories. DFAT using plain language and a readily comprehensi- staff have also provided training to a large num- ble system of grading of risk in different locations ber of travel agents in Sydney and Melbourne, as in its travel advice. DFAT routinely reviews the well as 100 branch managers from the Student presentation, format and general approach to Travel Association (STA), about travel advice. travel advice on a regular basis, particularly given In May 2004 the Government established the the Government’s concern to ensure that the ad- smartraveller Consultative Group, comprising vice remains credible in the public mind. In re- DFAT and travel industry representatives, to pro- sponse to feedback from the travelling public and vide a forum for advancing the aims of the Char- the travel industry, DFAT is implementing a range ter, enable the travel industry to offer suggestions of changes to travel advisories. In particular, the on improving the presentation, format and clarity travel advice is being made clearer through the of travel advice, and strengthen the reach of key introduction of new sub-headings to differentiate smartraveller messages. safety and security threats, putting them in plain Of course, the Government does not rely solely English and introducing other textual changes. on the travel industry to disseminate travel ad- For lower risk countries, DFAT is adjusting lan- vice. Through the $9.7 million smartraveller guage to make it clearer that the behaviour being campaign, travel advice is brought to the public’s

CHAMBER 94 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 recommended equates to that which is practised The government has also provided a range of in Australia. other financial assistance and ongoing support to This is an ongoing process of reform which will those affected including meeting medical and include in its next phase consultation with lin- other costs associated with injuries that are not guistics and communication experts with a view otherwise covered by Medicare and private health to improving the intelligibility and accessibility of insurance, such as for counselling and rehabilita- travel advice language. tion, and assisting with the costs of travel and accommodation and providing support to those Recommendation 4 attending the first anniversary commemorations The Committee recommends that in Bali and Canberra. The government will con- - the Commonwealth government prepare tinue to monitor the needs of those affected by the a green paper on the establishment of a tragedy and to provide ongoing assistance, such national compensation scheme for vic- as emergency financial assistance and personal tims of terrorism related crimes that fall support, to those affected through a network of within the Commonwealth jurisdiction; family liaison officers. and ————— - the national council of Attorneys- Government Response to the Report of the General develop a proposal for the har- Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, monisation of state laws dealing with Defence and Trade compensation for victims of crimes so ‘Watching Brief on the War on Terrorism’ as to provide for circumstances such as terrorist attack. The Government thanks the Joint Standing Com- mittee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade for The Government does not support this recom- its inquiry into and report on the preparedness of mendation. The Government has concluded that Australian, state and territory governments and financial and other assistance should continue to agencies to respond to and manage the conse- be considered on a case by case basis, focusing on quences of a terrorist attack in Australia. The specific needs, such as that which has been pro- Government’s response to the report’s five rec- vided by the Government to date for the survivors ommendations is outlined below. of the Bali tragedy. Recommendation 1: The Committee recom- The Government is sympathetic to the suffering mends that the Government review the rationale of the Bali victims and their families and provides for emergency response equipment allocations to a wide range of ongoing assistance to meet the the States and Territories under the National health care and other needs of those affected by Counter Terrorism Agreement, taking into ac- the Bali tragedy rather than a general lump sum count the relatively more significant requirements assistance scheme. The Government was respon- of the larger jurisdictions. sive to the immediate needs of victims and families and provided substantial assistance, including Response: Agree in part. with the cost of airfares and accommodation for Under the Agreement on Australia’s National people travelling to Bali as a result of the attack Counter-Terrorism Arrangements signed on or who needed to travel within Australia to pro- 24 October 2002, all jurisdictions recognise their vide support to loved ones in hospital as well as joint responsibility in contributing to the devel- assisting with the cost of funerals. In addition, the opment and maintenance of a nation-wide capa- Government donated $1 million to the Australian bility to counter terrorism. The nation-wide Red Cross Bali Appeal, which was launched in counter-terrorism capability is developed through October 2002 to assist Australians directly af- utilisation of the policing and emergency man- fected by the Bali bombings and, through the agement capability funded by the states and terri- Indonesian Red Cross (PMI), to assist the Bali- tories; and operational and policy capacity of nese people in their disaster recovery and prepar- relevant Australian Government agencies funded edness. by the Commonwealth. This is supplemented by a

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 95 special fund to maintain and develop the nation- able national counter-terrorism capability, from wide counter-terrorism capability, provided and which the requirements for the various counter- administered by the Australian Government on terrorism capabilities can be measured in all ju- the basis of advice from the National Counter- risdictions. This will enable the NCTC to con- Terrorism Committee (NCTC). tinue to assist states and territories to develop In addition, from time to time the Australian their counter-terrorism capabilities to the defined Government provides specific targeted funding basic viable level. allocations to address identified priority areas. Accordingly, the Government is reviewing capa- For example, as part of the 2004-05 Budget, the bility requirements and defining minimum viable Government announced a proposed cost-shared capabilities to provide a basis for funding alloca- funding arrangement with the states and territo- tion decisions. However, the aim will be to effi- ries, up to the value of $30 million, for a package ciently allocate resources across all jurisdictions of emergency management measures focussing on to build a basic viable counter-terrorism capabil- urban search and rescue capability. The Govern- ity, rather than to focus on particular additional ment is currently working with the jurisdictions in requirements of the larger jurisdictions. developing this package. Recommendation 2: The Committee recom- Prior to the establishment of the NCTC, the mends that DOTARS should carry out a security Standing Advisory Committee on Common- risk assessment of Hobart airport to determine wealth/State Cooperation for Protection Against whether 24 hour surveillance capacity is required. Violence (SAC-PAV) administered funding to Response: Agree: all airport security risk as- enhance counter-terrorism capabilities in jurisdic- sessments are subject to ongoing review. tions. The essence of these earlier arrangements The security risk assessment of individual air- was ‘equity’ in the provision of various training ports, including Hobart Airport, is an ongoing courses, exercises and equipment to ensure that iterative process, rather than a single event or all states and territories were being equally devel- activity. This process is conducted by the Office oped. However, some funding was also directed of Transport Security in the Department of Trans- on a justifiable needs basis. For example, in the port and Regional Services (DOTARS) in close lead up to the Sydney 2000 Games, NSW Police consultation with the Australian Security Intelli- received additional funding for exercises and gence Organisation and the Attorney-General’s equipment. This was the also case in the lead up Department to determine, amongst other things, to the Commonwealth Heads of Government the appropriate level of surveillance capacity re- Meeting in Queensland. quired. In reviewing individual security risk as- The NCTC has recognised a greater need to move sessments, existing threat levels in the aviation from the previous ‘equity’ model, to that of a sector and the national counter-terrorism alert ‘justifiable needs’ model. The NCTC Constitu- level are taken into consideration. tion, Attachment D Statement of Financial Guide- Recommendation 3: The Committee recom- lines, states that the special fund is allocated by mends that the National Counter Terrorism the Australian Government to ‘... provide a basic Committee ensure, by means of a National viable counter-terrorism capability, built upon Agreement if necessary, the interoperability of extant state and territory capabilities, commensu- communications for police and emergency ser- rate with the general level of risk to Australia.’ vices across Australia. This special fund is allocated ‘… where there is a justifiable and demonstrable need for expenditure. The Committee also recommends that EMA ne- Parity in expenditure should only occur as a gotiate with the states to pursue memoranda of means to ensure the balancing of the nation-wide understanding with commercial broadcasters to counter-terrorism capability.’ provide emergency messages to the community similar to those being arranged with the ABC. To underpin this change from an ‘equity’ model The Committee urges the completion of memo- to a ‘justifiable needs’ model, the NCTC has em- randa of understanding as a matter of priority. barked on a programme of defining the basic vi-

CHAMBER 96 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Response: Agree in part. commissioned the development of the national The Australian Government recognises that these guidelines, which build upon the principles are important issues and agrees to the intent of document, and on the cooperation between busi- recommendation 3. Given their complex nature, ness and government on critical infrastructure however, the development of long-term solutions issues. will require the coordination of a number of gov- This cooperation has been facilitated through the ernment agencies and departments, ongoing nego- Trusted Information Sharing Network for Critical tiation with the states and territories and with Infrastructure Protection (TISN), which brings communications authorities such as the Australian together all levels of government, key security Communications Authority and the Australian agencies, and industry representatives to ex- Broadcasting Authority. change information and develop cooperative ar- To this end, the Department of the Prime Minister rangements for protecting infrastructure under an and Cabinet is currently working with a number all-hazards approach. Key priorities for the TISN of key government departments and agencies to include the identification of critical infrastructure, consider a range of government communications the identification and mitigation of risks and the issues, including communications interoperability promotion of best practice arrangements. and the broadcast of emergency messages, with a On 25 June 2004, the Council of Australian Gov- view to determining which agencies are best ernments (COAG) agreed that the draft national placed to develop and implement solutions. The guidelines should be the subject of industry con- states and territories are being closely consulted sultation. The consultation process included con- as part of this process to ensure their views are sideration of the national guidelines by the TISN taken into account and that consistent approaches and has now been completed. are adopted to issues which impact across juris- It is intended that the information provided in the dictions. guidelines will be consistent in its approach with Recommendation 4: The National Counter Terror- principles of good corporate governance, and ism Committee should assess and report on the with an emphasis on undertaking risk assessments arrangements put in place between state and terri- and appropriate planning. The draft guidelines tory authorities and the private owners of critical will not be prescriptive for the private operators infrastructure within each jurisdiction to ensure and owners, but are intended to help businesses the adoption of best practice security principles put in place appropriate protocols and security for infrastructure protection. arrangements. Given that a large proportion of Response: Agree. critical infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector, it was important to ensure that The Australian Government has been working these businesses provided input into the develop- closely with state and territory governments and ment of the national guidelines. with private sector owners of critical infrastructure to ensure that protective security arrange- The national guidelines will shortly go to COAG ments are appropriate, consistent and accord with for final endorsement, subject to which they will best practice. Draft National Guidelines for the be distributed to the owners and operators of Protection of Critical Infrastructure from Terror- critical infrastructure and to the Australian, state, ism (the national guidelines) have been developed territory and local governments, which will work in consultation with these parties and are now at closely together to encourage the private sector to an advanced stage. adopt them. In December 2002, the NCTC finalised the Prin- Recommendation 5: The committee recommends ciples for a National Counter-Terrorism Strategy that the Department of Transport and Regional for Critical Infrastructure Protection (the princi- Services (DOTARS) should review the security ples document), which sets out the responsibili- arrangements in place at all airports subject to its ties of governments and government agencies in regulation on a regular basis and report on them order to ensure consistency. The NCTC also in DOTARS annual report.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 97

Response: Agree in part. dence’ in contrast to the ill defined terms of DOTARS continuously assesses security ar- Article 5(c) ‘precautionary approach’ with rangements at airports through a programme of the consequent definitional and commercial compliance audits. DOTARS is reviewing its uncertainty that this ill defined term carries procedures for measuring aviation security per- at the international level. formance in the DOTARS annual report in light In international treaty negotiations dealing with of the Government’s response to the recommen- risk, the Australian Government places emphasis dations in the 2003 Australian National Audit on the need for science-based assessments of such Office Report on Aviation Security. However, risk. Where scientific evidence is insufficient or there would be risks associated with including unavailable and there are serious threats involved, information about aviation security arrangements a precautionary approach may be appropriate. The in a publicly available document such as the de- Government is aware of the definitional and com- partment’s annual report. mercial uncertainty that can be associated with ————— the term “precautionary approach” and notes the Committee’s recommendation. Article 6 of the Government Response to Report 53 of the Convention (Application of the precautionary Joint Standing Committee on Treaties approach) recognizes this uncertainty and seeks to The Government thanks the Committee for its enunciate the procedures for application of the consideration of the treaties tabled, and gives the precautionary approach under the Convention following responses to the Committee’s recom- (including by way of detailed reference to rele- mendations 7, 10 and 11: vant sections of United Nations Convention on Agreement on Medical Treatment for Tempo- the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 rary Visitors between the Government of Aus- (UNCLOS) and the Agreement for the Implemen- tralia and the Government of the Kingdom of tation of the Provisions of the United Nations Norway Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 Decem- Recommendation 7 ber 1982 relating to the Conservation and Man- The Committee recommends that the Gov- agement of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly ernment investigate ways of improving data Migratory Fish Stocks —UNFSA). This aims to collection for the purposes of monitoring place some discipline and rigour on the use of a costs associated with similar agreements. precautionary approach under the Agreement. The Department of Health and Ageing is aware of Recommendation 11 the limitations on data collection and monitoring The Committee recommends that Australia of medical treatment under the reciprocal health support and encourage through the prepara- agreements. The Department will maintain con- tory conferences the aim of ensuring that sultations with the States and Territories with a countries that are proposed as members of view to improving data collection. Similarly, the this body ratify the Fish Stocks Agreement. Department will consult with Norway, and other The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and countries covered by health agreements, on the Forestry, as the lead agency in the Preparatory monitoring of medical costs for Australians in Conference process for the Convention on the those countries. Conservation and Management of Highly Migra- Convention on Highly Migratory Fish Stocks tory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pa- in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean cific Ocean acknowledges the benefits that mem- Recommendation 10 bers of the Commission being parties to the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement offers to The Committee recommends that in future the effective management of stocks in the region. international Treaty negotiations of this kind, Consequently, within Regional Fisheries Man- Australia seek to give preference to more agement Organisations, the Department will rigorous language of the kind contained in broadly promote the comprehensive regime for Article 5(b) ‘best possible scientific evi- the conservation and management of straddling

CHAMBER 98 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 and highly migratory fish stocks afforded by the The Government will ensure that consultation United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement. takes place with all State and Territory Govern- ————— ments and other stakeholders in relation to the development of a National Plan of Implementa- Government Response to Report 55 of the tion and a National Action Plan dealing with un- Joint Standing Committee on Treaties intentionally emitted POPs. These National Plans The Government thanks the Committee for its fulfil obligations under the Stockholm Conven- consideration of the treaties tabled, and gives the tion. The Government will continue to undertake following responses to the Committee’s recom- consultation throughout implementation of the mendations 3 and 6: Stockholm Convention, consistent with its ap- Double Taxation Agreements proach in consideration of ratification. Recommendation 3 ————— Further to comments made at paragraphs Government Response to Report 60 of the 2.34 and 2.35, the Committee recommends Joint Standing Committee on Treaties that the Government give greater considera- Dr Andrew Southcott MP tion to the timing of the introduction of legis- Chair lation to bring proposed treaty actions into force, so that the incidence of enabling legis- Joint Standing Committee on Treaties lation being introduced prior to the conclu- Parliament House sion of the Committee’s review is reduced. CANBERRA ACT 2600 The Government acknowledges the Committee’s Dear Dr Southcott concern and its role in the treaty making process. I have received a copy of the Joint Standing The Government will make every effort to ensure Committee on Treaties’ Report 60 for Treaties that the Committee has due time to consider all tabled on 2 March 2004 and would like to thank treaty actions before relevant implementing legis- the Committee for their deliberations on Austra- lation is introduced. The Government notes, how- lia’s withdrawal from the International Fund for ever, that due to the national interest, this may not Agricultural Development (IFAD). always be possible. It remains open for Parlia- ment to delay considering such legislation until I accept the Committee’s Recommendation 5 and the Committee has reported. propose to proceed with formally withdrawing from the Agreement Establishing the International In order to reduce the incidence of enabling legis- Fund for Agricultural Development. lation being introduced to Parliament before the conclusion of the Committee’s review, the De- I would like to clarify my Department’s position partment of the Prime Minister and Cabinet will in response to Recommendation 4 which ques- write to portfolio Legislation Liaison Officers tions whether remarks in paragraph 5.65 of Re- about treaty enabling legislation. port 60 were made by Departmental officials and whether this is the Department’s approach to Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic treaty making. At a meeting on 27 November Pollutants (POPs) 2003 with three IFAD staff who have Australian Recommendation 6 citizenship, Australian Embassy officials con- The Committee recommends that the Gov- firmed that the decision to withdraw had been ernment, in consultation with relevant par- made at Ministerial level. The IFAD staff were ties, consider the formation of a negotiating advised that this decision would be put to the forum, of a size and management as may be JSCOT which would make its own conclusions appropriate, to include State and Territory and provide appropriate advice to the Govern- governments, in order to address concerns ment, and that Government would then make a raised by the Queensland Government in its decision as to how to respond to that advice. submission. Up to and during that meeting, there appeared to have been a continuing misunderstanding by

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 99

IFAD staff that my decision to proceed with was not a problem that was merely internal withdrawal was still under consideration. to the company, Australian Wool Innovation, Embassy staff confirmed that my decision had as the department tried to tell the committee. been made, but that there was still a treaty with- This was clearly a problem in which levy drawal process that had yet to take its course. payers and taxpayers had a vital interest. It I trust this satisfies the Committee with regard to was a direct and immediate problem for the Recommendation 4 of Report 60. minister. Unfortunately, this minister finds it Yours sincerely difficult to take action in a timely manner Alexander Downer when it is required. As was the case with the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport drought reforms, the US beef quota and the Legislation Committee Cormo Express fiasco, the minister sat on his hands until the situation was almost beyond Report: Government Response control. It is clear that the legislation and the Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (3.30 statutory funding agreement for AWI did not p.m.)—by leave—I move: give adequate protection for either levy pay- That the Senate take note of the document. ers or taxpayers, with the minister and his I welcome the fact that the government has department asleep at the wheel. now responded to the report by the Rural and The committee made a number of impor- Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation tant recommendations for improvements to Committee following its inquiry: Australian the way statutory funding agreements should Wool Innovation Limited—expenditure of operate, which not only are relevant to the funds under statutory funding agreement. AWI situation but also should be looked at in This inquiry was very important because it relation to similar agreements in other indus- exposed a web of mismanagement at Austra- tries. The committee formed the view that all lian Wool Services—a web of mismanage- expenditure by these private companies ment that I know Senator Ferris took a great should be in accordance with the terms of deal of interest in and made a great effort to their statutory funding agreements. It rec- expose, as did other members of the commit- ommended that such agreements should in- tee. The inquiry exposed a litany of inaction clude a requirement that all expenditure be in over a two-year period by the Minister for accordance with the strategic plan and the Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Mr research and development guidelines. Truss, and his department in the face of a With this mountain of evidence available growing body of evidence that all was not and the clear recommendations of the com- well at AWI. This was an organisation re- mittee on the table, it would have been rea- sponsible for the expenditure of $55 million sonable to think that the minister would take collected in levies from wool growers and these concerns into account when he framed $16 million provided by the Commonwealth the legislation and statutory funding agree- in matching funds. ments that have appeared in more recent As early as February 2002 the minister times. Unfortunately, these lessons seem to was told that the accountability and control have been wasted on this minister. The first systems in place were inadequate, yet he did versions of the legislation and funding not take action. The minister was also agreements for the dairy and live export in- warned of the problems through a series of dustries did not contain adequate protection articles in the Weekly Times, the Land and of the interests of either levy payers or tax- other newspapers serving the rural sector. It payers. Once again, it fell to Labor to sug-

CHAMBER 100 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 gest—and indeed insist on—improvements Board election, in breach of Corporations Law, to the documentation that should ensure that should be referred to the Australian Securities and we do not have another AWI situation. Investments Commission. I welcome the fact that the government This was very important. I would say it was has now agreed to take on board all but one the nub of much of what we inquired into. I of the recommendations the committee made am very pleased to say that Minister Truss in its report. But merely implementing these has agreed to write to the Australian Securi- recommendations will not overcome the ties and Investments Commission, providing other major problem exposed during this a copy of the report and drawing ASIC’s at- inquiry. It became quite clear in the course of tention to the views of the Senate committee. the inquiry that this minister has difficulty This was a crucial issue during our inquiries. taking action in a timely fashion, even when It referred to a large amount of money that he is confronted with a mountain of evidence was made available from levies compulsorily that urgent action is needed to protect the collected from wool growers in very difficult interests of taxpayers and levy payers. This times for the benefit of their industry. This inquiry established that, when the alarm bells money was used for a self-serving purpose were ringing for AWI, for the levy payers by a number of directors, which, when we and for the taxpayers, this minister simply did the inquiry, appeared to us to be in clear could not hear them. breach of ASIC regulations. I am very glad to see that Minister Truss has sought the ad- Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (3.35 vice of ASIC in relation to that recommenda- p.m.)—I want to take just a couple of motion. I think it is a very important issue and ments to address the issue of the govern- one that very clearly applies to a number of ment’s response to the report: Australian the independent agencies that have many Wool Innovation Limited—expenditure of millions of dollars in compulsorily acquired funds under statutory funding agreement, levies from rural industries. It is very impor- which Senator O’Brien has commented on. tant that it be clarified. As Senator O’Brien correctly said, the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legisla- A number of other areas covered in our tion Committee investigated this issue, and I other recommendations—there were eight of think it is fair to say that all members of the them—have been agreed to by the minister. I committee took the view that questions in think it is quite unfair of Senator O’Brien to relation to AWI arose from issues raised in criticise the minister as not having been up to the budget estimates process and required speed on this issue. When it was drawn to the answers. I would like to recognise the fact attention of the department during the esti- that, of the recommendations that our com- mates process and Senator O’Brien and I mittee made—all eight of them—the minis- agreed to form a subcommittee to take up ter has agreed with all but one. The one he these issues and pursue them, we did so with has not agreed with goes simply to a small a great deal of reluctance, in a sense, because detail in relation to the statutory funding it is very difficult in these sorts of circum- agreement and not a significant issue. The stances to tell wool growers that their hard- most important issue arising out of this in- earned levies are being mismanaged. But we quiry is reflected in recommendation 1. Rec- did uncover some very important shortfalls ommendation 1 reads: in the AWI and I am very glad to see that the minister is taking them up. The question whether AWI used company money to campaign for sitting directors during the 2002 Question agreed to.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 101

Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Refer- dation 4 of the committee report. A lot of the ences Committee publicity around this inquiry focused on Report: Government Response whether or not the travel advisories were Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— appropriate, whether or not there was infor- Leader of the Australian Democrats) (3.39 mation that the government was aware of p.m.)—by leave—I move: that they did not pass on or whether there were breakdowns in the system. It is impor- That the Senate take note of the document. tant to look at those matters. The Bali atrocity is, of course, in the con- With the benefit of hindsight, as I think sciousness of all Australians and has gone everyone has acknowledged, there are areas down in our nation’s history as a defining that can be and are being improved. Above event. It continues to make itself felt all else, I would say that many more Austra- throughout our nation in various ways, obvi- lians now take the time to look at travel advi- ously in particularly painful, ongoing ways sories. The reality is that, whatever the travel to those people who were directly affected advisory may have said in the past, many by that event. The Senate committee inquiry people would not have bothered looking at or into that event and into security threats in paying much attention to them. Now, I am Australia and South-East Asia in general, sure, many Australians do pay attention to whilst contentious in parts—and that is not travel advisories. At the end of it all, they surprising, given the emotions that always still make their own decision about whether come to the surface following events such as to travel or not. That is as it should be but that—was also, I believe, very valuable in people should have at least as accurate in- getting some information into the public formation as possible to form their judg- arena and in moving beyond the immediate ments on. That area is an important one. shock and imagery of the situation to some of the broader policy and government issues. The area that I am in some ways more concerned about is the response of the gov- I should say I was not part of that inquiry. ernment to the explosion and to helping the My colleague Senator Stott Despoja played a people who were affected by it. That is an key part in establishing that inquiry and was ongoing issue. People are still being affected involved in the conduct of the inquiry over a and people are still needing help. Some peo- period of time. Whilst still working, she is ple will need help for the rest of their lives. not able to be present today to speak to this Whilst we all hope there is never another motion owing to travel restrictions. But it is event like this, there is always the possibil- an issue that affects all of us. ity—some would say probability—that there The government response is a comprehen- will be. We need to ensure that, as much as it sive response to the various recommenda- is possible, survivors, victims and their fami- tions—more comprehensive than govern- lies are given prompt and effective help in ment responses often are—and that should every way possible. So I am disappointed be acknowledged. Broadly speaking, their that the government has not supported that responses to some of the recommendations recommendation in any way. It has not even are reasonably well thought through, al- supported in spirit the recommendation though I am not necessarily saying that I am which suggested the government explore in agreement with them. But there is one area establishing a national compensation scheme that I am disappointed with—that is, the for victims of terrorism related crimes and government’s refusal to support recommen- calling on the national council of Attorneys-

CHAMBER 102 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

General to develop a proposal for the har- tralia for certain victims of crime and people monisation of state laws dealing with com- in certain situations. One-off payments such pensation for victims of crime in circum- as the government may provide and suggest stances such as a terrorist attack. may be appropriate for people are often not That second part of the recommendation, adequate. One-off compensation payments to deal with the national council of Attor- are often not adequate for people that have neys-General developing harmonised laws lifelong health consequences. They need on- for the compensation of victims, was not going support. We need to look at establish- even addressed. It was just rejected and there ing support more widely, in my view, than was no further explanation at all as to the just for the victims of terror related crimes to reason. The first part, suggesting that the ensure that there is proper assistance for Commonwealth at least develop a paper con- people who are victims of crime in general sidering the establishment of a national com- where there are no other insurance mecha- pensation scheme for victims of terrorism nisms to assist them if they have ongoing related crimes, was also rejected. I think that medical expenses. They can be extremely is very unfortunate. expensive and can go on literally for 50 or 60 years of a person’s life down the track, and The government’s response is that they do impact on their families and on carers. not support this. They believe that financial and other assistance should be considered on I am very disappointed that there has been a case-by-case basis. I am sorry, but I do not a blanket rejection of the recommendation to think that is good enough. I am sure that look at establishing a compensation scheme there was evidence presented during this infor victims of terrorism related crimes. Ob- quiry—and I am aware of some myself sepa- viously we want to do as much as possible to rately—of people who do not believe that prevent such crimes occurring, but if they do they have got adequate assistance. That is not occur in the future we have to make sure as necessarily money or compensation pay- much as we can that there is adequate help ments; sometimes it is information or access for people. A national compensation scheme to other forms of support. Those are areas is a far more reliable way than just relying on where we do need to do as much as possible. government to decide on a case-by-case ba- We have to acknowledge that the trauma cre- sis what sort of help they will provide. It ated by events like this can live with people makes people in that situation have to beg for a lifetime. It can affect families and for assistance. It provides an extra level of friends and a wider group of people and, if stress not to know for sure what is available we do not deal with those things as effec- and to have to just rely on what the govern- tively and as quickly as possible, the shock- ment of the day may decide they want to pay, waves, the ramifications and the conse- in what way they want to pay or what type of quences are much greater than they other- help they want to provide. So whilst a case- wise would be or need to be. It is easy to say by-case approach may sound more efficient and hard to do—I acknowledge that. But we in some ways, the reality undoubtedly will have got to at least accept, I believe, that we always be that a whole range of factors will need to be doing a lot more. come into play determining what sort of help is provided by government and not all of During the election campaign I tried a those factors will be related to ensuring that couple of times to emphasise flaws in our people’s needs are appropriately met. compensation and insurance schemes in Aus-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 103

So that is a very disappointing response committee’s recommendation was to support from the government. In an inquiry that was what the government wanted to do. So in that valuable and where a lot of the focus was on sense the response is not surprising. But this the adequacy or otherwise of travel warn- is simply a final opportunity to express my ings, I think the part of the whole Bali trag- concern about the government’s action. edy that has not got the attention it deserves It is not the most significant thing by any is what happens to the people afterwards and means in the whole area of development as- whether there are ways we can better help sistance and international aid that the gov- people and their families. We are still a long ernment has withdrawn from the Interna- way short in this country in a whole range of tional Fund for Agricultural Development, areas in acknowledging the impact and the but I believe that it was not the best ap- role that carers and support people play in proach. Even if you accepted the govern- helping others who have been harmed by ment’s view that putting money into the fund incidents or illnesses or disabilities, and this at this stage was not the best use of devel- is another example of that. So I would urge opment assistance, to completely withdraw the government to reconsider that broader from the entire organisation was an unneces- issue as well as the narrow rejection that they sarily extreme approach. It is one that I do have come forward with here in relation to not believe was justified at all. It is not this issue. common to unilaterally withdraw from Question agreed to. agreements, from treaties and from various Joint Standing Committee on Treaties organisations that we have been part of—in Report: Government Response some cases, including this—for many years unless there is a very strong reason. Nothing Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— the government put forward suggested that Leader of the Australian Democrats) (3.49 there was such a calamitous situation that we p.m.)—by leave—I move: had to disassociate ourselves entirely from That the Senate take note of the document. the organisation, particularly given that the The 60th report of the Joint Standing Com- option was there for us simply to not con- mittee on Treaties deals with treaties tabled tribute money for a period of time to see on 2 March this year. I want to take the op- whether or not the organisation addressed portunity to repeat the concern the Democ- some of the issues that the government be- rats and I have with one aspect of that. The lieved were of concern. majority of the committee found that it was I think it was an overreaction and one that appropriate for the government to proceed had other agendas to it as part of the gov- with what they were talking about doing, ernment’s deliberate attempt to disassociate which was to formally withdraw from the itself from multilateral international aid ef- International Fund for Agricultural Devel- forts, and I do not think that sends a helpful opment, IFAD. As a member of that treaties signal either. I would be more willing to be- committee I put in a dissenting report—at lieve the government’s genuineness in rela- least I am fairly sure I did. I remember dis- tion to this action if it had shown any sign of agreeing so I hope I got around to writing a giving extra priority and extra resources to dissent. From memory, there were others on overseas aid and to overseas development the committee who also dissented. The gov- assistance more broadly. One of the govern- ernment, not surprisingly, accepted the ment’s rationales was that it wanted to repri- committee’s recommendation given that the oritise money into areas where it believed it

CHAMBER 104 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 would make more of an impact on develop- COMMITTEES ment assistance. That is a fair enough argu- Membership ment. You could debate whether or not it was The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! accurate, but it is a fair enough argument to The President has received letters from a at least put forward for consideration. But party leader and an Independent senator when it is not accompanied by any broader seeking variations to the membership of action by this government to give extra prior- committees. ity to overseas development assistance it is hard to believe that it was anything other Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— than just a pointed diplomatic snub with Minister for Immigration and Multicultural other messages attached to it—given that, as and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assist- I said, we did not need to withdraw. We ing the Prime Minister for Indigenous Af- could have just not put in money, and that fairs) (3.55 p.m.)—by leave—I move: would have still met the government’s al- That senators be discharged from and ap- leged concerns. pointed to committees as follows: It should be repeated—and I think this is Economics Legislation and References an area of debate that has slipped too far off Committees–– the agenda in recent times—that a very low Appointed—Participating member: level of international overseas aid has come Senator Brown from the Australian government, going back Environment, Communications, Infor- well into the past, back to the time of the mation Technology and the Arts Legisla- previous Labor government as well. We have tion and References Committees–– an ongoing very poor record when it comes Appointed—Participating member: to the level of overall assistance we provide Senator Brown for overseas aid and development assistance. Finance and Public Administration Leg- There is always a debate about whether that islation Committee–– could be better spent, but that should not be Appointed—Participating member: used as a cover for not spending the money Senator Brown at all. We provide unacceptably low levels of Finance and Public Administration Ref- assistance, and that has continued for far too erences Committee–– long, going back well over a decade now. I Appointed— believe it is time to re-emphasise that as a Substitute members: Senators point of public debate and of significant con- Murray, Barnett and Johnston to re- cern. Unless we can start to do more to replace Senators Ridgeway, Watson dress growing global inequality then a lot of and Heffernan for the committee’s broader problems will affect not just the inquiry into the operation of the Re- people who live in those poorer countries but gional Partnerships program Australians as well. It is in our own interest Participating member: Senator to do more in this area, and I believe that we Brown are failing to do that as a nation. Certainly Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Leg- this particular action by the government in islation and References Committees–– this area does not do anything to assist that. Appointed—Participating member: Question agreed to. Senator Brown

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 105

Legal and Constitutional Legislation at blunting the evening news of that night, and References Committees–– which would have been reporting very posi- Appointed—Participating member: tively Labor’s strategy to lift bulk-billing Senator Brown rates, to improve access to dental services for Rural and Regional Affairs and Trans- older Australians and to ensure cooperation port Legislation and References Com- between the various sectors of the health mittees–– system so that health outcomes for Austra- Appointed—Participating member: lians would have been improved. This bill Senator Brown. reflects a political strategy, not a health im- Question agreed to. provement strategy. ASSENT It is interesting to note that when the Min- A message from His Excellency the Gov- ister for Health and Ageing introduced the ernor-General was reported, informing the bill in the other place he repeatedly referred Senate that he had assented to the following to increasing the rebate from 85 to 90 per laws: cent of the scheduled fee. I understand that the Hansard had to be tidied up, but the tapes Customs Amendment (Thailand-Australia make it very clear that Mr Abbott was re- Free Trade Agreement Implementation) Act 2004 (Act No. 130, 2004) peatedly saying that the increase would be from 85 per cent to 90 per cent. It begs the Customs Tariff Amendment (Thailand- question: why? Why would he make such a Australia Free Trade Agreement Imple- mentation) Act 2004 (Act No. 131, 2004). fundamental error? Perhaps it was that the minister had a plan to do just that, to lift the HEALTH INSURANCE AMENDMENT rebate to 90 per cent not to 100 per cent, but (100% MEDICARE REBATE AND when the strategy unit of the coalition saw OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2004 Labor’s new deal to save Medicare their 90 Second Reading per cent strategy was just not going to cut the Debate resumed from 1 December, on mo- mustard, it was not going to shift focus away tion by Senator Colbeck: from Labor’s new plan. So now we have a That this bill be now read a second time. 100 per cent rebate on the Medicare scheduled fee, not because it is good health policy Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (3.56 p.m.)—The policy which leads us to be de- but because votes had to be shifted. It is also intriguing that the government took until 6 bating the Health Insurance Amendment September to announce the policy, given the (100% Medicare Rebate and Other Meas- ures) Bill 2004 was announced during the myriad of policy iterations that we have had over almost two years of this government. election campaign on 6 September as a direct counter to Labor’s new deal to save Medi- People will recall A Fairer Medicare. They care announced earlier on the same day of will remember it as a convoluted package. It the campaign. It was a policy announced was almost universally decried by doctors, with one single intent, and that intent was to hospitals and the allied health sector and, counter Labor’s policy lead in health both most importantly, by health consumers. It during the campaign and more generally. It was a policy based on Mr Howard’s first was not as a well thought through health principle when it comes to Medicare in Aus- strategy designed to deliver better health tralia, which is to pull Medicare right apart. outcomes. It was a simple electoral fix aimed He said it in 1993, and it is still there in his mind. Let us not also forget the advertising

CHAMBER 106 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 spree that occurred after A Fairer Medicare: offensive waste of money that could have $15.7 million was spent out of the health been better spent on health services. I am not budget on telling Australians that Medicare the only one who thinks that; the people who would be fairer under this strategy. It was spoke to me also think that. It was blatant $15.7 million that would have been better political advertising that should have been used in delivering health services to Austra- paid for by the Liberal Party, not the taxpay- lians. But, as we all recall, A Fairer Medicare ers of Australia. In those two iterations of was to no avail. The polling was not good; it health policy, $36 million was spent on ad- was not cutting through. So, not only did we vertising trying to persuade the community did we lose the package, A Fairer Medicare, that this government was interested in deliv- but the government threw out the minister ering quality health services to them. This and sent in Mr Abbott. Then, as you will re- expensive election commitment is recog- call, we got MedicarePlus, a slightly differ- nised as poor public policy and inflationary. ent set of strategies, but with a very similar There is nothing in this legislation to ensure outcome. The outcome was to be, and will that any part of the $1.7 billion is handed on be, a two-tiered health system, with a com- to patients, or that bulk-billing rates will in- plex safety net which is extraordinarily ex- crease. pensive to administer. Labor has concerns about this legislation, You will also recall that MedicarePlus its impact on Medicare and the government’s changed; it merged into a new title, Strength- long-term commitment to 100 per cent ening Medicare, without any clear explana- Medicare. There seems to be some confusion tion from this government as to why. The in Minister Abbott’s mind about the intent of real reasons for this transition from Medi- the bill, beyond the confusion of whether it is carePlus to Strengthening Medicare are very a 90 per cent or 100 per cent rebate. When he interesting. The word is that the focus groups introduced the bill in the House of Represen- that were asked to test the words ‘Medicare- tatives, he said that 100 per cent Medicare Plus’ took the view that this policy title will make visiting the doctor more afford- meant that the government was requiring that able, but there is nothing in this bill to ensure we would have Medicare plus more out of that any part of the $1.7 billion is handed on patients’ pockets—and how right those focus to patients. He refuses to give any guarantees groups were. This is exactly the govern- that this bill will boost bulk-billing. ‘Deci- ment’s policy position. With decreasing sions about bulk-billing,’ he says, ‘will be up bulk-billing rates and increasing out-of- to individual doctors.’ Somewhat conversely pocket costs a reality for all Australian health in his second reading speech he said: consumers, how could they come to a differ- There should be more bulk-billing, because bulk- ent view of the government’s intention? billing doctors will secure higher rebates ... Let us also not forget the second round of Well there may be, but this bill spends $1.7 advertising which ran almost right up to the billion with absolutely no guarantee that announcement of the election. That lot cost there will be. He said: us $20 million. I cannot count the number of Let me stress that all patients will benefit from people who expressed to me during that ad- this measure. vertising campaign their annoyance at the But in fact it is doctors who will benefit from repetition of that advertising campaign as it this measure, with no guarantee that any pa- appeared on their television screens, in their tients at all will benefit. To quote Mr Abbott, newspapers and on their radios. It was an

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 107 the government has invested ‘a great deal of their doctor? In my view, the answers are money’ over the past 12 months to boost GP fairly clear. They go to the availability of a incomes. And that is possibly true. When bulk-billing doctor and the out-of-pocket Labor asked his office and the department costs that the consumer will have from visit- for justifications for his claim that doctors’ ing a non-bulk-billing doctor. Is it that we are incomes will increase by $20,000, we found looking into our pockets and purses and not that there is no evidence to be had. It appears finding the average $40 up-front fee and that he just conjured this figure out of thin making the decision that the annual check-up air. can be put off for a while, that the Pap smear In the meantime, the AMA is urging can wait, that the prostate check-up can also members not to let this increased rebate take be put off and that we might get through this them back to the ‘treadmill of bulk-billing’. winter without a flu shot? Nobody prefers to It is disappointing that the President of the have a Pap smear or a prostate check-up, and AMA, Dr Glasson, has trumpeted ‘the be- the additional disincentive of finding $40 for ginning of the end of bulk-billing’. But, the pleasure of doing so may be the answer sadly, he is right, and while the AMA might to those six million fewer GP visits that the be pleased that the government is helping statistics bear out. This statistic should be of them discard bulk-billing as a relic of the concern to us all, and in my view it has a past, the Australian people are not. I note that direct correlation to the availability of bulk- Dr Glasson’s view about bulk-billing is not billing doctors and to the out-of-pocket costs. shared by all doctors, particularly by many In fact, the forward estimates for this bill GPs. Other doctor groups and many individ- support the fact that GP attendances are de- ual GPs have expressed their disappointment creasing. There is no growth factored into the with the position of the AMA and their desire forward estimates, with less spending in for the retention of bulk-billing, especially at 2007-08 than in 2005-06. high levels. A recent survey of GPs, how- Somehow this government has managed ever, has shown that more than 80 per cent to spend $1.7 billion in a rash election prom- are now charging a standard fee in excess of ise which lacks both effective health policy $40, so even under the best of circumstances, outcomes and sound economic principles. As patients will still be out of pocket. A second if to highlight the lack of economic credibil- survey has found that more than 80 per cent ity, the forward estimates also omit the costs of GPs now bulk-bill only some of their pa- of the provision to increase the fees paid by tients. The consequences will be that fewer the Department of Veterans’ Affairs for GP people will get the medical care they need services from 100 per cent to 115 per cent of because they cannot afford to visit the doctor. the equivalent Medicare fee—$83 million More people will miss out on preventive was just forgotten. Veterans with the gold health checks and too many people will end card and their GPs might have reason to be up in our emergency departments at public concerned if this funding is not forthcoming. hospitals. This legislative increase in the Medicare The decrease in GP attendances has con- rebate from 85 per cent to 100 per cent will cerned me for a long time. Over the life of mean an additional rebate of $4.60 for a the last parliament, six million fewer GP at- standard 15-minute GP consultation. Across tendances occurred than were projected. This all GP services the average additional rebate is a statistic that should have us all con- is $5. Where the service is bulk-billed this is cerned. Why is it that people are not going to in addition to the bulk-billing incentives of

CHAMBER 108 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

$5.10, or $7.65 for concession card holders on GP incomes—that is, the department has and children under 16. The government ar- not chosen to make any assumptions on what gues that this package provides a benefit to percentage of the rebate increase GPs will those patients whose doctors do not bulk-bill, absorb into income and what they will pass but that is only true if the doctor hands on on to patients. If a GP who sees an average part or all of the increased rebate. The aver- of 7,000 patients per annum—that is the na- age out-of-pocket cost of seeing a GP who tional average—kept the full rebate increase, does not bulk-bill is now $15.24. If the GP their income growth would be around hands on all of the additional rebate to the $35,000. Minister Abbott has been quoted as patient, the average out-of-pocket cost will saying that this package will increase GPs’ be around $10—that is, $15.24 less the $5. incomes by about $20,000. That means that But there is nothing in this proposal that re- he is expecting doctors to keep around $3 quires the GP to do so, and the expectation and hand on $2 to their patients. But appar- from most health economists is that GPs will ently the department has not conducted mod- absorb the additional rebate, albeit over time. elling that can be analysed or tested. The passing of this legislation will pose Last month the AMA announced their an- some very difficult questions for GPs. GPs nual recommended fee schedule, which is do not like having to change their charging from a higher base but indexed at 3.41 per regimes, and I understand that; they have cent. A survey conducted in November for a already had to make significant changes over GP journal found that 52 per cent of GPs the last three or four years, and they do not were planning to increase their fees, with like doing it. That is for a good reason: their more than 80 per cent of GPs surveyed now patients do not like change. Their patients charging a standard fee in excess of $40. want certainty; they want to know what they Doctors groups will continue to push for are going to be charged when they attend the higher indexation and for implementation of doctor. Patients do not like repeated changes the recommendations of the Attendance Item in the billing practices occurring. But I am Restructure Working Group, which would afraid this legislation does not give certainty better reward GPs for longer consultations. to doctors in determining what their billing But Mr Abbott has already indicated that practices may be into the future. there will be no major health reforms, no Many GPs have welcomed the Howard MBS restructure and no more money. Realis- government’s 100 per cent Medicare pack- tically, with the election over there will be no age, but there is concern that the level of in- more attention paid to Medicare until the dexation does not match the increase in doc- next election looms. tors’ costs and that the benefits of the pack- Labor will support the technical amend- age will erode over time. Despite requests, ment made to this bill to correct an error in the Department of Health and Ageing has not drafting with respect to the eligibility for the supplied the Labor Party with details of how Medicare safety net. We will also support the it has arrived at the annual cost of the meas- provision that will ensure that the current ure. It has indicated that the figures are in- relativity between the payments to GPs for dexed by the current WCI5 index of around gold card holders and everyone else is main- two per cent a year and has admitted that the tained and not eroded. However, as I said number of GP visits will continue to fall over earlier, we note that the bill does not specify time. The department has confirmed that it the cost of this measure. has not modelled the effect of this package

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 109

Labor has serious concerns about the have a mandate, and we will implement it. I long-term impact of the central provision of congratulate Tony Abbott, the relevant minis- 100 per cent return on rebates on Medicare ter, and the government on acting quickly to itself and on patients’ out-of-pocket costs. I implement the mandate. From 1 January think we have made the case that this is poor 2005 the rebate for GP services will be in- health policy and it is poor economic policy. creased from 85 to 100 per cent of the Medi- It is also this government’s excuse so they care schedule fee. That builds on the gov- will not have to address needed health care ernment’s Strengthening Medicare strategy, reforms in primary health care delivery, no and it commits $1.8 billion over four years to matter how crucial that issue is. the measure. What Senator McLucas did not We note that the bill does not stipulate put on the public record was an apology to what services will be covered in the schedule the Australian people with regard to Labor’s that will be brought to the Senate in regula- Medicare Gold policy, which was a complete tion form, but it amends the Health Insurance failure. She did not apologise for their vehe- Act 1973 to enable a Medicare benefit of 100 ment opposition to the 30 per cent private per cent of the schedule fee to be paid for health insurance rebate and the increase that certain services, as described in regulations. the government has proposed for Australians Can I say that Labor will be looking very aged 65 and over. I think the Labor Party closely at those regulations when they come should apologise, and it should now come on before the chamber, to ensure that the gov- board and support those initiatives. ernment’s policy position is adhered to and As a member of the Senate Select Com- that the policy is applied equally to all items. mittee on Medicare, it was quite clear to me The Howard government, however, can and to others that were watching and listen- claim that this measure is subject to an elec- ing that the Labor members were seeking for tion mandate, given its high exposure in the the Australian health system to be national- election campaign. We can hope that at least ised. They want a nationalised health system, in the short term some patients may experi- whereas, at the moment, we have a good bal- ence a benefit from the measure because ance between public and private. You see, their GP will pass on some, or hopefully all, the measure that we have in terms of Medi- of the rebate increase. For this reason Labor care will not affect GPs’ eligibility for bulk- did not oppose this measure in the House of billing incentives and for other payments Representatives and we will not oppose this from the Australian government through measure in the Senate today, but we do want other programs. In my own state of Tasma- to record in some detail our very real con- nia, GPs can still claim an extra $7.50 each cerns about the bill. It is the government’s time they bulk-bill Commonwealth conces- mandate, however, and they must take full sion card holders or children under the age of responsibility for its consequences. 16. In fact, we are the only state that has blanket coverage. I acknowledge that and Senator BARNETT (Tasmania) (4.15 thank the Howard government for that. Cer- p.m.)—I note that the last speaker, Senator tainly Tasmanians do the same, and they did McLucas, indicated that it is a government that at the election on 9 October. mandate that is being implemented through the Health Insurance Amendment (100% I want to make a couple of comments with Medicare Rebate and Other Measures) Bill regard to the AMA. I was guest speaker at 2004. I thank her for acknowledging that we their Christmas meeting just last week in Hobart. It was ably led by Dr Michael Aizen,

CHAMBER 110 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 who is the president of the AMA in Tasma- In conclusion, I want to thank Tony Ab- nia, and Rodney Cameron-Tucker, who is the bott for his leadership. I want to thank the executive director. It was a good function. government and acknowledge the work of We had discussions and meetings with regard Christopher Pyne. He is demonstrating ex- to a whole range of health policies. I can as- cellent understanding and leadership as Par- sure you that they are very supportive of this liamentary Secretary to the Minister for particular initiative. In terms of the health Health and Ageing. Finally, I support the policies that are benefiting the state of Tas- recent announcement by the Prime Minister mania, we are investing $12 million into a to have a review of our health system—the new medical school. We announced last year Andrew Podger AO review. In terms of the that we are adding 21 new medical places for improvement to the delivery of our health that medical school. It is going from 61 services, I think that will be good. The medical places to 82 medical places, which Health Insurance Amendment (100% Medi- is tremendous. The Australian government care Rebate and Other Measures) Bill 2004 will be injecting an extra $220 million over should be supported without amendment. It the next five years into Tasmania’s public will deliver many benefits for the people of hospital system. All those things are happen- Australia in the delivery of efficient and ef- ing, and I will comment further on them. fective health services. Access to GPs is improving. It has been Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (4.21 difficult in Tasmania because there are many p.m.)—We are dealing here with the Health rural and regional areas. In terms of our Insurance Amendment (100% Medicare Re- Strengthening Medicare initiative, we now bate and Other Measures) Bill 2004—a bill have an extra doctor at Exeter on the West that the government says will make medical Tamar. It has taken quite a bit of work to services more affordable than ever before. I make that happen. Dr Andrew Clarke is quite think that is rather an unwise claim on the relieved. We have more doctors for the part of the government. However, the claim north-east, based at Scottsdale. Together with has been made, and the success or otherwise the Liberal Senate team, we have worked of this measure will be measured against that very hard to ensure that under our Strength- claim. As we all know, Medicare is a critical ening Medicare package we have more doc- component of the Australian health care en- tors and nurses in those rural and regional vironment. It provides a taxpayer-funded parts of Tasmania and indeed across the universal rebate system for primary and spe- country. cialist health consultation fees. It currently What Labor fails to acknowledge and does pays 85 per cent of the schedule fee to pa- not want to accept is that Strengthening tients. The problem is that, for the last eight Medicare is already working. A few weeks years or so, doctors have been charging well ago Labor saw the results in the increase in above the schedule fee, complaining that its the bulk-billing rates and could not believe indexation has not kept pace with their ex- them. Those bulk-billing incentives have pectations, their professional status as spe- paid a dividend. In Tasmania we received the cialists, in the case of GPs, or what is de- largest increase of 14.8 percentage points, up scribed as rising health costs over that same to 63.2 per cent. That does not make it rosy, time. but it is still a huge improvement. It is easy I think it is also fair to say that there was to see that Labor has been embarrassed by an expectation that Mr Howard, a long-term that fact. critic of Medicare and a supporter of private

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 111 enterprise, would act to improve doctors’ 2005. Presumably, it would have passed in- incomes, but he did not—at least not until tact, and we would be looking at a massive bulk-billing rates became a monthly feature extension of private health insurance in this in our newspapers and a political problem country and the lack of fairness that goes that had to be solved. The bulk-billing rate with the concept. dropped substantially, from 79.3 per cent in The government then dropped its pre- 1995-96 to 67.6 per cent in 2003-04. It was ferred privatisation approach and came up also the case that overall numbers of consul- with MedicarePlus—which went on to be tations fell annually, when you would expect renamed ‘Strengthening Medicare’—a $1 them to be increasing, and that out-of-pocket billion package over four years of bulk- costs spiralled over that period. More people billing incentives for children and concession have poorer prospects of accessing a bulk- patients, with an additional $5 in metropoli- billing doctor, although the most recent fig- tan areas and $7.50 in designated outer met- ures show a very slight increase in rates as a ropolitan, rural, regional and remote areas. result of measures introduced by the gov- The government also introduced its two ernment. open-ended safety nets, the latter proving to We also saw, in the last couple of weeks, be extremely inflationary, particularly for figures showing the results of the shortage of specialists like obstetricians. Now we are doctors—extreme in many places, but over- dealing with an across-the-board increase in all around the country the number of doctors Medicare rebates at a cost of $1.8 billion— per 100,000 people is now 800 less than it an arbitrary one-off increase in the rebate of was about 10 years ago. So the actual rate of about $5 per consultation. doctor provision has also been in decline. As Welcome as this increase is in terms of to- bulk-billing fell, the level of copayments for tal increases in the dollars that are committed GP services grew, rising from an average of to health, the Democrats say that it does not $7.93 per consultation in 1995-96 to $13.98 address the major problem—that is, spiral- in 2003-04. Of course, it is not just the case ling doctors’ fees, particularly specialists’ that there have been rising copayments for fees, and the fall in bulk-billing rates. We GPs; it is also the case—in fact, more so— have argued in this place that too much of for the specialists in our system. Since 1996, the Medicare debate is around bulk-billing the level of copayments for specialist ser- rates and not enough about encouraging doc- vices has risen from $15.82 to $30.55 in tors to stick to the schedule fee or looking at 2003-04. In response to these damaging fig- how Medicare could be redesigned to be ures and community concern about access to more comprehensive, integrated in a primary GPs and the cost of medical care, the gov- health care system and better suited to the ernment introduced its A Fairer Medicare needs of the 21st century. I will come back to package. The government’s plan then was to that issue. allow private health insurance to cover out- Before I do so, let me say that the meas- of-pocket costs. ures to be introduced by the Health Insurance A Fairer Medicare was considered by the Amendment (100% Medicare Rebate and Senate, and the government failed to per- Other Measures) Bill 2004 are, according to suade the majority in this place that it was a the government, designed to make GP ser- good idea. I think it is useful for us to specu- vices more affordable than ever before. The late what would have happened had this bill will increase the rebate from 85 per cent original package been introduced on 1 July

CHAMBER 112 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 to 100 per cent of the Medicare schedule fee rates that have followed on from that infor all consultations, whether or not they are crease in the rebate. This time the govern- bulk-billed. According to Mr Abbott, the ment is just increasing the rebate, whether or theory is that, if your GP bulk-bills then they not the GP bulk-bills. It is possible that this will receive about $5 more for treating you, increase to the rebate will help maintain giving the average GP a pay rise of $15,000 bulk-billing rates in the short term. Those a year. On the other hand, if you are already doctors who are currently bulk-billing may paying up-front to see your GP then, rather continue to do so—after all, they will be get- than getting back $26.25 from Medicare, ting more money for doing this, and this is under the new deal you will be able to claim on top of earlier incentives for bulk-billing $30.85. This means that for many people the groups that the government decided were gap between what they get back from Medi- entitled to be bulk-billed. But there is no real care—currently it is about $15 a visit, on incentive for those GPs who are not bulk- average—should drop to about $10. In the- billing to start to do so. ory, this increase to the rebate should allevi- As an aside, I note that the President of ate the higher fees paid by patients who are the AMA, Dr Bill Glasson, commented on not bulk-billed. But what will really happen the government’s proposals and said that and what effect it will have on costs for the they ‘allow flexibility’ between those doctors average person is very much open to ques- who want to bulk-bill and those doctors who tion. do not. So the question is: how long will it be If we look at the effects of some past ini- before the pressures on bulk-billing come tiatives, it may give us some indication. back again? Less than a week after the How- Since the introduction of the government’s ard government was re-elected, the AMA bulk-billing incentives there is some evi- recommended an increase of $2 in its rec- dence that bulk-billing rates have in- ommended fee for the cost of a standard doc- creased—67.6 per cent in March 2004, rising tor’s visit. That essentially erodes much of to 70.2 per cent in June 2004, and 71.4 per the benefit of the $1.8 billion government cent in September 2004. This seems to sug- election promise already, both for the GP and gest that bulk-billing rates are affected by for patients. Of course, the AMA itself has increases in the schedule fee. On the face of said that these new measures will ‘release it, that looks promising for the success of the GPs from the shackles of compulsory bulk- rebate. But—and it is a big but—the earlier billing in the new year’—a move ‘welcomed increases to the schedule fee were of course by the AMA’. Bulk-billing has never been tied to bulk-billing. In other words, to get compulsory; nonetheless, that was its com- extra money the doctor needed to bulk-bill ment and I think it should alarm those people under 16-year-olds and concession card who think it is important for bulk-billing to holders. The AMA has said that the bulk- be accessible to as many people as possible. billing rise is due to the extra payments for The government has steadfastly refused to bulk-billing, and that is pretty self-evident. develop a proper negotiated indexation sys- So the government offered monetary incen- tem for the schedule fee, and now that tives to GPs to increase the percentage of schedule fee means very little. Presumably patients they bulk-billed, which they did. the next time there is pressure to increase the But this time around, the government has rebate, instead of looking at the schedule chosen to ignore its own evidence and to fee—which is of course the basis on which ignore the recent increases in bulk-billing the 85 per cent rebate was applied and on

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 113 which the 100 per cent rebate is now to be In the months following the introduction applied—are we going to see a further in- of the new incentives, out-of-pocket costs crease in the percentage? For instance, if this continued to rise—albeit somewhat more is taking us from 85 per cent to 100 per cent, slowly. To see a GP, people who are not the next time there is a complaint from doc- bulk-billed are now paying, on average, tors, the next time there is a significant in- $15.24 over and above the rebate, which is crease in the cost, will we see the percentage about 12 per cent more than this time last go up to 115 per cent? Will it be another ar- year. Doctors, it seems, are collecting the $5 bitrary handout that shirks the real issue— and $7.50 bonuses for bulk-billing children that is, containing the schedule fee? and the needy but they are charging other This is very similar to the decision that patients much more. Other past evidence was made earlier this year on the operational suggests that doctors tend to absorb rebate grants for aged care, where the government rises by increasing their fees to match patient announced supplementary grants. Instead of benefits. So I think it is likely that we will dealing with the underlying problems of in- see higher doctors’ fees for those people who dexing that operational grant and looking at are not able to access bulk-billing. the real costs of providing aged care, the According to a survey of 450 GPs in New government announced a supplementary South Wales and Victoria conducted for the grant which made it look as if it was doing Sun-Herald in October, 59 per cent of GPs something but which will of course lead to surveyed intended to increase their fees in another hiatus a few years down the track. the next six months and a further 15 per cent Whilst the debate about Medicare over the of those GPs surveyed said they intended to last couple of years has been about bulk- reduce their bulk-billing work. Given that billing rates, there are of course some who many in the medical profession and govern- will never get access to bulk-billing—like ment are arguing that bulk-billing is over- most people in rural areas and people in rated and that the most important thing is some metropolitan areas where doctors do that everyone has access to a doctor they can not want to work. For such people, keeping afford to see, even if it is not free, why is the overall fees down to a reasonable level is a government introducing a measure that not much more important issue. The government only is extremely unlikely to have any mean- argues that, if you are paying up-front to see ingful effect on bulk-billing rates but also is your GP, the extra $5 or so provided in this likely to increase costs, rather than keep legislation is money in your pocket. But we them affordable? know that that depends on how doctors react We would also argue that there is a press- to this rebate, and that is by no means cer- ing need—and it is very disappointing that tain. Many doctors will no doubt keep their we have $1.8 billion to spend and the gov- present fees. However, some will almost cer- ernment has not looked at other options—to tainly increase them—especially those who look at other ways of making Medicare more feel undervalued and who are not yet charg- relevant. For example, there could be better ing at the highest rate. Where doctors are in collaboration between state and federal gov- short supply—and there are long waiting ernments in providing health care. We have lists in some areas—this will mean that doc- seen some small examples of that—out-of- tors are in a relatively strong bargaining po- hours clinics, for instance—but very little by sition to raise their fees. way of universally applied options that might improve people’s access. We have not seen

CHAMBER 114 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 any expansion of options for community an open-ended cheque. There is nothing based clinics where salaried doctors might more open-ended and inflationary than the work, for instance. safety net that has been agreed. The Democ- We have not seen any more investment in rats will be attempting to amend this legisla- preventative health care or any expansion of tion. We would like to see the measures in primary health care options, such as allied this bill confined to bulk-billing consulta- health professionals. Having psychologists tions. We think that makes a lot of sense, and deal with people with depression and other I will be hoping to see support in the Senate disorders makes much more sense than hav- for doing so. ing these people see GPs. Including mid- Senator MARK BISHOP (Western Aus- wives in the Medicare rebate would make tralia) (4.37 p.m.)—The Health Insurance more sense. There is an enormous shortage Amendment (100% Medicare Rebate and of obstetricians in this country, and they are Other Measures) Bill 2004 brings to a tem- the ones who are pushing up their fees enor- porary end a three-year saga concerning the mously, yet 80 per cent of women with gold card, which has been needlessly en- healthy pregnancies and healthy babies could dured by the veteran community. In that time well be assisted by midwives practising in the government has failed repeatedly to fully the community as opposed to those who are support the gold card. Political fear just prior in hospitals. We could have nurse practitio- to the election environment jolted the gov- ners doing a great deal more than they cur- ernment to address the problem. This bill, as rently do, and we could be addressing the it applies to the gold card, is essentially a appalling state of Indigenous health in this political fix. country. We could also be looking at oral That observation also applies to the gen- health and mental health needs, both of eral Medicare policy, which this bill attempts which are grossly underfunded. to address. Indeed, it is amazing to consider In conclusion, Australia needs to be look- the almighty reversal in policy from this ing much more at models of care that pro- government. We can all remember the dia- vide us with the sort of health care that we tribe from the current Prime Minister about need. We need to be looking at other ways of abolishing Medicare. Medicare was first on funding doctors and our primary care practi- the chopping block as a result of his narrow tioners rather than at just simply the fee-for- approach. There was no place for public service arrangements that we currently have. health care in a philosophy which predomi- We need a government to demonstrate lead- nately backed a private model. ership and to tackle the hard and increasingly The undermining began when the gov- urgent issues by looking at our system as a ernment propped up the private health insur- whole rather than playing around with hap- ance funds with massive tax breaks for those hazard and arbitrary increases to the rebate who could afford it. The plot was to simply and complicated and unsustainable safety net let Medicare die as bulk-billing diminished. arrangements. Stealth was the weapon of choice to kill I was at the Press Club lunch this week Medicare, and that was clearly the ideologi- and heard parliamentary secretary Chris cal approach. But ideology does not always Pyne criticising Labor’s Medicare Gold work—political clout does. Australians made package—not that we have not criticised it, clear their attachment to universal health but his main area of criticism was that it was

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 115 care; hence the abandonment of the ideol- population. The sceptics, however, observe ogy—certainly for the time being. that publicly available research shows veter- The Howard government now says it has ans enjoy about the same level of health as become the champion of Medicare and bulk- their non-veteran peers in the same age co- billing, but this bill shows why that is not hort. They also note that the level of consul- necessarily the case. There is nothing in this tation is wholly within the discretion of the legislation that strengthens Medicare. There practising GP. So there is some degree of is nothing to ensure that any of the $1.7 bil- myth about the attachment of GPs to the lion will be passed on to patients. Medicare, health care of veterans. It is probably correct we are told, is all the government’s idea and to say that it is a straight commercial matter. Australians should be grateful for this GPs demonstrated this when they went on enlightened policy. Total humbug, of course, strike against the Department of Veterans’ but it does show the effectiveness of change Affairs early in 2003. They simply staged a in our political system. walkout, saying that their fees were insuffi- Despite the pain of defending Medicare, cient. They left thousands of veterans and we on this side are pleased to see the ALP war widows high and dry. Dentists now policy for universal health care adopted. That threaten the same successful tactic. Medical does not mean that there is going to be any specialists embarked on this course some end to the skulduggery. Australians remain time ago. There is no confusion in their rep- alert to the fact that this approach is not far resentations: it is about the fees or the money below the surface. Once government reve- involved—that is, it is a straight commercial nues begin to tighten, doctors’ claims for pay matter where veterans provide great lever- increases might meet a little more opposi- age. tion, and the whole sorry saga of bulk-billing The most recent chapter in this saga oc- will return to the political agenda. Then we curred prior to the last election. The govern- will see another last-minute rescue, probably ment, as part of its ad hoc decisions to save immediately prior to the next election. The bulk-billing, introduced a new schedule of pattern is plain to see. fees called MedicarePlus. This was version Today I would like to address the last part one, and version two quickly followed. Both of the bill which provides for an increase in versions increased payments to doctors who gold card fees. The bill increases the gold bulk-billed, but these changes left veterans card fee from 100 per cent to 115 per cent of and the gold card out of step. The Medicare- the schedule fee. This effectively returns the Plus schedule of fees was almost the same as margin over Medicare previously available the gold card schedule. In some cases it was for GPs accepting the gold card. For the re- better. GPs, through the AMA, made it plain cord, with the next indexation taken into ac- that they would charge Medicare rather than count, that margin is $7.62 for level A con- the gold card where the Medicare card had a sultations, $8.62 for level B consultations, higher fee. They no longer spoke of special and $12.78 for level C consultations. It respect for veterans. should also be noted that about 78 per cent of Nevertheless, the gold card remains the consultations for veterans are at level B, and flagship of veterans benefits in the area of that rate, as I said, is $8.62. health. It is at the heart of veterans health GPs claim this is the result of more comcare. It is always at the centre of all argu- plex disabilities emerging in the veteran ments of those seeking changes to the status

CHAMBER 116 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 of their service. This is perfectly understand- public demonstration of their commitment to able because the gold card is free private that service. health insurance for life, for all conditions. It But it became increasingly obvious that is due recognition to those Australians who centralised health services were no longer served overseas. It provides for those with the most convenient or efficient model. As serious disabilities from their service. It also well, publicly managed institutions went out assists widows whose partner was a veteran. of favour as governments sought to out- It is a badge of service and, of course, it is source or devolve service delivery down- greatly prized. wards. Alternative sources of state public and The government, through the Minister for private health care were available and they Health and Ageing, focused only on Medi- continued to grow. In many cases these al- care. The government chose to ignore the ternatives were just as suitable and were lo- veterans gold card. This, we suspect, was due cated far more conveniently. Despite initial to the myopia of the health bureaucracy. misgivings the sale and transfer of the repa- They have long regarded separate health sys- triation hospital network has been a suc- tems for veterans as redundant in a world of cess—it has been the best of both worlds. universal health care. This is an interesting Former repatriation hospitals retained their attitude and one worth exploring. The origins specialised care and priority for veterans but of health care stem from the enormous task their monopoly was largely removed. For that faced our community at the end of partners and families this was of great value World War I. Many young Australians re- as travel in our cities can be quite difficult, turned home badly maimed. At that time particularly for our ageing World War II gen- there was no basic public health system eration. which could cope with the enormous de- Along with this, the electronic card sys- mands. Additionally, the specific care re- tem developed. This streamlined manage- quired was often highly specialised. It cen- ment and facilitated more diverse provision tred on wound management and care for the of care. Rationalisation of these cards, which limbless, the blind and those with ongoing denoted different levels of entitlement for serious illnesses. A network of repatriation health care, also took place from time to time hospitals grew from defence hospitals and as part of government policy changes. From continued right up until the last 10 years. this emerged the gold card, which was given These hospitals cared for and treated vet- firstly to ex-prisoners of war and the totally erans. They were part of the Department of and permanently incapacitated. War widows Vet er a ns’ Affairs. They were considered spe- then became eligible, and then its use was cial institutions which reflected the commu- extended to those with severe disabilities nity commitment to dedicated care for veter- who also received some part of the service ans. Despite the rapid growth in public pension. In more recent times we have seen health this chain of repatriation hospitals eligibility extended to all those who are over continued as a Commonwealth responsibil- 70 years with qualifying service. It has also ity. They had their own special ethos and been made available to ADF personnel seri- were commonly regarded by veterans as ously disabled from their service. Thus a ‘ours’. Veterans rightly have always regarded limited and, in some senses, declining group their service to the nation as not only differ- of veterans became a much larger group— ent but unique. These institutions, as part of particularly in the last three to five years, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, were a when the numbers have increased by almost

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 117

300 per cent. For the AMA and GPs this be- ment is still in trouble with respect to spe- came a Trojan horse. The population for cialists. Veterans are now very seriously in- which they had done a special deal suddenly convenienced by lack of access to specialist doubled and in some cases tripled. It is no care. For the specialists it is a straight com- surprise therefore that their attitude became mercial matter. They get more revenue from less accommodating and less charitable. Medicare and private health funds. They say The range of health services attached to they treat veterans and widows below cost, the gold card is almost limitless. So it should and that stretches too far their commitment be of no surprise that veterans health care is to the care of the veteran population. a major business. The total budget this year, In Tasmania, as all veterans there know, for example, is almost $4.4 billion. Of this, specialist care is simply inordinately difficult over $700 million is paid to medical practi- to obtain. Orthopaedic care, I am advised, is tioners, and $1.67 billion is paid to public available only as a public patient, which and private hospitals. A further $520 million means joining the waiting list. Access to spe- is paid for other health care. Aged residential cialists in Tasmania has always been diffi- care costs $770 million and DVA administra- cult—predominately due to the size of the tion takes another $110 million. In anybody’s population—but now commercial reality has terms, these are massive amounts of public made it even more difficult. If the govern- money. It simply illustrates the huge cost of ment wants to honour the gold card in that military service over and above the direct state, it has no option but to pay up. defence effort required at the time of en- So far all that has been offered is that from gagement. This could be called the down- 1 January next year the fees will increase by stream cost of war. Unfortunately, it is not 15 per cent for consultations and 20 per cent something ever considered when costs are for procedures. Whether that will be suffi- estimated at the time of engagement. An cient is, of course, at this stage unknown, but even greater cost is compensation, which this the feedback my office and I are receiving year will be $2.8 billion—not including ser- from the AMA and interested parties in Tas- vice age pensions. This represents human mania is that it will not be. Specialists’ rela- loss, either through disabilities or through tions with DVA are poor, and they have made loss of a husband or a parent. the point repeatedly that other business is So veterans health is big business. But it is now more commercially attractive. not a business that is well known or under- I am therefore pessimistic about future stood. In considering it we must be aware of prospects. But worse, veterans will continue its origins. We must be aware of its very spe- to suffer. The gold card in Tasmania is, at cial nature within our current system. It is least, devalued currency, and veterans feel let built on the public commitment to care for down. They believe the public commitments those who serve our nation’s defence. It is to them are not being honoured. As ex- historic but remains absolutely relevant in pressed by my colleagues, the opposition terms of its tradition and commitment to support the bill but, as far as the veterans generations who might go to war in the fu- gold card is concerned, we note that this saga ture. That is why the gold card has become will continue. such a sensitive issue in recent years. That is Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) why the government panicked in its election (4.53 p.m.)—The Health Insurance Amend- commitment to increase GP fees to 115 per ment (100% Medicare Rebate and Other cent. And that is why the Howard govern-

CHAMBER 118 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Measures) Bill 2004 implements the coali- would fund through the public system, while tion’s election policy to increase the Medi- the government’s policy delivers more prof- care rebate for consultations provided by its to insurance companies, private hospitals general practitioners. It is a long way short of and private medical practitioners. The 100 per cent Medicare. The government Greens are not opposed to private health claims that the measure will make GP ser- care, but we say the priority for public funds vices more affordable, but that is far from should be public health care. Public funds certain. In fact, the AMA has recommended spent on health services should deliver pub- GPs increase the fees they charge. This lic benefits, such as timely access to quality means that increasing the Medicare rebate to care based on medical need, not capacity to 100 per cent of the schedule fee will be pay. The Greens’ vision for health care is fair meaningless for the many patients who can- and economically responsible, and is sup- not find a bulk-billing doctor. In some ported by the recently released OECD report places, 70 per cent of the population cannot on private health insurance. find a bulk-billing doctor and they will con- The coalition government finds itself in a tinue to pay out-of-pocket expenses. Con- difficult position when it comes to our public trary to the Minister for Health and Ageing’s health system. It is led by a prime minister recent refrain that these expenses have fallen, who abhors the concept of universal access in many parts of Australia people are being to fee-free public services for essential health charged a sum that is twice the schedule fee. needs. Yet this is the principle that underpins The measure this bill implements will make Medicare. Australians, unlike the Prime Min- next to no difference to these people when ister, support Medicare. They see the per- they visit their GP. sonal, social and economic benefits of pro- Just like the ill-conceived Medicare safety viding essential health services through pro- net, which this bill also addresses, this meas- gressive taxation. So the Prime Minister de- ure simply provides more cash to doctors cided that his earlier blunt, public condemna- with no public health outcome. It is part of tion of Medicare, and bulk-billing in particu- the government’s drive to privatise our pub- lar, was not politically palatable. Instead, the lic health system. This drive includes the government seeks to destroy Medicare by differential GP rebate that focuses on bulk- stealth, little by little, measure by measure. billing some people, not all Australians, and The Minister for Health and Ageing, Tony which was extended to certain marginal seats Abbott, boasted this week that the Howard just before the election was called; the 21 per government had invested $11 billion in cent rise in the patient charge for essential health in just over a year—since he has been medicines that takes effect from next month; health minister. The critical question people and the wasteful $2.4 billion a year private are asking is: where has it gone? It has gone health insurance rebate which the govern- towards election bribes, towards ill- ment now wants to extend at a cost of $1 conceived measures and straight into the billion over four years and which the ALP pockets of private health insurance funds. says it will now support after having de- Not only does Minister Abbott think out-of- nounced it during the election campaign. pocket expenses are inevitable; he thinks These measures result in a massive trans- they are desirable. Speaking during the defer of public health funds to the private sec- bate on this bill earlier this week, he said: tor. Australians are increasingly left to pay No-one likes to pay gaps. Everyone would prefer, for health services they expected their taxes if possible, to pay nothing and, if we have to pay

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 119 something, to pay as little as possible, but the fact there are no financial barriers to any Austra- is that there is no such thing as free medicine. All lian who needs essential public health ser- health services have to be paid for, either by tax- vices. That is why the Greens argue so payers or by patients, and it is no bad thing that strongly that we should be promoting bulk- there are at least some price signals in our health billing for everyone and not just for some system, because it makes patients conscious of what they are getting and is a significant deterrent people, as the government has done with the against overservicing and overuse of our health differential rebate. It is incomprehensible services. how the health minister can say with a Not only are these remarks astonishing; they straight face, ‘Bulk-billing is important and are alarming. To have the health minister should be widely available,’ when his gov- discourage people from seeing a GP when ernment has done so much to restrict access they need to or from buying their prescrip- to bulk-billing. tion medicines is not only socially indefensi- The Medicare safety net is another poor ble; it is economically irresponsible. Preven- piece of health policy. The Greens argued tative medicine is the best medicine and it is against the Medicare safety net from the start good economics. ‘Price signals’ in areas of because we could see what the government essential services disadvantage low-income refused to see—that the safety net would be earners and their families. In the case of expensive and it would encourage higher health, they disadvantage people with serious fees. The government originally forecast the and chronic illnesses. The mother of a small safety net to cost $120 million this financial child with measles does not need to be re- year, but Treasury figures released just be- minded about ‘price signals’; she needs to be fore the election revealed that the anticipated able to afford to take her son to the doctor. cost has doubled already. If the trend contin- The government’s price signals— ues then the safety net will cost more than $1 abandoning bulk-billing for many Austra- billion over the next four years. This is more lians—have led to a fall of seven per cent than double the original $440 million fore- over the last six years in the number of GP cast. services. The minister said he was confident The government’s economic irresponsibil- that the government’s policies would cause ity continues when it comes to the Pharma- the number of GP services to rise ‘at least for ceutical Benefits Scheme. The government the next couple of years’. There is no reason has reportedly ensured that US drug compa- to suspect that the government’s policies will nies will be able to take legal action to stop increase affordability of GP services and, generic drugs entering the Australian mar- even if they did, the minister is not confident ketplace. This arrangement—part of the final it would last very long. The government’s round of negotiations to secure the imple- approach is short-sighted—suited to the elec- mentation of the US-Australia Free Trade toral cycle but not to building a robust, so- Agreement—will undermine the Pharmaceu- cially just and economically responsible tical Benefits Scheme, which relies heavily health system. on generic medicines. As we know, low-income earners are more The government has also taken the short- likely to have an illness or chronic condition sighted view of imposing a higher patient than high-income earners, but ill health can charge on sick people as a quick fix to ensur- strike any one of us at any time. Therefore, ing that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme we all have an investment in ensuring that is secure for the long term. Making sick peo-

CHAMBER 120 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 ple, many of them on low incomes, and peo- high-income earners who would be able to ple with a chronic illness pay 21 per cent buy health insurance anyway without the more for their essential medicines from next rebate. The rebate already costs $2.4 billion a month is no good for their health or the na- year and the cost rises every time the gov- tion’s health budget. User charges hurt poor ernment allows the private health insurance people most, and they undermine efforts to funds to increase their premiums. keep people healthy or make them well Now the government wants to increase the again. The health department estimated that rebate from 30 per cent to 35 per cent for five million fewer scripts would be filled as a people aged between 65 years and 69 years result of lifting the patient charge so much. and from 30 per cent to 40 per cent for those Not content with the imposition of such a aged 70 years and older. This would cost at high price signal through increasing patient least $445 million over four years, and more charges, which was made possible when La- as premiums rise. This is a totally uncapped, bor reversed its opposition to the rise, Treas- financially irresponsible expenditure of pub- urer Costello is talking about further in- lic health funds. The Labor Party described creases in the patient charge, purportedly to this proposed rebate increase as a waste of keep the PBS sustainable. This is the same public funds when it was announced. Labor government that in an election campaign leader Mark Latham left little room for doubt miraculously found $831 million in PBS sav- about the ALP’s view when he said: ings by imposing a cap on the price the gov- This is a government that wants to privatise ernment will pay for generic medicines. The health in this country ... Labor is not going to Prime Minister admitted that the government tolerate that. Labor will always have a priority of had not looked at this particular saving putting our scarce public money into public within the PBS before increasing the patient health, into universal access, so that people have charge by 21 per cent. This casts great doubt got the fundamentals of Medicare available to on just how diligent the government has been them all the time. in looking for ways to keep the PBS sustain- But now the ALP have decided that the gov- able whilst guaranteeing its objective of ernment has a mandate to waste public health making essential medicines available to all funds in this way, so they have indicated they Australians at affordable prices. The Greens will support them. proposed an inquiry into the sustainability of An OECD report into private health insur- the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme over a ance which was released last month demon- year ago now and were not supported in such strates the corrosive effects of a policy that a call. promotes private health insurance as a major On top of imposing hardship on people element in the health system. It leads to a filling scripts for PBS medicines, the gov- two-tiered health system where people with ernment wants to squander almost half a bil- private insurance obtain faster access to lion dollars more on increasing the private health services than those who use the public health insurance rebate for older Australians. system. This has major social implications. Prime Minister John Howard said a year ago Under this government we will see a further that the government did not plan to increase erosion of the principle of access to health the rebate but a week before calling the elec- services based on medical need as it contin- tion he changed his mind. The rebate uses ues to shovel more and more public money public funds to subsidise private health in- to advantage those who have the where- surance premiums. The benefits go largely to withal to buy faster access through purchas-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 121 ing private health insurance. Everyone would and economically responsible health be better off if the funds went to public system”. health, because the public health system Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) treats everyone according to their medical (5.09 p.m.)—It is not my intention to speak needs rather than their capacity to pay. for long in this debate on the Health Insur- Early next year the Senate will reach a ance Amendment (100% Medicare Rebate crossroads with Medicare when it considers and Other Measures) Bill 2004 today. Firstly, whether to entrench the redirection of public as has been made clear, the opposition is funds to private health care by increasing the supporting the thrust of this bill. Secondly, private health insurance rebate for older Aus- my colleagues, particularly Senator McLucas tralians. The long-term implications of this and Senator Bishop, have outlined in some choice are profound. Australian National detail a range of issues that relate to the University academic Gwen Gray presents the whole question of this government’s ap- choice starkly in her recently published book proach to Medicare over a number of years The Politics of Medicare. She says: since it has been in government. I cannot let ... the health system as reshaped by the Howard the opportunity pass, Madam Acting Deputy government cannot work. The combination of President Moore, without saying a few Medicare and a large private sector is a highly words. In this chamber I like you have taken unstable arrangement which cannot survive. an interest in those issues and, as a member Eventually the Commonwealth will be forced of the Senate Select Committee on Medicare, either to spend even more tax money to subsidise we had the opportunity to hear first-hand private insurance or to abolish Medicare alto- from people right across the community— gether. practitioners, the specialist services, mem- The private health insurance rebate increase bers of the community, health interest groups is to be examined by a Senate inquiry, and I and a range of others—about the problems hope that the Labor Party will reconsider they saw with the government’s approach to their support for this measure and join the Medicare. Greens in deciding to prioritise public health for public health money, not private health However, I must first respond to what has insurance. The Greens’ election health policy just been put by Senator Nettle on behalf of proposed increasing the Medicare rebate for the Greens. There was an invitation there to GP services by around $5 along with other join the Greens—I can tell you that is some- measures to promote better access to primary thing I will not be doing—but also there was health care. We will not be opposing this bill, a criticism of the Labor Party for having put although we do have a second reading a position during the election campaign amendment. I move the second reading when we released our policy of increasing amendment on behalf of the Australian the Medicare rebate to 100 per cent of the Greens: schedule fee where doctors bulk-billed and that we are now supporting this measure of At the end of the motion add: the government to extend the impact of the “but the Senate notes that the Government has: increase for the rebate of the schedule fee to (a) failed to support bulkbilling for all Aus- 100 per cent for both patients who are bulk- tralians; billed and patients who pay up-front and then (b) privatised Australia’s health system; and claim the rebate back from Medicare. Sena- (c) undermined the principle of universality tor Nettle had a bit of a go at us for doing which is the foundation of a socially just

CHAMBER 122 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 that, and then right at the end she said the turn today, so they will not bulk-bill. They Greens are actually supporting the bill. I con- will charge the $50 up-front and allow the tinue to be amazed sometimes at the contor- patient to claim the rebate. If the difference tions that the Greens go through. is that a rebate of $25.60 will go to $30 or This bill does not address the fundamental thereabouts, how many doctors are going to problems that now exist with Medicare in say, ‘Yes, for that extra $5 I am suddenly respect of bulk-billing. This bill, as we know, going to change the whole nature of my increases the rebate to 100 per cent of the practice and bulk-bill’? They are just not schedule fee for GP services. That amounts going to do it. to $4.60 on a standard GP consultation. But As you know, Madam Acting Deputy this bill does not do anything to increase the President Moore, as a member of the Senate level of bulk-billing, and that is something Select Committee on Medicare, the legiti- that we have been talking about for a number mate complaint of GPs is that they have to of years as we have seen the rates of bulk- charge fees commensurate to their practice billing decline across this country, particu- costs, which have increased dramatically in larly in rural and regional areas. You can go recent years. There are a whole lot of reasons to towns in all states where there is no doctor for that, technology being one, compliance who bulk-bills, and I have been to places costs being another. But the schedule fee has where doctors do not bulk-bill anyone, not not kept pace with GPs’ costs. It just has not, even pensioners or concession card holders. I and we know that. That is the major problem know of situations on the North Coast of in this whole debate. GPs believe—and I New South Wales where concession card agree with them—that the schedule fee is holders, health care card holders and pen- well below what they charge. This proposal sioners may have to travel 50 or 60 kilome- does nothing about that. We had a policy we tres to one of the major cities like Coffs Har- put to the people which would have in- bour, Grafton, Taree or Lismore to see if they creased doctors’ incomes, particularly in ar- can get a bulk-billing doctor. eas where the rate of bulk-billing is low. Our This measure, whilst it is welcome in the policy would have increased doctors’ in- sense that it will increase the amount of re- comes by substantial amounts per year—in bate for a doctor who is bulk-billing a patient excess of $25,000 in some cases. and so the doctor will get some increase in Senator McGauran interjecting— his or her return, means that a patient who Senator FORSHAW—Senator McGau- pays up-front when they go to the Medicare ran says he does not remember them. Senator office to claim their rebate will also get an McGauran, you obviously have not been increase on what they are getting now. It paying attention. We had that policy and does not do anything more. It does not en- your party attacked us for it. We were trying courage doctors to increase the number of to help GPs—small business men. We were patients that they might bulk-bill, and it is trying to help these doctors and your party certainly not going to encourage a doctor rejected our ideas. who does not bulk-bill to suddenly start Senator McGauran—Why don’t you bulk-billing. Why would you if you were a help the patients? GP who is currently charging $50 up-front for a standard consultation? If you bulk- Senator FORSHAW—That would have billed you would get $25 back. Many of the helped the patients, Senator McGauran, be- doctors have said that is not a sufficient re- cause the patients would have been more

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 123 likely to have been bulk-billed under those they would get rid of it. The only time they arrangements than they will be under these have ever been honest about Medicare was arrangements. This policy, this proposal, is when Mr Howard said to the Australian pub- not going to do anything to increase rates of lic, ‘We will get rid of Medicare,’ and the bulk-billing. coalition did not win that election in 1993, or Another problem is that it does not do earlier elections either. You got beaten be- anything at all about specialist fees. We cause the people were never going to cop it. know that specialists by and large do not So you knew that in order to crawl your way bulk-bill at all—or, if they do, they only back into office you had to put Medicare in bulk-bill concession card or health card the bottom drawer and say, ‘We actually holders—and the fees that specialists charge support Medicare,’ and now that you are in are obviously much, much higher. This is office you have done very little to sustain it. I one of the major reasons why the govern- am afraid that under this government, whilst ment brought in its scheme to cover out-of- you continue to just put forward these little pocket costs. There has been nothing done by measures—this one of course will be of this government to try and assist people to be benefit to some—at the end of the day the bulk-billed by specialists. It has just been commitment is not really there. I will be ignored. looking with interest to see what happens to doctors charges and fees over the next 12 In an excellent speech by Senator Allison, months. where she went through some of the details of earlier proposals to reform Medicare or to What will happen, I predict, is that a lot of supposedly improve Medicare or, as it was this increase in the rebate will not ultimately said at the time, to make it fairer, she referred be passed on to the patient. They will ulti- to the proposal to allow the private health mately just be met with higher fees. We have insurance industry to provide gap insurance already been put on notice again by the pri- for out-of-pocket hospital costs. That pro- vate health insurance industry. Despite the 30 posal just did not fly. Everyone rejected that, per cent rebate, despite the proposal by this except the private health companies of government to increase the level of that re- course, and we saw the demise of Senator bate for older Australians, they are queuing Patterson as the minister. She lost her portfo- up again to ask for more increases in premi- lio and it has now gone to Mr Abbott. ums—another five, six or seven per cent. They have got their hand out every year. The approach of this government all along Thank God that the National Party are not in has been to try and wean people away from there, because they would probably be doing Medicare by propping up private health in- what they are doing in a few other areas. surance. They make no bones about that. They would be just throwing the money back What they do, however, is try and say that at them. I conclude with those remarks. We they are really defenders of Medicare. It is are supporting the bill, but this government all on the record. I have said it many times cannot hold its head high at all when it and so have many others. The government comes to supporting Medicare. and this Prime Minister have had an ideological obsession with opposing Medicare Senator MURPHY (Tasmania) (5.22 since it was introduced by the Hawke gov- p.m.)—I would like to say a few words about ernment. They have tried every way possible the Health Insurance Amendment (100% to undermine it, to even abolish it. They said Medicare Rebate and Other Measures) Bill 2004, which I support. I have reservations

CHAMBER 124 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 similar to those expressed by the opposition nett argued in the local press in Launceston and some other senators, but I think it appro- that the RRMA index scheme was there to priate to correct the record in respect of the stay and that to get an extra doctor down at contribution made by Senator Barnett, who Exeter, in the West Tamar region, we had to seemed to want to congratulate himself and have some other form of innovative thinking. the government for things they did not really When Mr Abbott became the minister, I in do. particular negotiated with him and he at least Senator Kemp interjecting— was able to grasp the nettle about the stupid- ity of the RRMA scheme. Senator Barnett Senator MURPHY—I note Senator could not. He argued that this was the Kemp is in the chamber and his cries in pro- scheme and that it was there to stay. As I tection of Senator Barnett. It is a bit disap- said, it is a little dishonest to come in here pointing that a senator would choose to come and suggest that somehow he and the gov- in here and try to lay claim to things that ernment have brought about this change. they did not actually do. It is also a bit dishonest. Senator Barnett thanked the govern- Senator Kemp—That’s a bit of sour ment for the introduction of the $7.50 incen- grapes. tive payment for Tasmania, which is paid Senator MURPHY—Sour grapes it ain’t, across Tasmania as a region. It is the only Senator Kemp. The reality is that I do not state or territory in the country to receive that mind people laying claim to fame for things payment. It was not a government initiative they have actually done and being honest but Senator Harradine in particular and other about it. But do not try to lay claim to things Independents who pushed for this particular you have not done or that you have played incentive. He was supported by the other two no real part in, and that is the point here— Independent senators and me in negotiation including those things that this bill will bring with the government to improve—albeit about such as the inclusion of allied health probably only slightly, but we did seek im- services and dental treatment for the chroni- provements—what was known then as cally ill. The Medicare safety net is another MedicarePlus. thing that I think Senator Barnett mentioned. Senator Barnett went on to talk about the When I refresh my memory about Medicare- $12 million for the medical school. The $12 Plus, I think the safety net was set at levels million for the medical school was actually of $1,000 and $500. They were lowered sub- negotiated with the government through an- stantially at the insistence of Independent other bill—that is, the higher education senators in this chamber, and the government bill—and again it was the Independent sena- agreed to that. tors who brought on the $12 million for the Senator McGauran—You’ve all done so medical school in Tassie, and it was a very much! good move. Senator Barnett went on to say Senator MURPHY—Through you, that we now have an extra doctor in the West Madam Acting Deputy President, I say to Tamar region, north of Launceston. Of Senator McGauran that we did a sight more course, we know that the previous Minister than you did. You actually supported Medi- for Health and Ageing, Senator Patterson, carePlus as it stood, as you will do with a and what was known as the Rural, Remote whole range of other legislation. When and Metropolitan Areas index, which applied 1 July comes to pass next year you will have then, were immovable. Indeed, Senator Bar- a chance to stand up and be counted in this

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 125 chamber and to actually demonstrate whether testinal fortitude when it comes to standing The Nationals have any capacity to act in up to the government— defence of those people who live in the rural Senator McGauran—We are the gov- and remote areas in this country and to genu- ernment. inely demonstrate that you stand apart from Senator MURPHY—That is an interest- the government, albeit that you are in coali- ing comment: ‘We are the government.’ We tion with it. You can do that. I will watch will watch with interest, because you do not with interest to see whether you in particular present yourself to the public as the govern- Senator McGauran make any speeches ment. You say you are there to stand up for against any government proposals you might country people. I hope, Senator McGauran, disagree with. that you will be able to do that after 1 July The Health Insurance Amendment (100% next year. Medicare Rebate and Other Measures) Bill Senator KEMP (Victoria—Minister for does make some improvements, and I sup- the Arts and Sport) (5.30 p.m.)—Normally I port it for that reason. But there is a long way would thank honourable senators for their to go in the medical debate in this country. I contributions to the debate but I think they hope that, at some point in time, we will were distinctly patchy, from the ones I have come up with a health policy that will deliver heard. I listened very closely to Senator Mi- better outcomes. chael Forshaw, a man who normally says A point about specialists was raised by things that are worth tuning into, but this Senator Forshaw. There is another very im- time his contribution would have to be portant aspect to specialist treatments and marked F for fail. For Senator Forshaw’s that relates to the cost of medical supplies information, the government is committed to and the replacement parts, for want of a bet- protecting and strengthening Medicare— ter description, which are used and which are quite contrary to what you said, Senator— fully covered by Medicare. I noted with in- and to delivering high quality and affordable terest the cost of a small stainless steel screw health care to all Australians. Senator, you used, I think, in a prosthetics operation. It spoke about the 1993 election—and you was a ridiculous cost for such a small piece know it hurts us when you speak about of equipment that was fully covered, yet 1993—but I would point out to you in a car- when we look at the amount of time and ing manner that we have won four elections training that specialists have and the amount since then, and health has always been an they are paid and the process of allowing important subject of debate. The Australian what is a recoverable cost under Medicare community, quite contrary to the claims you there are discrepancies there that we need to have made, have obviously supported our have a serious look at. position rather than yours. I noticed Senator This might be a challenge for Senator Murphy seeking to claim credit for a variety McGauran. He might like to do a bit of re- of things—and I do not blame him; it’s a search and look at those problems, and tough game, politics—and making wild maybe he might be able to convince the gov- threats and accusations against The Nation- ernment that something needs to be done, als. I am not sure that is a great help, Senator because there is something that needs to be Murphy, but we listened to you, as we al- done. Again, I will watch with interest to see ways do. We welcome the support that the whether the National Party have got any in- Labor Party is giving to this bill, and we note

CHAMBER 126 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 that, despite the criticisms, the support will Original question, as amended, agreed to. be given. Bill read a second time. The measures in the Health Insurance In Committee Amendment (100% Medicare Rebate and Bill—by leave—taken as a whole. Other Measures) Bill 2004 will make medical services more affordable in two ways. Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (5.35 Firstly, the government is investing more p.m.)—by leave—I move Democrat amend- than $1.7 billion over four years to make GP ments (1) and (2) on sheet 4423: services more affordable for Australians. (1) Schedule 1, item 1 (line 10) after “para- From 1 January 2005 the Medicare rebate for graph”, insert “and where those services are general practitioner services will be in- bulk-billed”. creased from 85 per cent to 100 per cent of Note: bulk-billed is defined in the Health the Medicare schedule fee. This means that Insurance (General Medical Ser- for the standard GP surgery consultation vices Table) Regulations 2004. there will be an increase in the Medicare re- (2) Schedule 1, item 3 (line 19) after “to”, insert bate of $4.60 for each patient visit. All pa- “bulk-billed”. tients will benefit from this measure. There I do not wish to extend this debate but I wish should be more bulk-billing—quite contrary to say that the purpose already identified in to what was said in some of the contributions our speeches in the second reading debate is from the other side, because bulk-billing to confine the benefit—that is, the $4.60—to doctors will secure higher rebates—and there those consultations which are bulk-billed, in will be more money in the pockets of pa- order to provide an incentive for doctors to tients where doctors do not bulk-bill. This give people access to consultations at no ex- measure will be complemented by an in- tra cost. As I said in my speech, we do not crease in the fees paid by the Department of believe there are any incentives for doctors Vet er a ns’ Affairs for GP services provided to to either contain their fees or bulk-bill their eligible veterans and war widows. This patients, and we think it is fanciful to suggest measure builds on other recent government that this extra on the rebate is going to do initiatives aimed at making GP services more anything much more than go straight into the affordable, such as bulk-billing incentives pockets of doctors. I strongly urge my col- targeting Commonwealth concession card leagues in the chamber to support these holders and children under 16 years of age. amendments. Secondly, this bill confirms the government’s Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (5.37 original policy on the Medicare safety net p.m.)—Labor acknowledges the intent of the and FTB A. This amendment will allow the Democrats’ amendments to link bulk-billing minister to determine that all families who to the increase in the rebate, but I refer to my are eligible for the FTB A are also eligible comments in the second reading debate when for the lower safety net threshold. Australia I said that the government can claim that this has one of the best health systems in the measure is subject to an election mandate. world. Australians trust Medicare and they Labor hopes—and I emphasise ‘hopes’—that can trust this government to make a good there may be some support for patients system even better through measures such as through this measure, but we are sceptical those in this bill. that it will be a long-term and sustainable Question agreed to. measure. However, as I said, we recognise that the government can claim that this

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 127 measure is subject to a mandate, so I cannot the reasons the government will not be sup- provide support to the Democrats’ amend- porting the Democrat amendments. ments. Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) Senator KEMP (Victoria—Minister for (5.40 p.m.)—The Australian Greens will be the Arts and Sport) (5.38 p.m.)—We wel- supporting these amendments because we come the Labor Party’s support for the gov- support bulk-billing and incentives for bulk- ernment’s position, which is of course to op- billing. pose these amendments. The Labor Party’s Question negatived. support has been given, albeit a trifle grudg- Bill agreed to. ingly. It is certainly accepted and we know where the votes will lie. I point out to Sena- Bill reported without amendment; report tor Allison that, over the last year, the gov- adopted. ernment has introduced significant incentives Third Reading for GPs to bulk-bill Commonwealth conces- Senator KEMP (Victoria—Minister for sion card holders and children under 16 years the Arts and Sport) (5.41 p.m.)—I move: of age. These incentives continue to apply. I That this bill be now read a third time. believe there are a number of those—I will not go through them—and the bulk-billing Question agreed to. incentives have been well received and have Bill read a third time. been instrumental in reversing the decline in AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND bulk-billing, as my colleagues have pointed FORESTRY LEGISLATION out. There have been rises in bulk-billing AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) 2004 rates since the incentives were introduced, Second Reading and the national bulk-billing rate rose to 71.8 per cent in the September quarter of 2004, so Debate resumed. we will not be supporting the linkage that is Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (5.41 proposed by Senator Allison. p.m.)—I am glad to rise to speak on the Ag- The government’s election commitment riculture, Fisheries and Forestry Legislation will make GP services more affordable to all Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2004 and to change Australians, and all patients will benefit from the nature of the debate from that which has this measure. Senator Allison, GPs are more gone on previously likely to bulk-bill as a result of the higher Senator McGauran—Supporting a man- rebate. Where GPs do not bulk-bill, patients date then, are you? will have lower out-of-pocket costs as they Senator O’BRIEN—It is tempting to take receive the higher rebate. Where a patient is an interjection from another member of The charged a fee by their GP, the patient will Nationals who has such little association receive the 100 per cent rebate from Medi- with regional and rural Australia that he care. For a standard GP consultation the needs a road map every time he leaves Can- Medicare rebate will increase by $4.60, as I berra to find his electorate office. pointed out in my summing-up speech. This bill is the second major piece of leg- Where the service is bulk-billed the 100 per islation designed to implement the recom- cent rebate will be paid to the GP as well as mendations of the Keniry inquiry, which was the bulk-billing incentives of Strengthening set up in the wake of the Cormo Express fi- Medicare, where those apply. I have stated asco. The review of the livestock export sec-

CHAMBER 128 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 tor undertaken by Dr John Keniry made a porated most of the recommendations of the number of recommendations that focused on Senate committee in the bill before us today. strengthening the regulatory framework for The bill provides the basis for introducing this sector. Most of those changes were con- greater flexibility for the disbursement of tained in a piece of legislation dealt with by funds derived from the collection of compul- the last parliament: the Agriculture, Fisheries sory levies by allowing for an industry or- and Forestry Legislation Amendment (Ex- ganisation representing livestock exporters to port Control) Bill 2004. Labor amended that be determined as a marketing body and as a bill to strengthen the accountability of the research body for the purposes of receiving industry through the minister to the parlia- revenue derived from a compulsory levy ap- ment and to the community. The bill we are plied to the livestock export sector and ena- considering today is designed to give effect bling the matching funds provided by the to the second aspect of recommendation 2 of Commonwealth for research and develop- the Keniry review, which states: ment to continue to be provided to the indus- Industry should be responsible for research and try research body. It is expected that the min- development and management of quality assur- ister will determine LiveCorp as the industry ance systems to support its members translate marketing body and as a research body for best practice standards into outcomes consistent the purpose of receiving revenue derived with best practice: from a compulsory levy. The bill will allow its activities should be funded by compulsory the compulsory levies to go directly to Live- levies. Corp. LiveCorp would then decide how This bill provides a legal framework for the those funds will be used within parameters collection and disbursement of a new com- set up by the legislation and subject to the pulsory levy, which will fund the research provisions of a statutory funding agreement. needed to drive the improvements in the way In the past, most research in this industry this industry conducts itself, especially re- has been channelled through Meat and Live- search into ways of ensuring the ongoing stock Australia. While under this new legis- welfare of animals being shipped and traded. lation LiveCorp will now be responsible for This bill is similar to one that the govern- its own research and development, it is ex- ment introduced in August but failed to get pected that much of its research and devel- through all stages of the parliament before opment will continue to be channelled the election. That bill was referred to the through Meat and Livestock Australia. This Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and is because only Meat and Livestock Austra- Transport Legislation Committee for exami- lia, and not LiveCorp, is eligible to receive nation and the legislation we have before us dollar-for-dollar matched Commonwealth today is a revised bill that incorporates the funds for research. In its explanatory memo- sensible recommendations made by that randum, the government has stated that it committee. Once again, Labor has been able does not anticipate that these new arrange- to use the processes of the parliament, ments will result in any increase in the through the Senate committee system, to matching Commonwealth funding for Meat improve legislation that has been put forward and Livestock Australia. The government has by this government. In the end the recom- based this assumption on the premise that mendations of the committee were supported LiveCorp is unlikely to increase the contri- by both Labor and coalition members of the bution it makes to MLA above the current committee. The government has now incor- level derived from the existing voluntary

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 129 levies. In evidence given to the committee, quired—he can set levy rates that will appro- Commonwealth officers offered the view priately fund industry programs as required that the limitation on the Commonwealth by the memorandum of understanding. The dollar-for-dollar matching funds for MLA Red Meat Advisory Council is then required research and development is an incentive to to commence a review of the memorandum keep contributions at current levels and not of understanding and the meat industry strat- to increase them. egy plan to identify any changes that may be I want to turn now to two matters that required as a result. emerged during the committee’s delibera- It does appear that this legally binding tions on the previous bill and which I found process was completely ignored by this min- most disturbing. First, evidence was pre- ister in the preparation of his response to the sented to the inquiry that the minister’s strat- Keniry review. The committee heard from egy to put this compulsory levy in place ac- officers of the Department of Agriculture, tually breached a longstanding memorandum Fisheries and Forestry that the process was of understanding with Australia’s red meat not followed because the minister was not sector. The memorandum of understanding operating within the terms of the memoran- was between the red meat sector and the dum of understanding on the LiveCorp levy Commonwealth, and it is a legally binding process. This is an extraordinary revelation. document. It ought not to be ignored or The minister chose to ignore a term of the changed at the mere whim of a minister. That memorandum of understanding he has with memorandum defines the roles and responsi- the red meat sector. He ignored a legal re- bilities of all parties to the agreement. It de- quirement to consult with those who will be tails funding arrangements, it details plan- most affected by his decision. ning and service delivery arrangements and The second matter that was exposed dur- it sets out industry reserves as well as re- ing the hearing on this bill’s predecessor in search and development arrangements. In the last parliament was the failure of the relation to industry levies, the memorandum minister to progress consideration of this of understanding provides for an orderly levy in a timely fashion. The minister was process of implementation and consultation told of LiveCorp’s financial problems back with signatories to the agreement. That proc- in February. He told LiveCorp in March that ess is contained in annexure D to the memo- a levy would be required. But here we are, randum of understanding. nearly at the end of the year, and the legisla- I want to go to the details of that agreed tion is only now before the parliament. This process—a process that was abandoned by has left an air of uncertainty about the finan- the minister in the preparation of his legisla- cial health of LiveCorp and around the fund- tive response to the Keniry report. The ing of a number of important ongoing re- memorandum of understanding contains a search projects. Labor has done all that it can requirement that the minister write to all to facilitate the passage of this legislation peak industry councils, affected companies, within our responsibility to the public and Meat and Livestock Australia and the Red the industry for ensuring that appropriate Meat Advisory Council and advise them of accountability mechanisms are in place. his intention to introduce a new levy. That, as Only the minister is to blame for the delay in I have said, is a legally binding requirement. getting this levy in place and for failing to Then, within 30 days—unless these groups secure the future for LiveCorp’s research and can satisfy the minister that a levy is not re- marketing activities.

CHAMBER 130 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Since 1996 the Howard government has Labor will always insist on strong and ap- privatised the research and development propriate accountability mechanisms for functions of key sectors, including the meat, money collected as compulsory levies and horticulture, wool, pork, egg and dairy indus- where matching Commonwealth funding tries. Labor has not opposed privatisation but may be involved, even—as in this case—if it has objected to the minimal accountability that matching funding comes indirectly arrangements proposed by the government. through another organisation. I am pleased These accountability requirements are part of that the government has finally taken on both the legislation and the statutory funding board Labor’s concerns. They are concerns agreements between the service body and the that I have raised many times in this cham- Commonwealth, but Labor amendments ber. A number of significant improvements have strengthened the accountability ar- have been made to the bill and the related rangements as enabling legislation has pro- statutory funding agreement. The account- ceeded through this place. ability provisions now included in the bill In relation to the statutory funding agree- and the statutory funding agreement are at ment with Dairy Australia, Labor did force least equivalent to similar measures that La- changes that required the tabling of the com- bor has forced on the government in the past, pany’s annual report, as well as financial such as those measures which I said now statements related to the compulsory levy apply to the operation of Dairy Australia. As and matching grant expenditure. The indus- a consequence, we are in a position where try service bodies are directly accountable to we will be able to support this legislation. industry members through the provisions of Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— Corporations Law. There is, therefore, ac- Leader of the Australian Democrats) (5.54 countability to the government, and eventu- p.m.)—We have only five minutes to go, as I ally to the parliament, through the statutory understand it, before our time for considera- funding agreements. Labor amendments in tion of government business runs out. I will the past have strengthened accountability not have enough time in that period to give arrangements, including, in respect of the full justice to the topic before us. dairy industry, the tabling in parliament of Senator Ian Macdonald—Just table your industry owned company annual reports and speech and get on with it! financial statements related to the levy and Senator BARTLETT—I am sure that, matching grant expenditure. given the Senate proceedings are being Labor were not satisfied with the account- broadcast, the public would rather hear the ability measures included in the similar bill views of the Democrats rather than just have presented to the previous parliament. We did them tabled or incorporated, Minister. I am not believe that they measured up to those sure the minister would concur—he might that we have insisted upon in the past, par- not agree with anything else I am about to ticularly those with Dairy Australia. That is say—that this is an important topic which one of the reasons we referred the bill to the should not be dismissively waved aside just Senate committee. It is amazing to me that because it is close to six o’clock on a Thurs- the recent experience the government has day. had with similar privatisations has not led it The Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to avoid problems. Again, the government Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2004, as has tried to foist the original bill, with all its Senator O’Brien said, was introduced in the faults, on the industry and on the parliament.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 131 last parliament in a similar form and was such as I do, should acknowledge that there sent to the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs are other issues that should not be forgotten, and Transport Legislation Committee for a including the economic impact on those brief inquiry. In large part it flows on from whose jobs and livelihood rely on this trade. the review that was conducted into aspects of Having said that, we should not ignore the the live animal export industry, following the fact that, clearly, jobs have been lost in Aus- notorious Cormo Express incident, now over tralia in slaughterhouses and meat processing 12 months ago. The incident involved tens of sectors by the expansion of exporting live thousands of sheep being required to sail sheep and cattle, rather than slaughtering and from port to port in the Middle East on the processing them here in Australia. Excuses Cormo Express because they could not be have been given over the years as to why that unloaded in any particular port. Once again, has to occur, such as they do not have it was something that brought to light the enough refrigeration in the Middle East so continuing public concern about and opposi- they have to slaughter the animal there and tion to the livestock export industry. eat it while it is still fresh. That is repeatedly I should remind the Senate that it is a con- given as an excuse, even though I have seen cern that has been present in significant pro- the photos and the film footage of the won- portion in Australia for many years. Last derful refrigeration counters in many of these year saw the tabling of well over 100,000 Middle Eastern countries. Some of these signatures of Australians who were opposed countries are actually the richest per capita in to or concerned about the animal welfare the world. It is a farcical excuse that keeps problems, and indeed the employment con- getting borne out. Another excuse is that for sequences of the livestock export industry. cultural reasons the animals have to be Indeed, those concerns were raised by the slaughtered in a special way over there and Senate in the report of the Senate Select they only take that sort of meat. It is true that Committee on Animal Welfare in the mid- halal slaughtering is required and desired, 1980s—and I should look back at the date of but the fact is that this slaughtering process the report, because it might be getting close exists in Australia and is accredited. So there to its 20th anniversary—when the report into is very little reason for that excuse. Because the live sheep trade was prepared and tabled of the time and because I believe some in the Senate. committee memberships need to be dealt Even at that stage, there was very strong with, I seek leave to continue my remarks concern expressed by the committee as a later. whole about the unacceptable impact of the Leave granted; debate adjourned. live export trade on animal welfare. From COMMITTEES memory, I think there was a line in the report Membership along the lines of, ‘If we were to assess the trade purely on animal welfare issues alone, The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT then there is no question that the trade should (Senator Lightfoot)—The President has be banned.’ Obviously there are other, eco- received letters from a party leader seeking nomic issues and I accept that. In the same variations to the membership of committees. way that people who are concerned about Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- animal welfare are continually asking that sland—Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and that issue be acknowledged and given accep- Conservation) (6.00 p.m.)—by leave—I tance, those of us who concur with that view, move:

CHAMBER 132 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

That senators be discharged from and ap- It took Minister Ellison a couple of days pointed to committees as follows: to get back to us in relation to that, which Finance and Public Administration Ref- was quite understandable, and he provided a erences Committee— statement today at the conclusion of question Appointed—Substitute members: Sena- time in relation to the question that had been tors Carr and O’Brien to replace Sena- asked by Senator Kirk. It came down to a tors George Campbell and Moore for point regarding the Australian Federal Police the committee’s inquiry into the Re- protocols that deal with complaints against gional Partnership program federal members of parliament. This was a National Capital and External Territo- complaint made to the Australian Electoral ries—Joint Standing Committee— Commission under their act. His statement Discharged—Senator Lundy said: Appointed—Senator O’Brien. Following further advice from the AFP, I wish to Question agreed to. inform the Senate that I can confirm the existence of AFP protocols which deal with complaints DOCUMENTS against Federal Members of Parliament. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT The protocols do not require the Australian Fed- (Senator Lightfoot)—Order! It being 6.00 eral Police to advise the Minister for Justice and p.m., the Senate will proceed to the consid- Customs of referrals from the Australian Electoral eration of government documents. Commission in relation to breaches of the Com- Australian Electoral Commission monwealth Electoral Act 1918. Debate resumed from 18 November, on Therein lies the nub of the issue—that is, motion by Senator Buckland: when a matter relates to the Australian Elec- toral Commission, under the protocols the That the Senate take note of the document. Australian Federal Police are not required to Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (6.02 notify the minister. But I will come to that p.m.)—I rise to speak on the Australian Elec- particular issue in a moment. Minister Elli- toral Commission report for 2003-04. There son’s statement went on: arose an incident in respect of the Electoral As Mr Windsor’s complaint involved a direct Commission, and perhaps I can go into it in a referral from the AEC to the AFP, I was not in- little bit of detail. Under the Electoral Act formed at the time of the referral of the investiga- there is provision for penalties, offences and tion, however I was advised on 17 November those sorts of things. Perhaps it is easier to 2004 of the investigation and further advised on take the Senate through the detail. Two days 22 November 2004 of its termination. ago, in question time, Minister Ellison was On 22 November, I was also advised that Mr asked a question about the date on which he Anderson and Senator Macdonald— was notified by the Australian Federal Police that is, Sandy Macdonald— that there was a criminal investigation into would not be interviewed. As previously stated, I Mr Anderson and Senator Sandy Macdonald do not intend to canvass this matter any further, and the date on which he was advised of as this is a matter for the AFP and Common- termination of the investigation. Minister wealth Director of Public Prosecutions. Ellison said on both counts that he could not That is the answer that was given by Senator recall the dates and would check with his Ellison. We do not take issue with that in office and notify the Senate. particular. What we do want to look at is the protocols. I refer to a speech given by the

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 133

Commissioner of the Australian Federal Po- Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- lice, Mr Keelty, on 28 August 2001. Al- tralia) (6.07 p.m.)—The incorporated speech though the answer given by Senator Ellison read as follows— raises a number of issues that do require an- I rise to speak on Government document the Aus- swering, it appears there is an exception to tralian Law Reform Commission report, Genes the policy in respect of the AEC. Mr Keelty and Ingenuity: Gene Patents and Human Health said: (ALRC 99). An exception from this policy is made in the case I welcome the completion of the ALRC’s final of the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) report as an important step in the biotechnology because of the special position that the AEC holds law reform debate and thank them for their won- in relation to breaches of the Commonwealth derful work. Electoral Act. The AEC may require the AFP— I have long campaigned for an investigation into that is, the Australian Federal Police— patent laws in relation to genes and gene sequenc- ing and, more recently, the issue of stem cells and to investigate Opposition members, Government their derivatives. I hope this report plays a key members and or their respective campaign work- role in furthering the public debate on these is- ers regarding possible breaches of the penal pro- sues. visions of that Act. For this reason, it is crucial that the AEC continue to be seen as an independ- I have a particular interest in this ALRC report ent body and free from political influence. because I initiated the preceding inquiry by the ALRC and Australian Health Ethics Committee It would be helpful if the minister would ta- (AHEC) which examined the protection of human ble the protocols so that we could see genetic information (Essentially Yours: The Pro- whether in this instance there was an excep- tection of Human Genetic Information in Austra- tion. His statement raises more questions lia, ALRC 96, 2003). That inquiry identified a than it answers. It does not go to the issue of range of concerning intellectual property issues whether the minister followed the protocol, and provided the impetus for this ALRC inquiry whether there is an exception in that respect to be established. or whether there is a requirement or need to My second reading amendment to the Research clarify this matter a little further. And, of Involving Human Embryos Bill 2002, which es- course, it does not go anywhere near the is- tablished the ALRC investigation of Gene Patent- sues of whether the Australian Federal Police ing and Human Health (DP68), also called for the should or should not have sought interviews reviewers of that Act and the Prohibition of Hu- man Cloning Act 2002 to consider and comment with Senator Sandy Macdonald or Mr on the ALRC report. The ALRC recommended Anderson. I seek leave to continue my re- that review also examine the issues of the exploi- marks later. tation of intellectual property rights over stem Leave granted; debate adjourned. cells when they consider the establishment of a National Stem Cell Bank. Australian Law Reform Commission While I understand the terms of reference for this Debate resumed from 18 November, on review are still being finalised, the intent of the motion by Senator Buckland: Senate was quite clear on this matter and I will That the Senate take note of the document. take this opportunity to reinforce the importance Senator WEBBER (Western Australia) of it. (6.07 p.m.)—Mr Acting Deputy President, I My amendment was agreed to by a conscience seek leave to incorporate a speech by Senator vote, as noted by Senator Evans in discussion of Stott Despoja. the amendment, and the Minister should give greater weight to this 2nd reading amendment as Leave granted.

CHAMBER 134 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 the will of the Senate than would normally be the on the advice of the Department of Foreign Af- case of a partisan 2nd reading amendment. fairs and Trade (DFAT). Their report into the I look forward to the commencement of the re- AUSFTA implementation legislation concluded— view and the announcement of its final terms of ‘3.214 The Committee is satisfied that fears about reference. ‘harmonisation’ of Australian and United States patent law are probably unfounded. It bases this It is disappointing, though that this ALRC report conclusion on DFAT’s assurances that the was not released immediately after its completion AUSFTA will not change the nature of what is on June 30. I find it intriguing that the Govern- patentable in Australia.’ ment delayed the public release of the report until August 31, the final day of Parliament and two But, section 4.31 of the ALRC report states: days after the election had been called, when it ‘The provisions of the AUSFTA have impli- could have released it as early as August 3. This cations for reform of Australian patent law. has not been explained by the Government and Amendments to the Patents Act are necessary appears to have been yet another example of the to give effect to some provisions of the Howard Government withholding politically sen- AUSFTA, for example, to preserve the crite- sitive information from the Australian people and rion of a ‘patentable invention’ as a ground dodging Parliamentary scrutiny from the Senate. for revocation of a patent.[47] In other cases, I did not want negotiations over the Free Trade where the AUSFTA reflects existing Austra- Agreement with the USA to influence the lian law or practice, the agreement may act ALRC’s work and pre-empt the Australian debate as a constraint on future change.’ on gene patenting, but unfortunately, this report Who are we to believe? A Department involved in was constrained from the beginning. The terms of the negotiations of the AUSFTA or the ALRC reference required the ALRC to have regard to experts? Would the ALP have passed the Australia’s existing or proposed international AUSFTA legislation had they known the ALRC’s obligations in relation to patent law and practice. findings on patents? All important questions that The Executive Summary states: will probably never be adequately answered. ‘Further, to propose specific laws for genetic Despite the stated reluctance to recommend materials and technologies may have had changes to Australian patent law, seven of the implications for Australia’s compliance with report’s 50 recommendations call on the Federal obligations under various international trade Government to amend the Patents Act 1990. agreements. As a result, some of the recom- The Government must respond to the ALRC rec- mendations are aimed at improvements in the ommendations through developing a new policy patent system in general, including a suite of that will allow the genetic sciences to continue reforms directed at patent office practice.’ their research without undue need for patent law- Regardless, the report’s discussion of the impact yers at every step of the innovation process. of the AUSFTA on our law and scientific prac- This world class report took 18 months for the tices would have been extremely useful to inform ALRC to prepare, the many issues it covers de- the Parliamentary debate over the legislation to serve considerable public and parliamentary con- implement the AUSFTA, which was passed on sideration and debate. Unfortunately, since re- August 13, ten days after the report could have ceiving the ALRC’s world class report, Essen- been released. tially Yours: The Protection of Human Genetic During the debate over the AUSFTA legislation, I Information in Australia (ALRC 96, 2003) in drew the Senate’s attention to the absence of this March 2003, the Government has sat on its hands. report and to how useful it would have been dur- This is not satisfactory government; biotechnol- ing discussion of the ALP’s amendment regarding ogy is moving at such a rapid rate that the Gov- patents. ernment can no longer ignore community con- The Senate inquiry looking into these matters, cerns on these issues. prior to the Parliamentary debate, relied heavily

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 135

The ALRC has provided the necessary guidance money so he can stuff it into the black hole on this issue, it now requires Government action. that is the CMR project. Senator BARTLETT (Queensland— On another issue, the 2003-04 annual re- Leader of the Australian Democrats) (6.10 port indicates that in the order of $5.7 mil- p.m.)—I seek leave to continue my remarks lion was spent on a consultancy frenzy at later. taxpayers’ expense. On analysis, the annual Leave granted; debate adjourned. report shows that 43 per cent of consultancy Australian Customs Service expenditure was for contracts not put out to public tender, while 47 out of the 55 consul- Debate resumed from 18 November, on tancy contracts were not even advertised motion by Senator Buckland: publicly. The fact that so many were not ad- That the Senate take note of the document. vertised does raise questions. I put the gov- Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (6.10 ernment on notice that Labor will be pursu- p.m.)—On the subject of the Australian Cus- ing answers to these questions through the toms Service report for 2003-04, I am sure parliament and the estimates process. It all senators present in the chamber tonight seems that small to medium sized enterprises are aware of the massive cost blow-out in the were locked out of the Customs consultan- cargo management re-engineering project, cies due to the lack of advertising or public caused by the Howard government’s mis- tendering process. management. I remind senators in the cham- Like everything else with the Howard ber of a promise made quite some time ago government, it is a case of ‘do as I say and by a certain minister who said: not as I do’. The Howard government talks Once the Bill has been passed by the House of about being the friend of small business but, Representatives next week, the new system will in practice, it handles these things in a way be phased in over two years, reflecting industry that leaves many small businesses out of the needs for time to adapt to the new processes and loop. It is a clear case of the Howard gov- information technology systems. ernment’s arrogance when so many Customs That statement was made by the Minister for contracts are directly engaged or selectively Justice and Customs, Senator Chris Ellison, tendered and most small contracts have been on 21 June 2001. It is now December 2004. awarded on a who-you-know basis. The Christmas decorations are up and every- Minister Ellison should explain why so one is out and about in shopping centres many of these consultancies were not pub- across the country—except us. licly advertised or open for public tender. I The CMR project was supposed to cost think some of the figures speak for them- the taxpayer in the order of $35 million, but selves. Of the type of tender that was taken, due to perhaps ministerial mismanagement the total value of publicly advertised tenders or incompetence—I do not know which— was $3,253,194. In percentage terms, that that cost has now blown out to $145 million. was 56 per cent of the total value. Those not In truth, it is only exceeded by Senator Hill’s publicly advertised were in the median of $8 billion black hole, but it is still shocking. $2,509,115. That relates to 44 per cent of We are still waiting for the minister to de- those contracts put out to tender which were liver on his promise. We certainly know what not publicly advertised. Minister Ellison will be asking Santa for this Of the type of engagement—that is, Christmas: he is hoping for a big sack of whether it was direct engagement or a selec-

CHAMBER 136 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 tive tender or public tender—33 per cent of the photograph and that on the declaration on the total was direct engagement. There was the application form. Three files did not even no ability for small to medium size busi- have photographs attached. In a third of nesses to get an edge. Only 10 per cent were these cases there had been no check of selective tenders and 57 per cent were public whether the person was in Australia at the tenders. There needs to be greater scrutiny by time. The department clearly lacks a proper this arrogant government as to how it lets approach to security issues. contracts in Customs so as to ensure that In the case of descent applications, 14 small to medium size businesses can have a case files were examined by the Australian go, because this annual report indicates that National Audit Office. These relate to people consultancies cannot get the tenders that are born outside Australia who are applying for put out by this government. citizenship. A police check was onlycon- Question agreed to. ducted in only two out of three cases. In two Department of Immigration and cases there was no photocopy of an original Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs ID or evidence that an ID check had even been done. Clearly this documentation is Debate resumed from 18 November, on important as the department requires these motion by Senator Buckland: types of documents to establish eligibility in That the Senate take note of the document. descent cases so that the grant of eligibility Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (6.15 can be determined from the information held p.m.)—In respect of the Report for 2003-04, by DIMIA. At a time when we are trying to including reports pursuant to the Immigration heighten our security measures these lax (Education) Act 1971 and the Australian Citi- checks and ID loopholes are of concern and zenship Act 1948, I would like to turn to a the minister is, in this instance, not doing couple of issues raised in the citizenship and enough to ensure that the department has multicultural affairs portfolio within the De- proper processes in place. partment of Immigration and Multicultural Unfortunately for Mr McGauran, Mr and Indigenous Affairs. I know they will in- Hardgrave has also left unfinished work in terest those in the chamber tonight—and relation to the proposed changes to the Aus- hopefully the Radio National listeners as tralian Citizenship Act, which were flagged well. The recent ANAO report into the citi- in July this year. It appears the previous min- zenship function of DIMIA highlights multi- ister was too busy organising citizenship ple problems that seem to have occurred un- ceremonies at Bunnings Warehouse to pro- der the watch of Senator Vanstone and the gress important reforms in the Australian previous minister, Mr Gary Hardgrave, and citizenship area. Rather than release the re- require significant work to be undertaken by forms so that we can get on with the task of this government. While the report says the dealing with the real issues of concern, the management and promotion of citizenship minister was busy trivialising the nature and services is generally well managed there re- meaning of Australian citizenship. I seek main serious concerns in relation to the risks leave to continue my remarks later. of fraud and, particularly, identify theft. Leave granted; debate adjourned. In a survey of 159 applications for citizenship, the report found three cases where the Consideration signature of the person attesting to the iden- The following orders of the day relating to tity of the applicant differed between that on government documents were considered:

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 137

Sydney Airport Demand Management Act Housing Assistance Act 1996—Report for 1997—Quarterly report on the maximum 2002-03 on the operation of the 1999 movement limit for Sydney Airport for the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement period 1 April to 30 June 2004. Motion of [Final]. Motion of Senator Buckland to Senator Buckland to take note of document take note of document called on. On the agreed to. motion of Leader of the Australian Democ- Reserve Bank of Australia—Report for rats (Senator Bartlett) debate was ad- 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to journed till Thursday at general business. take note of document agreed to. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade— Australian Radiation Protection and Nu- Reports for 2003-04—Volume 1—Depart- clear Safety Agency—Quarterly report for ment of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Motion the period 1 January to 31 March 2004. of Senator Buckland to take note of docu- Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of ment called on. On the motion of Senator document agreed to. George Campbell debate was adjourned till Thursday at general business. Medibank Private—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade— document agreed to. Reports for 2003-04—Volume 2— Australian Agency for International Devel- Medibank Private—Statement of corporate opment (AusAID). Motion of Senator intent 2004-2007. Motion of Senator Buck- Buckland to take note of document agreed land to take note of document agreed to. to. Repatriation Medical Authority—Report National Residue Survey—Report for for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland 2003-04, incorporating the report for 2003- to take note of document agreed to. 04 on the National Residue survey results. Final Budget Outcome 2003-04—Report Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of by the Treasurer (Mr Costello) and the document agreed to. Minister for Finance and Administration Australian Bureau of Statistics—Report for (Senator Minchin), September 2004. Mo- 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to tion of Senator Buckland to take note of take note of document agreed to. document agreed to. Australian Safeguards and Non- Australian War Memorial—Report for Proliferation Office—Report for 2003-04. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of take note of document called on. On the document agreed to. motion of Leader of the Australian Democ- rats (Senator Bartlett) debate was ad- Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and journed till Thursday at general business. Forestry—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document Defence Housing Authority—Statement of agreed to. corporate intent, 2004-05. Motion of Sena- tor Buckland to take note of document Civil Aviation Safety Authority Australia— agreed to. Corporate plan 2004-05 to 2006-07. Mo- tion of Senator Buckland to take note of Australian Strategic Policy Institute— document agreed to. Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed Indigenous Land Corporation—National to. Indigenous land strategy 2001-2006— Changes to strategy, February 2004. Mo- National Standards Commission—Report tion of Senator Buckland to take note of for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland document agreed to. to take note of document agreed to.

CHAMBER 138 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Repatriation Medical Authority—Report Australian Industrial Relations Commis- for 2003-04—Corrigendum. Motion of sion and Australian Industrial Registry— Senator Buckland to take note of document Reports for 2003-04. Motion of Senator called on. On the motion of the Leader of Buckland to take note of document agreed the Australian Democrats (Senator Bartlett) to. debate was adjourned till Thursday at gen- Remuneration Tribunal—Report for eral business. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Stevedoring Industry Finance Commit- take note of document agreed to. tee—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- Department of Communications, Informa- tor Buckland to take note of document tion Technology and the Arts—Report for agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Albury-Wodonga Development Corpora- take note of document agreed to. tion—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- Telstra Corporation Limited—Report for tor Buckland to take note of document 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to agreed to. take note of document agreed to. Department of Industry, Tourism and Re- National Archives of Australia and Na- sources—Report for 2003-04. Motion of tional Archives of Australia Advisory Senator Buckland to take note of document Council—Reports for 2003-04. Motion of agreed to. Senator Buckland to take note of document Export Finance and Insurance Corpora- agreed to. tion—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- National Gallery of Australia—Report for tor Buckland to take note of document 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to agreed to. take note of document agreed to. Australian Wine and Brandy Corpora- Australian Film, Television and Radio tion—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- School—Report for 2003-04. Motion of tor Buckland to take note of document Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. agreed to. Australian Trade Commission (Aus- Australia Council—Report for 2003-04. trade)—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of Senator Buckland to take note of document document agreed to. called on. On the motion of Senator Australian National Maritime Museum— George Campbell debate was adjourned till Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Thursday at general business. Buckland to take note of document agreed Maritime Industry Finance Company Lim- to. ited—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- Australian Communications Authority— tor Buckland to take note of document Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator agreed to. Buckland to take note of document agreed Department of the Prime Minister and to. Cabinet—Report for 2003-04. Motion of NetAlert Limited—Report for 2003-04. Senator Buckland to take note of document Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of agreed to. document agreed to. Australian Centre for International Agri- Film Australia Limited—Report for cultural Research—Report for 2003-04. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of take note of document agreed to. document called on. On the motion of Senator Webber debate was adjourned till Australian Broadcasting Corporation— Thursday at general business. Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 139

Buckland to take note of document agreed Family Court of Australia—Report for to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to National Library of Australia—Report for take note of document agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Office of the Federal Privacy Commis- take note of document agreed to. sioner—Report for 2003-04 on the opera- National Museum of Australia—Report for tion of the Privacy Act 1988. Motion of 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Senator Buckland to take note of document take note of document agreed to. called on. On the motion of Senator Web- ber debate was adjourned till Thursday at Australian Postal Corporation (Australia general business. Post)—Equal employment opportunity program—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Australian Transaction Reports and Analy- Senator Buckland to take note of document sis Centre (AUSTRAC)—Report for agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. Australia Business Arts Foundation Ltd— Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Industrial Relations Court of Australia— Buckland to take note of document agreed Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator to. Buckland to take note of document agreed to. Australian Postal Corporation (Australia Post)—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Australian Government Information Man- Senator Buckland to take note of document agement Office—Report for 2003-04. Mo- agreed to. tion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. Office of Film and Literature Classifica- tion—Classification Board and Classifica- Australian Film Commission—Report for tion Review Board—Reports for 2003-04. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of take note of document agreed to. document agreed to. Department of Family and Community Office of Parliamentary Counsel—Report Services—Report for 2003-04—Volumes 1 for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland and 2. Motion of Senator Buckland to take to take note of document agreed to. note of document agreed to. Federal Police Disciplinary Tribunal— Australian Institute of Family Studies— Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed Buckland to take note of document agreed to. to. Family Law Council—Report for 2003-04. Commonwealth Director of Public Prose- Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of cutions—Report for 2003-04. Motion of document agreed to. Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Author- ity—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- Australian Greenhouse Office—Report for tor Buckland to take note of document 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to called on. On the motion of Senator Web- take note of document called on. On the ber debate was adjourned till Thursday at motion of Senator Webber debate was ad- general business. journed till Thursday at general business. Film Finance Corporation Australia Lim- PSS Board—Public Sector Superannuation ited—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- Scheme—Report for 2003-04. Motion of tor Buckland to take note of document Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. called on. On the motion of Senator

CHAMBER 140 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

George Campbell debate was adjourned till Aboriginal Land Commissioner—Report Thursday at general business. for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland CSS Board—Commonwealth Superannua- to take note of document agreed to. tion Scheme—Report for 2003-04. Motion Anindilyakwa Land Council—Report for of Senator Buckland to take note of docu- 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to ment agreed to. take note of document agreed to. Acts Interpretation Act—Statement pursu- Indigenous Land Corporation—Report for ant to section 34C(6) relating to the exten- 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to sion of specified period for the presenta- take note of document agreed to. tion of a report—Department of Finance Tiwi Land Council—Report for 2003-04. and Administration—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. document agreed to. Central Queensland Land Council Abo- Australian Research Council—Report for riginal Corporation—Report for 2003-04. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of take note of document agreed to. document agreed to. Repatriation Commission, Military Reha- Goldfields Land and Sea Council Aborigi- bilitation and Compensation Commission, nal Corporation—Report for 2003-04. Mo- Department of Veterans’ Affairs and Na- tion of Senator Buckland to take note of tional Treatment Monitoring Committee— document agreed to. Reports for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Gurang Land Council (Aboriginal Corpo- Buckland to take note of document agreed ration)—Report for 2003-04. Motion of to. Senator Buckland to take note of document Department of the Environment and Heri- agreed to. tage—Report for 2003-04, including the Kimberley Land Council Aboriginal Cor- final annual report of the Australian Heri- poration—Report for 2003-04. Motion of tage Commission. Motion of Senator Senator Buckland to take note of document Buckland to take note of document called agreed to. on. On the motion of Senator Webber debate was adjourned till Thursday at general Aboriginal Legal Rights Movement Inc.— business. Native Title Unit—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of Commonwealth Grants Commission— document agreed to. Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed North Queensland Land Council Native Ti- to. tle Representative Body Aboriginal Corpo- ration—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Australian National Training Authority— Senator Buckland to take note of document Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator called on. On the motion of Senator Web- Buckland to take note of document agreed ber debate was adjourned till Thursday at to. general business. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Ser- South West Aboriginal Land and Sea vices—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Council Aboriginal Corporation—Report Senator Buckland to take note of document for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland called on. On the motion of Senator Web- to take note of document agreed to. ber debate was adjourned till Thursday at general business. Yamatji Marlpa Barna Baba Maaja Abo- riginal Corporation—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 141

National Oceans Office—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. take note of document called on. On the Australian Institute of Marine Science— motion of Senator Webber debate was ad- Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator journed till Thursday at general business. Buckland to take note of document called Australian National Training Authority— on. On the motion of Senator Webber de- Report for 2003. Motion of Senator Buck- bate was adjourned till Thursday at general land to take note of document agreed to. business. Inspector-General of Intelligence and Se- Department of Education, Science and curity—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Training—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. agreed to. Office of the Renewable Energy Regula- Enterprise and Career Education Founda- tor—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- tion Limited—Report for 2003-04. Motion tor Buckland to take note of document of Senator Buckland to take note of docu- agreed to. ment agreed to. National Australia Day Council—Report Administrative Appeals Tribunal—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. to take note of document agreed to. Commonwealth Ombudsman—Report for Australian Law Reform Commission— 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Report no. 100—Report for 2003-04. Mo- take note of document agreed to. tion of Senator Buckland to take note of Department of the Treasury—Report for document agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Federal Magistrates Court—Report for take note of document agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Australian Office of Financial Manage- take note of document agreed to. ment—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Australian Government Solicitor—Report Senator Buckland to take note of document for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland agreed to. to take note of document agreed to. Public Lending Right Committee—Report Administrative Review Council—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. to take note of document agreed to. Australian Broadcasting Authority— Federal Court of Australia—Report for Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Buckland to take note of document agreed take note of document agreed to. to. Food Standards Australia New Zealand— Bundanon Trust—Report for 2003-04. Mo- Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator tion of Senator Buckland to take note of Buckland to take note of document agreed document agreed to. to. Public Service Commissioner—Report for Comcare Australia—Report for 2003-04. 2003-04, together with the report of the Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of Merit Protection Commissioner. Motion of document agreed to. Senator Buckland to take note of document CrimTrac Agency—Report for 2003-04. agreed to. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of Australian Nuclear Science and Technol- document agreed to. ogy Organisation (ANSTO)—Report for

CHAMBER 142 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Australian Reinsurance Pool Corpora- Insolvency and Trustee Service Australia— tion—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator tor Buckland to take note of document Buckland to take note of document agreed agreed to. to. Inspector-General of Taxation—Report for Inspector-General in Bankruptcy—Report the period 7 August 2003 to 30 June 2004. for 2003-04 on the operation of the Bank- Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of ruptcy Act 1966. Motion of Senator Buck- document agreed to. land to take note of document agreed to. Sydney Harbour Federation Trust—Report Acts Interpretation Act—Statement pursu- for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland ant to section 34C(6) relating to the exten- to take note of document called on. On the sion of specified period for the presenta- motion of Senator Webber debate was ad- tion of a report—Department of Transport journed till Thursday at general business. and Regional Services—Report for 2003- Supervising Scientist—Report for 2003-04 04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take on the operation of the Environment Pro- note of document agreed to. tection (Alligator Rivers Region) Act 1978. Australian Prudential Regulation Author- Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of ity—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- document agreed to. tor Buckland to take note of document Employment Advocate—Report for agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Royal Australian Air Force Veterans’ Resi- take note of document agreed to. dences Trust Fund—Report for 2003-04. Commissioner of Taxation—Report for Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to document agreed to. take note of document agreed to. Services Trust Funds—Reports for Social Security Appeals Tribunal—Report 2003-04 of the Australian Military Forces for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland Relief Trust Fund, the Royal Australian to take note of document agreed to. Navy Relief Trust Fund and the Royal Aus- tralian Air Force Welfare Trust Fund. Mo- Aboriginal Hostels Limited—Report for tion of Senator Buckland to take note of the period 29 June 2003 to 26 June 2004. document agreed to. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed to. Commissioner for Complaints—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to International Air Services Commission— take note of document agreed to. Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed Aged Care Standards and Accreditation to. Agency Limited—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of Australian Security Intelligence Organisa- document agreed to. tion—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- tor Buckland to take note of document Australian Maritime Safety Authority— agreed to. Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document agreed Special Broadcasting Service Corporation to. (SBS)—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of document Corporate governance—Review of the agreed to. corporate governance of statutory authorities and office holders—Report, June 2003. Attorney-General’s Department—Report Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland document agreed to. to take note of document agreed to.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 143

Corporate governance—Review of the Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of corporate governance of statutory authori- document agreed to. ties and office holders—Government re- Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Tor- sponse. Motion of Senator Buckland to res Strait Islander Studies—Report for take note of document agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Tobacco Research and Development Cor- take note of document agreed to. poration—Report for 2003-04. [Final re- Murray-Darling Basin Commission— port]. Motion of Senator Buckland to take Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator note of document agreed to. Buckland to take note of document agreed Australian Government Solicitor— to. Statement of corporate intent 2004-05. Mo- Advance to the Finance Minister— tion of Senator Buckland to take note of Statement and supporting applications for document agreed to. funds for June 2004. Motion of Senator Product Stewardship (Oil) Act 2000— Buckland to take note of document agreed Independent review—Report by The Allen to. Consulting Group, May 2004. Motion of Department of Finance and Administra- Senator Buckland to take note of document tion—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Sena- agreed to. tor Buckland to take note of document Product Stewardship for Oil Program— agreed to. Independent review of the transitional as- Commissioner for Superannuation (Com- sistance—Report by Australian Academy Super)—Report for 2003-04. Motion of of Technological Sciences and Engineer- Senator Buckland to take note of document ing, March 2004. Motion of Senator Buck- agreed to. land to take note of document agreed to. Australia-Indonesia Institute—Report for Companies Auditors and Liquidators Dis- 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to ciplinary Board—Report for 2003-04. Mo- take note of document agreed to. tion of Senator Buckland to take note of Reserve Bank of Australia—Equity and di- document agreed to. versity—Report for 2003-04. Motion of Financial Reporting Council and Austra- Senator Buckland to take note of document lian Accounting Standards Board—Reports agreed to. for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland Australian Institute of Criminology and the to take note of document agreed to. Criminology Research Council—Reports Corporations and Markets Advisory Com- for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland mittee—Report for 2003-04. Motion of to take note of document agreed to. Senator Buckland to take note of document National Native Title Tribunal—Report for agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Australian Securities and Investments take note of document agreed to. Commission—Report for 2003-04. Motion Crimes Act 1914—Assumed identities— of Senator Buckland to take note of docu- Australian Federal Police—Report for ment agreed to. 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to Australian Statistics Advisory Council— take note of document agreed to. Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator Crimes Act 1914—Controlled operations— Buckland to take note of document agreed Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator to. Buckland to take note of document agreed Australian Radiation Protection and Nu- to. clear Safety Agency—Report for 2003-04. National Witness Protection Program— Report for 2003-04 on the operation of the

CHAMBER 144 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Witness Protection Act 1994. Motion of Employment, Workplace Relations and Senator Buckland to take note of document Education References Committee—Interim agreed to. report—Inquiry into Indigenous training Department of Employment and Work- and employment. Motion of Senator Wong place Relations—Report for 2003-04. Mo- to take note of report agreed to. tion of Senator Buckland to take note of Employment, Workplace Relations and document agreed to. Education References Committee—Interim Defence Force Remuneration Tribunal— report—Inquiry into lifelong learning. Mo- Report for 2003-04. Motion of Senator tion of Senator Wong to take note of report Buckland to take note of document agreed agreed to. to. Legal and Constitutional References Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Committee—Interim report—Inquiry into Commission—Report for 2003-04. Motion Australian expatriates. Motion of Senator of Senator Buckland to take note of docu- Wong to take note of report called on. On ment agreed to. the motion of Senator Webber debate was adjourned till the next day of sitting. Seafarers Safety, Rehabilitation and Com- pensation Authority—Report for 2003-04. Community Affairs References Commit- Motion of Senator Buckland to take note of tee—Interim report—Inquiry into aged document agreed to. care. Motion of Senator Wong to take note of report agreed to. Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation—Report for Community Affairs Legislation Commit- 2003-04. Motion of Senator Buckland to tee—Report—Tobacco advertising prohibi- take note of document agreed to. tion. Motion of Senator Wong to take note of report agreed to. APEC—Australia’s individual action plan 2004. Motion of Senator Buckland to take Employment, Workplace Relations and note of document agreed to. Education Legislation Committee— Interim report—Provisions of the Work- COMMITTEES place Relations Amendment (Protecting Consideration Small Business Employment) Bill 2004. The following orders of the day relating to Motion of Senator Webber to take note of committee reports and government responses report agreed to. were considered: Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee—Interim report— Employment, Workplace Relations and Provisions of the National Animal Welfare Education Legislation Committee— Bill 2003. Motion of Senator Webber to Interim report—Inquiry into the proposed take note of report. Debate adjourned till amendment in the form of Schedule 1B to the next day of sitting, Senator Webber in the Workplace Relations Amendment continuation. (Codifying Contempt Offences) Bill 2004. Motion of Senator Webber to take note of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Refer- report agreed to. ences Committee—Interim report— Inquiry into the effectiveness of Australia’s Employment, Workplace Relations and military justice system. Motion of Senator Education References Committee—Interim Webber to take note of report agreed to. report—Inquiry into student income support. Motion of Senator Webber to take Finance and Public Administration Legis- note of report. Debate adjourned till the lation Committee—Report—Annual re- next day of sitting, Senator Webber in con- ports (No. 2 of 2004), September 2004— tinuation. Corrigendum. Motion of Senator Webber to take note of document agreed to.

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 145

Legal and Constitutional Legislation Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee—Report—Provisions of the Legislation Committee—Report—Annual Criminal Code Amendment (Suicide Re- reports (No. 2 of 2004), including final related Material Offences) Bill 2004. Motion port on the administration of the Civil of Senator Webber to take note of report. Aviation Safety Authority, September Debate adjourned till the next day of sit- 2004. Motion of Senator Webber to take ting, Senator Webber in continuation. note of report agreed to. Legal and Constitutional Legislation Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee—Report—Marriage Amend- Committee—Report—Annual reports ment Bill 2004. Motion of Senator Webber (No. 2 of 2004), September 2004. Motion to take note of report agreed to. of Senator Webber to take note of report Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport agreed to. References Committee—Report— Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legis- Australian forest plantations: A review of lation Committee—Report—Annual re- Plantations for Australia: The 2020 Vi- ports (No. 2 of 2004), September 2004. sion—Corrigendum. Motion of Senator Motion of Senator Webber to take note of Webber to take note of document agreed report agreed to. to. Finance and Public Administration Legis- Finance and Public Administration Refer- lation Committee—Report—Annual re- ences Committee—Interim report— ports (No. 2 of 2004), September 2004. Inquiry into government advertising and Motion of Senator Webber to take note of accountability. Motion of Senator Webber report agreed to. to take note of report agreed to. Environment, Communications, Informa- Employment, Workplace Relations and tion Technology and the Arts Legislation Education Legislation Committee— Committee—Report—Annual reports Supplementary report—Provisions of the (No. 2 of 2004), September 2004. Motion Higher Education Legislation Amendment of Senator Webber to take note of report Bill (No. 3) 2004. Motion of Senator Web- agreed to. ber to take note of report agreed to. Employment, Workplace Relations and Environment, Communications, Informa- Education Legislation Committee— tion Technology and the Arts References Report—Annual reports (No. 2 of 2004), Committee—Interim report—Budgetary September 2004. Motion of Senator Web- and environmental implications of the ber to take note of report agreed to. Government’s energy white paper. Motion Economics Legislation Committee— of Senator Webber to take note of report Report—Annual reports (No. 2 of 2004), agreed to. September 2004. Motion of Senator Web- Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport ber to take note of report agreed to. References Committee—Report— Employment, Workplace Relations and Australian forest plantations: A review of Education Legislation Committee— Plantations for Australia: The 2020 Vision. Report—Provisions of the Higher Educa- Motion of Senator Webber to take note of tion Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 3) report agreed to. 2004. Motion of Senator Webber to take Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport note of report agreed to. Legislation Committee—Report— Administration of Indigenous Affairs— Provisions of the Agriculture, Fisheries and Select Committee—Interim report. Motion Forestry Legislation Amendment Bill (No. of Senator George Campbell to take note 2) 2004. Motion of Senator Webber to take of report agreed to. note of report agreed to.

CHAMBER 146 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Australian Crime Commission—Joint ministration. Motion of Senator Webber to Statutory Committee—Report—Examin- take note of document agreed to. ation of the annual report for 2002-03 of Auditor-General—Audit report no. 12 of the National Crime Authority and the Aus- 2004-05—Performance audit—Research tralian Crime Commission. Motion of project management follow-up audit: Senator George Campbell to take note of Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial report agreed to. Research Organisation (CSIRO). Motion Legal and Constitutional References of Senator Webber to take note of docu- Committee—Report—The road to a repub- ment agreed to. lic. Motion of Senator Stott Despoja to take Auditor-General—Audit report no. 13 of note of report called on. On the motion of 2004-05—Business support process au- Senator Webber debate was adjourned till dit—Superannuation payments for inde- the next day of sitting. pendent contractors working for the Aus- National Capital and External Territories— tralian Government. Motion of Senator Joint Standing Committee—Report— Webber to take note of document agreed Difficult choices: Inquiry into the role of to. the National Capital Authority in determin- Auditor-General—Audit report no. 14 of ing the extent of redevelopment of the 2004-05—Performance audit—Manage- Pierces Creek Settlement in the ACT. Mo- ment and promotion of citizenship ser- tion of Senator George Campbell to take vices: Department of Immigration and note of report agreed to. Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Mo- National Capital and External Territories— tion of Senator Webber to take note of Joint Standing Committee—Report— document called on. On the motion of Indian Ocean territories: Review of the an- Senator Ludwig debate was adjourned till nual reports of the Department of Trans- the next day of sitting. port and Regional Services and the De- ADJOURNMENT partment of the Environment and Heritage. Motion of Senator George Campbell to The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT take note of report agreed to. (Senator Lightfoot)—Order! There being no DOCUMENTS further consideration of committee reports, government responses and Auditor-General’s Consideration reports, I propose the question: The following orders of the day relating to That the Senate do now adjourn. reports of the Auditor-General were considered: International Volunteer Day Auditor-General—Audit report no. 10 of Senator BARNETT (Tasmania) (6.21 2004-05—Business support process au- p.m.)—I rise tonight to pay tribute to a pre- dit—The Senate order for departmental cious and irreplaceable cornerstone under- and agency contracts (calendar year 2003 pinning our society, and that is our volun- compliance). Motion of Senator Webber to teers. On Sunday, 5 December I commend all take note of document agreed to. Australians to reflect on the value of our Auditor-General—Report for 2003-04. volunteers as we pay tribute to them on In- Motion of Senator Webber to take note of ternational Volunteer Day. I firmly believe document agreed to. that the efforts of volunteers in Australia Auditor-General—Audit report no. 11 of provides the moral spinal cord of our eco- 2004-05—Performance audit—Common- nomic and social fabric. It is the volunteer wealth entities’ foreign exchange risk man- character of this activity that provides us agement: Department of Finance and Ad- with one of our greatest human and moral

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 147 assets as a nation, especially in times of need mense and quite a significant omission on and crisis. The Macquarie Dictionary defines the balance sheet of public administration in a volunteer as ‘someone who enters into any Australia. service of their own free will, or who offers In December 2002, I prepared a paper on to perform a service or undertaking’. In volunteering entitled ‘Volunteering in Aus- 1985, the United Nations General Assembly tralia—how can we help’ which included declared 5 December to be International Vol- many recommendations, such as restoration unteer Day. While in 1996 some 69 countries of small equipment grants for volunteering observed International Volunteer Day, by organisations—which I am thrilled to say has 2003 more than 125 developing and industri- happened—as well as small tax breaks for alised countries marked the day. volunteers. The Howard government has In Australia, International Volunteer Day demonstrated its commitment to supporting has been designated as a day for the recogni- community service throughout our nation tion of volunteer involvement. Australian through the restoration of those vital small communities and workplaces will embrace equipment grants, and I am pleased to say the volunteer spirit by participating in events the government has also demonstrated its organised by Australian Volunteers Interna- commitment through the provision of tional. These events will include at the St $100,000 in my home state to help Volun- Mary’s Community Health Centre, in my teering Tasmania develop a resource kit for home state of Tasmania, the Nursing in De- volunteers. veloping Countries exhibition, which will The government also has pledged to spend display memorabilia from volunteer place- $16 million over the next four years to estab- ments in the Solomon Islands and Pakistan. lish a national emergency volunteer support Why the fuss? Why is volunteering such a fund, aimed at boosting the recruitment, big deal and worthy of profound acknowl- skills and training base of volunteer organi- edgement—apart from saying thank you? I sations at the front line of emergency ser- am constantly amazed at the statistics on vices management—a fund which the Attor- volunteering. Australian Bureau of Statistics ney-General, the Hon. Philip Ruddock, re- data shows there are well over four million ferred to again today. These organisations volunteers in Australia aged 18 and over, will be able to apply for grants to fund capi- representing more than 30 per cent of the tal equipment and formal emergency skills adult population, or almost one in three adult training. Australians. In my home state, an estimated I want to thank Maxine Griffiths, the Ex- 38 per cent of the adult population are volun- ecutive Director of Volunteering Tasmania, teers, which is an outstanding record. for the tireless, wonderful work she, the A paper done for Volunteering Australia board and the staff of Volunteering Tasmania by Duncan Ironmonger calculated the value do for volunteering in my state. I also want of volunteering work in 1997 to have been a to recognise the work of Sha Cordingley, the massive $41.7 billion, or almost eight per Chief Executive Officer of Volunteering Aus- cent of Australia’s GDP—yes, donated free tralia, for the work she and her team do. of charge. Other more conservative estimates The $100,000 project in Tasmania is part are that the value of volunteering is $24 mil- of the very successful Tasmanian package lion or $66 million per day. Either way, the and grew out of the close working relation- value to Australia of volunteering is im- ship I hold with Volunteering Tasmania. The

CHAMBER 148 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Tasmanian Liberal Senate team got right be- memorate International Volunteer Day. Of hind it. The resource kit will include practi- course, the giving of such an award would cal guidance and support for volunteers and need the careful consideration of issues such volunteer organisations on issues such as as what defines volunteering, how candidates getting started, recruitment of volunteers, are rated, whether the medal should be cast orientation, support and management, infor- within the Australian honours system and so mation and training, codes of practice, insur- on. ance tips and tips on grant applications. Volunteerism was recognised in the bibli- On the issue of public liability insurance, I cal story of the good Samaritan, often taught have hosted several public forums in Tasma- in Sunday school or primary school, and in nia over the last few years, which have been the Bible message ‘love thy neighbour as supported by Volunteering Tasmania and the thyself’—helping a mate when they are Tasmanian Small Business Council. They down, irrespective of whether the volunteer were most productive and have concluded in knows them personally or not. Churches, the preparation of a 20-odd page survival kit, charities and a multitude of service and which has been made available to volunteer- community groups all contribute. More often ing organisations and small business. than not this contribution is unseen. With International Volunteer Day just days The contribution is made by the quiet but away, I take this opportunity to promote the persistent achiever. These people give of notion of a volunteering medal. We recognise themselves, expecting little or nothing in volunteers in an ad hoc fashion for various return but the pleasure of knowing they have awards, but rarely do we recognise them na- contributed to a better community and a bet- tionally for their volunteering efforts. Volun- ter Australia. In every phone book in Austra- teering is part of the Australian furniture— lia, there are hundreds of listings of incorpo- we know it is there and that pleases us, but rated and unincorporated organisations we expect it to always be there. It is often out whose objectives are to give without seeking of mind because it does not need a payment. a reward. Their objectives are purely non- Taking volunteerism and volunteers for financial—to offer generosity and to lend a granted is dangerous and wrong. hand. Service organisations and their many The Australian honours system consists of members expend time and resources to assist several award categories, the most well these organisations and meritorious causes. known of which are the four levels in the Both fire and ambulance services Order of Australia. The Order of Australia throughout Australia, particularly in rural recognises citizens for their service to Aus- and regional centres, rely on volunteers. In tralia or to humanity, irrespective of whether Tasmania there are an estimated 5,000 volun- their service is provided in a paid or an unteer firefighters, while nationally there are paid capacity. A specific ‘volunteer medal’ in 350,000 volunteers involved in emergency the Australian honours awards, either as a organisations such as rural fire services and category within the Order of Australia or as a state emergency services. The training under- category on its own, would highlight the role taken by these volunteers is often regular and that volunteers play in Australian society. A nearly always selfless, requiring not only the volunteer medal would provide increased cost of time but financial sacrifices in travel recognition in the community and would be a and transport costs, such as petrol, phone and suitable gesture at a national level to com- postage. The cost of the psychological ef-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 149 fects of on-the-job volunteerism is incalcula- on the International Day of Disabled Per- ble, but most volunteers of course would say sons. it is positive. Leave granted. Yet the need is great, and growing. We can Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— do more. We all have a responsibility to re- Minister for Justice and Customs) (6.32 view the financial, time and other contribu- p.m.)—The incorporated speech read as fol- tions we make to the lives of others. It is lows— time for each of us to pause and ask, ‘What My colleagues in this Chamber would be aware gift can I make—a sacrificial gift, a love gift, that since 1999 I have been involved in the Politi- a tithe from my income?’ Volunteers want to cian Adoption Scheme. The Scheme is run by the serve. They want to help, and many want the Developmental Disability Council and I was personal satisfaction of giving back a small adopted by Stephen Franklin and his family. amount of what benefits they derive from The condition suffered by Stephen manifests it- Australia’s economy and this great nation. A self in severe physical disabilities and mental vast majority would not dream of seeking handicaps. Yet Stephen’s family, particularly his publicity, some form of compensation, reim- mother, Carol, have shown incredible strength of bursement or thankyou for what they do, will to provide Stephen with the best possible because they want to remain anonymous and care and they have fought tirelessly for his rights simply experience the joy of giving. They and the rights of others with disabilities. Today we celebrate the achievement of people with dis- know that the saying ‘it is better to give than abilities, like Stephen, and their families in the to receive’ is true. However, this is no reason International Day of People with a DisAbility. for the rest of the community to blithely ac- Stephen’s transition into his group home has been cept such charity and not offer some form of a resounding success. So much so, that the home tangible recognition through their elected is being extended to accommodate others. representatives. Stephen has flourished in his home and I’m sure My speech is not about undermining or he will be very happy there for many years to ruining the concept of volunteering by sug- come. gesting that we pay people to volunteer, be- The Scheme’s co-ordinators, the Developmental cause that would be absolutely counterpro- Disability Council, are looking to extend the Poli- ductive, a contradiction in terms and I be- tician Adoption Scheme beyond Western Austra- lieve a majority of Australians would reject lia and I would urge those present to participate if such a move as unnecessary and unwelcome. possible. I have found the Scheme to be incredibly informative and rewarding through my accep- My proposal is, however, about Australians tance into the Franklin family. I would highly acknowledging the contribution made and recommend it. saying thank you, not only for the human It is important that today we recognise the contri- value placed on volunteering but also for the butions made by people with disabilities and also staggering financial value they contribute to the vital support provided by their families. this country. It is about the Australian com- Women’s International League for Peace munity collectively doing their bit for volun- and Freedom teering in a systematic and reasonable way. Senator MOORE (Queensland) (6.32 International Day of Disabled Persons p.m.)—Yesterday in a room in this building Senator BARNETT (Tasmania) (6.32 the wonderful women from the Women’s p.m.)—I seek leave to incorporate an ad- International League for Peace and Freedom, journment speech by Senator Chris Ellison WILPF, launched a web site. Their web site

CHAMBER 150 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 was designed to draw awareness to, and un- The Australian government has had a derstanding of, United Nations Security strong role to play. On each anniversary of Council resolution 1325. This resolution was resolution 1325 our United Nations represen- passed unanimously by the UN on 31 Octo- tative has made a strong statement about how ber 2000, not that long ago. This resolution is Australia has played its part in the process. the only document that specifically high- On the recent anniversary, on 28 October lights the impact of war and conflict on 2004, a statement by our representative, Mr women and girls and the importance of the John Dauth, clearly recognised the role that involvement of women in the peace-building Australia had played. He said, quite accu- processes. rately: It took a long time to have the people of We are proud to reaffirm our commitment to the world pull together through the United resolution 1325 ... which remains a landmark Nations process not only to develop this document both for the Council in its recognition resolution but also to ensure that members of of the true dimensions of peace-building and for the United Nations voted for it and secured its international recognition of the particular burden women and girls bear as a result of conflict. its passing. It was a wonderful moment that we should remember with pride because I will not burden this group by going Australia was there. It did not happen over- through horrific statistics on the impact of night; it happened over a long period. Cer- war and conflict on civilians. We have the tainly, experiences of the Beijing conference evidence before us now of what is happening in 1995 were important in the development in Iraq. Iraq has the media cameras there so of the international understanding of the way we are able to see, when allowed, the impact that women communicate and the way they of bombing and conflict and the way that can bond together to put an incredibly impor- that always impacts on civilian populations, tant resolution through the United Nations families, women, girls and children. But this processes. conflict happens not just where the TV cameras and journalists can get. Part of the im- This resolution is a commitment made by plementation of resolution 1325 means that the United Nations and is a platform from we, as part of the international community, which individuals, non-government organisa- must know what is happening across the tions, governments and international institu- world and be aware when these conflicts are tions can advocate for the inclusion of occurring. women in all aspects of conflict, peace and security. In 2005 we are leading to the Bei- Whilst we will always have to make jing Plus 10 process and we will be looking judgments about being involved in wars, at how we as a world have changed and how basically we need to know that war has a women and their values have been celebrated horrific effect on communities. Certainly across the world in that time. As we have from my point of view war does not have moved through this decade the key issues of any victors. We spoke about that in this place war, conflict and peace have been very con- when we debated the national decision on fronting and we need to understand them. our involvement in Iraq. There were numer- We, as women and as people who support ous arguments put forward from all sides of women, expect that the role of women in all the chamber about the need for war and the aspects will be identified and used effec- impact of war, but we agreed that, no matter tively. Certainly that must be important for what happened, women and children were Australia. going to be victims of this conflict. They

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 151 were not combatants; they were victims The impact of war on civilians is seen in caught up in something they could not es- no greater way than in the ongoing loss of cape. life and horrific injuries that are caused by Hopefully, the anniversary of Beijing in landmines after actual war zones are alleg- 2005 will not be just a time to get together edly made peaceful. There is something par- and say, ‘Splendid. This is what we have ticularly scary about that concept: the major- done,’ and file it away and look for the next ity of landmine injuries and deaths occur in conflict or crisis. We need to have the ongo- areas which are supposed to be in a state of ing involvement of communities across the peace. Once the fights are allegedly over, the world acknowledging that we are able to do bombing has stopped, the armaments have things better and accepting the universal been cleared and the armies have moved truth that our goal is peace. That is what the away, what is often forgotten is that some of wonderful women of WILPF have been those weapons of war continue to have a life working towards since the early days of well beyond the war. World War I. These women from across the Only last siting week, we received an in- world gathered in Europe—I am still amazed ternational report on the impact of landmines at how they could travel in those days—and across the world. It is sickening reading to committed themselves to working across see what is continuing to occur, but through international boundaries to ensure peace. You our process, through understanding United could say that since World War I there have Nations Security Council resolution 1325 been lots of wars so maybe they have not and through working with organisations like been all that successful in achieving peace WILF, we as individuals can make a differ- across the world, but what they have done is ence. Already across the Australian commu- remarkable. nity we are seeing people dedicating their The members of WILF—and they are the time to raise money, to give resources, so women of WILF and the people who support that they can help in some way to ensure that them—are committed to ensuring that effec- some of these horrid weapons are cleared tive dialogue is created and maintained on and that we will not have ongoing cases of what the causes of war are. There are all too small children and people trying to rebuild many similarities over the years, but we are their lives being maimed and murdered by trying to find ways of making sure that we yesterday’s war implements. That has got to can effectively work for peace. We—and I be wrong. am a long-term member of WILF—are The WILF web site—and we are excited committed to achieving total and universal in WILF that we have actually got a web disarmament with the goal of non-violent site; it is our attempt to move forward with conflict. Naturally, we support the United the communication process—is looking at Nations and the specialised agencies within resolution 1325 and calling on people to un- the United Nations which focus on particular derstand what is there and to see what that issues. We know the good work that has been resolution is about. It is about the participa- done by the groups that look after children tion of women in the peace process; gender and hunger. Amazing work has been done in training in all peacekeeping operations—and trying to get rid of the landmines that are still that is important for our own forces who are scattered across areas of conflict. working; the protection of women and girls and the respect for their rights; and gender mainstreaming in the reporting and imple-

CHAMBER 152 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 mentation systems of the UN relating to con- inclusive, and I commend her for it. How- flict, peace and security. Surely, that is some- ever, I note, for example, that in Mr thing in which we can all be involved and Latham’s reply to the Governor-General’s something that our community can hope for speech, which is a very important occasion, in the future. he said that the Eureka Stockade: Eureka Stockade: 150th Anniversary ... says so much about the Australian character Windimurra Mine and identity: our love of the underdog and support for those who have a go; our willingness to stand Senator TCHEN (Victoria) (6.41 p.m.)— up for our rights, to not buckle in the face of au- Tonight I wish to speak briefly on two mat- thority; our tradition of defiance, dissent and the ters of interest recently raised by other sena- larrikin spirit that makes us truly Australian. tors in this chamber. The first matter is the I have no argument with that either, because 150th anniversary of the Eureka Stockade. I think there is quite a strong element of truth This has been the subject of a number of in it. However, on occasions like this there is speeches both in this chamber and in the always the danger of people with ulterior House of Representatives. It was first men- motives hijacking a national event. I think tioned by Mr Mark Latham, the Leader of Senator Mason regards the stockade simply the Opposition, on 29 November, as well as as a great historical and cultural fraud perpe- the anniversary of the gathering at Bakery trated against the Australian people by the Hill. Since then the Eureka Stockade has Labor Party and their stealing the occasion. I been the subject of speeches by Ms Cath- think it is a bit more than that. I think we are erine King, the member for Ballarat, and by in danger of seeing not just the Labor Party Senator Mason and Senator Gavin Marshall stealing it but the event being stolen from the in this chamber. Labor Party. Tomorrow, 3 December, will be the anni- I want to raise this point because today’s versary of the storming of the Eureka Stock- newspapers report that the Eureka Stockade ade and the ending of that rebellion on the commemoration organisation has invited Mr field variously described as the birthplace of Terry Hicks—the father of Mr David Hicks, Australian democracy, the first statement of who is at Guantanamo Bay at the moment— Australian republicanism and even the be- to lead the walk for one of the major events ginnings of Australian multiculturalism. Per- of the Eureka Stockade celebrations and give haps in some way to distract us there are an address at the dawn service. I do not have those to whom it was simply a hiccup on the any problem with Mr Terry Hicks; he has way to Australia developing in an orderly done a very conscientious and admirable job way as a nation and a short-lived outburst by defending his son. I do not have any problem a small number of troublemakers which was with the walk organisers inviting Mr Hicks decisively put down and pacified by the fast- to perform this role in the Eureka commemo- responding authorities. rations, because in 1999, shortly after I be- I do not want to add tonight to the retell- came a senator, the organising committee ing of the story of Eureka, which other invited me to speak in that role. I attended speakers have done very well, but I want to and gave one of the shortest dawn speeches make a few points. All the speakers seemed that there has been. This was for the simple to take contradictory positions. Perhaps I reason that when I did some research on the should exempt Ms Catherine King from this Eureka Stockade I found that although there because her speech was very balanced and was a multicultural presence on the gold-

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 153 fields in Ballarat—there were quite a number small mining company called Windimurra. of different nationalities within the stockade Windimurra, a vanadium mine, was taken itself during the early stages and quite a large over by the Swiss company Xstrata—now number of Chinese diggers on the gold- bidding for Western Mining Resources—and fields—there was not one Chinese miner in they then closed down the mine, removed all the stockade, so I had nothing to say about the mining equipment from it and supplied the stockade. their customers from their mines in other That the Ballarat committee in their wis- countries. Consequently, all the jobs have dom chose to invite me on that occasion been lost in this small town of Windimurra in demonstrated that the committee is perhaps Western Australia. When Xstrata took over not very discriminatory in whom they ap- Windimurra they agreed that the company point. However, on this particular occasion would receive royalties for ongoing exports. the founder of this dawn walk, Mr Graeme But, once they closed down the mine, the Dunston, is quoted to have said that the or- company had no income and, having re- ganising committee chose Mr Hicks because moved all the equipment, it meant the mine his fight for his son was similar to the min- could not be restarted. This is a disgraceful ers’ battle for their rights. I think that is per- affair. What is surprising is that this matter haps pushing the similarity a bit too far. Mr was raised in the chamber by Senator Hicks’s fight for his son shows good parental Lightfoot rather than by the Labor Party. love, but it is not a fight for freedom as such. (Time expired) The reason for Mr David Hicks being incar- AUSTRAC cerated in Guantanamo Bay is quite different Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (6.51 to what the Eureka Stockade was about. p.m.)—I rise in this adjournment debate to- Senator Marshall—Being imprisoned night to talk about the AUSTRAC annual without charges? report. As I said earlier this evening, Cus- Senator TCHEN—I see Senator Marshall toms officers and the Federal Police have is now in the chamber. He responded to been doing an excellent job of late in relation Senator Mason’s earlier speech on Tuesday to the identification and seizure of drugs. Of and talked about how the Eureka Stockade course, this is just one facet of drug law en- was a defining moment in Australia’s devel- forcement. Of equal importance is tracing opment as a nation. I do not mind you hi- drug money that has been laundered and jacking this as your icon because, whatever tracing funds to and from criminal and ter- you do, you cannot deny the rest of the na- rorist organisations. tion of it, but you are in danger of having As a result of the announcement of the your icon hijacked by other people with new international anti-money laundering and other agendas. I think that is something that counter-terrorist financing standards in June the Labor Party need to pay particular atten- 2003, the Australian government authorised tion to. the review of Australia’s anti-money launder- I want to turn to the second issue I wish to ing regime to update Australia’s legislative raise tonight. It was this morning, during a requirements to meet the new standards. This debate on a bill on workplace relations, I review is being conducted by the Attorney- think, when Senator Ross Lightfoot spoke in General’s Department. The number of sus- this chamber about what has happened in pect transaction reports received this year Western Australia with the takeover of a has increased by up to 42 per cent. It would

CHAMBER 154 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004 seem therefore imperative that the Attorney- Acts Interpretation Act—Acts Interpreta- General’s review be finalised and delivered. tion (Substituted References—Section However, that is not the case. We wonder 19BA) Order 2004. whether Senator Ellison is even talking to the Australian Communications Authority Attorney-General about the need for this re- Act—Radiocommunications (Charges) view. It is needed, it should be dealt with and Amendment Determination 2004 (No. 2). it should be completed now. Until the review Australian Communications Authority Act is completed, AUSTRAC is unable to get on and Radiocommunications Act— with its real role. The scope of AUSTRAC’s Radiocommunications (Interpretation) future work is dependent on the outcome of Amendment Determination 2004 (No. 3). this review. How can it plan, how can it de- Environment Protection and Biodiversity termine its strategies for the coming years Conservation Act— and how can it get ready for new interna- Instrument amending list of specimens tional standards that might arise unless the suitable for live import under section Attorney-General completes his review and 303EB, dated 11 August 2004. maps out what AUSTRAC’s requirements Notices of proposed accreditation of are? the— The simple facts are that, if access to fi- Southern Bluefin Tuna Fishery Man- agement Plan (as amended), dated nance is cut off, terrorists cannot purchase 10 November 2004. weapons or bankroll their operations. If ac- Torres Strait Tropical Rock Lobster cess to finance is cut off, criminals are de- management arrangements, dated nied access to their ill-gotten gains. This 11 November 2004. really brings truth to the saying that crime Financial Management and Accountability does not pay. There is no doubt, however, Act—Regulations—Statutory Rules 2004 that the longer we wait for this review the No. 331. harder it will be for AUSTRAC to fulfil its Fisheries Management Act—Southern duties properly. It is high time the Howard Bluefin Tuna Fishery Management Plan government pulled its act together, got be- Amendment 2004 (No. SBT 05). hind its agency and expedited the review so Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act— that AUSTRAC can act on the recommenda- Regulations—Statutory Rules 2004 No. tions and get on with its job. 333. Senate adjourned at 6.54 p.m. Medical Indemnity Act—Regulations— DOCUMENTS Statutory Rules 2004 No. 334. Tabling Military Superannuation and Benefits Act— The following documents were tabled by the Clerk: Military Superannuation and Benefits Amendment Trust Deed 2004 (No. 3). A New Tax System (Goods and Services Military Superannuation and Benefits Ta x) Act—A New Tax System (Goods and Amendment Trust Deed 2004 (No. 4). Services Tax) (Language Other Than Eng- lish—LOTE—courses offered by ethnic Radiocommunications (Transmitter Li- schools) Determination 2004. cence Tax) Act—Radiocommunications (Transmitter Licence Tax) Amendment De- termination 2004 (No. 2).

CHAMBER Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 155

Telecommunications Act— Telecommunications Numbering Plan Variation 2004 (No. 8). Telecommunications Numbering Plan Variation 2004 (No. 9). Trade Practices Act—Regulations— Statutory Rules 2004 No. 332.

CHAMBER 156 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE The following answers to questions were circulated:

Superannuation: Small Business (Question No. 76) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 18 November 2004: With reference to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and the non-payment of superannuation contributions by small businesses: Given that it is reasonable for an employee to fear that an employer may not look kindly on the act of informing to the ATO, why are employees who ‘blow the whistle’ given no form of reassurance, written or oral, that their names will not be revealed to the employers in relation to whom they are reporting. Senator Coonan—As the question deals with matters administered by the Australian Taxa- tion Office, I have asked the Commissioner of Taxation for advice. The advice to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: The Commissioner of Taxation advises me that the scripting used by the ATO Contact Centre operators asks the employee if they give permission for the ATO to use their name. If the employee advises that they do not wish for their name to be disclosed, then the ATO does not reveal the identity of the complainant when dealing with the employer. In these instances, the ATO assures the employee that this will not occur. Superannuation: Small Business (Question No. 77) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 18 November 2004: With reference to the Australian Taxation Office and the non-payment of superannuation contributions by small businesses: In cases when an employer is found guilty of non-payment of superannuation for one tax year, why is that employer not investigated for non-payment in other years. Senator Coonan—As the question deals with matters administered by the Australian Taxa- tion Office, I have asked the Commissioner of Taxation for advice. The advice to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: The Commissioner of Taxation advises me that it is the practice of the ATO to not only investigate the period referred to by the employee, but also to audit the records of prior or subsequent periods. Where a complaint is made in respect of just one quarter under the quarterly Superannuation Guarantee regime, the ATO will investigate several quarters as well as financial years prior to 1 July 2003. Superannuation: Small Business (Question No. 78) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 18 November 2004: With reference to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and the non-payment of superannuation contributions by small businesses: (1) Why are complainants not routinely issued with receipts or reference numbers to help them keep track of the details of their complaints.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 157

(2) Would such records assist with any disputes with the ATO in relation to complaints that have not been followed up properly. Senator Coonan—As the question deals with matters administered by the Australian Taxa- tion Office, I have asked the Commissioner of Taxation for advice. The advice to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Upon receipt of complaints, the ATO issues a unique reference number to the employee that will assist them with any follow up correspondence or calls to the ATO regarding their complaint. (2) The complainant is able to use this unique reference number at any stage of the investigation to enquire about the progress of the audit. It should be noted that privacy provisions preclude the ATO from divulging specific details of any action being taken against the employer to an employee. Superannuation: Small Business (Question No. 79) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 18 November 2004: With reference to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and the non-payment of superannuation contributions by small businesses: Why are employees not offered information or feedback on the progress of investigations they have initiated and likely outcomes that could help them with decisions regarding whether to continue their employment. Senator Coonan—As the question deals with matters administered by the Australian Taxa- tion Office, I have asked the Commissioner of Taxation for advice. The advice in relation to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: Cases where employees are concerned that their superannuation entitlements have not been met are investigated by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) as an integral part of the ATO’s compliance strategy. The process of establishing whether an employer has met their obligations under the superannuation guarantee legislation can be lengthy. This is because it may involve any of the following actions: • obtaining information by writing to the employer; • undertaking a field audit of the employer; • prosecuting the employer if the necessary information is not supplied; • raising a default assessment if a statement has not been lodged and we have to gather sufficient information to raise an assessment; and/or • undertaking legal recovery action if sufficient payments have not been made. Moreover, as each case is different, the actions taken by the ATO may vary from case to case. As a consequence, it is not possible to advise on likely outcomes for employees where the ATO is investigating an employer for possible breaches of their superannuation guarantee obligations. In addition, the secrecy provisions contained in section 45 of the Superannuation Guarantee (Admini- stration) Act 1992 (SGAA) impose an obligation of secrecy on persons who acquire information on the affairs of another person. As the superannuation guarantee charge imposed on an employer is a tax, and in accordance with other tax obligations, the ATO is unable to discuss an employer’s possible SGC tax obligation with a third party (that is, an employee). While the ATO is bound by certain secrecy provisions, the nature of the superannuation guarantee charge requires the ATO to consider the competing interests of the two parties – the employee’s interest in the outcome and the employer’s right to have the ATO act confidentially in regard to their taxation and financial affairs.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 158 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

To this end the ATO provides the employee with information in the following circumstances: where sufficient superannuation contributions had been made by the employer and the details of the superannuation fund to which the contributions had been made is known, then these details could be passed on to the employee; where the employer has both lodged a superannuation guarantee statement and made a payment of the superannuation guarantee charge, the employee can be advised of the amount of this payment and if the Commissioner is satisfied that the account belongs to the employee, he will deposit the entitlement directly into their superannuation account; where the employer is insolvent/bankrupt and the ATO has received advice from an Official Receiver in Bankruptcy or the liquidator as to the extent of the likely distribution, then this information is passed on to the employee. Superannuation: Small Business (Question No. 81) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 18 November 2004: With reference to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and the non-payment of superannuation contributions by small businesses: (1) In cases where the ATO requires a particular number of complaints before starting an investigation, who decides how many complaints are required. (2) What happens in cases when the employer employs only a small number of people, too few to make up the required number of complaints. (3) How many people must complain to initiate an inquiry. Senator Coonan—As the question deals with matters administered by the Australian Taxa- tion Office, I have asked the Commissioner of Taxation for advice. The advice to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) There is no particular number of complaints required to initiate an investigation against an employer. The ATO treats each individual complaint seriously and therefore seeks to actively resolve each individual instance of a complaint being lodged. Therefore, an employer will be audited re- sulting from an employee complaint, irrespective of the number of employees that initiate the complaints. (2) and (3) Refer to answer (1) Superannuation: Small Business (Question No. 82) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 18 November 2004: With reference to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and the non-payment of superannuation contributions by small businesses: (1) Why are the proceeds of fines that the ATO collects from companies that are in breach of the requirement to pay staff superannuation not distributed to the employees who are often left out of pocket. (2) While the ATO states that it requires the company to pay the employees’ contributions as well, if these companies go bankrupt before the contributions are paid is it the case that the ATO is paid but the employees are not.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 159

Senator Coonan—As the question deals with matters administered by the Australian Taxa- tion Office, I have asked the Commissioner of Taxation for advice. The advice in relation to the honourable senator’s questions is as follows: (1) The Superannuation Guarantee Charge (SGC) is a tax and employers can reduce their liability to the SGC by making sufficient superannuation contributions to a complying superannuation fund or retirement savings account for each of their eligible employees. Where an employer does not make sufficient superannuation contributions they are subject to the SGC payable to the ATO. The SGC comprises the employer’s individual superannuation guarantee shortfall for the quarter, the employer’s nominal interest component for the quarter and the employer’s administration component for the quarter. Once the SGC payment is received from the employer the ATO pays the individual superannuation guarantee shortfall and the nominal interest component of the SGC to the employee’s complying superannuation fund or retirement savings account or directly to the employee. Further, as the SGC is a tax related liability for the purposes of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 where an employer has not paid their SGC debt they will be subject to a general interest charge (GIC) and potentially an additional penalty depending on the taxpayer’ behaviour. For SGC purposes the GIC is paid to the employee for the loss of earnings on the amount of the superannuation guarantee shortfall (which forms part of the SGC) not paid by the employer within a certain time. The additional penalty is retained by the ATO as it is a penalty on the employer for not meeting their tax obligations. (2) Previously, the SGC had no priority where an employer became bankrupt. As such, the SGC debt was placed as an unsecured creditor reducing the ability for the ATO to recover the amount of the SGC. It should be noted that the Commissioner has always had a priority for the SGC amount where a company goes into liquidation and is ranked as a secured creditor in line with salary or wages for the employee. In 2002/03 amendments were made to the Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 and the Bankruptcy Act 1966 to enable a priority of the recovery of SGC debt in cases of bankruptcy. These changes now mean that the ATO is in a better position to recover any SGC owed by employers who become bankrupt. Where the SGC is recovered by the ATO, the superannuation guarantee law and the ATO’s receiv- ables management policy ensures that the employee’s superannuation guarantee entitlements are paid before other employer related tax debts. Superannuation: Small Business (Question No. 83) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 18 November 2004: With reference to the Australian Taxation Office and the non-payment of superannuation contributions by small businesses: (1) Why are employees not provided with basic advice about what to do if their employer is not making superannuation contributions, for example ‘keeping payslips because it is an offence under corporations law to falsify records’. (2) Are employees told what they should do if they have evidence that their employer is falsifying records.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 160 SENATE Thursday, 2 December 2004

Senator Coonan—As the question deals with matters administered by the Australian Taxa- tion Office, I have asked the Commissioner of Taxation for advice. The advice to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) The scripting used by the ATO contact centre operators informs employees to approach their employer and superannuation provider to confirm whether payment has been made. If having done these checks, the employee is still of the view that their employer is not contributing sufficient Su- perannuation Guarantee contributions, then the complainant is encouraged to contact the ATO to lodge a complaint. (2) Where an employee believes that the employer may have falsified records pertaining to taxation or superannuation obligations, the Commissioner may undertake further reviews or audit activity to establish the employer’s compliance. Where the employer is a company, this may fall for consideration under the Corporations Law, administered by ASIC. Environment: Endangered Species (Question No. 86) Senator Brown asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 17 November 2004: With reference to the proposed importation of nine Asian elephants from Thailand by a consortium of Australasian zoos: (1) Is there a proposal by a consortium of Australasian zoos, including Taronga Zoo and Melbourne Zoo, to import nine Asian elephants from Thailand. (2) Is this proposal part of a broader plan to establish a herd of up to 64 Asian elephants in Australia. (3) Is it correct that: (a) under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, Asian elephants may only be imported into Australia for conservation breeding purposes, and not for commercial purposes; (b) Asian elephants have never been bred in Australian zoos; and (c) international attempts to breed elephants in captivity have been largely unsuccessful, with few, if any, conservation benefits. (4) Is it correct that elephants in zoos routinely suffer from serious health and behavioural problems. (5) Will the Minister approve the current application to import the nine elephants. Senator Ian Campbell—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) The planned maximum population of 64 would be held across both Australia and New Zealand. (3) (a) No. (b) Yes. (c) There have been limited breeding successes for Asian elephants internationally, although co-ordinated regional attempts at breeding for the purposes of conservation have only recently commenced and the future results of these attempts are unknown. (4) A number of serious health and behavioural problems have been recorded in the past for elephants in zoos around the world, including: - foot and skin disorders; - shortened life expectancy compared with wild elephants; - low rates of breeding success, including high rates of infant mortality; - aggression towards humans and other elephants; and - behavioural problems such as swaying or trunk-swinging, which demonstrate a lack of social and environmental stimulation.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Thursday, 2 December 2004 SENATE 161

The assessment of the proposed imports will include consideration of what measures have been put in place to mitigate against these problems and how likely it is that they will occur in the future. (5) My Department is currently undertaking a careful and comprehensive assessment of the applications to import elephants to determine whether or not all requirements under the Convention on In- ternational Trade in Endangered Species and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conser- vation Act 1999 can be met by the proposal.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE