Queensland Parliamentary Debates [Hansard] Legislative Assembly WEDNESDAY, 13 MAY 1981 Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy Address in Reply [13 MAY 1981] Questions Upon Notice 1193 PAPERS The foUowing papers were laid on the table:— Orders in Council under— Gladstone Area Water Board Act 1975. Electridty Act 1976-1980. Rural Training Schools Act of 1965 and the Local Bodies' Loans Guarantee Act 1923-1979. Statute under the University of Queens­ land Act 1965-1973. PETITION The Qerk announced the receipt of the following petition— PENALTIES FOR CRUELTY TO ANIMALS From Mr Shaw (122 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland will increase the penalties for cmelty to animals. Petition read and received. QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE Questions submitted on notice by mem­ bers were answered as foUows:— 1. USE OF LAND AT CAPE PALLASENDA Mr Cas^ asked the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General— With rderence to the former quaran­ tine reserve, situated at Cape PaUarenda, Townsville— (1) Has plan of survey No. 27507 been lodged with the Titles Oflice in TownsvUle WEDNESDAY, 13 MAY 1981 for the preparation of three separate titles, over this former reserve? (2) What was the area of the former Mr SPBAKKl (Hon. S. J. Muller, Fassi­ reserve and what are the pressed areas fern) read prayere and took the chair at of each of the three subdivisions? 11 a.m. (3) Who was the former owner of the reserve and who are the proposed owners of the three separate subdivisions or with « ADDRESS IN REPLY V whom will they be vested? HER MAJESTY'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (4) Do all of the proposed subdivisions include freehold title down to the high- Mr SPEAKER: Honourable mranbers, I water mark and, if not, which ones do? have to report that I have recdved the following letter from His Excellency the (5) What is the estimated valuation of the Governor— whole reserve and what is the proposed "Dear Mr Speaker, valuation of each of the new subdivisions? (6) As there is much public advocacy "I have the honour to inform you that in TownsvUle for Cape PaUarenda to be the Message of Loyalty from the Legisla­ a proposed site for a casino in Queensland, tive Assembly dated 31st March, 1981, has what discussions, if any, have been held been laid before the Queen and Her regarding the use of this land for such Majesty has asked that her appreciation purposes and have ,Kern Brothers of be conveyed to the Membere of the Legis­ TownsvUle been a company with whom lature of Queensland. discussions have been held? "Yours rfncerely, (7) If it is proposed that this land be "James Ramsay, made available for casino purposes, will "Governor," public tenders be called for the land? 1194 Questions Upon Notice [13 MAY 1981] Questions Upon Notice Answer:— security available and certain other aspects. (1) Yes. The plan was lodged on 1 Consequently, the board recommended that April 1981 by the Commonwealth Crown the application not be approved. Solicitor. Subsequent to receiving this recom­ (2) The original area comprises 66.8422 mendation and its consideration by Cabinet, I had discussions with the principals of ha. The proposed areas of these sub­ the company. They suggested to me that divisions are— there could be a somewhat different Lot 1 3.096 ha approach taken by my department in rela­ Lot 2 44.206 2 ha tion particularly to personal guarantees Lot 3 19.54 ha that could ibe forthcoming. It was agreed (3) The former owner was the Com­ that additional information would be sup monwealth of Australia. The three new pUed by the company upon receipt of certificates of title will also issue in the advice from my department of the details name of Commonwealth of Australia. required, and subsequently the telex d (4) Only proposed Lot 2 wiU include 28 April was addressed to the company. freehold title down to the high-water mark. Quite obviously the company was not (5) This question should be directed to prepared to furnish any of the details the Honourable the Minister for Environ­ sought, even though at the discussions pre­ ment, Valuation and Administrative Ser­ viously mentioned an offer was made to vices. supply certain information. (6 & 7) These questions should be (2) The time which elapsed bdween directed to the Honourable the Deputy receipt of the company's appUcation and Premier and Treasurer. its submission to the Industries Assistance Board was principaUy due to the delay Mr Casey: I direct them accordingly. experienced by the company in locating a source of loan funds for the project. My dqpartment was officially informed oil 8 2. ELECTRONICS RESEARCH AUSTRALIA April 1981 that funds could be available, PTY LTD and the whole proposal was considered by the Industries Assistance Board at a Mr Jennings asked the Minister for Com­ meeting held on 13 April 1981, five days merce and Industry— later. With reference to the application by , Electronics Research Australia Pty Ltd to his department on 5 January seeking 3. 'RAIL CORRIDOR, BEENLEIGH—Nfew a Government guarantee to assist them to SOUTH WALES BORDER raise $ 1.25m to transfer their operations to Queensland and set up a manufaduring Mr Borbidge asked the Minister for Trans­ facility at Southport— port—• (1) Is he aware that as recently as the (1) Have officers of the Railway Depart­ 28 Aprfl, some 3i months after the orig­ ment been investigating the feasibility of inal application, a 53 line telex was sent a rail corridor between Beenleigh and the from his department seeking detailed New South Wales border? replies to some 14 questions and that as (2) If so, what is the outcome of that a result of this delay and a .proposition investigation? received by that company from the Vic­ torian Government late in Aprfl that Electronics Research Australia Pty Ltd Answer:— are now proposing to set up their high (1 & 2) Two consultant studies were technology plant in Victoria? commissioned by the Metropolitan Transit Authority on the Brisbane-Gold Coast (2) If so, what is the reason for the Hnkage. The first report exanuned, at delay and what action is to be taken in the a strategic level, the scope for major future to see that applicant companies public transport initiatives in the Brisbane receive prompt consideration and replies? -Gold Coast corridor and addressed itself principaUy to the issue of the feasibility Answer:— of rail passenger services in that corridor. The other study was concerned with the (1) I am acquainted with, the drcum­ most appropriate and effective means of stances relating to this proposal. ITie providing a rail Unk between Beenleigh application submitted by Electronics and the Gold Coast and the feasibUity Research Australia Pty Ltd was thor­ of reserving a transit corridor. oughly examined by my department and referred by me to the Industries Asast- These reports are currentiy being exam­ ance Board for a recommendation ined by the officere of the Railway Depart­ regarding the provision of a Goverament ment, on my instractions. When that guarantee. In the board's view the examination is completed, the matter will appUcation did not satisfadorily meet the then receive further consideration by the usual requirements in relation to the Government. Questions Upon Notice [13 MAY 1981] Questions Upon Notice 1195 4. INTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS TO QUEENSLAND 5. LOCALITY ALLOWANCE, PORT CURTIS AREA Mr BorWdge asked the Premier— Mr Prest asked the Premier— (1) What is the extent of State Govern­ (1) What is the present locaUty aUow­ ment representations to Canberra to per­ ance paid to teachers in the Port Curtis mit a joint British Caledonian Airways electorate? proposal to fly into Queensland? (2) As the Minister responsible for the Public Service, does he regard these allow­ (2) Have any other international air­ ances as reflecting the real cost of living lines recentiy expressed interest in flying in this area? into Queensland and what has been the response of the Federal Government? (3) In view of the PubUc Service Board's statement in its letter of 16 March, wfll the board review a submis­ Answer:— sion on locality allowances in the Port Curtis area? (1) Permission for any intemational (4) Why is the aUowance not paid to flights into Queensland rests with the Com­ married women? monwealth Government, which in tura deals with the overseas Government Answer:— involved. I might add that Canberra goes to great lengths to protect the position (1 to 4) The locality allowances pay­ able within the electorate of Port Curtis of Qantas. would vary depending upon the centre. I wouU also point out to the honour­ These rates are set taking many factors able meinber that the question of any into account, including cost of living. The British airline being granted permission full rate is paid to supporting parents to fly into Australia is dependent in the and married women where evidence of first instance on a dedsion being made dependency is furnished. The Public Ser­ by the Civfl Aviation Authority in the vice Board has always indicated its wUl­ United Kingdom. ingness to review these rates upon receipt of evidence. AppUcations were recently lodged by British Caledonian Airways and Laker Airways with the CivU Aviation Authority 6. COMPENSATION PAYMENTS TO ROAD in the United Kingdom for licences to ACCIDENT VICTIMS fly the route between Britain and Aus­ tralia. The Queensland Goverament sub­ Mr Prest asked the Premier— mitted evidence to the London hearing strdigly supporting the British Caledonian (1) Is he aware that the gross disparity application, which was the only one that bdween compensation pay-outs to roaA included provision for international flights accident victims in different States leave in and out of Brisbane.