Official Hansard No

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SENATE

Official Hansard No. 7, 2002 THURSDAY, 22 AUGUST 2002

FORTIETH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—THIRD 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

SITTING DAYS—2002 Month Date February 12, 13, 14 March 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21 May 14, 15, 16 June 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27 August 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 29 September 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26 October 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24 November 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21 December 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12

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

CANBERRA 1440 AM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM BRISBANE 936 AM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 729 AM DARWIN 102.5 FM SENATE CONTENTS

THURSDAY, 22 AUGUST Temporary Chairmen of Committees...... 3535 Petitions— Immigration: Asylum Seekers...... 3535 Notices— Presentation ...... 3535 Withdrawal ...... 3535 Presentation ...... 3535 Business— Rearrangement...... 3536 Rearrangement...... 3536 Rearrangement...... 3536 Notices— Postponement ...... 3536 Daffodil Day ...... 3536 Committees— Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee—Extension of Time...... 3536 Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee—Extension of time...... 3537 Higher Education Funding Amendment Bill 2002 ...... 3537 Higher Education Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002 ...... 3537 Customs Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 ...... 3537 Import Processing Charges (Amendment and Repeal) Bill 2002 ...... 3537 Plant Health Australia (Plant Industries) Funding Bill 2002— First Reading ...... 3537 Second Reading...... 3537 Commonwealth Electoral Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002— Second Reading...... 3542 Business— Rearrangement...... 3575 Family Law Amendment (Child Protection Convention) Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 3576 Third Reading...... 3581 Jurisdiction of Courts Legislation Amendment Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 3581 Third Reading...... 3581 Health Legislation Amendment (Private Health Industry Measures) Bill 2002— Second Reading...... 3581 Third Reading...... 3581 Ministerial Arrangements ...... 3581 Questions Without Notice— Scientific Research: Funding Cuts ...... 3581 Distinguished Visitors...... 3582 Questions Without Notice— Workplace Relations: Compulsory Union Fees...... 3583 Agriculture: Drought ...... 3584 Resources: Stanwell Magnesium Project...... 3585 Agriculture: Exceptional Circumstances Program for Drought Relief...... 3587 International Criminal Court: Article 98 Agreements ...... 3588 Telstra: Regional Communications Inquiry...... 3588 Distinguished Visitors...... 3590 Questions Without Notice— Immigration: Border Protection...... 3590 SENATE CONTENTS—continued

Environment: Natural Heritage Trust ...... 3591 Insurance: Public Liability...... 3592 Australian Prudential Regulation Authority...... 3593 Health: Mental Illness...... 3593 Questions Without Notice: Take Note of Answers— Telstra: Regional Communications Inquiry...... 3595 Committees— Legal and Constitutional References Committee—Report: Government Response...... 3600 Higher Education Funding Amendment Bill 2002— Report of Employment, Workplace Relations and Education Legislation Committee ...... 3610 Committees— Membership...... 3610 Taxation: Family Payments...... 3610 Documents— Consideration...... 3630 Committees— Consideration...... 3632 Documents— Consideration...... 3634 Adjournment— Unauthorised Publication of Photograph...... 3634 Workplace Relations: Small Business ...... 3636 Sugar Industry: Queensland...... 3637 New South Wales: Education ...... 3639 Battle of Milne Bay: 60th Anniversary ...... 3641 Documents— Tabling...... 3642 Questions on Notice— Indigenous Land Corporation: Roebuck Plains Cattle Station—(Question No. 80)...... 3643 Environment: Rabbit Calicivirus Disease—(Question No. 372)...... 3645 Environment: Saemangeum Wetlands—(Question No. 385) ...... 3645 Environment: Priorities—(Question No. 387)...... 3646 Agriculture: Wool Industry—(Question No. 454)...... 3647 Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3535

Thursday, 22 August 2002 (i) on becoming the first state or territory ————— legislature to remove abortion from the Criminal Code, and The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. (ii) for repealing the appalling law which Paul Calvert) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., required women seeking abortions to and read prayers. first look at pictures of foetuses; TEMPORARY CHAIRMEN OF (b) notes that this landmark legislation COMMITTEES should serve to encourage all remaining The PRESIDENT—Pursuant to standing states and territories to enact similar order 12, I lay on the table a warrant nomi- legislative changes; and nating Senators Collins and Hutchins as (c) notes that the Australian Capital Temporary Chairmen of Committees when Territory legislation recognises that the Deputy President and Chairman of abortion is a decision for women and is not something that should carry the Committees is absent. threat of a jail term. PETITIONS Withdrawal The Clerk—A petition has been lodged Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (9.32 for presentation as follows: a.m.)—Pursuant to notice given yesterday, on Immigration: Asylum Seekers 21 August, I withdraw business of the Senate To the Honourable the President and the Members notice of motion No. 1 standing in my name of the Senate in Parliament assembled: for today. Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese Presentation of Melbourne carried without dissent the follow- Senator Nettle to move on the next day of ing Motion: sitting: That this Synod regrets the Government’s adoption of procedures for certain people seeking po- That the Senate— litical asylum in Australia which exclude them (a) notes that 26 August 2002 is the from all public income support while withholding anniversary of the beginning of one of permission to work, thereby creating a group of the most shameful chapters in Australia’s beggars dependent on the Churches and charities recent history, the turning away of the for food and the necessities of life; MV Tampa; and calls upon the Federal government to review (b) acknowledges that the Australian such procedures immediately and remove all Government acted callously and against practices which are manifestly inhumane and in international convention in turning away some cases in contravention of our national obli- the asylum seekers, who had been gations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on rescued by the MV Tampa on the request Civil and Political Rights. of our own Coastwatch; We, therefore, the individual, undersigned at- (c) condemns the Howard Government for tendees at the Forum on Refugees and Asylum its ongoing scare mongering and cynical Seekers at St Hilary’s Anglican Church, Kew, manipulation of public opinion against Victoria 3101, petition the Senate in support of refugees and asylum seekers; the abovementioned Motion. (d) calls for an end to the system of And we, as in duty bound, will ever pray. mandatory detention, which is inhumane, inefficient and an by Senator Allison (from 113 citizens) international embarrassment to Petition received. Australia; NOTICES (e) calls on the Government to abandon the Presentation ‘Pacific Solution’, which is designed to avoid Australia’s international Senator Mackay to move on the next day responsibilities, and to rule out any of sitting: expansion of this approach including the That the Senate— excision of Australian islands for migration purposes; and (a) congratulates the Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly: 3536 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

(f) reaffirms Australia’s commitment to its General business notice of motion no. 125 international obligations to shelter and standing in the names of Senators Brown and assist humanitarian refugees. Nettle for today, proposing the establishment BUSINESS of a select committee on the possible support by Australia of a United States invasion of Rearrangement Iraq, postponed till 26 August 2002. Senator TROETH (Victoria—Parlia- DAFFODIL DAY mentary Secretary to the Minister for Agri- Senator HARRIS (Queensland) (9.35 culture, Fisheries and Forestry) (9.33 a.m.)— a.m.)—as amended, by leave—I move the I move: motion as amended: That the following government business orders of the day be considered from 12.45 pm till not That the Senate— later than 2 pm today: (a) notes that: No. 3 Australian Radiation Protection and Nu- (i) Friday, 23 August 2002 is Daffodil clear Safety (Licence Charges) Amend- Day, the largest national fundraising ment Bill 2002 event for cancer research, education and patient support in the southern No. 4 Family Law Amendment (Child Protec- hemisphere, tion Convention) Bill 2002 (ii) cancer affects one in three No. 5Jurisdiction of Courts Legislation Australians, and the two in three who Amendment Bill 2002 are not directly affected by cancer No. 6 Health Legislation Amendment (Private will know someone who is, Health Industry Measures) Bill 2002 (iii) in 2001, Daffodil Day helped raise Question agreed to. over $8.6 million, and Rearrangement (iv) the target for Daffodil Day in 2002 is Senator TROETH (Victoria—Parlia- $8.7 million; and mentary Secretary to the Minister for Agri- (b) asks each senator to give his or her culture, Fisheries and Forestry) (9.33 a.m.)— financial support to this worthy cause. I move: Daffodil Day is a day to celebrate the hope That the order of general business for considera- that we can and will defeat cancer and a day tion today be as follows: to raise funds for cancer research, education (1) general business notice of motion no. 137 re- and patient and family support. At the begin- lating to the family tax payment system; and ning of the last century, people with cancer (2) consideration of government documents. faced almost certain death. Now, thanks to continuing improvement in research and pa- Question agreed to. tient care, more than 50 per cent of people Rearrangement diagnosed with cancer will recover. This Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (9.34 progress is celebrated on Daffodil Day. Al- a.m.)—by leave—At the request of the Chair though there have been major advances in of the Employment, Workplace Relations research, so improving detection and treat- and Education Legislation Committee, ment, cancer is still the leading health con- Senator Tierney, I move: cern in Australia. I commend this initiative That the presentation of the report of the Em- and ask all senators to support Daffodil Day. ployment, Workplace Relations and Education Question, as amended, agreed to. Legislation Committee on the provisions of the COMMITTEES Higher Education Funding Amendment Bill 2002 be postponed to a later hour of the day. Legal and Constitutional Legislation Question agreed to. Committee Extension of Time NOTICES Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (9.37 Postponement a.m.)—At the request of the Chair of the Le- Item of business was postponed as fol- gal and Constitutional Legislation Commit- lows: tee, Senator Payne, I move: Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3537

That the time for the presentation of the report Second Reading of the Legal and Constitutional Legislation Senator TROETH (Victoria—Parlia- Committee on statutory powers and functions of the Australian Law Reform Commission be ex- mentary Secretary to the Minister for Agri- tended to 19 September 2002. culture, Fisheries and Forestry) (9.40 a.m.)— I move: Question agreed to. That these bills be now read a second time. Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard. Extension of time Leave granted. Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (9.38 a.m.)—At the request of the Chair of the Fi- The speeches read as follows— nance and Public Administration Legislation HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING Committee, Senator Mason, I move: AMENDMENT BILL 2002 That the time for the presentation of the report This Government is committed to creating an of the Finance and Public Administration Legis- environment that encourages investment in the lation Committee on the provisions of the Mem- education and training of our young people, in bers of Parliament (Life Gold Pass) Bill 2002 be updating the skills and knowledge of the extended to 19 September 2002. workforce, in generating knowledge through research and in translating these ideas into eco- Question agreed to. nomic activity that benefits all Australians. HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING Despite Australia’s total investment in higher AMENDMENT BILL 2002 education already being above the OECD aver- HIGHER EDUCATION LEGISLATION age, the Government is currently delivering a AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) 2002 significant injection of funding through the Backing Australia’s Ability initiatives and other CUSTOMS LEGISLATION measures such as the 2001-02 Budget measure to AMENDMENT BILL (No. 1) 2002 provide additional places to regional universities. IMPORT PROCESSING CHARGES As a result of these initiatives, by 2004 annual (AMENDMENT AND REPEAL) BILL Commonwealth funding to universities through 2002 the Education, Science and Training portfolio, including HECS, will be $480 million higher than PLANT HEALTH AUSTRALIA (PLANT in 2001 at around $6.3 billion (in non cost- INDUSTRIES) FUNDING BILL 2002 adjusted terms) and there will be at least 8,300 First Reading more fully funded undergraduate places in 2004 than in 2001. Bills received from the House of Repre- sentatives. Many of the key indicators for the health of our higher education sector continue to be very posi- Senator TROETH (Victoria—Parlia- tive. Revenues which are at record levels and mentary Secretary to the Minister for Agri- growing. Higher education participation is at a culture, Fisheries and Forestry) (9.40 a.m.)— record level and increasing. Graduate employ- I indicate to the Senate that those bills which ment outcomes are improving. Graduate satisfac- have just been announced are being intro- tion is at record levels and our educational ex- duced together. After debate on the motion ports are more successful than ever. for the second reading has been adjourned, I Nevertheless the Government is not content to sit will be moving a motion to have the bills back. Over the coming months I am undertaking a listed as three separate orders of the day on review of the higher education sector and have the Notice Paper. I move: invited public discussion on the future policy directions of higher education. We want to bring That these bills may proceed without formali- institutions, students, the general community, and ties, may be taken together and be now read a even the Opposition if they are willing, on board first time. to work with us to create best higher education Question agreed to. system we, as a nation, possibly can. I am sure that all members would agree that this task is one Bills read a first time. of considerable national importance and one that should transcend political divisions. 3538 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

A well-educated and skilled workforce that em- ate a more strategic and internationally competi- braces life-long learning is essential for Austra- tive research system in Australia. lia’s economic growth. As part of its commitment Finally the bill provides for an additional funding to life-long learning, this Government announced cap for ARC competitive research schemes in the Postgraduate Education Loans Scheme in 2006, consistent with the current budget forward 2001 as part of Backing Australia’s Ability. The estimates, so that the Minister can approve ARC Scheme, which commenced this year encourages grants for a period of four years. The purpose of extended participation in education and helps this measure is to reduce administrative work and Australians update and acquire new skills. It is to give grant recipients greater certainty in rela- also an important equity measure ensuring that no tion to their funding. prospective postgraduate coursework student is prevented from studying by an inability to pay There is a technical amendment to correct a pre- upfront fees. Early indicators suggest that the vious drafting error in HEFA. Scheme has been extremely successful in in- I commend the bill to the Chamber. creasing the number of Australians undertaking ————— postgraduate coursework qualifications. For example, early estimates data shows a 20 percent HIGHER EDUCATION LEGISLATION increase in postgraduate coursework enrolments AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) 2002 in 2002 over 2001. Under the policies of this Government universi- This bill provides for the extension of PELS to ties have enjoyed an unparalleled opportunity to four additional institutions—Bond University, be key institutions in Australia’s social, cultural Melbourne College of Divinity, Tabor College and economic life. Most have used that opportu- and Christian Heritage College as promised in the nity well. Universities are earning record levels of election and announced in the recent Budget. This revenue—an estimated $10.4 billion in 2002. The gives students at these institutions access to post- sources of revenue are more diverse than ever graduate study loans on the same basis as other before, indicating how far universities have come students, but does not make the institutions eligi- in engaging with the community. Universities are ble for public funding. providing more opportunities for Australians to access higher education in the manner which suits The extension of PELS to these four institutions them. There are now around 55,000 more full- levels the playing field for competition in fee- time equivalent domestic students in our univer- paying postgraduate coursework degrees and sities than there were in 1995. The satisfaction further extends opportunities for institutions to level of graduates with their education has also provide and students to undertake fee-paying never been higher. postgraduate coursework. In building this impressive record, universities The bill also updates the funding amounts pro- have been able to rely on a strong and undimin- vided for in the Higher Education Legislation ished commitment of public funding. The Bill Amendment Bill No 2. 2002 which is currently currently before the Senate is a clear expression before the House. In doing so it provides addi- of that commitment. The major measure in this tional funding for the establishment of a Graduate Bill is the provision of university funding for the Diploma in Environment and Planning at the year 2004, the final year of the current funding University of Tasmania with six associated schol- triennium. In keeping with the Government’s arships. This honours an election promise and commitment to higher education the monies we implements an initiative from the recent Budget. seek to appropriate through the Parliament for The varied amounts also contain further supple- that year are significantly increased. In 2004 uni- mentation for indexation purposes, in accordance versities will receive operating funding through with the latest Treasury parameters and reflect a the Education, Science and Training portfolio revision of the estimated HECS liability in vari- totalling $6.35 billion, some $480 million more ous years. than in 2001. The bill also adjusts funding levels in HEFA and Last year the Prime Minister made the most sig- the Australian Research Council Act 2001 to nificant set of policy and funding announcements permit the Institute of Advanced Studies at the in support of innovation that has ever been made Australian National University to access the com- in this country. It should be obvious that innova- petitive funding schemes of the Australian Re- tion has become a vital driver of economic search Council and the National Health and growth, and the key to economic prosperity. Uni- Medical Research Council. This measure is part versities produce much of the knowledge and of the ongoing efforts of this Government to cre- skilled workforce that sustain the innovation system. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3539

The benefits of that package are already being four years, rather than the two currently allowed enjoyed by universities. This Bill puts in place the by the Act. This will reduce the amount of pa- next stage of that commitment. I would like to perwork involved in administering grants and remind the Senate of the extent of that commit- provide certainty to grant holders. ment. The Government’s Innovation Action Plan, They will also allow the ARC Board to create Backing Australia’s Ability, commits an addi- advisory committees, other than those specifically tional $3 billion over 5 years for science, research involving advice on funding allocations, without and innovation. It includes an additional $1.5 the approval of the Minister, thus streamlining the billion for the university sector. processes for the ARC Board to acquire expert The funding is comprised of an additional $736 advice on other matters. million to double the Australian Research Coun- In minor technical amendments, the Bill changes cil’s national competitive grant schemes. It in- two sections of HEFA to reflect changes in taxa- cludes $583 million to build up the research infra- tion legislation. It also amends the name of structure in our universities and an extra $151 Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Educa- million over five years for additional university tion in Schedule 1 of HEFA, which is currently places in the priority areas of information and listed as ‘Batchelor College’. It remedies a minor communications technology, mathematics and drafting oversight in relation to the post-graduate science. education loan scheme. The Bill provides for a number of legislative I commend the Bill to the Senate. housekeeping measures. It updates the funding amounts in the Higher Education Funding Act ————— 1988 and the Australian Research Council Act CUSTOMS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT 2001 in accordance with indexation arrange- BILL (No. 1) 2002 ments. It also varies funding amounts to reflect The Customs Legislation Amendment Bill (No 1) revised estimates for HECS contributions, the 2002 contains amendments to the Customs Act Commonwealth’s superannuation liability and the 1901, the Customs Legislation Amendment and provision and repayment of an advance of oper- Repeal (International Trade Modernisation) Act ating grant to the University of Adelaide. 2001 and the Passenger Movement Charge Col- The Bill provides for internal transfer of funding lection Act 1978. amounts between sections of the Act that will The bill continues the process of harmonising enable the Institute of Advanced Studies of the Customs offences with the Criminal Code; re- Australian National University to participate in stores the way imported goods are valued to make the Government’s performance based block re- it consistent with Australia’s international trade search funding schemes. This is an important step obligations; improves Customs border security in building a more integrated and competitive measures by allowing seizure of certain goods in higher education research system. the Torres Strait and providing for simplified re- The Bill reduces the compliance burden on uni- porting of re-mail; and makes a number of versities in relation to the accountability of amendments as a result of the Customs Legisla- Commonwealth funding. As it stands, universities tion Amendment and Repeal (International Trade are required to meet separate, and sometimes Modernisation) Act 2001. inconsistent, acquittal of requirements for differ- The bill also makes minor changes to the exemp- ent types of grant. These will be replaced with a tions available under the Passenger Movement single consistent provision applying to all funds Charge Collection Act. provided under the Act. First, the bill contains amendments to offence The requirement for institutions to send a ‘notice provisions in the Customs Act to make them con- of liability’ to overseas fee-paying students will sistent with amendments to other Customs of- be removed under the Bill. There is currently no fences made by the Law and Justice Amendment requirement to send liability notices to domestic (Application of the Criminal Code) Act 2001. fee-payers. The Government thinks it is best left to each institution to determine such administra- The amendments will ensure that where a fault tive processes. element is not required, offences are expressly described as strict liability offences. The Bill contains two measures to streamline the administration of ARC grants and the provision The amendments will also redraft some offences of expert advice to the ARC Board. The amend- to clarify that an exception to the offence is not an ments to the ARC Act will enable the Minister to element of the offence to be proved but can be formally approve research grants for a period of raised as a defence. 3540 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

The bill also provides for amendments to ensure Under current legislation if prohibited goods are consistency in the way financial penalties are found on a vessel, an application for a seizure expressed in the Customs Act by replacing refer- warrant must first be made to a Magistrate. ences to dollar amounts with the equivalent pen- This poses considerable operational and safety alty units. problems until the warrant is obtained. The next set of amendments deals with the provi- The amendments will allow for the seizure of sions for determining the customs value of im- prohibited imports and exports without a warrant ported goods for the purposes of assessing the in these circumstances. duty payable. Customs has consulted with and received support The Full Federal Court in CEO of Customs v from the Torres Strait Regional Authority for this AMI Toyota Ltd held in September 2000 that the proposal. warranty component of the price paid for imported vehicles should be deducted from the cus- The bill also proposes to amend the cargo report- toms value for the purpose of assessing duty. ing provisions for simplified arrangements for the reporting of cargo known as ‘re-mail’. The Government considers that decision to be inconsistent with the World Trade Organization Re-mail relates to bulk business mail such as pe- Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of riodic newsletters, bank statements and subscrip- the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade tion publications. 1994, to which Australia is a party. The nature of re-mail items, as defined, is such The WTO Valuation Agreement requires the that the potential for them to harbour prohibited customs value of imported goods to be the total of goods is low. payments made for the goods, with specific ex- To require standard Customs reporting of detailed ceptions. data for this class of mail is considered unneces- Those exceptions do not cover payments for war- sary. ranty costs. It is therefore proposed to amend the Act to en- The reasoning of the Full Federal Court is poten- able a person who registers as a re-mail reporter tially applicable to the valuation of a wide variety to provide fewer details for the report of re-mail of goods. cargo. The amendments will align the Government’s The bill also contains amendments to the Cus- policy objective with the WTO Valuation Agree- toms Legislation Amendment and Repeal (Inter- ment by clarifying that the warranty component national Trade Modernisation) Act 2001. of the price paid for imported goods is included in The provisions of that Act are to commence by the customs value. Proclamation within a two-year period dating A transitional provision included in the bill en- from Royal Assent. sures that these amendments affect only the The Trade Modernisation Act received Royal valuation of goods entered for home consumption Assent on 20 July 2001 therefore all provisions after the date of commencement of the amend- must commence by 20 July 2003. ments. Many provisions of the Trade Modernisation Act The next set of amendments will insert a power to depend directly or indirectly on the introduction seize without warrant prohibited imports and proof Customs new cargo management computer hibited exports found onboard certain vessels in system—the Integrated Cargo System. the Torres Strait Protected Zone established under The two-year ‘Proclamation period’ was to allow the Torres Strait Treaty 1978. sufficient time for the trading community to be Traditional inhabitants of the Torres Strait using ready for the procedural and computer system vessels in the conduct of traditional activities in changes that the amendments support. the Torres Strait Protected Zone do not have to However, since enactment it has become apparent comply with the normal Customs reporting re- that the trading community may not be ready to quirements when travelling between Papua New use the Integrated Cargo System by July 2003. Guinea and Australia. To avoid uncertainty for industry, the bill there- However, to maintain control over the movement fore allows up to a further one year (until 20 July of prohibited imports and prohibited exports into 2004) for the relevant provisions to commence. and out of Australia, Customs officers intercept The bill also amends the Trade Modernisation Act and board these vessels. to allow the repeal of the provisions in the Cus- toms Act that govern the operation of Customs Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3541 current cargo management computer systems to Since the Trade Modernisation Act was enacted, commence on different days. it has become apparent that industry would not be Currently the Trade Modernisation Act requires in a position to implement its computer system all those provisions to be repealed on the same changes by July 2003. day. The Customs Legislation Amendment Bill (No. Given the scale of change involved in the re- 1) 2002 will extend the time in which those pro- placement of the current systems with the Inte- visions can be Proclaimed to commence to three grated Cargo System, Customs intends, in con- years to allow the trading community the extra sultation with industry, to introduce the new sys- time it would need to be ready. tem in a phased manner. This bill ensures that the 1997 Charges Act will The bill also includes some minor and technical continue to apply in respect of import reports and amendments to the Trade Modernisation Act, the processing made under the old systems. majority of which are to more closely align some These charges will continue to apply until all of of the provisions to the development of the new the new import reporting and entry processes computer systems. have commenced. Finally, the bill clarifies an existing exemption to The bill also continues the imposition of charges the Passenger Movement Charge as it applies to for documentary cargo reports made during the 6 persons making more than one departure from months general moratorium period, or any further Australia while on a journey that incorporates moratorium period granted by the Chief Execu- both air and sea legs. tive Officer of Customs. The bill also extends the exemption from the Pas- ————— senger Movement Charge to the small number of PLANT HEALTH AUSTRALIA (PLANT persons covered under the Overseas Missions INDUSTRIES) FUNDING BILL 2002 (Privileges and Immunities) Act 1995. This bill will enable new levies and charges to be ————— paid to Plant Health Australia Limited (PHA) IMPORT PROCESSING CHARGES through the normal appropriation from Consoli- (AMENDMENT AND REPEAL) BILL 2002 dated Revenue. The bill also provides a mecha- The main purpose of this bill is to continue the nism for monies collected in excess of a plant imposition of the import processing charges im- industry’s liability to PHA, to be appropriated for posed by the Import Processing Charges Act 1997 research and development activities. which is to be repealed by the Customs Legisla- PHA was established in April 2000 as a Corpora- tion Amendment and Repeal (International Trade tions Law company responsible for coordinating Modernisation) Act 2001. national plant health matters. The Common- The Trade Modernisation Act introduces substan- wealth, all States and Territories, and a number of tial new import reporting and entry processes plant industries are members. PHA’s running under the Customs Act 1901 as part of the Inte- costs of approximately $1.5 million per annum grated Cargo System. are shared between its members. The purpose of the bill is to help plant industries fund their share The charges for these new reporting requirements of PHA’s costs. are contained in the Import Processing Charges Act 2001. Industry members of PHA cover the grains, cotton, vegetable and potato, sugar, winegrape, nurs- It was intended that the repeal of the 1997 ery, apple and pear, rice, banana, fresh stone fruit, Charges Act and the new processes would com- nut, honey and strawberry industries. mence on a day to be fixed by Proclamation and if the provisions were not Proclaimed, they would To date, as an interim measure pending the devel- commence automatically two years after the opment of these new arrangements, industry Trade Modernisation Act received the Royal As- members of PHA have been funding their share of sent. PHA’s costs either directly from industry association monies or through their industry’s Research Many provisions of the Trade Modernisation Act and Development Corporation. When these ar- depend directly or indirectly on the introduction rangements are in place, industry funding of PHA of Customs new Integrated Cargo System. using research and development funds will no The two year proclamation period was to allow longer be necessary. sufficient time for the trading community to be Plant industries’ share of PHA’s costs is approxi- ready for the procedural and computer system mately $500,000 per annum. Under PHA’s con- changes. stitution, these costs are shared between its plant 3542 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 industry members based in part on the value of Debate (on motion by Senator Mackay) production of the various crops. adjourned. The legislative mechanism was developed in con- Ordered that the Higher Education Fund- sultation with PHA plant industry members. It is ing Amendment Bill 2002 and the Higher designed to limit the appropriation made to PHA Education Legislation Amendment Bill (No. to exactly that of each plant industry member’s share of PHA’s annual costs. 2) 2002; and the Customs Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 and the Im- Given seasonal variations in crop production lev- port Processing Charges (Amendment and els and revenue from sales, it is impossible to set operative levy and charge rates that will collect a Repeal) Bill 2002 be listed on the Notice fixed sum of money, whereby the levy and charge Paper as two orders of the day, and the Plant burden is shared equitably by levy and charge Health Australia (Plant Industries) Funding payers. Bill 2002 be listed as a separate order of the Accordingly, once an industry’s share of its an- day. nual contributions to PHA have been met, the bill COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL provides for monies collected in excess of this AMENDMENT BILL (No. 1) 2002 amount to be redirected to that industry’s R&D Corporation and be deemed to be R&D levy or Second Reading charge. This R&D component will be matched by Debate resumed from 21 August, on mo- the Commonwealth, as is currently the case. The tion by Senator Abetz: new PHA levies and charges component will not That this bill be now read a second time. be matched. Senator HUTCHINS (New South Wales) Clearly, the benefit of returning any excess levy collections to research activities is that the indus- (9.41 a.m.)—I was speaking to a distin- tries will benefit from the Government’s matching guished colleague—and I think we would all dollar for dollar research and development fund- call him that—Senator Ray, about the Com- ing. monwealth Electoral Amendment Bill (No. The bill also contains measures that will enable a 1) 2002 and he said to me that this is essen- plant industry member to raise additional funds tially a bill about a dash for cash for the Lib- for special projects that the member wishes to be eral Party. After having done a bit of re- undertaken by PHA on its behalf. In accordance search on this bill, I understand that this is a with PHA’s constitution, PHA’s members have to bill to assist the federal secretariat of the agree to these before the start of the year. Liberal Party, bunkered down in Robert While the plant industries have sought to pay for Menzies House, in their dispute with the their yearly contribution to PHA from a new PHA Queensland division of the Liberal Party. levy and charge, there will be no increase in the Senator Ferguson—I thought you were overall levy and charge burden on industry members. This is because the proposed operative rate going to talk about Centenary House. That’s of PHA levy or charge for initial participants will your dash for cash. be exactly offset by a corresponding decrease in Senator HUTCHINS—No, Senator that industry’s existing R&D levy and charge rate. Ferguson. I am not sure what position the In addition, the impact on business will be mini- South Australian Liberal Party is in at the mised as existing levy and charge collection ar- moment. You are not in power there at the rangements are to be used with no change to the moment, are you, Senator Ferguson? In fact, paperwork required of businesses/producers al- as you would know, Mr President, in no state ready paying levies and charges. or territory is the Liberal Party in power. This legislation has the full support of industry This bill, as Senator Ray explained to me, groups and producers. It establishes arrangements for the long term funding of PHA’s plant health quite emotionally—this dash for cash by the activities. It facilitates plant industry members of coalition to get this money—has a long and PHA contributing to the development of an inter- tawdry history. I have been here only since nationally outstanding plant health management 1998, but I have become aware of this system that enhances Australia’s plant health growing division within the Liberal Party status and the profitability and sustainability of and their particular bureaucracies as a result plant industries. of this bill being once again presented to the Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3543

Senate. I am aware that the Queensland Lib- Mr Acting Deputy President, can you eral Senators Mason and Brandis and indeed imagine the sort of flaying that we would get potentially our new ambassador to Ireland, on our side of politics if we were not even Senator Herron, have been involved in lob- able to run our own political party. As a bying to assist their Queensland state divi- president of the New South Wales branch of sion. These divisions, I imagine, go back to the Labor Party, I can tell you that we are why a lot of parties start to fall out of favour always operating in surpluses. We will al- with each other—the fact of the appalling ways operate, and have always operated, in performance of the Queensland Liberal Party surpluses. Can you believe that these gen- over the past few years, and of the conserva- iuses on the other side who would purport to tive forces up there in Queensland. As a represent and govern this country cannot young man, I never thought that someone even run their own political party? We have like Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen would have ever to have special legislation, which has been been defeated—he looked invincible. Yet presented to us this morning, to get them out after many years of that coalition govern- of the—I was going to use a swear word, but ment up there the people had had enough and I know you cannot do that in the chamber, so they punted them. When parties fall into so ‘poo’ will do. We have to try to dig them out much disarray and there is anger within of their own graves. I am not in favour of it. I themselves and there are internal disputes, have spoken to Senator Ray and Senator they sometimes spill out publicly, as we have Faulkner about this. I know that Senator seen in my own party. But for the Queen- Faulkner has a deep and lasting affection for sland Liberals to do some of the things that it state branches of political parties, but, in- has been alleged Senators Brandis, Mason deed, not even Senator Faulkner could come and Herron have done is quite outrageous. at this bland hypocrisy that is ensconced in I cannot for the life of me think that we in this bill. The Courier-Mail of 30 August last the Labor Party would even consider ap- year said that Senators Brandis and Mason proaching the Democrats and asking them to were lobbying the Australian Democrats to make sure that this bill was defeated, even if make sure that they opposed this bill. I sup- we had received instructions from our state pose as good state righters they have been branch like those the Queensland Liberal dispatched to Canberra to represent their Party have given to people like Senators Ma- party, but to treacherously go round and talk son, Brandis and Herron. In fact, Mr Presi- to the Australian Democrats to make sure dent, in your exalted role within the Liberal that this bill was defeated is a new low. Party, you will be well aware, no doubt, that Senator Faulkner—They are treacher- in the Sydney Morning Herald of August last ous, but they are also right on this. year, the Prime Minister complained about Senator HUTCHINS—In fact, Senator the Queensland division. I gather he said that Faulkner, it was reported that in the cabinet it had reneged on handing over its share of meeting the Prime Minister was so angry funding. He made it clear, undoubtedly, to about the actions of Senators Brandis and your party room meeting that the bill was Mason that he himself labelled them treach- going ahead. As a consequence of that, peo- erous. As I said, the treachery and duplicity ple like Senators Brandis, Mason and Herron of these new-age Liberals that have been started to lobby the divided Democrats. They dispatched to Canberra from Queensland was want this bill defeated. They do not want the reported on 30 August last year. Mr Acting federal secretariat of the Liberal Party having Deputy President, you only have to listen to this money. They want it to go back to their some of their speeches, particularly those by own mates in Queensland. I gather from re- Senator Mason, to realise that they think the ports in the Age of April and July last year triumph of capitalism has finally occurred that this so-called great coalition party, this and that they and their predecessors have great conservative party, is in debt to the tune been proven right about the combat between of $300,000 north of the Tweed. the Left and the Right. Listening to some of the madcap speeches that Senators Brandis 3544 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 and Mason have made in here, you would mess around with the GST if you don’t have sometimes think that Dr Strangelove had to?’ This rationale was rejected by Lynton been let into the Senate. Crosby, who instead claimed that the These two gentlemen get up here and beat changes will—and it sounds very Orwel- their chests about the triumph of Liberal lian—‘more accurately reflect the purpose capitalism that they believe has occurred for which public funding is paid’; that is, for over the last few years, but we have not us for the federal election campaign. heard them comment at all on the appalling Can you imagine small businesses being performances of their capitalist mates in satisfied with one of the paid servants, one of America. Where are their answers to what the paid puppies, of the Liberal Party saying, has happened to Enron and WorldCom? ‘Why mess around with the GST if you don’t Where is their apologia for what is happen- have to’? Mr Acting Deputy President, can ing in the HIH royal commission? Where is you imagine going to one of the small busi- their apologia for what Adler and all of those nesses in the southern suburbs of Sydney— sorts of people have got up to? Their answers as I know you do all the time—shoving one are nowhere; the silence is very deafening. of those quotes in front of them and saying, We still wait to hear their contribution about ‘Why muck around if you don’t have to’? I this so-called triumph of Liberal capitalism. will tell you what they would say; they The only triumph that they are trying to have would say that the Taxation Office would be in the Senate in this period is to make sure up you like a rat up a drainpipe, wouldn’t that this bill is defeated. When a division is they? Imagine that. All these taxation offi- called on this bill, I hope they are not gutless cers have been crawling over these small and get paired or something like that. I businesses, except of course the Queensland would like to see exactly where their loyal- Liberal Party and the Western Australian ties lie. What about Senator Herron? You division. I invite Senators Brandis and Ma- have to give it to him. He has an ambassa- son—and, as I said, I can understand the dorship in the offing, and he may not be able predicament Senator Herron is in at the mo- to vote in accordance with the wishes of the ment, because he does not want to get any- Queensland division of the Liberal Party. But body offside. He has his loyalties to his Brandis and Mason do not. I am looking Queensland division but he does have Dublin forward to seeing what they will do and and Rome in sight. I can understand that he where their loyalties are. Are their loyalties would not want to get people browned off with their Queensland state branch or with about taking them on. But, definitely, Bran- the federal coalition here? dis and Mason could at least come down The Prime Minister has made it clear here— where he thinks their loyalties are. As I said The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT earlier, he believes they are treacherous. Can (Senator Forshaw)—Order! Senator you imagine a successful Prime Minister—I Hutchins, you should refer to senators by have to say it—like John Howard going into their correct titles. a full cabinet meeting and labelling two of Senator Troeth—Thank you. That is cor- his obscure backbenchers as treacherous? rect. That is what he has done. What are we expected to do here today? We are waiting Senator HUTCHINS—Senator George again for the government to respond on this. Brandis and Senator Brett Mason. I am not sure of their second names but I will try to One of the reasons this legislation is be- read them out, Senator Troeth, if I can get a fore us is that both the federal and state divi- hold of them at the moment. You can see the sions of the Liberal Party have cash flow divisions in the Liberal Party, not only in problems, not only in Queensland but par- Queensland, where they are rocking and ticularly in Western Australia. In fact, in the rolling on this, but also in Western Australia, Canberra Times of 8 August 2001 the West- where they feel that compliance with the ern Australian Liberal Party director, Mr GST is something you might not need to Wells, said in relation to the changes, ‘Why look at if you can get away with it. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3545

In our state of New South Wales, Mr Senator Faulkner—Do you think it Acting Deputy President, we have some in- would have reached the same sticky end? teresting things going on, particularly in the Senator HUTCHINS—It could have, but seat of Wentworth. I have become aware, as the Hughes in-laws conducted a poll against we would all have become aware, of the the Sinclair in-laws and they found that the rorting and stacking that has been going on Hughes in-law, Turnbull, was more popular in the seat of Wentworth. We saw Andrew than the Sinclair in-law, Peter King. That Thomson, who was the member for was released to the press. However, that did Wentworth, getting rolled by Ian Sinclair’s not get too far because we have the Sinclair son-in-law in last year’s preselection. That in-law in here now rather than the Hughes was a conflict, I suppose, between the Left son-in-law. I know it is confusing but among and the Right. In fact, in 2000 it got so bad in the aristocracy they are all related anyway, Wentworth—this is one of ‘the’ suburbs in and it is just a matter of getting the surnames Australia; this is one of the rich suburbs in correct. When this occurred there was obvi- Australia. ously some conflict in the Wentworth area. I Senator Faulkner—This is where all the am not sure if you received it, Mr Acting patricians live. Deputy President, or even if my leader Senator HUTCHINS—This is where all Senator Faulkner received it. But I certainly the patricians live, of course. It got so bad for received this anonymous email and I put this Andrew Thomson that he had to call in the caveat on it. police to stop factional operators from sign- Senator Faulkner—No, I did not but I ing up members. There were also allegations would like to receive one. that 120 Young Liberals were stacked into Senator HUTCHINS—In your interests, the meeting of the University of New South Senator Faulkner, I think that I should Wales Young Liberals Club and that they probably should read it out. were enticed to go to the meeting for the free grog. I could not imagine Young Liberals Senator Faulkner—Thank you. going along to a meeting where they were Senator HUTCHINS—Before I read the offered, say, Tooheys Draught or Resch’s— contents of this email and the transcript, I Senator Faulkner—Was it Verve would like to point out that I am not neces- Cliquot? sarily alleging that this email and the attached transcript of the recording implies Senator HUTCHINS—Senator Faulkner, that it is actually going on. I am merely re- I think that is what it would have to have laying to the Senate what has been sent to me been. I could not imagine them being enticed by an unidentified source as evidence of the to go to a meeting unless they were offered level of disarray at their level in the party. Verve Cliquot, or some nice, expensive The email says: French red or something like that. But, ap- Dear Recipient, parently, they turned up. I gather that, after King was selected— The following is a recorded telephone conversation (22/05/02) between a source from Woollahra The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Young Liberals, and one Mr. Adam Crozier, a DENT—Order! Senator Hutchins, you member of the branch, who clearly states that a should refer to members by their full names. Mr. John Hyde Page— Senator HUTCHINS—I am sorry: Mr No-one has single names anymore in the Peter King—Ian Sinclair’s son-in-law. After Liberal Party. I wonder whether you have to Mr Peter King was selected, a member of have Saxe-Coburg-Gotha or something like one of the other dynasties in Sydney, one of that— the Hughes in-laws, was not happy with the had offered a bribe to induce Mr. Crozier to at- Sinclair in-laws getting the selection—it is a tend a meeting. bit like Romeo and Juliet, the Capulets and Context: the Montagues—so the Hughes in-laws con- Mr. JHP has been lobbying to ‘take out’ certain ducted a poll— members of Woollahra Young Liberals as a con- 3546 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 sequence of the defection of those who control Senator HUTCHINS—You would think the branch from ‘The Group’ (the Left faction) to so. It is outrageous that they were only of- the Right wing faction of the Liberal Party. fered $70 to try to stack out the meeting Several meetings have already been held at against one of the Sinclair in-laws as op- Woollahra— posed to the Hughes in-laws. (Time expired) I do not know how much champagne or red Senator HOGG (Queensland) (10.01 wine they spilt in Woollahra— a.m.)—I am very grateful that the Common- without much success to re-take the branch from wealth Electoral Amendment Bill (No. 1) the Right. Senior members of the Party have been 2002 has been brought on by the govern- implicated in activities surrounding the ‘Wool- ment. It certainly gives me an opportunity to lahra war’. say a few things that need to be said. This This transcript reads: bill is known as the ‘dash for cash’ bill. I FIRST SPEAKER: I’d just like you to know I think that is probably more closely aligned to won’t be attending that meeting at this point de- the TV program Who Wants to be a Million- spite someone expecting me to. aire because, when I looked at it, that is what SECOND SPEAKER:Is that you Mr Crozier? it is really about. It is really a grab for the FIRST SPEAKER: Yes, that’s right. funds that would have otherwise been allocated to the Queensland branch of the Lib- SECOND SPEAKER:Have you had a call have eral Party in a federal election by the na- you? tional secretariat of that party. The bill comes FIRST SPEAKER: Yes I have. about because the Liberal Party is unable to SECOND SPEAKER:Can you tell us who called resolve its own internal administrative prob- you? lems. It is shameful that it has been left to FIRST SPEAKER: John Hyde Page. this parliament to sort out those particular I do not know whose in-law he is. Maybe the problems. That is certainly not the purpose Liberals who follow me can assist us. The of this parliament; that is not why this par- transcript goes on to say: liament is here. The Liberal Party should at SECOND SPEAKER:Has anyone else called least be able to sort out its own problems you? within its own party. We will come to the Queensland branch in a few moments. FIRST SPEAKER: Apart from being indicated at this meeting yesterday, no nothing else. I likened the bill to the program Who SECOND SPEAKER:How did he try to convince Wants to be a Millionaire. In that program you to get to the meeting? you are given a number of options and you FIRST SPEAKER: Cash inducement. lock in your answer. As I understand it, if you get the answer right you progress and SECOND SPEAKER:He offered you a cash in- you could potentially win the big prize. The ducement? big prize, if you get it right for the national FIRST SPEAKER: Yes. secretariat of the Liberal Party, is the federal SECOND SPEAKER:How much did he offer funding out of Queensland. The competitors you, just out of interest? in this are their state rivals. This has led to a FIRST SPEAKER: Seventy dollars. very bitter struggle within the Liberal Party, SECOND SPEAKER:How much? both in the Queensland branch and nation- FIRST SPEAKER: Seventy dollars. ally. That is all they were offered. You would I always turn to the Bills Digest, because I think that the Woollahra Young Liberals in think that it is always a very handy document particular would have been offered more to refer to when one is considering a bill be- than 70 bucks. fore this parliament. It talks about the rationales for this bill being before parliament. I Senator Faulkner—You would think will take those rationales straight from the there would be a few noughts on the end of Bills Digest. I think they are very good op- that! tions. Those who are listening and watching, get ready to lock in your options. The official Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3547 rationale is that the amendments reflect the So we see a number of prominent people in purpose and the pattern of election funding the Senate, the House of Representatives and expenditure. That is option one. The second within the machinery of the Liberal Party in rationale is that the amendments will relieve Queensland participating in open warfare for the Liberal Party of an unnecessary adminis- the control of the party and the funds. This is trative burden associated with the goods and a party which is reduced to substantially less services tax. The third rationale alleges that even than the reserves that you would have the amendments serve to settle an unresolved for a cricket team and which cannot even get dispute between the federal secretariat and anywhere near the line in the Brisbane City certain of the state and territory divisions. Council elections, let alone the state gov- These are the three options before the con- ernment elections. testants. Lock in your options. If you picked Those who are ready to plug in their an- the third option, you are right. If you picked swers, get pen and paper ready, because we the second option, you are right. If you will be getting to that in a short moment. picked the first option, you picked a furphy. Further on in this article, we find the fol- We are now heading down the path of the lowing quote, from one of the same angered further options. Undoubtedly, anyone out backbenchers who are still running around there with no real hand in the political proc- today: ess can see that this is a set-up by the gov- ‘This will make us mendicants,’ said a Liberal ernment. It wishes to use this parliament and backbencher. ‘Bear in mind [Robert] Menzies its legislative processes to overcome the dif- deliberately created a federal party structure. ficulties that exist within the Queensland What is being proposed would subvert Menzies’ branch of the Liberal Party in particular. designs.’ Having identified the fact that the source of It seems there are a number of recalcitrants the problem was the internal problems within in the Queensland branch of the Liberal the Liberal Party in Queensland, I was led Party. These recalcitrants are readily identifi- back to the Financial Review of 2001. For able. For the purpose of this debate, we need those who are still wanting to compete in the not give them any publicity here today. They contest, we will have some more options to know who they are. choose from in a few moments. The article in This led me down the path of trying to the Financial Review of 27 June 2001—12 find out if there was another way to describe months ago—says: these recalcitrants. I went into the thesaurus Outraged Liberal backbenchers forced the on my computer and it came up with a num- Government to remove the Commonwealth ber of alternative descriptions. I wonder if Electoral Law amendment from the top of the these fit the recalcitrants that are in the agenda for discussion at yesterday’s joint Coali- Queensland branch of the Liberal Party. ‘Un- tion party to allow for more consultation. ruly’—I think that has been clearly exhibited The article goes on to say: by the outbreaks that have taken place in Unusually, the amendment—which would re- preselection battles in Queensland. ‘Unruly’ direct funding from the States to the Liberal clearly fits them. ‘Intractable’—now, there is Party’s federal headquarters—was listed for dis- a good word for them. They are intractable. cussion under the name of the Prime Minister, Mr They have dug their toes in. They are not John Howard. This is an indication of the impor- here today fighting for their little piece of tance the Government attaches to its efforts to strengthen federal control before the next elec- turf, which surprises me, but they are intrac- tion, which is due by the end of the year. table. ‘Disobedient’—I cannot say that about them. ‘Refractory’—I think one would have Then the article really gets to the nub of the to use one’s own judgment there. ‘Way- issue: ward’—now, there is a good word to de- The bid to strengthen central party control has scribe the recalcitrants. I will include that in angered backbenchers when the Federal Govern- the list. ‘Obstinate’—I do not think they are ment is also intervening in State affairs on an obstinate, because they have given in too unprecedented scale. quickly and too easily and vacated their 3548 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 piece of turf. ‘Unmanageable’—they are prove to be much of a problem for them in definitely unmanageable. Most of their con- the longer term and something that they sultations and decisions are taken at a trendy would not like to throw back to us. The Cou- coffee shop in Racecourse Road at Ascot or rier-Mail of 18 March 2000 reports about the in Park Road at Milton or at some plush cafe Brisbane City Council election which was at Mount Gravatt. imminent at that stage. I think it was actually I think I have covered all the principal held that Saturday. The article says: players there. They are unmanageable, un- A poor result in the council poll could reignite controllable and are causing undoubted diffi- recent Liberal problems, including factional in- culties within their own party, for which I am fighting, and trigger speculation over the future of very grateful because it has helped our pros- Queensland president, Con Galtos. pects in Queensland no end, not only for re- Con is now history as branch president of the taining state government but also for retain- Queensland party. Then an article on 27 ing the Brisbane City Council. ‘Non- March 2000, post the Brisbane City Council compliant’—yes, I think that could be said to election, says: apply very readily to these people, and so Mr Galtos said last night his party had failed to could ‘stubborn’. You have a number of properly resource its councillors in the past nine words that you can now lock in to choose to years, making it difficult for them to develop get you closer to the prize. Of course, the policies. prize at the end of the day will be whether or But he said the key to the Liberals’ stunning not this chamber chooses to pass the legisla- loss was party disunity, with five or six figures tion and take the funding away from the constantly leaking information and creating fac- Queensland branch of the Liberal Party and tion-based disunity. hand it to the national secretariat of the Lib- ‘These five or six people should not even call eral Party. If this legislation is defeated, then themselves Liberals,’ Mr Galtos said. it will be up to the internal processes and These are the people in the smoke filled goodwill of the party—which I find does not rooms. These are the people who are doing exist within the Liberal Party in Queen- the plotting and the scheming. These are the sland—to resolve their problems. people who are creating the havoc within the One might say, ‘If you live in a glass- Liberal Party. I say to keep at it; you are do- house, you should not throw stones.’ In the ing a good job. Having said that, it does not political argy-bargy, there are difficulties give you the right to bring a bill before this within political parties. We all have our parliament and misuse the purpose and the fights and our battles from time to time. One role of the parliament. Settle your disputes accepts that there will be stiff contests for down at the coffee shop at Racecourse Road, some positions within the party, but, if one Ascot or wherever. Sip on your caffe latte reads a number of the articles that are avail- and work out your difficulties. Go to Park able on the internal machinations within the Road and have your cappuccino, but do not Liberal Party in Queensland, one will find bring your problem here. The next bit of the that we in the Labor Party are in absolute article is even more interesting. I quote again peace in Queensland and that we have been from the Courier-Mail of 27 March 2000: at peace for years. Dr Watson— This article from the Courier-Mail of 18 who was the state Liberal parliamentary March 2000 highlights the internal faction- leader at that time— alism and the fighting in the Queensland said the council result would not translate to the Liberal Party. I have this argument with a next state election, due in the middle of next year. number of people that I know on the other ‘Mr Beattie isn’t in the same league as Lord side of politics about whether or not there are Jim,’ Dr Watson said. factions within the Liberal Party. I get a wry Lord Jim, for those who do not know, is Jim smile out of one of the people on the other Soorley, the long-serving Mayor of the City side of the chamber now, but I am assured of Brisbane. He continues: that there are factions. I am sure that that will Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3549

‘The Premier has made more mistakes in 18 ual vacancy in Western Australia. It is really months than Lord Jim in nine years.’ saying something when the Liberal Party in That was reassuring indeed for the Labor Queensland can outstrip the Liberal Party in forces in Queensland. That was the best Western Australia. I note that my colleague, thing that could have been said. From the Senator Webber, is going to talk about the prediction of Dr Watson—I do not know if highlights of that. Sherlock Holmes was in on this—we ended I would have loved to have put a lot more up with a record majority in the state parlia- quotes on the record, but time does not per- ment in Queensland. The disunity reduced mit. This really boils down to a hypocritical the Liberals, as I said, to fewer than the act, in my view. We should not have to re- number of reserves you would put in a solve internal party differences. If you have cricket team. The party in Queensland has an internal party difference, go down and frittered away its resources and lost its credi- have your caffe latte, cappuccino or what- bility, and its only way to resource itself is ever you have at that hour of the morning through federal funding. Then you find that and resolve it down on Racecourse Road in a you end up in a battle with the national sec- restaurant or coffee shop. But do not bring retariat of the Liberal Party, who want to take your problems here. Do not expect us to re- that federal funding away. It is an absolute solve them. (Time expired) disgrace and absolute shame that this bill has Senator WEBBER (Western Australia) shown up here at all. If you want to be a (10.21 a.m.)—I join with my colleagues from millionaire, then you have got to plug in ei- the opposition to speak today to the extraor- ther of the answers. You vote for the bill and dinary Commonwealth Electoral Amend- it goes to the national secretariat, or you do ment Bill (No. 1) 2002. In fact, I join many not vote for it and it stays in Queensland. I other members on this side of the chamber to would be only too pleased to see that happen. state my wholehearted opposition. As Sena- They have now developed into an art form tor Faulkner so eloquently said earlier in this frittering money away on internal fights and debate, this bill is commonly described on internal preselections—thereby enhancing our side as the ‘dash for cash’ bill. It is out- Labor’s standing as a responsible state gov- rageous that the mechanics of this bill are ernment and also Labor’s standing in the basically to allow a party interest—in this Brisbane City Council, the principal council case the federal secretariat of the Liberal in the state of Queensland if not the whole of Party—to overcome its own internal diffi- Australia. culties. The specific nature of this bill is to I turn for one moment to the preselection allow the federal Liberal Party to circumvent crisis. It now looks as though Senator Herron the operation of the Commonwealth Elec- is departing us for other climes. Will we go toral Act. The Electoral Act is designed, through the same haggling and wrangling above all else, to ensure that elections in this that took place in the wake of Senator Parer’s country are conducted in a transparent man- resignation? I hope we do. I have got the ner. If we cannot be guaranteed that, then same notice of motion ready for when that what can we be guaranteed? What the Lib- happens as I had when Senator Parer left. eral Party want us to do is to amend the act The wrangling, the infighting and the fac- so that they can ensure that the distribution tionalism within the Liberal Party in Queen- of funds between the federal secretariat and sland led to a record 117 days elapsing be- the state branches of the Liberal Party is un- fore the party could present Senator Brandis dertaken in the interests of the federal wing. to us here as the replacement for Senator In essence, the federal secretariat of the Lib- Parer. I hope that happens again; it gave me a eral Party is forcing this parliament to pass notice of motion to put up each day. I know legislation because it cannot get the numbers it was followed with interest around the par- to make the organisational changes necessary liament and around Australia, because the to allow it to receive moneys from public previous record was 109 days. That record funding. was set when Senator Lightfoot got the cas- 3550 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

When I gave my first speech in this place not agree amongst themselves. As Senator the other day, I started by quoting Edmund Hogg said before, when Senator Lightfoot Burke, and a number of people opposite was preselected they had to have two goes at congratulated me on that. I now have another it. They ran it up, he nominated, it was a one. Edmund Burke once observed: contested preselection and he won with the One of the first motives of civil society, and able assistance of former Senator Crichton- which becomes one of its fundamental rules, is Browne. Some did not like that result, so that no man should judge in his own cause. what did they do? They did it all over again. This bill seeks to allow the federal secretariat And just to prove that former Senator to circumvent the Electoral Act to judge in Crichton-Browne could actually count, its own cause. The Electoral Act currently Senator Lightfoot won again. In the mean- provides for public funding to be paid to the time my state of Western Australia was un- agent of the state branch of the party for derrepresented in this chamber because the which the candidate stood. We all know that; Liberal Party could not manage their internal we have all had to sign appointment of agent difficulties. forms as part of the process of getting Having been involved with the WA branch elected. of the ALP for some time and having worked The current act allows a mechanism for our former state government, I under- through section 299(5A) whereby a state stand how difficult it is to make the transition branch lodges a notice with the Australian from government to opposition. I went Electoral Commission requesting that pay- through that process. As I say, I worked for ment be made to an agent of another party. the Lawrence state government and therefore Section 299 allows a straightforward ap- went through all the heartache that goes with proach that permits public funding to be paid losing government, so I have some sympathy to an agent rather than to the state branch for for what Colin Barnett is going through as which the candidate stood. Unlike Mr Lynton Leader of the Opposition, and I am sure he is Crosby and his colleagues, our national sec- trying to do his level best. I think he would retariat in the ALP is quite capable and has have a fair bit of sympathy for Senator Stott reached agreement with each state branch of Despoja at the moment in that he is being our party and, in accordance with section undermined by four of his own at every turn. 299, such notice was duly lodged. Not only do we have Colin Barnett, who Everyone carries on about the internal dif- wants to be and is Leader of the Opposition, ficulties that the ALP is supposedly having but also we have Matt Birney, the new mem- because we are quite happy to have an open ber for Kalgoorlie, who would really like to and transparent process where we engage our be leader—but the trouble is that, with one rank-and-file membership and the commu- vote, one value, he will probably lose his nity at large in our internal processes and our seat; he is actually going to have to find a process for policy development, yet we can seat because you have to be in the parliament make sure that, whilst we are doing that, the to be the Leader of the Opposition—and mechanics of conducting an election and the Mike Board, who is the AMA spokesperson mechanics of managing our own internal for health in the state parliament, who would structural affairs duly comply with the act. really like to be leader as well, although it is Why is it that we now have to change it be- a bit of hard work and you need more than cause the Liberal Party is completely unable the AMA to help you develop policy if you to achieve the same thing? have to deal with more than the health portfolio. Next is Rob Johnson, who seems to be Those opposite know that this legislation trying to be involved in who is going to be is being proposed only because they cannot leader. He would probably like to be leader achieve it. They cannot manage to get it to- and, if not that, at least deputy leader—that gether. Having met some of the more inter- is when he is not helping to organise the esting characters from the WA division of the members of One Nation to be elected to his Liberal Party, it is little wonder Lynton local council! Then, of course, there is the Crosby cannot get them to agree. They can- Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3551 dark horse, Cheryl Edwardes. She has had a reports and critiques of what goes wrong in longstanding involvement in the northern each state branch, the Liberal Party want the suburbs of Perth, and I would have to say Australian parliament to pass a bill that is that, of all of those candidates, she is proba- nothing less than a shameless attempt to im- bly the one I am most in awe of it. She has a pose a legislative solution on a purely inter- tremendous network within her local com- nal matter. They have the cheek to claim that munity and an incredible work ethic; she the ALP is the party with internal problems. works really hard. She is probably the one Where is this nonsense going to end? How whom they would all like to draught, but she many other pieces of legislation will we be is frustrating them because she just won’t asked to pass to resolve their internal diffi- play: she keeps saying that she is backing the culties? Perhaps we could have an act to re- current leader. So the Liberal Party have all store the former President of this place to her sorts of internal difficulties in my part of the former position—that would certainly re- world. And I gather, from having listened to solve another internal dispute—or we could some of the debate here, that my state is not introduce a bill to allow Dr Napthine to be on its own. returned as Leader of the Opposition in Vic- As I say, if you cannot manage who is toria. Of course, we can do none of these going to be the leader and you cannot suc- things, and nor should we allow this bill to cessfully manage to preselect senators, little pass into law. wonder that you cannot sign forms and make If we pass this bill we will create a prece- sure that you are going to disburse public dent that at any time it is acceptable to pass funding accordingly. In fact, I would like to amendments to laws that are to the direct be so bold as to suggest that it would be far benefit of one political party. This bill is so more appropriate if the Liberal Party in- obviously a bill for the benefit of the Liberal vested some of their time and effort into get- Party that it is mentioned directly by name. ting their own house in order rather than de- This bill was not designed for the general valuing the role of this place by proposing operation of the disbursement of public this legislation. funding but specifically for the benefit of the Why should the federal parliament be Liberal Party alone. As I said before, no-one forced to pick up the pieces because the Lib- should be entitled to be the judge in their eral Party hierarchy cannot get all of their own cause. Neither should the legislative state divisions to reach agreement on the power of the Australian parliament be used public funding disbursements under the cur- to act as the circuit-breaker for an internal rent act? Simply, it should not. Instead of problem of the Liberal Party. This govern- having the courage to adopt a truly national ment has become so arrogant that it comes structure—and what is wrong with having a into this place with legislation that is de- national structure?—we now have to have signed for nothing other than its own benefit. federal legislation to deal with their internal How could anyone support this crass attempt difficulties. This comes from the states rights to resolve its own organisational and struc- party—they come into chambers like this all tural problems? In fact, it must be incredibly the time and give us lectures about how you embarrassing to actually have to draft and have to stand up for your own state and are introduce and then try to negotiate the pas- not allowed to be partisan and about how we sage of a bill for an act of parliament to ad- all have to be from Western Australia to- dress your own internal structures. gether or from Queensland together or what- It is clear that this attempt to amend the ever. But it would seem that they cannot ac- Electoral Act to their own benefit is a case of tually bring all of those state branches to- their judging in their own cause, and they gether into a federation and act as a truly just assume that the Australian parliament is national body. going to roll over and assist in their self- Instead of adopting a truly national struc- interest. In fact, if you examine the statement ture and having a proper national structure of Senator Abetz on 15 May this year when with an enforceable code rather than nice the motion for the bill’s second reading was 3552 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 moved, there is no doubt that this is solely to We believe that it is up to the Liberal Party to the benefit of the Liberal Party. You need deal with public funding through its own only read the minister’s own words to con- structure and, if it wants to aggregate that firm that the bill is intended to allow the into the national office from the states, it Commonwealth legislation to be used for the should arrange to have that done within its purpose of resolving an internal party prob- own democratic and administrative proc- lem. He said: esses. It is very evident, as other speakers However, as the Federal Secretariat of the Liberal have said, that there is some fault line within Party is responsible for federal election cam- the party that is preventing that, but it is not paigns, it is appropriate that all or part of the up to us to arbitrate a matter of dispute public funding be paid to the agent of the Federal within the Liberal Party from outside. Leg- Secretariat islation is not the way to go. I agree—that is the way it is handled within On behalf of the Australian Greens I will the ALP. We do not need an amendment act be moving an amendment to this legislation to make sure that that happens; we have an on another very pertinent aspect of the agreed structure that governs the conduct of funding of political parties: what happens federal elections. We have lots of robust in- when donations from the corporate sector ternal, and sometimes external, debates, but come to political parties from donors who we can actually agree on the fundamentals of then turn out to be insolvent or go insolvent. the organisation of our party and the conduct There is some dispute about this at the mo- of an election campaign. As I have said be- ment, as you will know, in relation to a cou- fore, that payment of public funding to the ple of companies. I will talk about those in a federal secretariat can already be achieved moment. It is a very contentious issue that through section 299 of the current act, if the shareholders in Australia are left out of Liberal Party could only get all of their state pocket when a company goes insolvent. In- directors to actually trust their federal direc- deed, some face bankruptcy themselves tor. through the loss of money through that in- There can be no doubt that a mature po- solvency. It has a negative cascading effect. litical party should be able to resolve these The question is: isn’t it the ‘moral duty’, as matters. On this side of the chamber we have the headline of the Sunday Telegraph edito- copped nothing but abuse and criticism be- rial of August 18 puts it, of politicians to cause we are prepared to review and reform ensure that in such circumstances donations our structures in a very public, open and that have come from those companies to the transparent manner, whilst those on the other political parties be returned so that there will side cannot even agree, it would seem, on at least be that amount of assistance to the who is going to bank the money. After 60 shareholders who are at loss? I think so. years—60 long, hard years in some cases— You will know, Mr Acting Deputy Presi- the Liberal Party are so poorly organised and dent, that the Greens believe that donations structured that they would rather skulk in from the corporate sector to political parties here and use parliament’s legislative powers should go into an opaque trust and then be than address their own structural and organ- disbursed according to the vote at the elec- isational problems. This legislation does ab- tion—in other words, on a basis exactly the solutely nothing to create any benefit for our same as that on which public funding is dis- fellow Australians: it does not create one bursed. We believe that there is a corrupting additional job; it does not help one Austra- influence on politics from donations coming lian achieve a better standard of living. It is a from the corporate sector. We are not alone shameful exercise that is designed to benefit in this. Various presidents of the United the federal secretariat of the Liberal Party, States over the last century have commented and for these reasons this bill should be re- on the untoward effect on policy and demo- jected. cratic outcomes from the pressure of corpo- Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (10.36 rations—not least from their financial pres- a.m.)—The Greens oppose this legislation. sure. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3553

I am stating the obvious when I say that a previous years should be returned, there is an corporation which is acting effectively on argument for making it a decade. Why behalf of the shareholders cannot ethically should the $800,000 not be returned? How- give donations to political parties without ever, we are being conservative about this expecting a return—without discussing this and our amendment would mean that the at board level and being able to say, ‘It is a $115,500 that has gone to the government wise investment for our corporation to give parties would be returned. this many dollars to that political party, be- Of course, donations occur across the cause it will advantage the corporation’s board. The company Froggy, built up by en- profit line and therefore the interests of the trepreneur Mr Karl Suleman, gave the New shareholders.’ For a corporation not to be- South Wales ALP $181,000 in recent times. have in that way would go against the whole The company is apparently facing losses of philosophy of corporate ethics, which should $65 million. We know that that is hitting ultimately be ethics which advantage the shareholders—I would think potentially shareholder. Where the rules advantage the thousands of small shareholders across the shareholder, the whole thrust of the corpora- country—and I believe that in these circum- tion is to make a profit which is going to stances that money ought to be returned. The maximise the interests of its members, who return of neither of those donations—either are its shareholders. That is not happening in by the Liberals to the authorities looking Australia today. after the bankruptcy of HIH or by the New We have recently had a number of corpo- South Wales ALP to those looking after the rate collapses which have left people in terri- insolvency of Froggy—is going to create a ble financial loss—citizens of Australia who huge problem for the political parties in- have put hundreds of thousands of dollars, in volved. It is a matter of real ethics that we some cases, into investments. These dollars show, as politicians, we are capable of un- that they have earned through their own life- derstanding the suffering at a very personal time’s hard work have gone into companies level when bankruptcies like those occur— like HIH—the most notable one at the mo- because party political donations do become ment. The company has then become insol- personal for those politicians who are ad- vent and they have lost nearly all, if not all, vantaged by them—and there is a willing- of that money. One only has to stop and ness to be fair, to be reasonable, to be re- think for a little while about the plight of sponsible and to give back the money. shareholders who have put most of their The amendment that the Greens are put- money into a corporation like HIH to know ting forward has been circulated, but I will how devastating it is for them. flag it by reading it to the chamber. It pro- HIH is a case in point. Since 1994 that poses that, after subsection 306 of section 7, company has given $800,000 to the Liberal you would insert 306A, headlined ‘Repay- Party. In 1999 alone—and there is evidence ment of donations where corporations wound to suggest that insolvency was already com- up etc’. The amendment reads: ing down the line—$100,500 was given to Where: the Liberal Party and, I understand, another (a)a political party, a candidate or a member of a $15,000 to the National Party. This is money group receives a donation from a corporation that, we submit, should now be returned being a donation the amount of which is equal to from those parties to the shareholders, be- or exceeds $1,000; and cause they are the people who are really suf- that has to be recorded— fering. I would of course like to hear argument on this. It may be that the Liberals in (b) the corporation for a period concluding three years after making the donation has been this case could mount an argument that their wound up in insolvency or wound up by the court suffering is greater, but I doubt it. I might on other grounds; add that, while our amendment would mean an amount equal to the amount of the donation is that moneys that have come from a corporate payable by the political party to the liquidator and entity that has gone bust within the three may be recovered by the liquidator as a debt due 3554 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 to the liquidator by action, in a court of competent also we share the risk and the donation will jurisdiction against: have to be returned if the corporation be- (c)in the case of a donation to or for the benefit of comes insolvent. I do not see why political a political party or a State branch of a political parties should be protected from that risk— party: in fact, quite the opposite. If there is a risk to (i) if the party or branch, as the case be borne by anybody, I think head of the list may be is a body corporate—the party or branch, should be political entities that are taking as the case may be; or donations from the corporate sector. There (ii) in any other case—the agent of the will be the argument: if the political parties party or branch, as the case may be; or do it, why shouldn’t football clubs or art (d) in any other case—the candidate or a mem- galleries or Opera Australia? This is a very ber of the group or the agent of the candidate or different matter to a political party which has of the group, as the case may be. gained an advantage in circumstances which There are two notes at the conclusion of the the Greens find very troubling. We are very amendment. The first note reads: concerned about the influence of the dona- The donation received by the liquidator is an asset tion system on politics and on the outcomes of the corporation to be distributed under the pro- in this place. I have said that a number of visions of the Corporations Act 2001. times before. The amendment I am flagging The second note reads: on behalf of the Australian Greens is a small step towards bringing some control, some This section applies to donations made after the transparency and some responsibility into the commencement of this provision. corporate donation system. We believe that, It was very tempting to put in a retrospective if it ought not be abolished—public funding clause here, which would include the HIH is a much better option—it should, as I said and Froggy donations. I am not an advocate earlier, become opaque to political advantage of retrospectivity. I think we have to appeal through a trust which disburses moneys here to the goodwill of the parties involved without fear or favour or the current potential that they return those donations. I note that in for political advantage. one case it has become a little bit of ‘if you That said, we oppose the legislation. I do, I will’. It should not be that way; it commend this amendment very strongly to should be: ‘We’ll do the right thing here by the house. I flag right now that, if the op- shareholders.’ If the political parties return portunity to move it does not succeed be- that money, they will be doing the right thing cause this legislation is knocked out on the not just by the shareholders but for the kudos second reading, I will be taking the very next of politics. It is not just a giving thing to opportunity to amend either the electoral do—this is not a charity—but a reasonable, legislation or the corporations legislation and fair-minded thing to do, and it should and return this amendment to the house. I ear- must happen. I also point out, regarding the nestly ask for very diligent consideration of note at the bottom of the flagged amend- it by all others concerned. ment, that if this legislation does not pass the second reading—and I reiterate the Greens Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) will be opposing it—at the next opportunity, (10.51 a.m.)—We are debating the Com- under any amendment to the Commonwealth monwealth Electoral Amendment Bill (No. Electoral Act, or maybe better still, to the 1) 2002. The long title of the bill reads: Corporations Act 2001, I will be moving a A Bill for an Act to amend the Commonwealth similar amendment. Electoral Act 1918, and for related purposes I strongly commend this amendment to Anybody picking up this piece of legislation the chamber. I ask all parties to look at it for the first time would think, ‘Yes, this has very seriously. It is an amendment which is got something to do with the electoral proc- about good governance. It is a timely ess in this country. We are amending the amendment, and it will put us all on notice Commonwealth Electoral Act.’ As honour- when we are taking corporate donations that able senators know, when legislation is in- not only do we get the benefit from them but troduced into this parliament, of necessity we Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3555 have to read it. You then read the explanatory money goes to the Queensland branch of the memorandum, which is a document provided Liberal Party. Because of the internal divi- by the government to explain in supposedly sions within the Liberal Party in Queensland, plain English what the legislation is about. the national secretariat of the Liberal Party You have to read very closely the many ex- wants to get its hands on the money, but the planatory memorandums and pieces of leg- Liberal Party branch in Queensland have islation that come before the parliament. You said no. As has been referred to, they want to have to study them and try and find what continue with the structure that has been in might be the hidden consequences of the bill operation in the Liberal Party since it was or the real purpose or intention behind the founded by Sir Robert Menzies, which is that legislation, because it is not always clear. But of a federalist approach. This is the party that I have to hand it to the government on this has lectured us year after year. one! They have not tried to dress this up in I notice that the two senators leaving the some way to hide from the public or the par- chamber, Senator Brandis and Senator Ma- liament what they are really about. They son, have been some of the fiercest advo- have no shame when it comes to this legisla- cates for the maintenance of states rights tion. When you read the bill—this bill that within the Liberal Party and within this has six clauses—you find the words ‘Liberal country. They have made speeches in the Party’ mentioned 33 times. Senate on many occasions opposing the con- I have not done a full search of all of the cept of centralism. But what do we find on legislation that operates in this country or of this occasion? They have been silent. As was all of the legislation that has been passed by so eloquently pointed out in earlier or brought before parliament since Federa- speeches—I particularly listened to Senator tion in 1901—that is a mammoth task. I am Hutchins’s and other speeches—Senators sure the library would be able to do it, but it Brandis and Mason have been rolled on this would be a huge task. I would be prepared to bill. They do not want the funds that would bet on the fact that if you searched the legis- otherwise be paid to the Liberal Party branch lation of the Commonwealth parliament you in Queensland to fall into the hands of the would probably not find any legislation that national secretariat. But, if this legislation is mentions the name of a political party. You passed, that is clearly what will happen. As would certainly not find any legislation as has been said, this bill should more properly blatant as this, which provides for the Liberal be called the ‘dash for cash’ bill. I would Party national secretariat to be given the suggest that it possibly should be called the legislative power to control the electoral ‘Lynton Crosby slush fund’ bill, because that funding that the Liberal Party may receive is what this bill is about. following federal elections. As the explanatory memorandum says, the We all know the reason this bill has been bill seeks to amend the Commonwealth introduced—it is to fix up a problem in the Electoral Act to allow the agent of the Lib- Liberal Party in Queensland that the Liberal eral Party, before polling day, to determine Party itself is unable to fix up. As we know, how the percentage of public funding for the the problem is quite simply that, under the Liberal Party will be distributed between the electoral funding system that operates in this federal secretariat and the state and territory country, political parties and candidates are divisions of the Liberal Party. On reading entitled to receive electoral funding follow- that, you have to say that this is a total abuse ing elections on a formula based upon the of the parliamentary procedure of this coun- vote that they receive at the election, and that try. This is outrageous! Why should the par- money goes to the nominated political party. liament of this country—why should we, as What happens in Queensland, of course, is elected representatives of the people—be that the money goes to the Queensland required to consider legislation that relates to branch of the Liberal Party. Not much of it the internal financial arrangements of the goes to them because their vote has been Liberal Party? pretty damn low—we know that—but the 3556 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

It is a total abuse of the principles of par- there is no doubt that when the elections are liamentary government that you have a piece held in March next year his government will of legislation that so specifically refers to the be returned, again with a significant major- Liberal Party—as I said, on 33 occasions in ity. What we saw in New South Wales prior the bill—and gives the Liberal Party national to the last election was a desperate attempt secretary power, by virtue of legislation, that by people within the Liberal Party—led by his own organisational state branches are not the former member Ron Phillips, who lost prepared to give him. This is an outrage! his seat—to undermine their own leader and This bill is not directed at better accountabil- replace Peter Collins with Kerry Chikarov- ity of the public funding process. This bill is ski. not about improving the electoral process in Senator Hutchins interjecting— this country. This bill is simply about solving divisions within the Liberal Party. This bill Senator FORSHAW—There is such a should be thrown out, and the Liberal Party list—I would need another 20 minutes, should go away and solve its own internal Senator Hutchins. But we remember it so differences. But of course the Liberal Party well. Kerry Chikarovski was going to be the cannot. Why can’t it? Because right across heroine of the Liberal Party; she was going this country the Liberal Party at the state to be the Joan of Arc of the Liberal Party and level is racked with division and dissension. lead them into the electoral battle and win It is in a hopeless mess. the election. What happened was that Kerry Chikarovski was absolutely humiliated. Of Senators Brandis and Mason of course course, Kerry Chikarovski not only was hu- have been mentioned on a number of occa- miliated at the election but, in a coup within sions, and we know why. They have fought a her own party—I think about 20 of them got battle within their own party against this a vote—was rolled by John Brogden. Her legislation. As we know, their actions have popularity was so low that my state col- been described, according to newspaper re- league the Minister for Primary Industries in ports, as treacherous by no less a person than New South Wales, Richard Amery, once said the Prime Minister. Senators Brandis and that he had noxious weeds in his portfolio Mason have tried to stand up for the princi- area that had a higher popularity rating than ples of the Prime Minister’s great hero Sir Kerry Chikarovski—and he was right. Robert Menzies—as I said, the principles of states rights and federalism. But the current Senator Hutchins—And Chopper Read. Prime Minister, who claims to carry the Senator FORSHAW—Chopper Read mantle and the torch of Sir Robert Menzies, even, yes. The Liberal Party certainly know has apparently attacked them as being something about the exploits of Chopper treacherous. It is not hard to work out, when Read. You can go through all of the other it comes to the principles that the Liberal states. Recently in Tasmania, Jim Bacon ob- Party has so long espoused—the Menzies tained a huge majority in a landslide win. tradition—who is really treacherous to that Getting landslide victories in Tasmania has tradition. never been easy because of the nature of the As I said, the Liberal Party around this electoral system, but Labor did it under Jim country at the state level is in total disarray. Bacon. The Liberal Party were humiliated Other senators of course have made refer- and Bob Cheek lost his seat. In Queensland, ence to this, but it is worth repeating because Premier Beattie obtained a landslide victory. it is at the heart of why this legislation is in In the state where this legislation is designed the parliament. The Liberal Party cannot to try and help the Liberal Party heal their govern itself in any of those states, and that own divisions, Labor leader Peter Beattie is why it is not in government in any of those achieved a magnificent victory. In Victoria, states—or in the territories. In my home state Steve Bracks achieved a win for Labor. In of New South Wales the Labor Party is in Western Australia, Geoff Gallop has been government with a record majority. Premier elected. In South Australia, Mike Rann is the Bob Carr enjoys unparalleled popularity, and Labor Premier. We also know that, in the Northern Territory, Clare Martin was elected Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3557 with a record victory for the Labor Party. In problem in the Liberal Party over who gets the ACT election, Jon Stanhope was elected their hands on the money. as the ALP leader. Every state and territory In conclusion, my colleague Senator Hogg in this country is governed by state Labor in his remarks quite appropriately drew an governments because the Liberal Party are a analogy with that TV program Who Wants to hopeless rabble. It is just a disgrace. be a Millionaire. There are strong analogies Senator Kemp interjecting— to be drawn between what this legislation is Senator FORSHAW—I notice that in about and that particular quiz show. When Victoria, in the home state of Senator you think about the likely prospects of the Kemp—who is interjecting because he obvi- Queensland Liberal Party in the future, I do ously cannot stand hearing the truth—they not think that, if they were on Who Wants to have just dumped Denis Napthine as leader be a Millionaire, they would get to the stage and replaced him with Robert Doyle. of answering the questions for the million dollars or even the $500,000. They would be Senator Hutchins—He was a member of knocked out on the first question. That is the right club. how pathetic it would be. Senator FORSHAW—That is right. The At the end of the day, the amount of facts are that the Liberal Party at the state money that would be available to the Queen- level right across this country cannot govern sland Liberal Party under the public funding itself. It cannot solve its own internal prob- formula is not going to be all that much. lems. We know about the rorting of branch Lynton Crosby may think that if this legisla- memberships in Queensland; we know about tion were passed he will get his hands on a that in New South Wales. It cannot keep bundle of money. I have to say that he will these young turks under control in the Young be surprised. He certainly will be disap- Liberals. pointed. But I do not think that this legisla- Senator Kemp interjecting— tion is going to be passed. I think the mem- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT bers of this Senate already realise that this is (Senator Chapman)—Order! Excessive nothing but a rort. This is nothing but an interjections are unruly, Minister. You may abuse of parliamentary procedure to try to enter the debate at an appropriate time and sort out the internal problems of the Liberal respond if you choose. Party. I challenge Senator Brandis and Senator FORSHAW—There was even an Senator Mason, particularly, and the other instance in New South Wales with the Young Queensland senators and the other Liberal Liberals where they had on their web site a Party senators who claim that they stand up link to the Nazi party. That is how low it has for the federal structure of the Liberal Party got in some parts of the Liberal Party. You and support state rights: here is your oppor- have got these young activists who are only tunity to put your mouth where your money interested in total power and they do not care is and vote this bill down. at all about the electoral consequences on Senator CARR (Victoria) (11.10 a.m.)— their own party. Sir Robert Menzies would The Commonwealth Electoral Amendment be ashamed to see what is being done here Bill (No. 1) 2002 clearly illustrates how the today. As much as he was our political oppo- Liberal Party works. Their essential problem nent, Sir Robert Menzies was, as we know, a is that, as a political party, they are of course great parliamentarian—a person who trained moribund. Their problem essentially is that in the law and, as a parliamentary figure, they have failed to modernise in their ap- someone who understood and respected the proach to government, in their approach to role of the parliament. Many other leaders of dealing with conflict and in their approach to the Liberal Party and the coalition parties resolving differences about the direction in have carried on that tradition, but that tradi- which the party should go. This bill seeks to tion is being torn up now. It has been thrown impose a parliamentary solution on a failure out of the window simply to try and fix a of the Liberal Party to reach internal agreement. The reason they cannot reach internal 3558 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 agreement is that they have no processes by time now to discuss this frivolous matter, this which that can be undertaken. attempt to essentially impose upon this par- We have before us a bill that gives carte liament a rort by the Liberal-National secre- blanche to the Liberal Party national secretariat to fix up its internal problems! We have tariat to divide money between the various an attempt by the Prime Minister’s office on fractious elements within the divisions of the behalf of the Liberal secretariat to deal with Liberal Party itself. As members of this problems that should be dealt with internally. chamber, you are being asked to resolve a We have noticed that throughout the states problem that the Liberal Party cannot resolve there are serious problems in the Liberal itself. The Prime Minister made it perfectly Party, so I can understand why the Liberal- clear when this bill was first proposed back National secretariat feels it necessary to do in August 2001—perhaps earlier than that— this. Their failure to develop proper proc- when he said that the Queensland division of esses is to be deplored. Their failure to de- the Liberal Party had reneged upon funding velop a decent factional system that ac- arrangements. As a consequence, the Prime knowledges the importance of conflict reso- Minister’s office initiated this bill. It failed to lution is to be deplored. Their ancient atti- go through the normal parliamentary proce- tudes, their primitive views, the notion that dures in terms of the joint house committees, the winner takes all, the psychology of the and it failed to acknowledge the appropriate Liberal Party that essentially argues that a consultations within the parliament on such narrow clique can dominate all effective de- basic issues as the electoral bill and sought to cision making within the political organisa- impose upon this parliament a very partisan tion are inevitably going to lead to disaster. political fix to sort out a problem within the What is the evidence for that? The evi- Liberal Party. dence from around the country can be found We saw the initial responses around the in every single division of the Liberal Party. states to the GST. The Western Australian We see the dominant characteristic of a nar- divisional secretary indicated that he was row group of people based essentially on concerned to avoid the GST obligations—a exclusivity—more often than not, as we see concern that was of course reflected right in Victoria, linked to the big end of town; the around the country by small business. But in special private club that is called the Liberal the Liberal Party’s case, you come into par- Party. We see the new leader of the Liberal liament to fix up your problem. If we look at Party in Victoria exemplifying the principle the subsections 299(5E) to (5G) of the bill, that one has to be a member of the right club, we see that there are no accountability go to the right schools and enjoy the right mechanisms whatsoever for how this money social connections to get on—and if you do is going to be distributed. There is no attempt not, you call on the Liberal Party national being made to employ the normal parlia- secretariat to sort out your problems. What mentary processes that come to the distribu- we have is the failure of the Liberal Party to tion of funds. It is a centralisation of decision modernise. To be dominated by vested inter- making within the Liberal Party. ests— It is quite clear that this bill is not urgent. Senator Sherry—Lawyers! It has been around for a little while, that is Senator CARR—It is not just lawyers; it true. We saw at the end of the last parlia- is these corporate types who feel the need to mentary session an attempt to pre-empt express their social ambition through the much more urgent legislation by bringing on Liberal Party. It is not a political party in the this matter. Now at the beginning of this par- modern sense of the word at all; it is essen- ticular sitting period an attempt is being tially a social club designed to allow certain made to pre-empt much more urgent matters. persons to get on at the expense of the over- No doubt, at Christmas time, we will hear all majority. The interest of the clique domi- the cries and see the crocodile tears from the nates the interest of the total. A recent report other side of this chamber about the failure by the Liberal secretariat itself identified to pass urgent legislation. We have plenty of this. I do not have to be relied upon here; I Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3559 can rely upon the Liberal Party itself. What dear. I repudiate every promise that I have does Mr Crosby say? He says that there is no made. Every commitment I have made is effective management mechanism in place to now repudiated. We have no policies in Vic- deal with constructive resolution of internal toria whatsoever.’ That is not inconsistent conflict. I acknowledge quite freely that in with the approach taken around the Com- the Labor Party there are differences of monwealth. We have tensions between the opinion about the pace and the route of so- factions in Victoria. We have huge doubts cial reform and social change, but in the par- about the future leadership. Even though Mr ties of town and country capital, as they were Doyle has only been in there for five min- once called, there is no mechanism. It is a utes, already there is speculation about what winner-take-all attitude of brute force. We is going to happen to him in the future. have, essentially, disputes being fixed in the Let me talk about the way in which the Liberal Party in a very visceral way. We have carve-up in Victoria occurs. Let us take the an irrational, self-destructive approach being simple example of the seat of Forest Hill. taken. We have a bitterness borne on per- The seat of Forest Hill is one of those inter- sonal ambition and ‘fuelled by spite’, to esting cases where we will see, I trust, within quote Mr Crosby himself. the foreseeable future just what impact this In Victoria in recent times we have seen sort of corruption in the Liberal Party pro- quite serious problems emerge as a demon- duces. In Forest Hill, the upper house MP stration of this. The problem, as we have Maree Luckins was defeated in a preselec- seen and has been brought to public attention battle against an Indian-born business- tion, between Dr Napthine and Mr Doyle man who, I might say, was fortunate enough was fuelled, we might say, by the great back- to attract the support of 500 new members— room boys of the Liberal Party—Mr Kennett 500 new members in a state seat! These new and Mr Kroger are out there, Mr Costello, of members, who were mainly from Sri Lankan course, is lining up for his chop as well. and Fijian communities, were attracted to the Senator McGauran—Enough! I’ve run Liberal Party in that electorate to assist the out of room! candidate to gain preselection. You have to understand what it means to have 500 new Senator CARR—I hear an interjection members in a state electorate such as Forest from the man who, as I have often said, Hill at the edges of Melbourne—an area that proves the point that the National Party in is not known for its huge levels of participa- Victoria is an absolute irrelevance. His father tion in any political party—and what that put him here as a result of his great wealth. would do to a preselection ballot. Buying a seat in this Senate is the means by which the National Party operates in Victo- Senator McGauran—It’s called a suc- ria, so we should not hear much more of the cessful membership drive. National Party’s view of political reform and Senator CARR—I call it corruption. modernisation. There is nothing older in the When you stack 500 members in a state political lexicon than the capacity to buy a electorate, you have corruption, and that is a seat in parliament. perfect example thereof. I read in a report in With this discussion with Dr Napthine and the Age on 12 March that at one branch at Mr Doyle, we have Mr Bailleau sitting there. least 12 of the 16 votes came from Indians The great Bailleau family of Victoria is just and two from Young Liberals who were also waiting for their chance to hop in for their from the Indian community. Forest Hill rose chop. We have an example in Victoria that is as a vacancy because the veteran MP, Mr characteristic of every state in the Common- John Richardson, was retiring. I bet Mr wealth as far as the Liberal Party is con- Richardson would not have found this sort of cerned. We could go through it state by state. behaviour in the past, but that is characteris- They are characterised by disarray, by un- tic now of the Liberal Party in Victoria. certainty over policies. Mr Doyle in Victoria Mr Doyle says that he will bring in a new in his first decision said: ‘I repudiate all that broom. I know damn well what has hap- the previous occupant of this office held pened here: a coup has been organised by the 3560 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

Kroger-Costello forces. I know meetings Senator CARR—That is the problem: occurred about it, but it all happened very have you moved out of Collins Street? early in the morning with Mr Doyle, I can Senator McGauran—Yes. tell you that. They only could have happened early in the morning; you would not want to Senator CARR—You have? How long get this bloke too late in the day as he would have you been out of Collins Street? not make much sense at all. I am afraid to Senator McGauran—I have two offices say that you have a Liberal Party that is now. characterised by its inability to face up to the Senator CARR—So you have two offices challenges that it should be meeting. now, but you have an office in Collins Street. We could turn to New South Wales, where Is that correct? a similar pattern emerges and where we have Senator McGauran—I have been years the backroom powerbrokers, the shadowy in Benalla—catch up! figures, the shadowy men of money and in- Senator CARR—But you have an office fluence associated with Mr Yabsley and the in Collins Street. That is where the National Millenium Forum— Party are; they are Collins Street farmers. Senator Sherry—What was Senator They do a very good job of representing McGauran doing? Collins Street farmers. What they do is make Senator CARR—I do not think the Na- sure that, first of all, they get a seat in this tional Party counts for much in New South Senate as a result of being a Collins Street Wales. The McGauran family does not have farmer. They are not representing the people that sort of influence in New South Wales. of Victoria; they are representing that small Senator Sherry—If they only have three unrepresentative clique that fosters its influ- per cent of the vote, how did McGauran get ence through the private clubs of Melbourne. in? As I say, I am afraid that is a pattern that is repeated around the country. I notice that in Senator CARR—His problem is that they Victoria there is again talk of coalitions, but spent so much money financing the DLP. it is instantly rejected. They cannot even Senator Sherry—I did read about the agree among themselves. DLP. Talking about coalitions, Victoria pales Senator CARR—It is extraordinary. They into insignificance when we look at Queen- were once a very wealthy family in Victoria. sland, where the results are quite profound. Unfortunately, they managed to lose it on a Again there are examples of widespread whole range of things, and presumably in- branch stacking involving ministers in this vesting in the Liberal Party, and if it is not government and state members of the par- investing in the Liberal Party it is investing liament of Queensland. It is very difficult to in the DLP. If only the National Party could involve the state members in Queensland attract that level of support. I would have because there are only three of them. I un- thought that the National Party in Victoria derstand that, of the three, one is about to could probably do a lot better than it cur- retire and the other one is being groomed for rently is. a leadership challenge. So it is only a ques- Senator Hutchins—But they had to find tion of time before the internal divisions in Julian a job. Queensland come to the fore again. Senator CARR—He was not buying Senator Sherry—Julian McGauran as a himself a seat on the Melbourne City Coun- leader in the Senate! cil. In fact, if you live in East Melbourne, it Senator CARR—It is a very difficult is very hard to represent rural Victoria. thing to have, out of three, at least one retir- Senator Sherry interjecting— ing and the other one being groomed for a leadership challenge. Mr Quinn said in the Senator McGauran—I have an office in paper this morning that if he does not get Benalla. what he wants they might be left leaderless Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3561 within a very short period of time. One a pattern that will inevitably lead to the de- shudders to think of the prospect of a lead- struction of the Howard government. I heard erless Liberal Party. It is an extraordinary what was said about the last election. The proposition. Howard government won the last election by As I said, there is a similar pattern around utilising the great darkness of race and xeno- the country. In New South Wales the situa- phobia in Australian society. They were the tion in relation to the Millenium Forum has characteristics this Prime Minister used to become infamous. We had Mr Michael Yab- hold together this house of cards. Essentially, sley, former MP Mr Photios, former Premier the result was a status quo. If you think about Mr Nick Greiner and, of course, Mr Greg the number of people who came in and the Daniel pulling the strings and organising the number of people who went out in the House coup against Mrs Chikarovski. According to of Representatives, you can see that it was the reports, we have a situation where vari- essentially a status quo result. So the Prime ous persons in this parliament are being tar- Minister was able to produce a stay of exe- geted by Senator Heffernan for their failure cution on the collapse of this house of cards to meet the requirements with regard to fund- by basically gluing it together with racism raising. The Daily Telegraph of 27 March and xenophobia. The Liberal Party now 2002 states: seeks this parliament’s assistance to fix up its problems by trying to get us to agree to Senator Heffernan was understood to have drawn up a hit-list of Liberal MPs who had not met their handing out very large sums of public money fundraising targets over a certain time-frame. to the Liberal Party national secretariat. This is a party based on intimidation, not just Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy on intrigue and bitterness in terms of their President, I raise a point of order. Senator personal attitudes. Let us have a look at it Carr has just accused the Prime Minister of around the country: in Queensland, three out racism. That type of comment is completely of 89 seats are held by the Liberal Party; in out of order and should be withdrawn. Western Australia, 16 of the 57 seats are held The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT by the Liberal Party. In each of those states (Senator Forshaw)—I did not actually hear there is leadership conflict. In New South the full words that Senator Carr used because Wales, 20 out of 93 seats are held by the I was just coming to the chair as he was Liberal Party—and we assume that it is only talking. If those words were used, Senator a matter of time before there is a further Carr, I think you should withdraw them. leadership challenge in that state; in Victoria, Senator CARR—I withdraw anything it is 35 out of 88 seats; and in South Austra- that is regarded as unparliamentary. I would lia, 21 of 47 seats and, again, questions about say that the Liberal Party in the last election leadership emerge. In Tasmania they have used the issues of racism and xenophobia as seven out of 25 seats. One has to question the glue to try to hold this house of cards just how long it will be before there is an- together. By this bill they are seeking to find other leadership ballot there. a mechanism to channel public moneys to Senator Sherry—The leader and the dep- the Liberal Party national secretariat. uty have both lost their seats. Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy Senator CARR—That is basically right, President, I raise a point of order. The Senator Sherry: we have a party that is un- Hawke-Wran report showed that the Labor able to function; it is a dysfunctional organi- Party failed at the last election because of sation. We have a bill before the parliament their hopelessness on policy. that seeks to fix up these problems by the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Liberal Party national secretariat imposing DENT—Order! Senator Kemp will resume its will on these increasingly fractious, inef- his seat. That is not a point of order and you fective and desultory organisations that run know it. their business in a visceral way, aimed at tearing down opponents rather than thinking Senator CARR—This is a bill that should about the future direction of this country. It is be rejected. This is a bill that is essentially 3562 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 improper. It is totally inappropriate. The bill bodies. Those divisional bodies work in co- has not gone through the normal processes hesion with the federal body and the federal that one would expect for such a fundamen- funding is divided up in an ad hoc informal tal piece of legislation as the Commonwealth way. What this legislation seeks to do is to Electoral Act. The Commonwealth Electoral perfect that system so that everybody knows Act ought to be amended from time to time, where they stand. This is in stark contrast to as we all know, but it ought to be done on the the arbitrary and centralist exercise that was basis of general agreement. Essentially, there performed in 1995 by Labor. It said, ‘We will is an attempt being made here to impose a take every cent of the money and we will not partisan solution. It is a partisan proposition dole it out to the divisions. We will run the that asks us to interfere in the Liberal Party’s campaign centrally.’ Effectively, their state internal affairs in a manner that gives prece- divisions are just a facade and that facade is dence to a centralised administration. It asks totally unrepresentative. us to try and sort out the problems that the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Liberal Party should be able to sort out itself. (Senator Forshaw)—Order! Would senators (Time expired) on my right please resume their seats or Senator JOHNSTON (Western Austra- carry on their conversations outside the lia) (11.30 a.m.)—Mr Acting Deputy Presi- chamber. dent, may I draw your attention to the fact Senator JOHNSTON—There is a stark that what we have heard this morning is the contrast between a representative body such most outrageous litany of hypocrisy. If we as my division, and the senators who are look back to what happened in 1994 and chosen by my division, and what happens subsequently, in 1995, we can see that this is right around Australia with respect to ALP exactly what the Labor Party did with respect selection. I will give an example. In Western to the public funding. They have chopped Australia there is an Independent member in their state divisions off at the knees. They set Pilbara called Mr Larry Graham, who was a the system in place in 1994 and then, in true believer—a long-term member of the 1995, they amended the act so that they took Western Australian division of the ALP. His all of the money. family before him were all strong, loyal Let me explain something to my learned members of the Labor Party. He lost his pre- senators opposite. The Liberal Party in West- selection. It was a seat that he had held very ern Australia, which I represent, has a struc- comfortably for many years through many ture. That structure is one of branches. We elections. He lost his seat at the whim of a have over 200 branches in various towns and group of people sitting in Perth who do not communities throughout our state. May I say live in his seat of Pilbara. They had abso- that the number of our branches is far in ex- lutely no knowledge of the work of that cess of the handful of ALP branches spread member on the ground. They had no under- through the state. Those branches elect dele- standing of his commitment to his electorate. gates to divisions. Each of the divisions is But they decided, through a factional brawl representative of the federal divisions. Those and deal, that he should lose his seat. And, of divisions elect delegates right up to the pre- course, what happened? He held his seat selection committees, the state council and quite dramatically, obviously and convinc- the state conference, which is held once a ingly in the face of a Labor candidate who I year in my state. The Labor Party does not think lost her deposit. have such a structure. In this place, repre- In Western Australia the diversity of our sentative members are chosen for their states communities is reflected in our structure. from here, through EMILY’s List. So there is This is in absolutely stark contrast to what absolutely no representation of the states in happens in the Labor Party. We have mem- this place by the Labor Party. bers choosing their elected representatives When you look at the way our party has from the Pilbara, the Gascoyne, east functioned and is structured, you can see that Gascoyne and the Goldfields. All of these there are strong individual state divisional towns and communities have representatives Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3563 who come along and choose their members. party whose members may actually be interested The Labor Party chooses them in a small, in issues. dimly lit back room at the bottom of Curtin And they cannot understand how they are not House. It is absolutely unrepresentative. We in the Lodge painting the walls today! They conduct 50 preselections over the course of a have chosen the colour scheme and they state campaign. The Labor Party sits there— have done all the curtain matching but they two or three faceless men who are cannot understand how it happened that they unelected—parachuting people into these did not win. They fought another GST elec- seats. The members opposite have the tion, they would have us believe. They will audacity to call us corrupt! Forget about the talk about the good ship Tampa, but we corruption of anything other than the system, know about the policy vacuum and the fact by them. They have corrupted the system to that they are an unrepresentative party. And deliver to some of their favoured few a re- they have the audacity to come into this ward for services to the other favoured few. place and say we are corrupt. Who went to It is a partnership made in dimly lit rooms, jail in Queensland? A woman going to jail in one that largely had its genesis in the favour- this country for nine months— itism and nepotism of the union movement. Senator Ferris—A mother! Back in the year 2000—I think it was— Senator JOHNSTON—She was a when the Labor Party held their national con- mother. Now who is corrupt? I could go on, ference, they had 189 delegates voting. but I will be brief. Let me quote former Forty-seven per cent of them were union Keating government minister Gary Johns— representatives. A further 30 per cent of the one of their own—talking about the ALP Labor politicians present were former union division in Western Australia: heavyweights. Of course, union representation is below 20 per cent in the private sector Local Branch members have no say in preselection, there is no sense of democracy in WA—it in this country. Only five per cent of the or- has the most overwhelmingly union dominated dinary run-of-the-mill community based pre-selection rules. Branch members are irrele- membership of the Labor Party is not affili- vant— ated to the union movement. They are totally Senator Cook—I wouldn’t go there, if I and utterly unrepresentative of anything were you. You’ll open up a can of worms. other than their own nepotistic empire. In an article in the Australian of 27 July 2000, Senator Kemp—That’s right, Cookie. Malcolm McGregor wrote one of the most Senator JOHNSTON—The honourable stunning indictments of my political oppo- senator knows what I am talking about. nents and the members sitting opposite when The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- he said that that conference was: DENT—Order! There is far too much con- ... in reality, emblematic of Labor’s deterioration versation and interjection across the cham- into a narrow, spiteful, schismatic political ghetto ber. Would you please desist. presided over by a hereditary cloister of petty shoguns. It exists mainly as a conduit for its own Senator JOHNSTON—Gary Johns goes born-to-rule caste to secure public office, from on to say of WA: whence to dispense largesse to immediate family Branch members are irrelevant—it is whatever members and assorted sycophantic supporters in the main union characters at the time think. Kim the lobbying and public relations industries. (Beazley) has been a major beneficiary so he And they say we are corrupt! This is the won’t try to change anything. He’ll do things greatest example of hypocrisy and corruption when it suits him and I think we are looking for of the democratic process that anyone could better things from our leaders. possibly imagine in Australia today. The ar- So were the Australian people at the last fed- ticle went on to say: eral election—and they got better things. The West Australian newspaper of 14 April 2002 It is an avant garde outfit that rates Della Bosca more highly than Barry Jones. Better to have a stated: cadre of loyal boofheads than a community-based The WA Labor Party gave a sop to branch representation on preselection ballots at its conference 3564 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 last year when local branches with at least 40 in this legislation more times than there are members were granted a 15% say in choosing members of the Liberal Party in this cham- their candidates. ber, and that is true. That is what this bill is And they say we are corrupt! Larry Graham about. Why? The Liberal Party—which says, of the way that Geoff Gallop, the Pre- claims to be foremost among political parties mier of Western Australia, runs the ALP: in Australia in supporting the concept of fed- ... if he ran a polling booth like that in a general eration, that is, our constitutional entity as a election, he would be arrested. federation of states—has a party organisation This bill simply seeks to deliver to our repre- that mirrors a federation of state divisions. sentative structure what the Labor Party does Under their rules they pocket the public now. funding at state level but, despite their record of being federalists, they want to pocket the Senator COOK (Western Australia) money at national level in the federal secre- (11.42 a.m.)—This bill is entitled the Com- tariat of the Liberal Party and not at state monwealth Electoral Amendment Bill (No. level. Lynton Crosby, the national secretary 1) 2002. That is its formal title. It sounds of the Liberal Party, wants the cheque; he grand. It is in fact the ‘Dash for Cash Bill’. It does not want it to go to his states. I do not is a bill introduced into this chamber by the want to blame Lynton Crosby in this. We executive of the parliament—that is to say, know that the Prime Minister—who, in the the ministry—but it is in essence a sordid, words of Shane Stone, the President of the seamy exercise only understandable if you Liberal Party, is ‘mean and tricky’ and who follow the money trail, because the money we know is the most hands-on, intervention- trail leads you to the conclusions. In Austra- ist Prime Minister in political and cam- lia, we have public funding of elections. paigning organisation of any party at any Quite a wad of taxpayers’ money goes to time in our history—wants this cheque in the support the democracy of Australia, to allow hands of Lynton Crosby so he can decide the cases to be put fairly to the electors by who are the favourites and who are not; who political parties. This bill is about who pock- gets the dollars and who does not. That is ets that cash in the Liberal Party. It is not what this is about. It is just a seamy, sordid about who does it in the Labor Party or the dash for cash. National Party. There is certainly a reference to the Democrats, but none to the Greens. It All political parties have internal disputes, is about the Liberal Party. It is a dash for and from time to time these disputes blow up cash. If you follow the dollar signs, you find in public. At the moment we are witnessing out what this bill is about. the implosion of the Australian Democrats as they go through internal argument, division Let me go through the purposes of this and power struggle. We have seen it on the bill. First of all, this is its second appearance. front pages of our newspapers over the last It was introduced before the last election. It couple of weeks. We know that the National lapsed and it has now been brought back Party are going through a similar thing. The again for a second try. Normally, legislation Western Australian branch of the National of this sort would go to the Joint Standing Party have delivered an ultimatum to the Committee on Electoral Matters. Has this federal organisation. They say that they will legislation been there? No. Why? Because it withdraw from the National Party and stand is inconvenient to open up this bill for proper alone if the National Party here in Canberra public scrutiny, something that would take support the privatisation of Telstra. We know place if the committee had a hearing into the that the National Party went through all sorts contents of this bill. This is an attempt—al- of internal ructions before the last election in though it is broad daylight now—to sneak deciding whether they supported Pauline this through in the dead of night in order to Hanson as a second preference or whether get in place legislation that solves an internal they did not and put her last. They could not party problem in the Liberal Party. agree. In the end they threw their hands up in My colleague Senator Ray said yesterday the air and let each individual person decide. that the Liberal Party is mentioned by name Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3565

I must say that from time to time even the Then we have the spectacle which oc- Labor Party has internal disputes that attract curred in the last sitting week that this par- public attention. In the history of politics in liament was together, when we had a vale- this country up until this day, though, no po- dictory for outgoing senators. A Liberal litical party has come to the Senate—the senator from Western Australia—one who, to legislature of Australia—to solve an internal listen to his colleagues in this chamber and party problem by legislation of the federal in my view too, has a long and distinguished parliament. No-one has ever done that. Eve- career in this place—stood in his place and ryone has had the dignity and honour to set- wept. He shed a tear, he said—and his words tle in-house squabbles in-house, and not pull are in the Hansard for all of us to read—on the parliament into solving divisions between the basis that he had been stabbed in the different groups and forces within their own back. Hoping for guidance and assistance, he party. We are being asked now—and I find had gone to the president of his party divi- this absolutely incredible—to legislate, as a sion and shared concerns about a police in- serious legislative chamber, to solve an in- vestigation into the rorting of his travel external dispute in the Liberal Party. I do not penses. He then found that information he know why the Liberal members in this place had passed in confidence to his president was do not turn a vivid red in embarrassment. used against him to remove his endorsement The Liberal members of this parliament must as a Liberal Party candidate. He stood have a hide thicker than a rhinoceros to pre- there—just over there—and physically wept tend that there is any public interest or na- as he told this chamber, lips trembling, what tional public purpose in carrying this bill. had happened to him. A real happy ship, you The last speaker, Senator Johnston—a would have to say. former president of the Western Australian But it gets worse. Just recently, the Liberal division of the Liberal Party—said that the Party in Western Australia had its state con- Labor Party has some problems. We do from ference. The notorious Graham Kierath, who time to time, but we have never come in here was the party’s hero in introducing the third to solve them. Since he has raised the ques- wave of industrial legislation, was defeated tion of the Western Australian situation, let for the presidency of the party and, in bad me complete the picture. His has been, dare I faith, left the meeting declaring that he had say, a one-sided, biased presentation of the been done over by the powerbrokers and that facts. Let us look at the Liberal Party divi- it was not a fair vote of the rank and file. We sion in Western Australia. They have trouble have heard those sorts of stories before. The keeping a leader. Colin Barnett is elected as thing that takes the cake, though, is the the leader; weekly, members of his caucus seamy saga that we had on the front page of leak against him. Most recently, the Sunday the West Australian newspaper a couple of Times carried a headline that he was going to years ago when the office of the then mem- be deposed at a party meeting on the fol- ber for Stirling, Mr Eoin Cameron, was lowing Tuesday. On Monday night, as Lib- raided by the Australian Federal Police be- eral members turned up for a sitting of the cause, as it turned out later, Senator Sue parliament, we saw doorstop interviews by Knowles had tipped them off that he was the almost all of them with none of them genu- source of a document that had been spread- inely endorsing their leader. The best he got ing discontent in the Liberal Party and that was condemnation by faint praise; some of this was scurrilous. Senator Knowles went them were outrightly hostile to him. Did they before a disciplinary committee of her party have the ticker to go ahead with their leaked and was in fact expelled for a time. She was threat? Of course not; they all backed off. brought back only by the intervention of the One of their putative candidates, Mr Matt Prime Minister, it would seem. Birney, the member for Kalgoorlie, retreated So goes this saga of sordid internal squab- from all of the innuendo and leaked threats bles. It is not exceptional—it sometimes by declaring—and this is a stunning political happens in other places—but no-one ever quote—that he is a ‘lover not a fighter’. comes here to try to solve it. The thing that I 3566 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 think illustrates this is a letter that has been and I understand Senator Cook has with- given to me by a former prominent senator drawn the words, but Senator Kemp is now representing the Liberal Party in this place— taking a point of order. a letter he has personally sent me. It is a copy Senator Kemp interjecting— of a letter to another senator in this chamber. Mr Acting Deputy President, I propose to Senator COOK—I withdraw any reflec- read part of the letter provided to me by a tion on an honourable senator in this cham- former, dare I say, distinguished Liberal ber. I do not know whether this is true. All I senator. It is addressed to Senator Ian Camp- am saying is that this is what has been said. bell, Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- It says: DENT—Senator Cook, you have withdrawn. Dear Ian Do you wish to still take a point of order, Senator Kemp? I have become aware of the full extent of your insulting and abusive conduct towards State Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy Council delegates and State members of parlia- President, on a point of order: I think the ment at Sue Knowles’ appeal. Apparently you withdrawal is not the correct withdrawal. think you have a right to act like a lout towards The withdrawal should be that the inappro- anybody and everybody who disagrees with your priate comments made about Senator opinion of what is right. Knowles and Senator Campbell should be It does not offend you that Knowles lied about her withdrawn directly, and Senator Cook has allegations of death threats, conspired with the not said that. Labor Party to have those lies published, lied to her pre-selection, deceived the public before the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- last federal election ... DENT—Senator Cook has withdrawn the words— Senator McGauran—Who would have written that? Senator Kemp—In the appropriate form, Senator. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Forshaw)—Order! Senator Cook, I The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- understand you are reading from a copy of a DENT—There is no point of order, Senator letter. The words in that letter may have been Kemp, and I ask you, Senator Cook, to re- written by someone else, but nevertheless sume your speech. their use in this chamber is a reflection on Senator COOK—Thank you, Mr Presi- another senator. Therefore, it is unparlia- dent, and I will, but I want to say this, too, mentary to use the words you did. I ask that because it relates to what I am quoting into you withdraw them. the Hansard: I withdraw any reflection on an Senator COOK—Thank you, Mr Acting honourable senator. I am not saying these Deputy President. I withdraw anything I words are true. As I said, when I introduced have said. I make the point, however, that I this letter for quoting, these are the opinions am quoting from a letter by a former senator of Liberal Party members about other Liberal who was a Deputy President in this chamber. Party members. They may or may not be true. I do not make a reflection either way on Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy another senator. It is just emblematic of the President, on a point of order— problem, and I withdraw any reflection that The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- is made. Let me continue with this letter, and DENT—Senator Kemp, would you resume I will observe the standing order as far as any your seat. I am listening to Senator Cook’s— unparliamentary expressions that might be Senator COOK—I am not saying that contained in this letter are concerned. I will this is my opinion, Mr Acting Deputy Presi- start where I left off. It says: dent. It does not offend you that Knowles— Senator Kemp interjecting— delete— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- about her allegations of death threats, conspired DENT—I have ruled on the point of order with the Labor Party to have those— Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3567 delete— Feel free to distribute this correspondence. I shall. published ... Yours sincerely, Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy Noel Crichton-Browne. President, on a point of order: it is very clear I do not think I can read this letter honestly that Senator Cook, in a rather underhand and and conform with standing orders at the sleazy manner— same time. Therefore, I will summarise es- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- sentially what it says and do so in conformity DENT—Senator Kemp, you will withdraw with standing orders, because it serves to that word. illustrate the deep divisions within the Lib- Senator Kemp—I withdraw that word. It eral Party and the divisions that give rise to a is very clear from the manner of Senator manipulation by this government of this leg- Cook that he is trying to go around your rul- islature to solve those problems in the Lib- ing. He is persisting in reading this letter, eral Party by having a Liberal government which contains a scurrilous attack on two enact laws that settle an internal party dis- members of this chamber. I think that Sena- pute. This is a relevant piece of evidence that tor Cook should now observe the ruling that the party disputes in the Liberal Party are you have made and stop attempting to get deep, entrenched, bitter and personal, and it around it by this most unfortunate behaviour is therefore not surprising that there is anger that he is adopting, which I might say is be- and distrust. coming more typical of him in recent Senator Kemp interjecting— months. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- DENT—Order! Senator Kemp, would you DENT—Senator Cook, I am not aware of be quiet. I need to hear what Senator Cook is the rest of the words that you are going to saying. read in the letter, so I am not able to rule on Senator COOK—In all dignity, it ought any future comment at this time, but I draw to be the proper reaction for the Liberal Party to your attention the fact that you should re- to solve those problems itself, not to come frain from using any words or any imputa- here and ask us to vote in order to solve tions or making any references which would those problems for it. If I can summarise this be unparliamentary and reflect on other letter, it is a damming, almost incendiary, senators. Even though you are quoting from indictment of the ethical behaviour and con- a letter, that does not remove the fact that it duct of honourable senators—and I will not is still unparliamentary to use those words or go to the details. It sets it out in some con- those references. siderable detail; the letter runs to one and a Senator COOK—Thank you, Mr Acting bit pages. It refers to me directly by name— Deputy President. I therefore seek leave to which is obviously why it has come to me— incorporate the letter in Hansard. because the imputation of this letter is that I was the victim of misconduct by individual Leave not granted. members of the Liberal Party, some of whom Senator COOK—Mr Acting Deputy are members of this parliament. I am cer- President. I seek leave to table the corre- tainly interested to know that that is the view spondence. of at least one member, who was a deputy Leave not granted. president of this chamber. Senator COOK—I note for the Hansard Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy that Senator Kemp, a Liberal Party minister, President, I rise on a point of order. Senator denied leave for the incorporation or tabling Cook has alleged that he was the ‘victim’ of of this letter. I now should say that this is a misconduct by members of this chamber. letter written by a former Deputy President Senator COOK—No, I didn’t. I said that of this chamber and former Liberal senator the letter said it. for Western Australia, Noel Crichton- Browne. It concludes with the words: Senator Kemp—This is a very grubby way to get around your ruling, Mr Acting 3568 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

Deputy President. The fact of the matter is the purpose of providing answers to ques- that if Senator Cook wants to attack mem- tions asked of the executive. If that is the sort bers of this parliament there are ways to do it of seamy politics they play here, it is not and they should be warned. surprising that within their own organisation The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- they cannot agree and that they would seek DENT—There is no point of order. to put their hands on public money by legis- lating to solve that problem through this Senator COOK—Politics is a rough chamber, not by fixing it as they would if game sometimes. Perhaps it should be less they had any dignity and self-respect within rough and more civil or less vulgar and more their own party. (Time expired) genteel, but from time to time it breaks out. I have not complained about being the victim Senator MASON (Queensland) (12.07 of alleged Liberal Party misconduct toward p.m.)—Mr Acting Deputy President For- me; it only becomes relevant in the context shaw, as you know, I am rarely shocked— of the stupidity underlying this bill. Here we indeed, rarely surprised—by the sanctimony have a government trying to solve problems and hypocrisy of the Labor Party when it within its own political party by, in my sub- comes to organisational structures, party in- mission, misusing this legislature to solve a tegrity and policy relevance. factional dispute in its own party. It is a dis- Senator Chris Evans—You’re from the grace that this should occur. Queensland branch of the Liberal Party, so I do not complain about being the subject you haven’t had a good experience. of rough treatment—if that is the rough and Senator MASON—Thanks, Senator Ev- tumble of politics I am prepared to wear it ans. I have not heard many of the speeches and get on with the job, because my interest from the opposition, but I did hear my good in this place is in policy, not personality. But friend Senator Carr—perhaps the last of the when this issue comes before us in the man- unreconstructed Stalinists in any Australian ner that it has it is a relevant element of this parliament—giving the Liberal Party a lec- debate to put before this chamber the sort of ture on policy irrelevance. The other day I trenchant distrust that occurs between mem- was at the tree of knowledge in Barcaldine. bers of this organisation called the Liberal The tree of knowledge, which I have dubbed Party, which has fielded candidates that other ‘the shrub of ignorance’ is withering, just as members—who have achieved distinction the Labor Party is. and are in good standing—regard as less than The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT worthy. I will leave it there. (Senator Forshaw)—Order! Senator Mason, In leaving it there, I make this point. I ask you to withdraw the comment you Senator Johnston is new to this chamber and made a moment ago in respect to another is entitled, as a debutant member of this senator. I ask you to withdraw the word you chamber, to make his regulation number of used. mistakes. We all did it, and he is entitled to Senator MASON—Which one? do it and not have it held against him. But in an excess of zeal a few moments ago he used Senator Chris Evans—I suspect, given this platform in this chamber to try and deni- that Stalin murdered thousands, it is probably grate my party. I resent and reject that. All of not very— those things that he said are fundamentally The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- untrue, yet we see this sleazy operation of DENT—The word is unparliamentary. the art of the big lie and giving the lie to the Senator MASON—I understand what conduct of the Labor Party. We know that you are saying, Mr Acting Deputy President, there is this element in politics; I reject it, but and I withdraw it. We received a lecture from we keep hearing about it. If anyone is in any Senator Carr about policy irrelevance. What doubt then they should wait until question I do know about this debate is that the people time, because we will see a number of min- here in the chamber and those who will read isters come in here just for the purpose of the Hansard later are not interested in this slagging off against the Labor Party, not for debate at all. This is the ultimate insider’s Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3569 debate. They are actually interested in trade, The ALP is seen as a pale alternative to the Coa- globalisation, industrial relations reform, lition. It is incapable of embracing and speaking mutual obligation, welfare reform, social for the divergent progressive groups in the com- issues and changing policies relating to munity. It has been unable to respond effectively families. They do not care at all about the to new aspirations. It no longer represents con- internal structures of political parties. So temporary Australia. when I hear lectures from the Labor Party— Let me repeat that: including, I might add, from those who are It no longer represents contemporary Australia. supposedly the best and the brightest of the Mr Button said this; not me. He said: Labor Party—I find it (1) unbelievable and It may not even represent its members any more: (2) pathetic, and (3) in some ways I cannot its national body has become an offshore island understand why I have been asked to speak adrift from the rest of the party, inaccessible to its in a debate on which I have very little inter- rank and file, a barren and rocky outcrop un- est. If we are talking about policy irrele- touched by new ideas— vance—and you have heard me so often on except those they borrow from us! Mr Blair this subject, Mr Acting Deputy President—I is pretty intelligent; he got rid of the union could go on for hours. movement. It took some courage, but he did The 20th century was won by those who it, and the policies that he has adopted are wanted to liberate humanity, not by those called the ‘third way’. Do you know what who wished to enslave it. The Labor Party that is? It is the Left grabbing our ideas, re- finally adopted conservative economic poli- badging them and saying, ‘They’re ours.’ cies in the eighties and the nineties. I will That is what has happened in the Labor Party make this prediction: they adopted conserva- and the Left over the last 20 years. They may tive economic policies but within the next, have state governments and they might build let us say, decade they will adopt the conser- nice highways, but the best the Labor Party vative formula of mutual obligation. You can do these days is become a pack of watch. They will, because they now know straighteners and managerialists. The right that the Australian community will not toler- wing of the ALP has made that party a pack ate welfare without some reciprocity from of managerialists and straighteners—they are the recipient. Slowly and steadily the Liberal all that is left, because they lost the big is- Party has had to drag the Labor Party into the sues of the 20th century. I will move on to 21st century and relevance. As you know, Mr structural problems. Acting Deputy President, because you have Senator Hutchins—Tell us about Enron! heard me on this many times, I dislike the Left not so much because they generously Senator MASON—I concede that there lent their lunatic economic policies to the can be peccadilloes by individuals on both Third World, nationalising industry and sides of politics. I accept that. I certainly do things like that, and thereby impoverished not claim to be closer to the angels than thousands of millions of people—I can for- Senator Hutchins is. The point, of course, is give that; they probably cannot, but I can— that it is not so much about whether individual Liberal senators or individual Labor Senator Hutchins—Tell us about the Party senators are good or bad but about Queensland Liberal Party. whether the structure and the organisation of Senator MASON—but because, and this a party are corrupt. The Labor Party are is what I can never forgive, and I will not get dominated by an increasingly irrelevant onto this now, Senator Hutchins, of the ar- bunch of people—namely, the trade unions. guments about moral equivalence. You will Once again, you might think, ‘Oh, that’s not hear a speech on this matter from me shortly. right’—they are tethered to the trade union Moving on, if you do not believe what I say, movement. I will again quote from former let me cite what former Senator Button re- Senator Button. At page 36, he said: cently said in his article ‘Beyond belief: In August 2001 unions made up less than 25 per What future for Labor’, published in the cent of the total workforce and only 19.2 per cent Quarterly Essay. On page 4, he said: of the private sector workforce. 3570 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

This is the crux of why the Labor Party are The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- irrelevant, this is why they are tethered to the DENT—Order! Senator Hutchins, do not trade union movement, and this is why they interrupt while the chair is speaking. I ask all will go nowhere in the battle for ideas. Mr senators to tone it down a bit and observe the Button says: standing orders. Unions affiliated with the Australian Labor Party Senator MASON—If you thought, represent less than 15 per cent of the workforce. Senator Hutchins, that somehow the union That is who they represent: less than 15 per hold over the Labor Party might have cent—and they come in here and claim to changed, you are wrong. I have a copy here speak for a majority of Australians! Less of the Hawke-Wran report of August this than 15 per cent of the work force is who year titled An enduring partnership: Labor they represent. and the union movement. Senator Ferris, it Senator Hutchins interjecting— says that less than 15 per cent— Senator MASON—And they do not like The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- it, Senator Hutchins, when this is brought up. DENT—Senator Mason, direct your remarks The one thing the Labor Party hate is when through the chair and not directly to other they are exposed as frauds—speaking for an senators. absolute minority of working Australians. Senator MASON—The report An en- We represent ordinary Australians; the Labor during partnership: Labor and the union Party do not. Mr Button refers at page 37 in movement says: his essay to ‘less than 15 per cent’, Senator Unions affiliated with the Australian Labor Party Evans. Mr Button continues: represent less than 15 per cent of the workforce. The past twenty-five years have seen no new How pathetic! I think my friend Senator Ev- union affiliations to the ALP in technical and ans said something about factions; so does professional areas. Membership of unions in the Mr Button. Let us get to that now. He says growth sectors of the economy—information on page 21 that in Labor: technology, telecommunications, electronics, biotechnology and financial and business serv- These disputes represent something important. ices— They are signs of a Labor Party corrupted by petty conflicts, dominated by what unionist Mar- and that is where this country is moving— tin Foley calls factional ‘warlords’— is low, sometimes tiny. that is them sitting over there— They are not even attached to those parts of and distracted from its historic purpose. This is the economy that are growing. They repre- the new inward-looking, corrosive culture of the sent less than 15 per cent of the workers of ALP. this nation, and they sit there with smirks on Of course, factional disputes are hardly un- their faces saying that they represent the av- known to the Labor Party. What is new is the erage Australian worker. It is pathetic, hypo- domination of the party hierarchy by a new class critical and sanctimonious. of labour movement professionals— Senator Chris Evans—The comparison there they are— is stacking branches with people who have who rely on factions and unions affiliated to the left the country; that is your— party for their career advancement. These people Senator Hutchins interjecting— come from the ranks of political advisers, trade union policy officers and electoral office staff. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- Individually they can be thoughtful and decent DENT—Order! I know this is a very vigor- people. ous debate but I would ask all senators to I think that is right; I can see some individu- conform to the standing orders of the cham- ally thoughtful and decent people— ber. Collectively— Senator Hutchins—Give him a Moga- don. the Labor Party are collectivists— they are destroying the diversity and appeal of the ALP and its affiliated unions. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3571

Mr Button states in his essay: worse simply because of its tethering to the The overall effect on the ALP has been pro- union movement. Mr Button says on page foundly destructive. Federally, the party is in re- 28: treat. Its primary vote, its membership and the Unions, of course, have had a long involvement breadth of people it sends to parliament are all in politics. They started the ALP and once domi- shrinking. These things are intimately connected, nated party conferences with numbers and ideas. and they are made possible by a party structure They pumped their best-qualified members into that has barely changed in the past century, that is parliament, often from self-educated and politi- moribund and out of touch with contemporary cally motivated rank and file members. Now it is society. the other way around. He goes on to say: Mr Button writes: What had replaced a broad spectrum of back- ALP factions try to capture the allegiance of un- grounds was a new class of political operator who ions to advance the interests of a breed of Labor had been filtered through the net of ALP machine professionals. politics. Out of a total of ninety-six members, fifty-three came from jobs in party or union of- Not to advance the workers but to advance fices. the breed of Labor professionals. He says: And I wonder why they are irrelevant to These professionals do not come from the rank policy debate! What more can I say? It gets and file of union members, and so a gap widens between the leadership of the union and its mem- worse, far worse. bers. Too often the members switch off politics as Senator Ferris—There’s more! a result, to the long-term detriment of the ALP. Senator MASON—There is a lot more, I will make one last mention of Mr Button’s and this is perhaps the worst part. It goes on article before I get onto even more interest- to say: ing themes. He says: The narrowing parliamentary base is symbolised Hyped-up by the heady tribalism of group loyalty, by the predominance of a number of holy families factional warriors— of Labor politics— and there they sit— this Comcar aristocracy that the Labor Party are primed to suffer, like athletes overdosed on has developed— steroids, from testicular atrophy when confronted Once upon a time it was conservative clans like by the real enemy. the Downers and the Anthonys who tended to Quite right. I have never been afraid—not of monopolise parliamentary dynasties, but today this lot. He goes on: the ALP has a rival list that reads like a row of gentlemen’s outfitters in the lower end of Bond They can make good constituent members, but in Street: Beazley and Son, Crean and Son, parliament their identity is swamped by sexual Ferguson Brothers, Fitzgibbon and Son, Brown fealty and the need for tribal approval. and Hoare (father and daughter), McClelland and You see: testicular atrophy. He continues: Son ... The list goes on, and they are all worthy Because of this a curious phenomenon occurs: and respectable concerns; there can be no serious they often have no strongly developed sense of objection to their continuing in the family busi- difference from the Liberals sitting opposite them. ness. Between them, however— Because we have won the battle of ideas, and listen to this— they want to be like us. the present generation of dynastic representatives makes up about 10 per cent of the ALP lower Senator Chris Evans—I don’t know why house. you don’t go home if you’ve won everything. Ten per cent of the Labor members of the Senator MASON—You might think I am House of Representatives are part of a dy- saying nasty things about my friends oppo- nasty—and they are against hereditary mon- site, but I have tagged all their backgrounds archies! The argument I am developing is in the Parliamentary Handbook, and I will that while there are individual peccadilloes, get to that in a minute, because I am sure the and I concede there are on all sides, the in- gallery will be amused. I note, and I say stitutional corruption—indeed, the sordid again, that we have our peccadilloes in the institutional corruption—in the ALP is much Liberal Party—I concede that—and I know 3572 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 the Labor Party does. But the difference is parent, so they come in here and talk about the institutional tethering of the Labor Party the internal structures of the Liberal Party. by the union movement. I did not see it but I The day that the Labor Party get over the understand that Senator Ray had a go at my union movement and have the courage to preselection yesterday. Then I had this mem- say, ‘We only represent less than 15 per cent ory—a flash—going back over 20 years, of the work force, we should do something Senator Hutchins. about this,’ is the day they can come in here Senator Hutchins—You should be a and lecture to us. They are irrelevant because preacher, you know. they represent no-one except the professionals climbing up the greasy pole to end up in Senator MASON—Yes. In fact, perhaps this place. it was divine! When Senator Ray said that my preselection was bitter and everything Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (12.27 else, I remembered—I may have been at p.m.)—The Commonwealth Electoral high school or just at university, but it was Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002 has a seem- the late seventies to early eighties—when ingly very innocuous name. Unlike the gov- Senator Ray knocked off that old leftie Jean ernment’s colourfully and, I think, inaccu- Melzer. That was the most bitter struggle in rately titled bills like More Jobs Better Pay, the Labor division in Victoria ever. And ap- A New Tax System or the quite strangely parently that is okay, but a close run in the named fair termination bill, this bill would Liberal Party is not okay. I remember, even have you believe that it was simple and plain as a student, that I thought it was all right. and that it would change the way that the Do you know why? I thought, ‘They got rid Commonwealth Electoral Act works for the of an old leftie—that’s good.’ And I ap- betterment of our nation. Nothing is further plauded Senator Ray for doing it. I thought, from the truth. All politicians are aware of ‘Great stuff. Get rid of an old leftie from the the community’s view of us all. There is a Labor Party. That’s good for democracy.’ But sense of disengagement and contempt for do you know what? It was the most bitter, political processes. I think the community the most sordid and the most disgusting would welcome positive and sensible re- campaign. I do not care about how Senator forms of the electoral process. Ray got here, because I used to think he per- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT forms a good job, but the fact that the best (Senator Forshaw)—Order! Excuse me, and the brightest of the Labor Party spent all Senator McLucas. Would honourable sena- their time going through the gutters and the tors on my right resume their seats or leave rubbish of this place makes me sick. I will the chamber if they wish to have a conversa- take on Senator Ray in a policy debate any tion. day of the week and win. Senator McLUCAS—I think the com- Someone like Senator Ray or Senator munity would welcome a thorough review of Faulkner—bright people though they are— our political processes and our electoral sys- will never come in here and debate policy, tem. But this seemingly innocuously named because when they do they lose. The one bill does nothing like that. It is simply a bill constant is that they always lose. So what to solve the internal problems and factional they do is they think, ‘We’ll see if we can wars of the Liberal Party. find a bit of rubbish, a bit of dirt, a bit of this This bill is designed to use the processes and a bit of that and we might get some- of the parliament to manage the power bat- where.’ They will never come in here and tles and struggles in the Liberal Party, both debate taxation policy, industrial relations nationally and between the states. It is to my reform or welfare reform, because if they do mind an outrageous abuse of the parliament they will lose—because they are irrelevant. and the parliamentary system. Essentially, That is what makes me so sick about this the bill allows the federal secretariat of the debate: the best and the brightest of the La- Liberal Party to control the disbursement of bor movement have nothing new to say on all the public funding due to the Liberal the agenda. It is becoming increasingly ap- Party following an election. Liberal Party Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3573 state divisions would only receive the pro- showing enormous leadership. He got rid of portion of public funding agreed to with their the ‘rorters’—to use his language. It was federal secretariat. It is a bill about money; it tough and it was hard, but he did it. How- is a bill that strips electoral public funding ever, it is too hard for the Liberal Party. Mr from the state based organisations and pro- Quinn himself said: vides it to the federal secretariat. It is a bill Peter Beattie has shown us what to do ... that should be called ‘Commonwealth Elec- We have to move to put those sorts of reforms toral Amendment Bill (Liberals Dash For in place in our own party. We can’t bury our head Cash)’, if the government were following in the sand. true to form in the way that they have mis- Mr Quinn tried to adopt the Beattie style named other legislation in this place. It is electoral reforms that had cleaned up cor- reasonable, I believe, for the community to ruption in the Queensland branch of the ALP, ask why it is that the parliament is spending but he has failed. In the Liberal Party in all of this time—I say, wasting all of this Queensland you can still vote in a preselec- time—talking about the internal processes of tion if you are not an Australian citizen or a political party. The answer is that the Lib- even if you do not live in the electorate for erals cannot, will not and do not talk to each which you are selecting a candidate. Surely other. It is across these benches that we, the that is a fundamental democratic principle parliamentarians of this country, have to for any preselection process, but unfortu- solve the internal problems of the Liberal nately it would seem that Mr Quinn will fail Party. in his attempt to clean up electoral rorting All of the state branches of the Liberal within the Liberal Party in that state. As I Party are in enormous disarray, and the said, Mr Quinn failed to deliver party reform Queensland branch of the Liberal Party, to stop branch stacking but then, as has been more than any of the others, is the champion reported very widely, he also lost the stack of factional warfare. Over the last few itself. months in Queensland we have seen the most On 9 August this year, we saw unprece- unseemly public brawling reported in the dented growth in the membership of the Lib- newspapers and other media. It seems that eral Party of Queensland—20 per cent every Friday night we see a trooping of the growth. A total of 800 new members were factional chiefs off to Liberal Party head- joined up on that evening, adding to the quarters to carry out the next stage of the membership of 4,500. The Santoro-Carroll battle. We see the sad and sorry Leader of the faction, which includes the state president, Liberal Party of Queensland pleading for his Mr Caltabiano, stacked 500 votes, it is said, party to adopt electoral reform. We see the on that night. It is important to note that Leader of the Liberal Party leading a parlia- Senator Brandis and Senator Mason are part mentary party of three: himself, Dr David of that group. The scuttlebutt is that they will Watson and Mrs Joan Sheldon. The Liberals have the numbers to preselect Mr Santo are irrelevant in Queensland—they have Santoro, the failed member for Clayfield, as three seats out of 89. One would wonder a replacement for Senator Herron. That will what they are squabbling about! not please a number of women in the Liberal The only game you can play with three Party of Queensland, especially Kathy Sulli- players is piggie-in-the-middle. I think that van, a former member of the House of Rep- Mr Quinn is the unfortunate player standing resentatives, who has been arguing for and in the middle trying to catch that ball—the urging the Liberal Party to do the right thing prize. The prize in my mind is party electoral and find a woman candidate to replace democracy, but he just cannot catch it. He Senator Herron when he moves to his next has tried—a couple of weeks ago he tried appointment. But unfortunately I do not very hard. He tried to do what Peter Beattie know that the women of the Liberal Party in has done so successfully, I believe, in Queensland actually carry a lot of weight. Queensland in cleaning up internal party The other player of course is Mr Michael electoral corruption. Peter Beattie has done it Johnson, the new member for Ryan. He is 3574 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 clearly at the moment the champion branch but then your actions have to sit well with stacker in Queensland. He is the head of your words. Mr Quinn went on: what is known as the ‘fly in, fly out branch’ I’m trying to hand the party back to the mem- and is aligned with, but not a captive of, the bers of the party rather than the elected people Santoro-Carroll faction. Mr Johnson controls sitting around state executive ... the largest membership of the Liberal Party It’s that important. in Queensland and is a powerful player— Well, Mr Quinn, we will see at the state con- someone that requires respect from all of the ference whether or not you have been suc- combatants. It is said, though, that Qantas cessful in delivering to the Liberal Party the shares will rise in the lead-up to the state reforms that you speak of. In the Courier- conference this year as some of the Liberal Mail at a later date, he also said: Party people have to travel from quite a long way, including from overseas. If we are going to clean up this party, then I need to work with people who do support the On the other side of the battle we have the reforms that I am proposing. The current presi- old Bob Tucker faction, known as the ‘West- dent isn’t supporting them. He is more of a hin- ern Suburbs Wets’. I understand that includes drance than a help, quite frankly. Senator Ian Macdonald, so there is also a Mr Quinn said: division within this place. Mr Mal Brough Mr Caltabiano was not interested in complete has been busy in his attempt to win the reform and was part of a “small clique” of fac- stacker of the year trophy, but I do not know tional power brokers more interested in preserv- that he has quite made it. It is reported that ing their stranglehold than making the Liberal he personally took most of the 300 new Party respectable enough to deserve election. membership forms to party headquarters on It is very unedifying. It is not a pretty sight. 9 August and that those memberships were The actions of the Liberal Party in Queen- paid for with a small number of cheques. Mr sland are undignified, just as this bill is an Quinn has been attempting to rule out this undignified misuse of this parliament. This sort of branch stacking. This is the sort of should have been solved internally in the branch stacking that has been comprehen- Liberal Party; it should not be wasting the sively ruled out by the work of Peter Beattie. time of this Senate or the parliament. We do not have that sort of corruption in the Labor Party anymore in Queensland because This bill is about money and power. Un- we dealt with it. Unfortunately, it seems that fortunately, it seems that that is what the the Liberal Party in Queensland is not quite Liberal Party stands for. Last week the How- prepared to. Mr Quinn, as I said, is a member ard government cabinet travelled to Cairns, of this group—the Bob Tucker group—and I the place where I live. When I heard that the do not think it would sit well with his tough cabinet was coming to Cairns I was initially words about reform. As is reported in the very welcoming. It is very important that Courier-Mail on 16 July, he said: parliamentarians travel outside Canberra and the major cities to understand what is hap- The reason I’m proposing these tougher re- pening, especially in rural places. I was ini- forms for the Liberal Party is I want to make the Liberal party respectable and electable and I think tially pleased that they were going to make those are the key words here ... some sort of attempt to connect with the community, to understand the issues that face If the community doesn’t respect you, they won’t elect you. people, especially in regional Australia. It is important, as I said, for parliamentarians to That is pretty clear: there are only three of travel, to get to places outside the major cit- them! The Courier-Mail article continues: ies and I always encourage it. It is an oppor- Mr Quinn said his party would not be electable tunity to understand those community con- or presentable until it stamped out branch- cerns. But it became evident very early in the stacking. piece after we found out that the cabinet was But it is evident from the events of 9 August coming that there was really no attempt at all that his group are up to their ears in it as for true community connection. well. So you can say one thing, Mr Quinn, Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3575

As an aside, I would like to explain what of the convention centre is ‘Serious business happens when Peter Beattie does what are in a stunning location’. We are serious in called the ‘community cabinet visits’ in North Queensland about doing business but Queensland. Every three weeks the cabinet we do not like it when our community is travel to a regional place in Queensland. On treated in the way that I say the Howard the Sunday afternoon they sit down with cabinet treated us last week. It is important community members at an open forum. Eve- that MPs are always seen to be working. ryone is invited. There is an advertisement in There were three opportunities for the the newspaper and everyone comes. Any- community to meet with the cabinet during body can raise any issue from the floor. That their time in Cairns. The first one was at a lasts for a couple of hours and then the cocktail welcome reception. It cost you $40 meeting breaks into smaller groups where to go to that. According to Mr Entsch in the each cabinet member sits at a table and any- Cairns Post, 450 people came along to that body in the world can walk up and have a event. At a cost of, let us say, $15 per head, I discussion with that cabinet member about would put the profit from that connection the issue that concerns them. They are in- with community at about $11,250. So the vited openly and freely and they do not pay a Liberal Party of Leichhardt FEC made cent; anyone can come. Later on that Sunday $11,250 by hosting an event where commu- evening—and it is the same pattern at every nity members could meet the cabinet. That community cabinet meeting—Peter Beattie was on the Monday night. That was followed hosts an open barbecue or drinks. It is very later in the evening by a dinner party. The cheap and once again anyone can come Cairns Post put it beautifully: along. The following day the cabinet meet and then there is an open luncheon to which Dinner with the Prime Minister for $2000 a plate. usually the local government invites whom- We have done a bit of figuring on that one, ever they would like to come along to it. too. Let us say that eight people sat at Mr These visits are very open, very communica- Howard’s table. That gives a net income tion based and extremely effective. It is from that table of about $16,000. I under- something that the Beattie government stand that not all members of the cabinet are should be commended for. I know commu- worth $2,000—Mr Costello was worth nity members across Queensland welcome $1,500, so $13,500 would have been col- these events as an opportunity to truly con- lected from the eight or nine people who sat nect with their members of parliament. around that table. The other 15 ministers ranged in value from $750 to $1,500. Let us The contrast between those events that be conservative and say that they were all happen every three weeks in Queensland and worth $750. That brings us to $101,250 that the fanfare and palaver of the cabinet visit to could have been made from those tables. Cairns could not be more extreme. The itin- With 170 people, the total income would be erary was a litany of publicity opportunities $130,750, less—let us say it was $50 a and fundraising events. In North Queensland plate—$18,500, giving a final profit from the we live in a wonderful part of Australia. dinner with the Prime Minister—this event Members of parliament and businesspeople where we connect with the community, are often criticised for travelling to our part where we understand what the community of the world in the winter when it is 27 de- thinks—of $122,200. The total income to the grees, there are beautiful clear skies, Trinity Leichhardt FEC would be $135,450—not a Inlet sparkles and the Great Barrier Reef sits bad thing if you can do it. out there. People are often criticised for coming to North Queensland at that time of Debate interrupted. the year. I always say to them that that is BUSINESS unfair. We deserve parliamentarians to come Rearrangement to our part of the world, and we would like you to come when it is attractive and beauti- Senator COONAN (New South Wales— ful—not that it is not all the time, but it is Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treas- always better in the winter. In fact, the logo urer) (12.45 p.m.)—I move: 3576 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

That consideration of government business or- cifically incorporated in Australian law, then der of the day No. 3 (Australian Radiation Pro- it has no direct legal effect. tection and Nuclear Safety (Licence Charges) Amendment Bill 2002) be postponed till a later That is nowhere more evident than in ar- hour of the day. eas such as the refugee area. Whilst the refugee convention is partly incorporated in the Question agreed to. Migration Act, it is also regularly and re- FAMILY LAW AMENDMENT (CHILD peatedly undermined in the Migration Act PROTECTION CONVENTION) BILL through various components of it. The many 2002 breaches of the refugee convention that this Second Reading government continues to allow to occur daily Debate resumed from 20 August, on mo- do so because our national law allows it, de- tion by Senator Coonan: spite the fact that we have ratified an international convention. This is even more the That this bill be now read a second time. case in a convention such as the Convention Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) Against Torture, which we have ratified and, (12.45 p.m.)—I rise to speak briefly to the technically, are accountable to. But we have Family Law Amendment (Child Protection not incorporated it in Australian law, so there Convention) Bill 2002. It is an example of is no mechanism for people to legally en- the government actually implementing, force through the courts their right to protec- through legislation, international convention under the Convention Against Torture, tions. It is worth noting that fact, given this despite the fact that Australia has ratified it. government’s own propensity from time to They do have an option, if all their legal time to criticise and to be seen to be under- avenues have been exhausted, to go to the mining the importance of international con- relevant UN committee overseeing that, ventions, particularly ones relating to human which can examine their situation. But the rights, such as this one. This government government is under no compulsion to pay uses rhetoric to suggest that we should not be any attention to what that committee finds or, dictated to by people in Geneva or by people indeed, whilst the committee makes its con- in ivory towers in the UN and that we should siderations, even to allow the person to re- determine for ourselves what we wish to do, main in the country. The government has despite the fact that we have signed up to followed that convention to allow that to particular conventions. happen in previous times, but it is purely on However, as this legislation shows, whilst its own wishes. There is no legal requirement that may be good rhetoric to appeal to the for it to do so, and there is no legal way that anti-internationalists, quasi-One Nation vote, people, if they have a complaint before the it is not reflected in the reality of how the relevant UN committee, can enforce the gov- government operates in practice a lot of the ernment to do so. All we are left with in that time, thankfully. This legislation is one ex- area is ministerial discretion, which ministers ample of that, where it implements an inter- can use or not use as they choose, without national convention that the government has any right for that to be compelled through a adopted and incorporates it into law. It is court. worth emphasising that, because I do not It is important to emphasise that, under think there is a common misunderstanding many of these crucial human rights treaties, amongst the Australian public that Austra- such as the Convention Against Torture, lia’s ratification of an international conven- whilst it is obviously good if Australia rati- tion does not automatically make it enforce- fies them, we are reliant in many cases able in Australia. If there is no other law to purely on the goodwill of the government of the contrary, it is certainly open to courts to the day. Even if one were to suggest that this take that into account when interpreting how government and its current minister operated existing laws should be enforced or how they in an appropriate way in that area—and that should operate. Unless the convention is spe- is, in the very least, debatable—there is no legal guarantee that future governments will Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3577 feel bound to uphold the conventions they want to hold up its passage, but I do think it have signed. That is a long way of saying is important for the Senate to express an that bills like this are important and wel- opinion about the broader issue. come, because they do actually put into leg- The child protection convention that this islation the principles that we have signed up bill deals with stresses the need to improve to in conventions, so that people will have a the protection of children in international legal right and are able to seek legal remedy situations. It notes the importance of interna- if those rights are breached or if they need to tional cooperation for the protection of chil- be enforced. dren, which the bill deals with. The conven- It is an important process and it is an im- tion confirms that the best interests of the portant bill, and the Democrats support it. child are to be of primary consideration and But it needs to be emphasised that, whilst it it reinforces the obligation of Australia to might seem a run-of-the-mill thing to simply protect refugee and internationally displaced reflect international conventions in legisla- children. It specifically makes reference to tion, it actually does not happen automati- the Convention on the Rights of the Child, cally. It does not happen as often as it should. which is a much broader convention that we I think there is no surer way of undermining are also a signatory to. That is another con- our credibility as a nation and our support for vention that we have regularly breached, and international conventions than if we ratify continue to breach—not just under this gov- them and then flout them, regardless of the ernment but also under the previous Labor topic, but particularly in areas like human government—with our insistence on detain- rights. ing children for prolonged periods of time. Australia needs to play an effective role We have the recent outrageous case of the internationally as an advocate for strong hu- Bakhtiyari family being detained in man rights protection—I believe we have Woomera for over 18 months while the fa- played that role effectively in the past—and ther was out in the community. There have it is one of the constructive international ap- been allegations from the minister about proaches we can take. But we cannot be ef- whether the father has told the truth and fective at it if we preach to other govern- whether or not his story is genuine. That is ments, saying, ‘You should pick up your act an important issue, but it is irrelevant to the on human rights; you should ratify these fact that this family had a parent recognised conventions; you should meet these stan- as a refugee under our system out in the dards,’ and breach them ourselves. That is community but being kept separate from his one, amongst many, of the real tragedies of wife and children. I do not think you would this government’s flagrant abuses of human get a more blatant breach not just of the rights in the refugee area in the last couple of refugee convention, which recognises the years, and that is an extra negative conse- importance of immediate family reunifica- quence of those actions. When we perform tion, but also of the Convention on the so badly ourselves, it dramatically reduces Rights of the Child. Imprisoning children our ability to effectively advocate and push should be absolutely a last resort and for ab- internationally for better performances by solutely the minimum time possible. There other nations. can be no excuse for those children to have This bill relates to the child protection been kept in jail—and they are still there— convention and the family law components for over 18 months, without any certainty as of that, which in many ways are tangential to to how much longer they will be there, while the refugee issues but they do have a com- a parent is legitimately out in the Australian mon link in the recognition of the funda- community. That goes directly to the protec- mental rights of children and putting chil- tion of children and the broader Convention dren’s interests first. I have circulated a sec- on the Rights of the Child. If we are serious ond reading amendment to emphasise this about not just the content of legislation and fact. I have decided not to go with moving treaties like these but also the spirit, intent amendments to the bill, because I do not and aim of treaties like these, we need to 3578 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 make that clear. We need to put on the record Australia has signed up to and it is part of the a clear statement that we reinforce that the broader principle of respecting the conven- best interests of the child must be given pri- tions that we adopt not just in word but in mary consideration. practice. I believe this amendment will play The practice of mandatory detention of an important role both in sending that mes- child asylum seekers has been widely con- sage and in reinforcing it for the future im- demned throughout the Australian commu- plementation of this particular act. nity, even by people who are broadly sup- Having said that, the act itself is one that portive of other aspects of this government’s we support and we do not wish to hold up its approach to unauthorised arrivals. The area passage. But we do believe the principles of ongoing detention of children is one that I within it need to be reflected more broadly in believe the majority of the community are the policy approach this government takes not supportive of and are keen to see other towards children across the board. That is alternatives explored. There have been no not the case at the moment. Children’s best serious attempts to adopt other alternatives interests are not being put first; in fact, they by this government; instead, we have a are not being put anywhere other than dead situation where, at any time a child story last if they happen to be in a refugee or asy- becomes public and there is a potential for lum seeker situation. That is something the public sympathy to come out, the relevant Democrats believe needs to be changed. child, their family or their circumstances are Amongst virtually everything else that needs dragged through the mud and they are dis- to be changed about the approach this gov- credited in some way or other. Quite frankly, ernment takes to asylum seekers its approach while it is important to get the truth of what to children is the one thing that I think has to people’s circumstances are, in relation to change most urgently and most comprehen- children, I do not care. They should not be sively. I commend the amendment, along locked up for prolonged periods of time. with the bill, to the chamber. I move Demo- They should not be locked up at all unless crats second reading amendment: there is a very strong case, and we should not At the end of the motion, add: be deliberately confusing the issue between “But the Senate: looking after the interests of the child and any broader issues about the credibility or (a) recognises that the Child Protection otherwise of their parents. If there is one Convention: group that are the most innocent victims of (i) stresses the need to improve the displaced people, of refugees, of people- protection of children in international situations; smuggling—of all of those things—it is the children. They should not be the pawns and (ii) recalls the importance of interna- victims of government policy, particularly tional cooperation for the protec- one that has been driven so clearly for politi- tion of children; cal reasons. (iii) confirms that the best interests of the child are to be a primary con- So apart from reinforcing the importance sideration; and of the best interests of the child being taken (iv) reinforces the obligation of Aus- into consideration, the amendment specifi- tralia to protect refugee and in- cally condemns the practice of detaining ternationally displaced children; child asylum seekers and calls on the gov- (b) and therefore: ernment to detain children only as a matter of last resort. I think this is a fundamental (i) condemns the practice of mandatory detention of child asylum principle that should be expressed. It is rele- seekers which fails to meet our vant to the bill, because it specifically men- protection obligations; and tions not just family law situations but also (ii) calls upon the Government to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, detain children only as a measure which it links to. It is part of the schedule of of last resort, and then only for the convention, it is part of the principles that the shortest appropriate period of Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3579

time, necessary to conduct back- thus enabling Australia to ratify that conven- ground health and identity tion. As its long title indicates, the conven- checks”. tion defines when a national court or admin- Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (12.58 istrative body has jurisdiction in respect of a p.m.)—Labor supports the second reading child, what law it should apply, the circum- amendment to the Family Law Amendment stances in which a national court or admini- (Child Protection Convention) Bill 2002, stration body should recognise a foreign de- moved by the Australian Democrats. Perhaps termination affecting a child and provides for I can add that the bill highlights the com- cooperation through central authorities be- plexities that arise in national disputes in- tween member states—that is, countries that volving children, yet equal complexities do are a party to the convention. It applies to arise in laws and regulations affecting chil- parental rights existing by operation of law dren between states in Australia. We do such as the attribution of parental responsi- sometimes lose sight of the fact that, as gov- bilities to each of the natural parents at birth, ernments, we should be trying to make sure to court orders and to administrative deci- that the best interests of children are put first sions. As defined in article 3, it broadly cov- when determining how to resolve these com- ers three types of situations: firstly, the pri- plexities. It does require a lot of hard work vate sphere of parental responsibility, cus- and cooperation between states and the tody and access rights—and this is the most Commonwealth, which is sometimes diffi- important aspect of the convention; secondly, cult to obtain. The detailed work that went the public sphere of child protection by or on on in the preparation and review of this bill behalf of public authorities; and, thirdly, the is a sign that it can be done in the area of property rights of children. children and youth. Labor has highlighted It is said that the advantages of the con- areas where more work needs to be done to vention for Australia would include, firstly, protect our children’s interests, in particular the clarification of responsibilities and the the need for a children’s commissioner, elimination of conflicts in jurisdiction be- which we believe will further the best inter- tween Australia and overseas authorities in ests and protection of children nationally. relation to child protection and family law As an independent statutory office, a chil- matters. Secondly, it would ensure recogni- dren’s commissioner would be able to con- tion and enforcement abroad of Australian sider the best interests of children and advo- court orders and other measures of protection cate, both to the government and to the pub- overseas where appropriate. Thirdly, it would lic, measures to advance the interests of chil- provide mechanisms for child protection dren in society. Details of the proposal were authorities in Australia and other countries to announced by the Leader of the Opposition, cooperate in relation to protective measures Mr Simon Crean, in May on the occasion of for an Australian child abroad or a child re- this bill. I commend Labor’s proposal to the turning to another country who is subject to Senate in relation to a children’s commis- Australian protective measures. sioner and support the second reading The Family Law Association of New amendment moved by the Australian Demo- South Wales commends the ratification of crats. the Hague convention insofar as it strength- Senator HARRIS (Queensland) (1.00 ens and extends the rights of children who p.m.)—I rise to speak on the Family Law are wrongfully removed from their country Amendment (Child Protection Convention) of habitual residence and extends the rights Bill 2002. This bill seeks to amend the Fam- of the parent left behind. The association ily Law Act 1975 so that it is consistent with also supports the objective of enhancing the the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Ap- effectiveness of provisions for the protection plicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and of children from abuse and neglect. How- Cooperation in respect of Parental Responsi- ever, the association notes that many signa- bility and Measures for the Protection of tory states have applied their obligations to Children—the child protection convention— the convention in an entirely unsatisfactory 3580 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 way. Recent cases involving children wrong- law, extinguish or grant another parental re- fully removed from their mothers from sponsibility notwithstanding the provisions Greece and Mexico have caused great con- of article 16. cern, and this could be seen to undermine In essence, the bill does not appear to take Australia’s reputation as a signatory. away any rights of the states to deal with the I now give an example of how the child matters of child protection and interventions. protection convention works in relation to Nor does it appear to seek any significant applicable law. Article 51.1 of the conven- level of uniformity on how child protection tion states a principle long applied by Aus- intervention will be determined, imple- tralian courts: once the court has jurisdiction mented or executed across state boundaries. it shall apply its own law. However, article In other words, families seeking consistency 15.2 gives the court an option by way of ex- between countries in matters of child protec- ception to apply the law of another state— tion will be sorely disappointed. Rather, it not necessarily that of another contracting appears to focus purely on the matter of ju- state—with which the situation has a sub- risdiction where a child may have been stantial connection. The law of the forum moved from one country to another or will therefore be applied in most situations through multiple jurisdictions over any given even if the child is foreign. Questions as to period of time. I draw the minister’s attention whom residency will be granted, or in whose to clause 17 of the bill which reads: favour an order for contract should be made, At the end of subsection 67P(1) Add: will be determined by local law. But this ; or (f) with the leave of the court that does not apply to the issue of whether a per- made the location order: son has parental responsibility by operation (i) the Commonwealth central authority; of law, by agreement or by some other act— or such as recognition of paternity—which does not require the intervention of a court of ad- (ii) a central authority or a competent authority of a Convention country. ministrative authority. The bill is reasonably straightforward, al- Article 16 subjects those issues to the law though by necessity it is complex in its func- of the state, not necessarily a contracting tions because of the issues related to it. My state, of the habitual residence of the child. A concern is that, in relation specifically to change in the child’s habitual residence will clause 17, the second sentence appears to not extinguish by itself an already existing make the provision ambiguous. It appears to parental responsibility even if the law of the say that as soon as a parent absconds, or with new residence does not confer parental re- a legal right changes to another state with a sponsibility on that person. Thus, if a child child and takes up residence there, it be- of unmarried parents is taken from eastern comes the child’s habitual state of residence Australia to England, the father will be as a matter of fact. In other words, in terms treated in England as retaining parental re- of residency, under the bill it becomes a fact sponsibility even though English law does that they are habitually resident in the new not confer it on an unmarried father. But if area rather than a fact that is determined by the new habitual residence confers parental law. The bill clearly states that the fact that responsibility, when the old one did not, that the child moves, either by being abducted or person gains parental responsibility under the by legal means, changes the habitual resi- new law. In the converse case of the example dency place. It is not the fact that it is de- given, an English unmarried father will gain cided at law that it has moved. The mere fact parental responsibility in England and Aus- of change of residence makes it habitual in- tralia—assuming they are both contracting stead of considering the meaning of ‘habit- states—if the child moves to eastern Austra- ual’. lia. It is not necessary in either case that the father change his habitual residence. The I want to place on record the fact that One court of the new habitual residence may, of Nation supports the bill. As I said, we have course, by orders made according to its own some concerns whether it will deliver the outcomes of security for the parents of the Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3581 children involved, and we are concerned that Third Reading by merely relocating, the legislation as it Bill passed through its remaining stages stands clearly sets out that the child’s place without amendment or debate. of residency has changed. I look forward to the minister’s contribution. HEALTH LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (PRIVATE HEALTH Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western INDUSTRY MEASURES) BILL 2002 Australia—Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) (1.11 p.m.)—I thank all senators, Second Reading including your good self, Mr Acting Deputy Debate resumed from 21 March, on mo- President Bartlett, for their contributions to tion by Senator Ian Campbell: the debate. It will be a disappointment to That this bill be now read a second time. you, Mr Acting Deputy President, to know Question agreed to. that we will not be supporting your second reading amendment. Bill read a second time. To save us going into committee, I want to Third Reading answer a question that Senator Harris raised. Bill passed through its remaining stages In reply to Senator Harris, may I say that, without amendment or debate. although the law says that habitual residence Sitting suspended from 1.15 p.m. to 2.00 would be a fact, it would not be a fact if p.m. there were an abduction because it would be MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS illegal and the abduction convention would overrule that. If it were an illegal abduc- Senator HILL (South Australia—Leader tion—as an abduction is—that would not be of the Government in the Senate) (2.00 a fact. p.m.)—by leave—I have pleasure in advising the chamber that Senator Ferris is to be the Senator Harris—What if it was a legal Government Whip and Senator Eggleston is movement? to be the Deputy Government Whip. Senator IAN CAMPBELL—That would QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE be a different situation. If it were an abduction, it would obviously not be a fact. I thank Scientific Research: Funding Cuts all honourable senators and I commend the Senator CARR (2.00 p.m.)—My question bill to the Senate. is to Senator Alston, the Minister represent- Question agreed to. ing the Minister for Education, Science and Training. What action does the government Original question, as amended, agreed to. propose to take to address the concerns ex- Bill read a second time. pressed by Professor Frank Fenner, the re- Third Reading cipient of this year’s Prime Minister’s Prize Bill passed through its remaining stages for Science, about the future of scientific without amendment or debate. research in Australia following the government’s drastic funding cuts? Is the minister JURISDICTION OF COURTS aware that Professor Fenner has said that he LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL is concerned about the government’s policy 2002 on the commercialisation of research and Second Reading that: Debate resumed from 20 August, on mo- ... with the fall off in direct government spending tion by Senator Coonan: and the dependence on commercial support, the chance for doing blue sky research, something for That this bill be now read a second time. which there is no apparent commercial end in Question agreed to. view, is diminished. Bill read a second time. Senator ALSTON—I am not sure whether Senator Carr is referring to remarks made by Professor Fenner, as I understand the correct pronunciation to be, at the Prime 3582 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

Minister’s science awards the other night. If was stressing the importance of blue sky re- he was then that is not my recollection of search, but he was not for a moment sug- what he said. Professor Fenner certainly did gesting that what has happened in the last emphasise the importance of blue sky re- couple of years has not been enormous prog- search. I think we all understand the signifi- ress. cance of that—in the same way that we do Senator CARR—Mr President, I ask a not want an obsessive emphasis on the sci- supplementary question. Minister, had Pro- ences as opposed to the humanities—but that fessor Fenner’s remarks been edited in the is a far cry from suggesting that somehow published video displayed to the dinner the there have been drastic funding cuts. I cer- other night? Were statements to the effect tainly do not think he said that to the audi- that I have read today broadcast on ABC’s ence. Maybe he had a word to Senator Carr Radio National yesterday? I can quote those afterward or maybe, as usual, Senator Carr words directly. Professor Fenner said that he was away with the fairies and was making up was concerned about the ‘fall-off in direct notes of things that he would have liked Pro- government spending and the dependence on fessor Fenner to have referred to. commercial support’ and that ‘the chance for The fact is that the latest ABS statistics doing blue sky research, something for show that Australia’s gross expenditure on which there is no apparent commercial end R&D in 2000 and 2001 was at an all-time in view, is diminished.’ Further, is it also the high of more than $10 billion—more than $1 case, since you cite ABS figures—and the billion higher than it was in the previous sur- Group of Eight also cites ABS figures—that vey. All of those present the other night were the fall-off in GDP has in fact been from very laudatory of the government’s efforts 1.68 per cent to 1.4 per cent, which is an with Backing Australia’s Ability. They were equivalent of $3.5 billion in support for sci- too polite to say that the poor, unfortunate ence and research in this country? ‘noodle nation’, which disappeared without Senator ALSTON—I do not know if trace, offered not the slightest sense of en- Senator Carr meant to say what he said, but couragement to them. It was all funding on he talked about a fall-off in GDP. I am sure the never-never and it did not touch the that is not right—I presume that he meant the sides. proportion of GDP devoted to science. The Those present were extraordinarily grate- fact is that this year’s science and innovation ful for what we have committed ourselves to budget exceeded $5 billion for the first time. over the next few years. The announcement That $3 billion package is making a huge of the awards, the Federation Fellowships difference. You offered no serious alterna- and all of the things that are happening now tive. You dithered for about nine months as in a very dynamic scientific sector are very to whether you would endorse it. You finally positive indeed. Certainly, as far as the gov- came out with that very amusing alternative ernment is concerned, Backing Australia’s to a policy proposal, but there was no serious Ability is going to provide an enormous fillip financial commitment. I think that the sci- to the scientific community. Priorities will ence community well and truly understands need to be set and we have already started who is backing the right horse and who is down that path but, at the end of the day, we not. They understand our commitment to will be encouraging research in all its mani- innovation and to research in all of its mani- festations. festations. The sooner you start listening to Senator Carr should not for a moment try the wider community and backing off the to suggest that Professor Fenner was stand- relevant union, the more informed you will ing up there being critical. As I recall it, al- be. most his opening remark was, ‘It is 20-odd DISTINGUISHED VISITORS years since I retired and I’d feel very diffi- The PRESIDENT—Order! I draw the dent talking about current public policy is- attention of honourable senators to the pres- sues.’ I think that, if you put Professor Fen- ence in the chamber of a parliamentary dele- ner’s remarks in context, you will see that he gation from the Republic of Korea, led by Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3583 the Vice Speaker of the National Assembly, their families. What do unionists want? Of the Hon. Kim Tai-Shik. On behalf of hon- course, they want money, power and influ- ourable senators, I have pleasure in wel- ence, but they also want security. But it is a coming you to the Senate and I trust that different form of security. What they want is your visit to our country will be both infor- the free trip into parliament. When you have mative and enjoyable. done a few years apprenticeship, you actu- Honourable senators—Hear, hear! ally end up in the Senate. What did we see after all these modernisation reforms? Come QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 1 July, there were six new members of the Workplace Relations: Compulsory Union Labor Party in the Senate. Four of them are Fees trade union officials. Two of them represent Senator TCHEN (2.06 p.m.)—My ques- the public sector, which is what you would tion is directed to Senator the Hon. Richard expect, and, of the other two, one is simply a Alston, the Minister representing the Minis- party official and the other, representing the ter for Employment and Workplace Rela- real community, is an academic lawyer. tions, the Hon. Tony Abbott. Would the There it is: a party that looks like Australia? minister inform the Senate about how some Senator Carr—You cannot get a job over Australian workers are being coerced in their there unless you are a lawyer! workplaces to pay fees for services they have Senator Sherry—Lawyer! Lawyer! Law- not requested? What is the government doing yer! Lawyer! Lawyer! to ensure that Australian workers continue to have freedom of choice in the workplace? Honourable senators interjecting— Are there any alternative positions in relation The PRESIDENT—Order! There are far to this issue? too many interjections on both sides of the Opposition senators—That is out of or- house. I ask you to come to order. der! Senator Cook—Mr President, I rise on a Senator ALSTON—No, it is not. The point of order, which relates to your ruling matter is off the Notice Paper. You know yesterday on the point of order taken by that. It was disposed of yesterday. I can un- Senator Abetz on Tuesday. It relates to derstand your exquisite sensitivity on this standing order 73. Standing order 73(4) says: issue, because once again it is a classic ex- In answering a question, a senator shall not de- ample of laziness. Rather than have your bate it. union masters get out there and work for a Mr President, you ruled narrowly—as it was living and persuade people to join unions termed in this chamber—on Senator Abetz’s because of their inexorable decline, you want point of order in relation to this section of the to impose a non-performance levy. In other standing orders about questions. I ask you words, what you have in mind is to just rake now to apply the same standard that you ap- hundreds of dollars into union coffers so that plied in your ruling on questions to answers, you will be able to have this cosy relation- under standing order 73(4). Clearly, the ship continue indefinitely. minister is not answering the question. The facts are that the contribution of the Clearly, he is debating it. Normally, the point union movement in recent years to the Labor of order would be on relevance, because Party has been little short of spectacular in what he is now saying is irrelevant to the financial terms but, at the same time, you question he was asked, but it is clear under have less than 20 per cent of the private sec- the standing orders—and from the an- tor now choosing to belong to unions. There nouncement you made yesterday on how the is a fundamental disconnect here between standing orders are to be interpreted—that servicing the needs of workers and servicing this answer is out of order and that you the needs of unionists. What do workers should rule that the minister confine his re- want? Workers want increases in wages and marks to the question, answer the question salaries and conditions. They want a better and not debate it. If he wants to debate it, he standard of living. They want security for should be sat down immediately by you, un- 3584 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 der the standard that you now apply—with would not kill her—says that there are legal respect. difficulties with two parties agreeing to im- The PRESIDENT—Senator Cook, I hear pose something on a third party. The fact is your point of order. I rule that there is no that part of the Labor Party—but it seems to point of order, but I ask the minister to return be the state part—actually believes in per- to the question. formance and getting a reward. The other half does not; they think it is all about just Senator Cook—Mr President, I rise again raking in the dollars—from people who do on a point of order: consistent with your not want to be raked in and do not want to ruling yesterday, you now rule there is no contribute, because they do not think they point of order. I accept your ruling, but are getting value for money—so that the un- would you please take on board what I have ions can then have this wonderful closed said and provide reasons why you think that circle where you end up shovelling people in questions should be narrowly confined but, here when they are past their use-by date. As in answers, ministers should be able to cut Senator Cook clearly demonstrates today, loose, irrespective of what the black letter of even when you are well past it you are al- the standing orders says? lowed to stay on. It really is a meal ticket for The PRESIDENT—I have taken notice life on that side of the parliament. Let there of what you, Senator Faulkner and Senator be no doubt about it: we do not believe in Ray said yesterday and I have already asked coercion. We do not believe in forcing peo- the minister to return to the question. ple. We believe in freedom of association Senator ALSTON—On a separate point and in people’s rights to join organisations. of order, Mr President: could I ask that you We do not believe in this lazy method of also look at whether it is an abuse of parlia- collecting funds which can then be recycled mentary process for a question to debate an back to the Labor Party at election time. Get issue in the way that Senator Cook has. He serious about it. (Time expired) was not quite clear on whether he was taking Agriculture: Drought the debating point or the relevance point but, Senator O’BRIEN (2.15 p.m.)—My in either form, all he did was engage in a question is to Senator Ian Macdonald, the pretty low-level diatribe to distract attention Minister representing the Minister for Agri- from the embarrassment that the Labor Party culture, Fisheries and Forestry. Can the min- obviously feel. ister advise what action the Department of The PRESIDENT—We seem to be in- Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has taken volving ourselves in a debate on points of in expectation of receipt of applications from order. I would ask you to return to the ques- New South Wales and Queensland seeking tion. exceptional circumstances declarations for Senator ALSTON—I will, with great the worsening drought? Will the minister enthusiasm. The fact is that the federal Labor give thousands of farm families in New Party are fundamentally at odds with their South Wales and Queensland a guarantee state colleagues on this issue of compulsory that the government’s bungling of excep- fees. Mr Carr said that you cannot put a tax tional circumstances reform will not delay on other members of the work force, and the the consideration of drought relief applica- state cannot require the collection of union tions from these states? fees from non-unionists. That is round 1. The Senator IAN MACDONALD—I thank Western Australian workplace relations Senator O’Brien for raising what is obvi- minister, John Kobelke, said: ously an issue of great concern to many peo- We think unions need to get out and provide ple on the land—particularly as Australia services to their members and attract members on seems to be entering a period of even greater what they can offer. drought difficulties. In May this year the We think that is right too. We agree entirely Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and For- with him. In Victoria, Monica Gould—who I estry, Mr Truss, met with his state and terri- presume is a non-lawyer, so probably you tory colleagues at the first meeting of the Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3585 new Primary Industries Ministerial Council more sensible approach to exceptional cir- to negotiate EC policy reform. As Senator cumstances; that is essential for all of those O’Brien may know from his Labor col- who are on the land and for all of those in leagues on that committee, the agriculture this place who have the wellbeing of farmers ministers broadly agreed on the elements of at heart. the proposed new framework, including the Senator O’BRIEN—Mr President, I ask extension of the role of the states and territo- a supplementary question. Farmers around ries in the proposed application, assessment Australia are not interested in buck-passing and streamlined decision making process. on this issue. Farmers are interested in the Regrettably, the ministers were not able to answer to this question: will the government reach agreement on a new EC framework in provide immediate emergency income sup- its entirety. The state and territory ministers port to drought-affected farm families in would not agree to implement the package of New South Wales and Queensland on the reforms if it were to be underpinned by a same terms as the emergency support pro- new fifty-fifty funding arrangement for EC vided to farmers in Western Australia and business support. Queensland in the months before the 2001 At Commonwealth level, we consider that federal election? Or is this just another case it is essential that the state governments have of the government treating an issue one way a financial commitment to exceptional cir- before the election and another way straight cumstances. This is critical to avoid the ad- afterwards? versarial situation that has occurred under Senator IAN MACDONALD—I always the current arrangements, whereby states are tell Senator O’Brien and his colleagues that able to prepare at times questionable appli- they should not judge this government by the cations for assistance and place responsibil- standards they adopted when they were in ity on the Commonwealth when they are government. People on this side of the rejected because they do not fit the guide- chamber are in very close contact with rural lines. Mr Truss has been very active in ap- communities. We understand the real diffi- proaching the state and territory treasurers culties that most of them face and suffer— and agricultural ministers, urging them to we should, because we represent nearly all of consider the issues so that the matters may the rural and regional electorates around be resolved urgently. He will be meeting Australia. It shows that rural and regional with state agriculture ministers at the next people have confidence in this government Primary Industries Ministerial Council and have little confidence at all in the Labor meeting in October, with the aim of ad- Party, who rarely show any genuine interest dressing outstanding EC issues and finalising in this. We will be approaching this in accor- negotiations. dance with the guidelines. We will be doing The difficulty, as all of us who have an what we can. But we do call upon the states interest in rural and regional matters and and plead with them to put aside the sort of farming matters are aware, is that the states political point scoring that Senator O’Brien help with the putting forward of the applica- has just involved himself in. We call upon tions but it is the Commonwealth that pays. them to seriously look at the questions and This leads some recalcitrant states to put up join with the Commonwealth in making sure applications that are not appropriate and that we can help people who desperately do which do not fit the guidelines. They know need help in these difficult times. (Time ex- that, but they are prepared to make a political pired) point out of it—unfortunately, playing with Resources: Stanwell Magnesium Project other people’s adversity, playing with people’s futures at the time when they are at Senator MASON (2.22 p.m.)—My ques- their lowest ebb because of drought and tion is to Senator Minchin, the Minister rep- other exceptional circumstances. Mr Presi- resenting the Minister for Industry, Tourism dent—and congratulations to you publicly on and Resources. Will the minister inform the your appointment—we are trying to get a Senate of the benefits to Queensland and Australia of the Australian Magnesium Cor- 3586 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 poration’s Stanwell magnesium project? over the next 15 to 20 years, that that is go- What role has the Howard government ing to increase to 150 kilos, making cars played in getting this project off the ground? much more environmentally friendly and Is the minister aware of any alternative ap- efficient, and Australia is extremely well proaches? placed through the AMC to meet that de- Opposition senators interjecting— mand. The Queensland government has sen- sibly seen the virtues of this project, as has The PRESIDENT—I ask the minister to the Australian government. We supplied the answer—if he could hear the question. CSIRO with some $50 million to help— Senator MINCHIN—Thank you, Mr Senator Bolkus interjecting— President. I did manage to hear Senator Ma- son’s question and a very good question it The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator was too. Today is a very significant day for Bolkus. I have asked you several times now those of us who, like Senator Mason and me, to stop interjecting. I had hoped you would believe in maximising value adding to Aus- observe the chair and the standing orders. tralia’s great wealth of natural resources. Senator MINCHIN—I was just telling Today the ground will be broken for Austra- the Senate how much support the federal lia’s first—and the world’s largest—magne- government has provided to this project to sium plant at Stanwell, near Rockhampton, get the magnesium industry off the ground. effectively marking the birth in Australia of We provided $50 million to our CSIRO to the magnesium industry. Today sees the invest in this technology, and we have as- groundbreaking ceremony for a $1.3 billion sisted the AMC with its capital raising by magnesium plant being built by the Austra- acting as guarantor for $100 million of debt. lian Magnesium Corporation in regional Our vision is to see Australia become a Australia. It is going to create 1,300 jobs world leader in light metals. We want to see during the construction phase and 350 jobs more of these sorts of plants. We want to see once the smelter is operational in regional the magnesium plant at Port Pirie in South Australia. The magma site which will supply Australia commence. They have an offtake this plant has the largest deposit of its type in agreement with Thiessen in Northern the world. Most important—and I think rele- Europe, so we have every expectation that vant to the question from Senator Carr to that program should proceed. Magnesium is Senator Alston—is that it is using Australian one of the great value adding industries for science. The processing technology is genu- this country, but it is only going to succeed if inely Australian, developed by the company we can continue to supply cost-effective in collaboration with the government’s own electricity to these great industries, and we CSIRO. The company secured a 10-year can only do that if we stay out of the Kyoto contract with Ford in the United States to protocol. supply nearly half its product for that 10-year Unlike these people opposite, we are not period. This plant is going to generate some going to sacrifice the national interest, these $500 million in export income every single great new Australian industries or the jobs year, so it is a major development for Aus- that go with them by a knee-jerk reaction to tralia. the Green movement and sidling up to We expect demand for this great new Kyoto, which is contrary to the Australian metal, magnesium, to double over the course national interest, because it will increase the of the next decade. It is going to be driven by price of electricity and it will mean that these the car industry, which is increasingly using resource value adding industries will go to magnesium. Magnesium is 75 per cent our competing countries that are not signing lighter than steel and 35 per cent lighter than up to Kyoto and can outbid us on electricity aluminium, so it is going to be critical to prices. These projects will move to those producing fuel efficient, lighter vehicles countries. We have to stay out of Kyoto for which will be much more friendly to the en- that reason—because we will not have the vironment. Cars currently have about three opportunity to produce these light metals kilos of magnesium in them, and we expect, Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3587 which are environmentally friendly and envi- we could encourage them to approach this ronmentally efficient. properly. Agriculture: Exceptional Circumstances Senator O’Brien—When did he do that? Program for Drought Relief Senator IAN MACDONALD—I am Senator O’BRIEN (2.25 p.m.)—My afraid I am not in Mr Truss’s office actually question is to Senator Ian Macdonald, the checking when he sends his letters out, but Minister representing the Minister for Agri- my advice is that he has written. In fact— culture, Fisheries and Forestry. I note the here it is—on 29 May he wrote to the treas- minister confirmed that all states expressed urers in all states and the Northern Territory opposition to Minister Truss’s proposed concerning the EC package, and he wrote in funding changes to the exceptional circum- similar terms to ministers for agriculture. I stances program for drought relief at the May am advised that, to date, substantial re- meeting of the Primary Industries Ministerial sponses have been received from the Queen- Council. Just what has the Minister for Agri- sland minister for agriculture and the Treas- culture, Fisheries and Forestry done to urer and the Northern Territory minister— achieve reform of the exceptional circum- only the two of them so far. That is as at 15 stances program since that time, other than to August. Neither of them have supported this issue a stream of media statements com- proposal. plaining that no-one is listening to him? Senator O’Brien, perhaps you could en- When does the government propose to re- courage David Crean and the other treasurers solve the funding impasse with the states or to at least respond to Mr Truss’s approach. is it simply depending on the matter resolv- Mr Truss has been working. Senator ing itself at the October meeting? O’Brien, I am sure you, as a sensible person, Senator IAN MACDONALD—Again, I would understand that we need to take this thank Senator O’Brien for raising this im- out of the political arena. We can play poli- portant issue because it does allow me to ask tics with a lot of things but not with people’s him to use his good influences with the state livelihoods, not where drought is concerned. Labor governments to get a better, more sen- I might say the Labor governments are not sible and more rational approach to excep- the only ones that used to play at this. When tional circumstances throughout Australia. I we used to have some Liberal govern- will have to double-check this with Mr ments—regrettably we do not have too many Truss, but as I recall from the ministerial now—they were not much better. They were council meeting—I do not think they are better but not much better. So in these in- secret, I do not think I am giving away any stances, Senator O’Brien, we do not want to confidences; and I think this was the issue play politics. I call upon you and ask you to they were talking about—a lot of the state use your good offices with the state agricul- ministers were agreeable to having a look at tural ministers to get involved and get a sen- it and to contributing something, although sible arrangement going with the Common- they all complained that their treasurers wealth. No doubt we will continue to pay a would not be very happy about it, that they substantial part of the money. We just want had half made their budgets and would not the states to put in a portion of it and to have be very keen about it. a regime that does not allow for various po- Senator Kemp—In spite of all the GST litically oriented ministers to play political revenue. games with people’s futures and livelihoods. Senator IAN MACDONALD—In spite Senator O’BRIEN—Mr President, I rise of all the GST revenue that the states are to ask a supplementary question. Again, I ask now getting. What are they doing with all whether this government will use the ab- that GST money? Mr Truss was going to sence of agreement with state ministers to help out the Labor agriculture ministers by withhold exceptional circumstances pay- writing directly to their treasurers to see if ments to drought affected farm families if this matter is not resolved at the October meeting? Can the minister assure farm fami- 3588 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 lies that the federal government will not use Senator GREIG—I ask a supplementary absence of agreement to withhold excep- question, Mr President, and I ask the Minis- tional circumstances payments? ter for Justice and Customs to also follow Senator IAN MACDONALD—There is this up with the relevant minister. Does the a system in place at the moment, but it is not government accept that giving the citizens of a system that is working well. We could ac- one country immunity from prosecution be- tually fix this tomorrow or this afternoon, fore the ICC for war crimes, genocide and Senator O’Brien, if you could get all the state crimes against humanity is in fact completely treasurers and agricultural ministers— inappropriate and would undermine the effectiveness and credibility of the court? Senator Kemp—All the Labor ones. Senator ELLISON—We have made our Senator IAN MACDONALD—to ring position on the International Criminal Court Mr Truss and say, ‘We agree, something quite clear: we support it. The best thing I needs to be done. Let’s get a better system to can do for Senator Greig is to get back to the help those in immediate drought.’ So we do Minister for Foreign Affairs and see if there not have to wait until October; we can do it is anything further he can add. this afternoon or tomorrow if you can get your people to be sensible about this, to con- Telstra: Regional Communications tribute some money and to really help out. Inquiry Otherwise, the normal procedures will apply. Senator MACKAY (2.33 p.m.)—My International Criminal Court: Article 98 question is to Senator Alston, the Minister Agreements for Communications, Information Technol- ogy and the Arts. Can the minister confirm Senator GREIG (2.31 p.m.)—Mr Presi- that the chair of the minister’s regional tele- dent, I congratulate you on your election. My communications inquiry, Dick Estens, is a question is to Senator Chris Ellison, the paid-up member of John Anderson’s branch Minister for Justice and Customs, represent- of the National Party and long-time mate of ing the Attorney-General, and is in relation the Deputy Prime Minister and that the sec- to article 98 of the Rome statute in the con- ond member of the three-member inquiry is text of the International Criminal Court. Is Ray Braithwaite, former long-time National the minister aware of reports that the US Party member for Dawson? How can Aus- government has approached a number of tralians take seriously the minister’s claim countries to make article 98 agreements that the inquiry will be independent when which would give US nationals immunity two out of the three inquiry members are from prosecution by the International Crimi- members of the National Party? Given that nal Court? Is the minister aware of related this inquiry is stacked with political mates of reports indicating that the US Congress has the government, will the minister confirm mandated the threat to withhold military as- that this is simply a sop to the National Party sistance from and impose sanctions on to sell Telstra against the wishes of the vast countries which do not sign such agree- majority of the Australian public? ments? Has the US government approached the Australian government to see if such an Senator ALSTON—It is unfortunate that agreement could be met, and would the Senator Mackay chooses to denigrate people minister rule out the government ever mak- simply because they happen to have some ing such a deal? affiliation, past or present. Senator ELLISON—I understand that Opposition senators interjecting— the Minister for Foreign Affairs is the appro- Senator ALSTON—I note that the inde- priate minister in relation to this issue. There pendent review the Labor Party had into the has been some mention made of this issue, nature and extent of their union ties, which and I will take it up with the Minister for was conducted by a former leader of the Foreign Affairs. He is not a minister I repre- ACTU, said that Labor MPs should respond sent, but I will take it up and get back to directly to local unionists’ priorities and sup- Senator Greig. port the role of local union activists. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3589

The fact is that these people are not party to the last inquiry, headed by Mr Tim Besley, hacks; they are not simply people who have we are in the process of spending about $160 done nothing else in life except work or million. worm their way up through the ranks and Senator Mackay—Why don’t you just end up in the parliament. Mr Estens is a very table the report now? distinguished cotton grower from Moree and a very successful businessman in the area. Senator ALSTON—How are you going He has been extremely successful in em- with your little exercise for tomorrow? Are ployment programs in relation to Aboriginal you going to roll Mr Tanner or not? Good youth and reconciliation, so he has a very luck—we are barracking for you, let me as- impressive track record of involvement in sure you. I think you have right on your side community affairs. on that issue, but on this one you are fundamentally wrong, because this committee of Senator Mackay—Is he a member of the people who have very impressive credentials National Party? in being involved in regional and rural Aus- Senator ALSTON—Whether or when he tralia are uniquely well placed to make these joined the National Party is a matter of utter sorts of judgments. Just imagine what they irrelevance. When I approached him and would be saying if we had appointed a few when we announced his appointment it was people from the city! They would be saying, not done on the basis that he was a member ‘Totally unrepresentative,’ wouldn’t they, of the National Party. I had no knowledge of Senator Boswell? Instead, we have appointed that fact, if it is a fact. If it is a fact, it was people who understand the real issues. If you not known to me. have a word to them, you might learn a lot in Opposition senators interjecting— the process. Senator ALSTON—You can believe it if Senator MACKAY—Mr President, I ask you like. The fact is that Mr Braithwaite’s a supplementary question. Is the minister credentials are well known. Not only was he seriously asking the Senate to believe that he a distinguished member of parliament and a was unaware that Mr Dick Estens was a member of the opposition frontbench for a member of the National Party and that Mr number of years but also he has been a con- Ray Braithwaite was a member of the Na- sultant to the Productivity Commission and tional Party—a former long-time member for has travelled very widely around Australia. Dawson? How much is the inquiry expected Jane Bennett is a dairy farmer in Tasmania. to cost? Who will be paying for this sop to All of these people have impeccable regional the National Party—Commonwealth taxpay- and rural credentials, which is what it is all ers or Telstra itself? Specifically, what are about. They are actually Australians—they the daily fees to be paid to this National have a commitment to understanding how Party dominated panel and what are the ex- the bush works. I do not remember the Labor pected travel costs for their junketeering Party volunteering any names that might around the country? serve on the committee; you simply are not Senator ALSTON—One man’s consulta- interested in people who have community tion is another man’s junketeering. Imagine credentials. As Mr Wran and Mr Hawke if we said, ‘In the interests of saving money, make it plain, you are only allowed to talk to they won’t go anywhere; they will do a desk union activists. That is your problem; you audit.’ We would be slaughtered, wouldn’t should get out into the wide world. we? Of course I was not suggesting that I did These people will conduct the inquiry im- not know that Mr Braithwaite was a member partially and independently. They will come of the National Party; of course I knew. That to their own conclusions and make judg- is just sloppy thought processes on the part ments. I hope they will take note of the fact of the opposition, but it is eerily reminiscent that we have spent over $1 billion in the last of the way they attacked Mr Besley. That is five years on regional and rural telecommu- what they did from day one with Mr Besley: nications infrastructure and that in response they bagged him; they said he had a conflict of interest. They were not in the slightest bit 3590 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 interested in having a decent independent international criticism of our border man- inquiry into the adequacy of services, be- agement. I reject that totally. Internationally cause they have never said a word about it. there has in fact been some following of our All they have ever done is align themselves border management, and you need go no with North Korea and just say no. It is not further than the governments of New Zea- good enough. We are interested in the ade- land and the United Kingdom, both Labour quacy of services and we think we have governments, following our policy on border made enormous progress. You will see some management. Far from international criti- ACA figures coming out shortly which show cism, there has been more international en- that satisfaction rates and compliance with dorsement of our policy on border manage- the CSG on installation and fault repairs are ment. Indeed, at the people-smuggling con- well over 90 per cent, which was the Besley ference in Indonesia this year, which I at- target. They are the sorts of things we want tended, it was recognised as appropriate that examined. We want them taken seriously and countries should look after their own sover- we will not be assisted by party political eignty by way of border management and in point scoring. (Time expired) relation to people-smuggling. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Senator George Campbell interjecting— The PRESIDENT—Order! I draw the Senator ELLISON—Senator George attention of honourable senators to the pres- Campbell should remember that Prime Min- ence in the President’s gallery of a former ister Blair, a Labour Prime Minister, is fol- Democrat senator for New South Wales, lowing exactly the same path that we have former Senator Karen Sowada. adopted in Australia, as has the Labour QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Prime Minister in New Zealand. We have taken appropriate steps regarding our per- Immigration: Border Protection sonnel at Manus Island in relation to local Senator BROWN (2.40 p.m.)—I add a authorities and the authority they exercise. word of welcome to former Senator Sowada. Not only at Manus Island but also at other My question is to the Minister representing institutions we exercise appropriate measures the Minister for Immigration and Multicul- in maintaining order without resort to unnec- tural and Indigenous Affairs. In view of the essary force or the sorts of things that Sena- extraordinary statement today by the minister tor Brown alluded to. In fact, we pay careful that: attention to the way we conduct the control ... claims that Australia’s border management of those institutions. If Senator Brown has strategies have come under international criticism any example of where we have allegedly are simply not true— overstepped the mark he should raise it, but I is it true that riot gear, including truncheons am not aware of any group being on stand-by and shields, has been sent to Manus Island at Port Moresby and I am not aware of any by the Australian government? Is it true that untoward action by the officers at Manus the 15 to 20 Australian Protective Service Island. In relation to their power as consta- officers who are there are, in the main, there bles, I understand that all appropriate meas- without official constable recognition or ures have been taken for the lawful exercise authority in relation to guarding? Is it true of any authority. that the notorious mobile squads who, Senator BROWN—Mr President, I ask a amongst other things, are remembered for supplementary question. That was a very shooting four unarmed students at Port Mo- smudged answer, and I ask the Minister rep- resby last year, are on hand, should a riot resenting the Minister for Immigration and occur, to meet any emergency and are Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs to ask brought into play whenever a decision or a the minister, and come back with an answer determination about the future of people on to the Senate, whether riot gear, including Manus Island is about to be announced? truncheons and shields, has been sent to Senator ELLISON—Senator Brown has Papua New Guinea for use on Manus Island. raised a number of issues. The first is that of Has tear gas been involved in preparations? Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3591

Are officers of the Australian Protective that most money distributed to rural Austra- Service always in an official capacity on lia will go to areas that happen to be Liberal Manus Island as far as guard duties are con- Party and National Party seats. cerned? Are the mobile squads from Papua Senator Bolkus—Mr President, I rise on New Guinea involved and on hand at Manus a point of order. The question referred to Island should there be a riot? The question is numbers per seat: $4.5 million in Liberal very serious, the potential outcome is very seats and $1.64 million in Labor seats. I did serious and I expect a direct answer from the not refer to a cumulative amount. I referred government. to specific averages. He should focus on an- Senator ELLISON—I will take up with swering that question rather than on trying to the minister the issues raised by Senator slip and slide out of it by misrepresenting it. Brown. It is the responsibility of the gov- The PRESIDENT—There is no point of ernment to ensure that order is maintained at order. I think the minister has only just these centres. We have seen recently at started answering his question, and I will Woomera in particular, and Curtin is another listen carefully. centre that comes to mind, outrageous conduct which has resulted in not only injury to Senator HILL—As I understand it, the people but also damage to property. It is ap- coalition holds some 80 per cent of non- propriate that we have provisions for the metropolitan seats. I should remind Senator maintenance of order. I will take up Senator Bolkus that the Natural Heritage Trust was Brown’s issues with the minister to see set up to repair damage that had been done whether there is anything we can add. principally to rural and regional Australia, and not surprisingly that is where the money Environment: Natural Heritage Trust will be invested. It is to repair the damage Senator BOLKUS (2.45 p.m.)—My and put in place processes to give us greater question is to Senator Hill, representing the confidence that the land will be utilised in Minister for the Environment and Heritage. the future in a sustainable way. So the money Is the minister aware that National Party has been allocated exactly where it was in- seats have received almost six times as much tended, which was to bring the greatest bene- funding as Labor seats over the life of the fit in terms of both economic value through government’s Natural Heritage Trust? Is he rural production in a sustainable way and also aware that Liberal seats received an av- environmental and ecological recovery. I erage of $4.52 million, whilst Labor seats cannot help it if the Labor Party is so unsuc- received an average of just $1.64 million? cessful in rural and regional Australia. But I Government senators interjecting— can say to Senator Bolkus that the NHT has been remarkably successful, firstly, in mobi- Senator BOLKUS—I understand why lising public support for its cause, which is, the other side is concerned about good gov- as I said, sustainable agriculture and ecologi- ernment, Mr President, but they should keep cal recovery and, secondly, in getting that quiet for a moment. Given the importance of process under way and starting to deliver real environmental issues to Australia’s social outcomes which will be a benefit to not only and economic future, when will this govern- this generation but also future generations. ment stop using the Natural Heritage Trust to pork-barrel in its own seats? It is always possible, if you want to play political games, to find one seat and another Senator HILL—I am not sure where seat and that in the first or the second more Senator Bolkus has been for the last few money went to that seat than the other. But years. That question was actually asked five when you start to analyse it, you find, for years ago—but it takes a while for some to example, that Landcare happened to be better catch up. The answer given five years ago organised in the first seat—they put in better was that the Labor Party holds very few seats quality applications—and that the govern- in regional Australia, the Liberal Party holds ment would have greater confidence that the a considerable number, and the National money would deliver the outcomes that were Party holds slightly less. It logically follows sought under the guidance of the trust. If you 3592 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 are genuinely interested, you can always find agricultural outcomes and better ecological an explanation that does not have a political outcomes. (Time expired) connotation to it. But, of course, that does Insurance: Public Liability not suit the interests of the Labor Party. The bottom line is that the Natural Heritage Trust Senator LIGHTFOOT (2.52 p.m.)—My was set up for good reason. It was funded in question is addressed to the Minister for part from the part sale of Telstra, and there- Revenue and Assistant Treasurer, Senator the fore capital from the sale of a telecommuni- Hon. Helen Coonan. Will the minister advise cation company was being reinvested in the the Senate how actions by the federal gov- natural capital of our country. You will find ernment are helping address the rising cost of that it has been remarkably successful in the public liability insurance for businesses, outcomes that it has been able to deliver. If sporting and community groups? Is the min- Senator Bolkus wants to concentrate on the ister aware of any alternative policies? politics, he might also be interested to know Senator COONAN—I thank Senator that it is remarkably popular in rural and re- Lightfoot for his question and for his ongo- gional Australia. If the Labor Party focused a ing interest in trying to derive solutions to little more on the benefits that are flowing this very difficult community problem. As from the trust, they might learn how they can most senators would be aware, the afforda- contribute to a healthier rural and regional bility and availability of public liability in- Australia in both productive and ecological surance has presented serious problems, not terms. only for small business and big business but Senator BOLKUS—Mr President, I ask a for community organisations, sporting supplementary question. Given that in 2000- groups and local councils. It is important that 01—not five years ago, but just a few all of the activities that Australians enjoy can months ago—the Auditor-General found that continue to go on. Things such as watching the Natural Heritage Trust was largely unac- your kids play Little Athletics or going to a countable and that it released inaccurate data barbecue or a school fete have been severely about the effectiveness of its funded projects, threatened by this current problem. The what steps will the government be taking to Howard government has in fact acknowl- depoliticise the trust? Specifically, what will edged these concerns and moved very the minister do about removing the three quickly to work with the community, indus- board members who are failed Liberal and try and state and territory governments to National Party apparatchiks? assist in coordinating an appropriate response. Senator HILL—Senator Faulkner spent months on this project. We can all remember I am pleased to say that after a great deal that. Remember when he defamed the Bail- of work and cooperation from most state and lieu family, for example. He got it totally territory governments I have some very sig- wrong. He said Baillieu was rorting the sys- nificant good news to report to the chamber. tem when Baillieu was dead. This is just an- I am advised that one of the nation’s largest other manifestation of the same thing. The insurers, Suncorp GIO, has announced today proof is in what was found on the last occa- that it is moving immediately to expand its sion when the Labor Party suggested exactly public liability business and to make afford- what Senator Bolkus is now saying. The able insurance coverage available to com- Australian National Audit Office audit of the munity fundraising activities and several trust in 1998 found: classes of businesses. In a second phase, which is expected to begin in September, it • the Natural Heritage Trust decision-making will expand the availability of cover in New process is fundamentally sound ... and there was South Wales for a range of community no evidence of systemic bias in the allocation of funds to projects. groups, including services for people with disabilities, unlicensed clubs, performing arts I am confident that exactly the same position venues and residential care services. exists today and that the money is going to the causes for which it was intended: better Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3593

Suncorp GIO has announced that it is Australian Prudential Regulation taking these steps specifically because the Authority reforms being put in place will reduce the Senator HOGG (2.56 p.m.)—My ques- costs in the system and put some predictabil- tion is to Senator Coonan, the Minister for ity into the payout of claims, allowing them Revenue and Assistant Treasurer. Does the to provide policies at a reasonable price. minister recall comments by her predecessor Once the Commonwealth and the states fi- and former factional ally Mr Joe Hockey on nalise laws allowing people undertaking 2 October 2001 alleging various misconduct risky recreational activities to waive their by trade union representative trustees of in- right to sue in appropriate circumstances, the dustry superannuation funds? Hasn’t the As- company expects to be providing more af- sistant Treasurer, in answers to questions on fordable and readily available public liability notice tabled on Monday, confirmed that Mr insurance to groups that have had so many Hockey received no advice providing evi- problems—riding schools, skating rinks, golf dence of misconduct by union trustees be- clubs, bowling clubs and fitness centres. cause there is no evidence of misconduct? The changes that the federal government Will the Assistant Treasurer therefore de- has been working to implement are getting mand that Mr Hockey retract his remarks? concrete results. Without overstating the po- Senator COONAN—Thank you, Senator sition, the actions announced by Suncorp Hogg, for the question. I will, in fact, ask Mr GIO today demonstrate that the cooperative Hockey what he said on an occasion last and productive approach of the federal gov- year. I am not aware of what his comments ernment and most of the state and territory were. Without checking with Mr Hockey I governments is starting to pay very real divi- would not be prepared to accept that that is dends for the community. To help ensure a an accurate statement of what he has said. I consistent and coordinated approach across will pursue the question with Mr Hockey and the nation, there have been two ministerial get back to Senator Hogg. meetings that I have coordinated with my state and territory counterparts, and the third Senator HOGG—I ask a supplementary is now scheduled for September. I am happy question, Mr President. Does the Assistant to inform the Senate that concrete steps to Treasurer recall telling the Senate on 14 May address the complex issues involved are now that: being implemented. Labor’s union masters are responsible for $200 billion in investment assets. This, of course, is a As agreed at these ministerial meetings, wonderful fund for the union movement’s politi- most states have moved on tort law reform, cal wing here in the Senate. introducing changes that will stabilise the Is the Assistant Treasurer aware that not one cost of claims, which is partly driving the big industry superannuation fund has ever do- increases in premiums, and will introduce nated to the Australian Labor Party? Will more certainty into the system. This govern- she, too, retract her inaccurate and ignorant ment has led the way in driving these meet- remarks? ings, coordinating action to address the problem. The federal government has moved Senator Coonan—Mr President, I raise a to introduce these reforms. The New South point of order. The supplementary question Wales government has moved to introduce raised by Senator Hogg had absolutely these reforms. New South Wales is seeing nothing to do with his question, and I do not the benefits of its own determination to re- propose to deal with it unless you rule that I form the law. I say to all of those on the should. other side of the chamber: if you have any Health: Mental Illness influence with your state counterparts, please Senator ALLISON (2.59 p.m.)—My urge them to go ahead and reform the law, question is to the Minister for Health and and do it quickly. Ageing. Has the minister read the report last week by Sane Australia that found: mental health services are in disarray in this country 3594 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 and are now operating in crisis mode; proven training sessions for general practitioners to effective treatments for mental illness are not deliver this service. The scheme will im- routinely available on Medicare; untreated prove the community’s access to primary mental illness is a leading contributor to mental health care, encourage evidence Australia’s suicide rate; and the cost of based practice and allow allied health profes- schizophrenia alone will spiral to $10 billion sionals and psychiatrists to provide support a year this decade unless services are im- for general practitioners. proved? Minister, the report says there is an Since 1993, expenditure on mental health urgent need for action on the National Men- services has increased by 44 per cent in real tal Health Strategy. Will your government terms, with the increase in Commonwealth take that action? spending at 88 per cent and state and terri- Senator PATTERSON—The Sane report tory government spending at 30 per cent. highlights Australia’s spending on mental However, mental health has only main- health services with comparable countries tained—not increased—its position relative such as Canada, the United Kingdom and to total government spending on health. The New Zealand. That direct comparison is very National Mental Health Strategy has lead to difficult to make because there are differ- significant changes—for example, a much ences in the way that countries assess what greater cooperation between the various or- comes under mental health services. For ex- ganisations that represent people who suffer ample, countries may or may not exclude from mental illness, and that has been a real services for dementia, intellectual disability step forward. They themselves have ac- and retardation, drugs and alcohol, housing knowledged that it was important for them to and social services, and capital expenditure. meet together and have assistance from the The actual delivery of specialist mental Commonwealth to do that—to bring their health services in the acute and community concerns to not only the Commonwealth health sectors remains a state and territory government but state governments. There responsibility, as Senator Allison would have been significant changes. I have to give know, through you, Mr President. credit where credit is due—it has not all States and territories provide acute mental happened since we came into government. health services through both specialist men- The first national strategy was under state tal health services and the general health Liberal governments and the then Labor system. The emphasis on public mental Commonwealth government, and we have health services may be increased at their dis- continued that and added to it. cretion. The Commonwealth continues to There will always be criticism—there will work with the states and territories to im- always be that in any area. When you have prove the care of people with a mental illness got this portfolio there will never be enough under the National Mental Health Strategy. money for all the demands made on it. But We have had two mental health strategies we have made significant inroads and some and we are working towards a third mental innovative changes—for example, with health strategy. I ask Senator Allison to re- BluePages, a web site I launched that was flect carefully on the whole of that Sane re- initiated at ANU for young people and peo- port because it has acknowledged where ple with depression to access services, and change has occurred. A new scheme for gen- beyondblue, an organisation which is looking eral practitioners, Better Outcomes in Mental at innovative ways to address issues of men- Health Care, which is an area where the tal illness. Commonwealth has responsibility and can Senator ALLISON—Mr President, I ask actually do something, was introduced in a supplementary question. I ask the Minister July 2002. It provides $120 million of Com- to again advise the Senate whether or not she monwealth funds over four years to increase rejects those findings of that important re- the availability of general practitioners to port. Minister, why is it that your govern- care for people with mental health needs in ment has not produced its annual report on the community. This is a first. There are mental health since 1998? How can we take Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3595 the minister’s statements about improve- that he had no idea whether or not Mr Estens ments in services seriously when such a re- was a member of the National Party. The port has not been delivered in some years? reality is that Mr Estens’s own admission is Senator PATTERSON—I suggest that that he was John Anderson’s friend for over Senator Allison looks at my answer to her 10 years. Everybody knew he was a member original question. Her question did highlight of the National Party—he is in Mr Ander- some issues that need to be addressed, but I son’s branch of the National Party! So I do have outlined some of the significant not know where on earth Senator Alston has achievements in this area through the two been, but it was common knowledge out national mental health strategies. As I said to there. Senator Allison, we are working towards a Honourable senators interjecting— third. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Could Senator Mackay—Mr President, I raise a those members not participating in the de- point of order. In respect of the supplemen- bate move out of the chamber please. tary question from Senator Hogg to Senator Senator Heffernan interjecting— Coonan, as I understood it, Senator Coonan was actually asking you to rule as to whether The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator the supplementary question was in order in Heffernan, you might take your conversation relation to the substantive question. You did outside. not rule but went straight to Senator Allison, Senator MACKAY—At least Minister so Senator Hogg is still waiting for a re- Alston had the courage, I suppose, to fess up sponse and an appropriate apology from that he knew who the other National Party Senator Coonan on this matter. member on this committee is and, of course, The PRESIDENT—Senator Mackay, that is Mr Ray Braithwaite. He really had to Senator Coonan indicated that she was not say that because Mr Ray Braithwaite was in going to answer the question, so I moved to fact a member of the parliamentary National the next person. Party and a former National Party member for Dawson. Senator Hill—Mr President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Senator Boswell—And a very good one, Paper. too. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: Senator MACKAY—Probably very TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS good, but should he be on a so-called independent inquiry into telecommunications Telstra: Regional Communications services in the regions? Why should it be a Inquiry prerequisite that two out of the three mem- Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (3.06 bers of a critical inquiry in relation to re- p.m.)—I move: gional Australia be members of the National That the Senate take note of the answer given Party? How on earth the minister has got the by the Minister for Communications, Information hide to put out a press release that describes Technology and the Arts (Senator Alston) in re- this inquiry as ‘independent’ is, as I said be- sponse to a question without notice asked by fore, unbelievable and incredible, and totally Senator Mackay today relating to the issue of the stretches credulity. so-called ‘Besley inquiry mark II’ looking at regional services and Telstra, and of various an- I want to make it very clear that the Labor swers given by ministers in response to questions Party is not saying that there should not be without notice asked by opposition senators today an independent inquiry into Telstra and what relating to the failure of the National Party in a is going on. We have a major difficulty with series of areas. this inquiry. First of all it is stacked. It is ab- The response of the Minister for Communi- solutely stacked. Two out of the three mem- cations, Information Technology and the Arts bers are members of the National Party. How was somewhat incredible, and certainly he on earth can you hope to have anything like probably stretched credulity in his claims an independent outcome with regard to that? Secondly, we are not saying that this com- 3596 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 mittee should not travel extensively around I am sure the National Party is very happy regional Australia. In fact, we would like to with this, but the reality is that the outcome see this committee also have a look at some is predetermined. This committee will advise of the metropolitan areas as well. We would that Telstra is going to be sold. Otherwise, encourage this committee to travel widely. why would the time frame be 8 November? We just hoped that the members of the com- Let us get real here. Why didn’t you push for mittee would be average members of the a decent independent inquiry? Why didn’t Australian community and not, as seems to you have some guts in relation to trying to be the prerequisite, paid-up members of the deal with the government? They have al- National Party. ready ruled out the bucket of money. There is In relation to the view of the opposition, not going to be a bucket of money. Richard we would encourage the Estens inquiry to go Alston confirmed that the other day. I think to Cunningham and have a talk to the people the National Party has yet again been side- of Cunningham about what they think in re- lined and whitewashed. lation to Telstra and what they think in terms Senator EGGLESTON (Western Aus- of the standards of behaviour. We will just tralia) (3.11 p.m.)—Senator Mackay, the key see how serious this inquiry is. If it were se- thing about all three of these people is that rious it would go to Cunningham and it they are regional people. They come from would talk to the people there in relation to regional Australia, they understand regional Telstra so that they can make their own Australia, and that is why all three of them minds up when that by-election comes. Are have been appointed to this committee. They they going to vote for any party in relation to are from regional Australia. They are people the sale of Telstra, none of which are entirely involved in business. They live in regional signed up to not selling it, or are they going Australia and they understand the needs of to vote for the only party in this chamber that regional Australia. That is what we are trying has made its position absolutely clear in re- to assess—the telecommunications needs of lation to the sale of Telstra, and that is the regional Australia. Labor Party? We are the only party in this Senator Mackay—Of the National Party! chamber that has not flinched on the issue of the privatisation of Telstra. Every other party Senator EGGLESTON—No, of regional sitting in this room has made it very clear Australia. All three of them come from re- that they are prepared to deal, they are pre- gional Australia. I will keep on repeating that pared to sell out or they are prepared to get a for five minutes if necessary because that is bucket of money. One of the Independents the key criterion for their appointment. Let sitting in this chamber already has form in us have a look at their CVs. Dick Estens is a relation to this—a senator from my own state cotton farmer from Moree with a long his- of Tasmania, Senator Harradine. Who knows tory of involvement in community issues at how Senator Harradine is going to vote? We local and national levels. While running his cotton business he has also been involved did not know until the last minute last time. with the Moree Plains and Barwon Health The reality is that this is a total political Services, chaired the Gwydir Valley Cotton exercise. The reality is that in order to be a Growers Association and been involved in member of a so-called independent inquiry local Indigenous employment issues. He is a you first have to produce your National Party person very much involved in regional Aus- membership ticket and, if you want to be tralia. chair, you have to be a really good friend of John Anderson. The minister claims that he Jane Bennett is the production manager did not know these two facts—in John An- and a director of Ashgrove Farm Cheese in derson’s branch? It is blatant. Couldn’t you Tasmania and was the ABC Radio Australian have even picked somebody who was not in Rural Woman of the Year in 1997. In addi- John Anderson’s branch—a semblance of tion to her commercial experience, she has independence? extensive public and community experience including as a member of the National Food Industry Council, the federal government’s Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3597

Trade Policy Advisory Council, the Tasma- and also identify any areas which still need nian Together Progress Board and as Deputy to be improved. The government will then be Chair of the Food Industry Council of Tas- able to make a well reasoned decision about mania. Tasmania, when it comes down to whether or not the improvements have met dairy farming, is very much regional Austra- John Howard’s commitment to not proceed lia. So she is a good appointment too. Ray with the further sale of Telstra until regional Braithwaite, who indeed was a member of telecommunications levels have been satis- the National Party in this parliament, comes factorily met. (Time expired) from regional Australia—the area around Senator ROBERT RAY (Victoria) (3.16 Mackay in mid-North Queensland. p.m.)—The government, again, are starting Senator Robert Ray—Where do you their softening up campaign on Telstra. live? Metropolitan Perth? When they first brought the bill into this Senator EGGLESTON—Senator Ray, chamber, they said, ‘We only want to sell the point is that Mr Braithwaite is somebody one-third.’ Then, within a week, they said, who comes from regional Australia. As far ‘Having sold one-third, it is untenable not to as my credentials go, I was born in the south- sell the other two-thirds because it is unfair west, I grew up there and I lived for 25 years to the people who have bought one-third of in the north-west, so I have pretty good re- the Telstra shares.’ That is the way the logic gional credentials. Do not think you can went. make any progress in suggesting that I have The government have always had a little other than excellent credentials for regional difficulty with their country cousins on this Australia. particular thing. The rednecks in the National Let us have a look at what the federal Party have not always quite agreed with their government has done in terms of assessing city cousins on this. This has led to the the needs of telecommunications in Austra- making of certain promises to them. You do lia. We set up the Besley inquiry in response not want to actually go into an election cam- to concerns that regional telecommunications paign saying, ‘We’re going to privatise Tel- were not up to scratch, that they were not stra.’ That is too tough. What you do is you equal to those provided in metropolitan ar- go into an election campaign saying, ‘We eas. Indeed, that has proved to be the case. It will hold an inquiry and, if the objective has been shown that there were deficiencies conditions are okay, we might then sell Tel- in the level of services in regional Australia. stra.’ So, going into the last election, the coalition said, ‘We’ll hold an inquiry.’ They What have the government done since held an inquiry, but it did not come up then? They have worked very hard and have trumps. So they are going to keep holding spent a lot of money to improve telecommu- inquiries, and sooner or later they are going nication services in regional Australia. It to get a jury that says, ‘You can sell Tel- follows, therefore, in a logical way, that it is stra,’—that is exactly what it is going to quite reasonable to set up another inquiry to say—and they will sell Telstra. assess the level of progress and the improvements that have been made in tele- We went into the last election, the election communications services to the regional before that and the one before that saying, parts of this country. It follows further that ‘We’re not going to sell Telstra.’ We gave the logical and obvious people to put on that our word that we would not sell Telstra, and board of inquiry are people from regional we have been consistent on that. The absent Australia, and that is what we have done. We ones from here, who are currently adding have put people on this board who have ab- massively to Telstra’s profits by ringing each solutely impeccable credentials as represen- other constantly, held a press conference and tatives of regional Australia. One could not signed a pledge that they would not sell Tel- ask for a better group of people. I am sure stra. They did it before the last election. The that they will very ably make an assessment government was not the target; we were the of the improvements that have been made in target. They can be trusted, they said; be- telecommunications in regional Australia cause we had not actually gone before the 3598 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 cameras and signed off, we could not be they have given the dirty work to the Na- trusted. We will put them to the test later this tional Party. They are quite clever. They are year when this report comes in, and we will not going to give it to their own. They will see where they go. be able to say, ‘Two of your committee The argument put up by Senator Eg- members have come back and said that we gleston is quite farcical. He said, ‘On the should sell Telstra.’ So there is the moral committee you have to get people from rural sanction against you. areas, so what is wrong with two of them It is time the National Party representa- being members of the National Party?’ This tives in this chamber looked after the inter- is supposed to be a genuine exercise. The fix ests of not only their own members but also is not supposed to go in at the start; it is sup- their constituents. Selling out on Telstra posed to go in at the finish. That is how the without going to an election and getting a game is played. Being generous, 0.1 per cent mandate on it—and you have never got a full of the Australian adult population are mem- mandate on the sale of Telstra—is wrong. To bers of the National Party, yet on this inquiry put up this sort of weak excuse: ‘We’ll have two of the three members are members of the an inquiry. We’ll stack the inquiry and, by National Party. What a coincidence! gosh, we’ll accept its recommendations. If This minister has form. Remember when that doesn’t work, we’ll set up another in- Mr David Barnett was appointed to the Na- quiry a few months later,’ is just not good tional Museum and he was asked how his enough. It is a really pathetic effort by the name came forward. His answer was, ‘I think National Party of Australia. it was by osmosis.’ We at least know on this Senator BOSWELL (Queensland— occasion how the cotton-picker got onto the Leader of the National Party of Australia in committee—he is a close mate of Mr John the Senate and Parliamentary Secretary to Anderson. Give Mr Anderson credit for the Minister for Transport and Regional thinking about a mate; none of us knock that. Services) (3.21 p.m.)—I can recall hearing But we have to rely on that mate to suddenly exactly the same words in relation to the chair this particular committee with objec- Besley inquiry: ‘Besley was a rort. Besley tivity. He may do so; that is possible. But we was stacked. Besley would bend over, kneel are at least a bit cynical that two out of three and bow at the altar of the coalition.’ But members of this committee are members of what happened? Besley gave a very good the National Party. The third one is most un- and strong report which said that Telstra fa- likely to be a National Party member be- cilities were not up to scratch and which cause, as far as I know—and I might be cor- would not give a tick for the sale. We heard rected by colleagues in the chamber—there that. Now we are going to be challenged is not a National Party in Tasmania anymore. again because two people on an inquiry hap- Poor old Julian went down there, tried to pen to be from the National Party. If you rule form a branch and about four people, half of out people from rural Australia who are from whom work for his family, turned up. So we the National Party, you would effectively do not have a National Party in Tasmania. rule out about 50 per cent of the farmers and But do not worry about it; the Liberal Party other people connected with primary indus- is heading in the same direction, thanks to try, because the National Party is part of pri- comrade Senator Eric Abetz. mary industry and most farmers are. So, if If we had ever set up an inquiry into Tel- the opposition are going to rule out people stra and put on it two Labor Party members because they are in a political party, I would out of three, the coalition party, if they were suggest that if they ever do get into govern- in opposition, would have gone absolutely ment again they use their own mantra. berserk. They would have talked about the This is no more than a beat-up on the Na- usual mantras of trade union mates. They tional Party. The Labor Party went to two would have whined and whinged, absolutely. elections—I can remember when we first They would have gone on and on. But, of came to government—and there were ban- course, the Liberal Party have clean hands; ners all around every polling booth, yards Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3599 and yards of plastic banners encircling Besley got the nod first. Besley was asked to schools, saying, ‘We will not sell Telstra.’ do it even though he brought down a re- What did the electorate say? ‘We don’t give sponse that telecommunications services a damn. We just don’t want the Labor Party.’ were not up to scratch. We did not say, ‘We Bang, they were out. Never ones to learn don’t like you, we don’t like the answer you from their mistakes, they did it again. What gave us; you’re out.’ We approached him happened at the last election? Bang, they again, but he said he did not want to do it. A were out again. You never, ever learn from person that I remotely know, Dick Estens, your mistakes, and that is why you will be was suggested by John Anderson, not as a over there in opposition for some time. Mr National Party person but as a person who Braithwaite gave a report that telecommuni- had great standing in Moree. He is a very cations were not up to scratch. The National successful cotton grower. He is a person who Party has been in the forefront of the coali- got the community together on Aboriginal tion in getting $1 billion spent on rural tele- affairs and said, ‘Let us try to get these peo- communications. Ninety-seven per cent of ple decent, meaningful jobs,’ and he put for- Queenslanders have access to a mobile ward a program that was successful. (Time phone. The ones who have not got access to expired) a mobile phone can take a mobile that— Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (3.26 Senator O’Brien—A satellite phone. p.m.)—The sham review of Telstra services Senator BOSWELL—Yes, they can use is another example of how willing the Na- a satellite phone for access. tional Party of Australia is to sell out its own constituency, and I want to develop that Senator O’Brien—Yeah, for about theme further. The first thing I want to talk $2,000! about is some comments by Senator Ian Senator BOSWELL—That is subsidised. Macdonald about exceptional circumstances Everyone has Internet connection. applications where he said that some excep- Senator O’Brien—What does it cost? tional circumstances were questionable. I Senator BOSWELL—It costs 83c a min- want him to come back to the chamber and ute, and that is not much more than an ordi- tell the parliament just which exceptional nary telephone call. Of course, everyone has circumstances lodged by state governments Internet access. What about untimed local on behalf of drought affected communities calls? I have been in the National Party since are questionable. I would like him to do that 1974, and every time I went to a preselection today. meeting or a National Party meeting I said, On the issue of the National Party, as I ‘You’ve got to stop having timed local calls.’ said, it is selling out its own constituency on Everyone, whether you rang your next door Telstra. There is only one party in this cham- neighbour or even another house on the same ber that is standing up for country people and property, was charged the STD rate for their their rights, particularly their right to have calls. All that has been removed—a billion world-class telecommunications, and that is dollars has gone into rural telecommunica- the Australian Labor Party. Increasingly, tions. So do not say that the National Party there is only one party in this parliament that has walked away from telecommunications actually asks country Australians what they in rural and regional Australia, because it is think and then bothers to listen to the answer. one of the great success stories of the Na- The once great National Party, the defender tional Party and the coalition in honouring a of country Australia, is no more. There is no commitment to the bush. There is no better better example of this decline than the min- way to remove the tyranny of distance than ister who holds the Agriculture, Fisheries by having a great telecommunications serv- and Forestry portfolio, Mr Warren Truss. ice. Rather than lie back in the traces and This is a portfolio that the National Party say, ‘Everything that has to be done has been used to take seriously. In fact, it is a position done,’ we are going to have another com- that the leader of the party used to claim as mittee with Mr Estens on it. Mind you, his own. When not occupied by the leader, 3600 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 the position was given to ministers of sub- Party members who are unwilling or unable stance, but not anymore. Admittedly, the to stand up for their constituencies. parliamentary National Party is not as big as Perhaps the most spectacular example of it once was, but that is hardly an excuse. Minister Truss’s incompetence is his mis- We now have a minister who is not up to handling of the US beef quota crisis. A min- the job in that portfolio, who has failed to ister faced with the circumstances that Min- give leadership to his department, who has ister Truss was faced with a few months ago failed to stand up and give rural industries a ought to have consulted widely and acted voice in cabinet, who has completely decisively. He failed to do both. A committee mucked up the administration of Australia’s of this Senate is now doing the work that the US beef quota, who has ignored the needs of minister should have done. It is no coinci- the sugar industry, who has failed to negoti- dence, I might say, that the Victorian Farm- ate with the states on reform of exceptional ers Federation Pastoral Group passed a mo- circumstance relief, despite the growing tion of no confidence in Minister Truss last drought crisis in rural Australia, and who has month. On the question of sugar, yesterday failed to deliver a plan for Australian fisher- during questions without notice in the other ies. place the Prime Minister gave an answer that On the question of leadership, I have al- is instructive in this debate. When answering ready informed the Senate this week of the a question about the sugar industry, the crisis of confidence in the Department of Prime Minister made reference to the mem- Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. On bers of the government who are most con- Tuesday night, a senior departmental officer cerned about this issue. There was a name told a Senate inquiry that AFFA ‘does not missing from the list—that name is Minister have a view of quota arrangements that is of Truss, the very minister responsible for this any relevance’. Either the minister has lost industry. It is no wonder that we have had confidence in his department or the depart- two months of silence since the Hildebrand ment has lost confidence in its minister. Ei- recommendations were handed down. I have ther way, the minister must take responsibil- touched on exceptional circumstances today. ity when the Commonwealth department All senators will be aware of this issue. with responsibility for primary industries say (Time expired) that its views on quota administration are of Senator Boswell—Mr Deputy President, I no relevance. wish to respond to Senator O’Brien. A further example of the minister’s fail- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—You can- ings is his inability to advance the interests not, because you have participated in the of rural Australia and, by extension, the in- debate. terests of rural Australia inside the cabinet Senator Boswell—It is on another issue. room. If Minister Truss was doing his job, the federal Treasurer would not tell the fi- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—You can- nancial press that drought had no relevance not—you have participated in the debate, to the Australian economy. You did not hear Senator Boswell. I draw that to your atten- comments like that from the Hawke and tion. Keating governments, because primary in- Question agreed to. dustry ministers in those governments exer- COMMITTEES cised their voices in cabinet and made sure Legal and Constitutional References that all ministers, from the Prime Minister Committee down, knew what was happening in regional Australia and understood the nexus between Report: Government Response regional Australia and overall economic Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— wellbeing. Under this government the gulf Minister for Justice and Customs) (3.32 between income and services in the country p.m.)—I present the government’s response and those in the city has grown wider. It is in to the report of the Legal and Constitutional no small way the responsibility of National References Committee on its inquiry on the Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3601

Human Rights (Mandatory Sentencing of understand English will not continue to be disad- Juvenile Offenders) Bill 1999, and I seek vantaged by the legal system. leave to incorporate the document in Han- Government response sard. The Government accepts the recommendation Leave granted. (see discussion below). The document read as follows— Government Senators also made a number of suggestions which are also discussed below. Government Response to the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee Report Discussion of the Inquiry into the Human Rights (Manda- As the report explains, the main issue with which tory Sentencing of Juvenile Offenders) Bill the Committee was concerned was the application 1999 of mandatory sentencing laws to juveniles in the The Government welcomes the report by the Sen- Northern Territory and Western Australia. The ate Legal and Constitutional References Com- object of the Bill was to overturn those laws. mittee of its inquiry into the Human Rights The Northern Territory (Mandatory Sentencing of Juvenile Offenders) The report has been substantially overtaken by Bill 1999. the repeal on 22 October 2001 by the Legislative The Senate referred to the Committee the Bill and Assembly of the Northern Territory of mandatory the following related matters: sentencing laws in relation to juvenile offenders (a) the legal, social and other aspects of manda- and in relation to property offences. tory sentencing; The Government welcomes this development. (b) Australia’s international human rights obli- Western Australia gations in regard to mandatory sentencing The Criminal Code (WA) provides for mandatory laws in Australia; detention for third home burglary offences. How- (c) the implications of mandatory sentencing for ever, the practice in relation to juvenile offenders particular groups, including Australia’s in- is that the courts have a choice between impris- digenous people and people with disabilities; onment or detention on the one hand and a super- and visory order of some kind on the other. (d) the constitutional power of the Common- A review of the mandatory sentencing provisions wealth Parliament to legislate with respect to of the Code was tabled in the Western Australian existing laws affecting mandatory sentenc- Parliament on 15 November 2001. ing. The review did not recommend any changes to Committee recommendation those provisions. It confirmed the existence of a The Committee recommended that the Bill be judicial discretion to impose non-custodial sen- passed by the Parliament. tences instead of detention. It also showed that only a small number of juvenile offenders (143) Government response have been convicted under the mandatory sen- The Government does not accept the recommen- tencing laws since they were introduced in 1996, dation and notes that, in relation to the Northern of whom 17 per cent were not sentenced to de- Territory, the laws at which the recommendation tention. was directed have been repealed by the Juvenile Commonwealth Government position Justice Amendment Act (No.2) 2001 (NT), which repealed mandatory sentencing for juvenile of- The Commonwealth Government recognises that fenders, and the Sentencing Amendment Act (No. the States and Territories have a difficult job in 3) 2001 (NT), which repealed mandatory sen- dealing with the impact of crime and the problem tencing for property offences for adults, both ef- of repeat offenders and that in some circum- fective from 22 October 2001. stances they may consider it appropriate to introduce mandatory detention laws for some offences. Government Senators’ recommendation The Commonwealth Government believes that Interpreter services the States and Territories are best placed to ad- Government Senators recommended that the dress the problems associated with repeat of- Commonwealth Government support the North- fending and detention through their own legisla- ern Territory with funding to assist the continuing tures and court systems. development of an adequate interpreter service to The Commonwealth is committed, however, to ensure that young people who do not speak or working with the States and Territories to prevent juveniles from entering the criminal justice sys- 3602 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 tem. This is demonstrated by the Agreement be- By 30 September 2001, the AIS had 242 inter- tween the Commonwealth and the Northern Ter- preters covering 104 languages on its register. ritory that was signed on 27 July 2000 and came The AIS has advised that it has completed more into effect on 1 September 2000. than 1900 jobs. So far some 140 Aboriginal inter- Agreement with the Northern Territory preters have undertaken training and 180 clients of the AIS have been trained in the effective use Under the Agreement, the Commonwealth is proof interpreters. This includes members of the ju- viding $20 million over 4 years for the following: diciary, police, health professionals, lawyers and • a range of new community-based diversion- legal staff. ary programs in urban, rural and remote The agencies that have used the AIS the most communities, including the establishment of between April 2000 and 30 September 2001 are: community youth development units and • drug and substance abuse diversionary pro- Territory Health Services and community grams; service issues ( 633 jobs—33% of all agency jobs) • the establishment of juvenile diversion units • in the Northern Territory Police Service to NT Police ( 317 jobs; 17% of all agency oversee the diversion process and act as a jobs) source of information and expertise on juve- • Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions nile offenders for police throughout the Ter- (172 jobs—13% of all agency jobs) ritory; • North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid • a jointly funded Aboriginal Interpreter Serv- Service (245—13% of all agency jobs) ice with offices in Darwin and Alice Springs; • Central Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid • an on-site interpreter service at Royal Dar- Service (271—14% of all agency jobs) win Hospital and Alice Springs Hospital; and Under the Agreement, the Northern Territory is • an additional $250,000 in the first year for required to provide detailed performance infor- training of interpreters (in addition to recur- mation to the Commonwealth every 6 months. rent funding for training) and funding for the The first performance information report was four Northern Territory Aboriginal Legal provided in April 2001 and the second in Novem- Services for the purchase of interpreter serv- ber 2001. The Agreement requires annual audits ices. of expenditure, a review of progress in achieving The Agreement provides for different levels of the purposes of the Agreement during the first 12 response to juveniles apprehended, depending on months and a review no less than 6 months prior the seriousness of the offence. These responses to its expiration in 2004. The 12-month review of include verbal or written warnings, formal cau- progress has been delayed due to the Northern tions, family and victim conferences and substan- Territory and Federal elections but is expected to tive community based programs. Under the terms be completed by April 2002. The review will of the Agreement, all juveniles who commit mi- include an assessment of the impact of the diver- nor property offences are to be offered diversion, sionary schemes on juveniles in the Northern and diversion for more serious offences is at the Territory and a report of the review will be made discretion of the police. public. Since the commencement of the Agreement, Other interpreter services sound progress has been made. By 31 August The Northern Territory also has a general Inter- 2001: preter and Translation Service that can provide • 1215 juveniles had been offered diversion, interpreters in 39 languages. The services are mainly by way of verbal or written warnings; provided free of charge when migrants access this equates to 79% of all juvenile apprehen- Northern Territory Government services. Addi- sions (1548 cases in total). tionally, the Commonwealth provides a national • Translating and Interpreter’s Service which offers 94 programs had been approved by the po- a 24-hour, 7 day per week service covering lice as suitable for diversion, with programs switchboard, telephone interpreting, on-site inter- registered in 23 predominantly Aboriginal preting and a translation service. Non-English communities outside the major centres of speaking residents, migrants and refugees can Darwin, Alice Springs, Katherine and Ten- access the service for free. Other agencies access nant Creek. the service on a user pays basis. • 35 juveniles were referred to registered programs and 44 to informal programs. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3603

Government Senators’ suggestions In addition, there are specific initiatives focussing Government Senators also suggested that the on indigenous youth including the Indigenous Commonwealth, in consultation with the Western Sport Program and employment and education Australian and Northern Territory Governments, initiatives, such as the School to Work Program. address the following: Both the Department of Education, Training and (a) Undertake an audit and review of all avail- Youth Affairs and the Attorney-General’s De- able diversionary and other support programs partment liaise closely with the Australasian Ju- for juvenile offenders: venile Justice Administrators’ Group. The Group meets regularly to discuss standards, good prac- In addition to the review of progress in achieving tice and approaches to the diversion of juvenile the purposes of the Agreement between the offenders, and correctional services for juveniles. Commonwealth and the Northern Territory, the Commonwealth is undertaking two important (c) Consult with indigenous communities to projects in this regard. The first project is to con- resource and develop from within those duct a national audit of all diversionary programs communities alternative programs to deal in place for juvenile offenders to identify exam- with juvenile offenders: ples of good practice in diversion. These will be The Agreement with the Northern Territory rec- presented at a national forum to be held in Sep- ognises that consultation with key people within tember 2002. The second project involves a na- communities, particularly Aboriginal people, is tional profiling of Mentoring Youth At-Risk pro- imperative in the development and operation of grams, which is also directed at identifying best community-based and driven diversionary pro- practice. This is expected to be completed in grams. 2002. As of August 2001, more than 170 organisations, (b) Actively canvass and develop options for committees and groups, and more than 700 com- rehabilitating and deterring juveniles and munity members, had been briefed or consulted young adults from repeat offending, as alter- by the Northern Territory police on the diversion natives to mandatory sentencing: scheme. The police have been meeting with Abo- While State and Territory Governments have pri- riginal leaders across the Territory and conducting mary responsibility for matters relating to juve- extensive consultations with a wide range of nile offending and rehabilitation, the Common- community groups and non-government organi- wealth is strongly committed to a range of initia- sations and service providers to identify existing tives that contribute to the prevention of juvenile programs suitable for the diversion of juveniles. offending. These include early intervention in Consultations are also designed to develop tar- relation to such issues as suicide and drug abuse, geted responses to emerging needs in indigenous early school leaving, unemployment and home- communities. lessness. The major strategies are the National (d) Monitor the impact of mandatory sentencing Drug Strategic Framework, the National Illicit on juveniles and young adults, and publish Drug Strategy, National Mental Health Strategy, the results at least annually: the National Youth Suicide Prevention Strategy, The Western Australian review of its mandatory the National Homelessness Strategy, the Youth detention laws is referred to above. Pathways Action Plan Taskforce, the Stronger Families and Communities Strategy, Partnerships An examination of the impact of the juvenile pre- Against Domestic Violence and the National court diversion scheme in the Northern Territory Crime Prevention Program. is being undertaken as part of the review referred to above of progress in achieving the purposes of The Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce Re- the Agreement in the first 12 months since its port, Footprints to the Future, sets out a policy commencement. framework for supporting young people through school and from school to further education, The Social Justice Report 2001 also contains a training, work and active citizenship. The Com- detailed review of the operation of the Criminal monwealth has welcomed the recommendations Code (WA) and the recent legislative develop- and has committed itself to continuing to expand ments in the Northern Territory. young people’s opportunities. Senator ELLISON—I understand that ar- Programs that target young offenders include the rangements have been made for four speak- Young Offenders’ Pilot Program, the Job Place- ers: Senator Ludwig, Senator Payne, Senator ment, Education and Training Program and the Greig and Senator Brown. The time alloca- Illicit Drug Diversion Initiative. tion is 10 minutes for Senator Ludwig, 10 minutes for Senator Payne, six minutes for 3604 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

Senator Greig and four minutes for Senator years. It would make existing laws of no Brown. force or effect and require any child in prison Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (3.33 or detention be brought back to the sentenc- p.m.)—by leave—I move: ing court within 28 days for reconsideration of the remainder of the sentence. The bill That the Senate take note of the report. was developed to address a number of issues I rise to take note of the government’s re- of concern over the introduction of manda- sponse to the report of the Senate Legal and tory sentencing for various property offences Constitutional References Committee on the in both Western Australia and the Northern Human Rights (Mandatory Sentencing of Territory. These concerns included whether Juvenile Offenders) Bill 1999. This report the jailing of children was contrary to the was completed in March 2000. The bill itself Convention on the Rights of the Child and was introduced into the Senate on the motion whether other international obligations were of Senator Brown, Senator Bolkus and being breached, the lack of relationship be- Senator Greig. It was read for the first and tween the type of crime and the severity of second time on 25 August 1999. the punishment, the limited options available It is worth giving a bit of the background to replace detention, the apparent discrimi- to the report so that we can put the response natory effect on Indigenous people; and the by the government in context. It was referred concept of mandatory detention for juveniles to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Ref- representing a disturbing shift away from the erences Committee for inquiry and report by traditional sentencing principles. The empha- the first sitting day in 2000. The terms of the sis had previously been on rehabilitation inquiry were: (a) the legal, social and other rather than on the protection of the commu- aspects of mandatory sentencing; (b) Austra- nity through detention, thus legislation gov- lia’s international human rights obligations in erning the sentencing of juveniles had gener- regard to mandatory sentencing laws in ally restricted the kinds of sentencing options Australia; (c) the implications of mandatory available in respect of juveniles. The clear sentencing for particular groups, including preference had always been for non-custodial Australia’s Indigenous people and people sentences. with disabilities; and (d) the constitutional In essence, the Senate Legal and Consti- power of the Commonwealth parliament to tutional References Committee unanimously legislate with respect to existing laws af- condemned the laws in both the Northern fecting mandatory sentencing. The commit- Territory and Western Australia and the ma- tee held four public hearings, in Alice jority supported the bill. The two Liberal Springs, Darwin, Perth and Canberra, in Feb- senators, Senator Payne and Senator Coonan, ruary 2000. To underscore the seriousness of gave the Northern Territory and Western the issue, a supervening event occurred Australian governments a chance to consider which heightened public concern. A 15-year- the report, although it is recognised that one old Aboriginal boy was found in his room at senator was predisposed to support a Com- the Don Dale Detention Centre in Darwin in monwealth override if the governments’ re- the Northern Territory on 9 February fol- sponses were not positive. lowing what is believed to have been a suicide attempt. The boy, from Groote Eylandt, The committee’s preferred course was to was serving his second detention term under allow the respective governments to take mandatory sentencing and was due to be reaction. The committee was not, however, leased on the following Monday. He died in convinced that the Northern Territory and Darwin Hospital on Thursday morning, 10 Western Australian governments would act February. on their own volition to resolve this issue. Therefore, the committee recommended that The bill itself was to ensure that a Com- the bill be passed by parliament. The Senate monwealth, state or territory law must not did pass the bill. Surprisingly, a number of require a court to sentence a person to im- Liberal members in the House of Represen- prisonment for an offence committed as a tatives at the time indicated support for the child—that is, when under the age of 18 Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3605 passage of the bill in the House. This sup- sistencies and discrimination and unfairness. port, however, did not materialise. The gov- It is hoped that the Western Australian government’s position on this was very disap- ernment will heed the progress made in the pointing. Northern Territory and do likewise. Manda- The arguments against mandatory sen- tory sentencing laws in the Northern Terri- tencing can be summarised in the following tory have been a lightning rod across Aus- way. In my view, they breach international tralia and amongst the international commu- laws, they are perceived to have a discrimi- nity because of their unjust nature. Dr Jonas, natory effect on Indigenous persons and they the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander So- are perceived as allowing parliament to inter- cial Justice Commissioner, welcomed the fere with and potentially undermine the in- repeal of the mandatory minimum term of dependence and integrity of the judiciary. imprisonment for property crimes committed The government’s response to date has been by juveniles. Dr Jonas stated, and I agree pathetic. When the bill was introduced, Ms with him: Vale in the House of Representatives said she A sense of justice has been restored to the Terri- was willing to introduce into the House a tory’s legal system. similar bill, but failed to take that step. Mr There is another area where the response John Howard promised a good old back- fails and fails miserably. There was a call by bench committee to advise cabinet on meas- the Liberal senators for improved interpreter ures to lessen the impact of the mandatory services. The government’s response focuses sentencing laws. Clearly, nothing of any sub- on the Indigenous interpreter services it is stance came out of that. Nearly every living helping in the Northern Territory, yet does retired member of the High Court con- not mention the need for such funding in demned mandatory sentencing laws. Many WA. There is no federal funding, as far as I academics similarly condemned mandatory am aware, for Indigenous interpreter services sentencing. In addition, a report of the in WA. Since they set up about three years United Nations Committee on the Elimina- ago, I understand that the Kimberley Inter- tion of Racial Discrimination condemned preting Service have been seeking funding to mandatory sentencing and Australia’s treat- continue their operation of providing inter- ment of Indigenous people. preter services to Aboriginal peoples and The Prime Minister attempted to persuade have managed on the basis of a grab bag of the then Northern Territory Chief Minister, funds from different state departments and Denis Burke, to change the law, but was sin- programs. They have not been able to access gularly unsuccessful. However, by April Commonwealth government funding. They 2000 the federal government struck a deal have lobbied Senator Ellison and Minister with the Northern Territory government to Ruddock for about a year to receive funding provide $5 million for additional diversion- from the government, but they have been ary programs. This of course failed to ad- singularly unsuccessful. I hope the govern- dress the issue itself. At best, it was a face- ment does take heed of that call and, if they saver for this government. However, it did are serious about providing a serious re- not save the Northern Territory government. sponse to this report and they are serious The date 22 October 2001 was an important about interpreter services, that they look at one for those who are opposed to mandatory the obvious needs not only in the Northern sentencing, because it signified the end of Territory, where a deal was done with the mandatory sentencing for property offences previous government, but right across Aus- in the Northern Territory. The Labor North- tralia, to ensure that interpreter services are ern Territory government under Clare Martin provided. should be congratulated for expunging from There is a clear need. Fourteen per cent of the record books a regime that imprisons Indigenous people aged over 13 years speak children for minor offences. The application an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Island lan- of the laws brought about unjust and inap- guage, and a further three per cent speak propriate sentences which resulted in incon- Aboriginal English. It is obvious that those 3606 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

Indigenous Australians coming into contact Since that time—as Senator Ludwig has with the justice system need to have ade- referred to in one manner; I will perhaps do quate interpreter services, particularly when so slightly less pejoratively—the nature of they are juveniles. Funding for these services the legislation in the Northern Territory has in the Northern Territory, as I have said, only been changed significantly by the introduc- arose out of a deal that they did with their tion of the Northern Territory Juvenile Jus- mate the former Chief Minister Denis Burke tice Amendment Act (No. 2) 2001 and the not to overturn mandatory sentencing. The Northern Territory Sentencing Amendment government must move to remedy this situa- Act (No. 3) 2001, which repealed mandatory tion around the country, not just in the sentencing for juvenile offenders and man- Northern Territory. The original committee datory sentencing for property offences for recommended that the bill be passed by the adults respectively. Both took effect from 22 parliament. The government’s response said October 2001. I welcomed on a personal ba- that the government does not accept the rec- sis those actions of the new Northern Terri- ommendation. (Time expired) tory government last year. In the report, ta- Senator PAYNE (New South Wales) (3.43 bled in 2000, the government senators made p.m.)—Mr Deputy President, may I take this a number of recommendations which, in this opportunity to congratulate you on your response, the government has acknowledged election to that high and responsible office. and in some cases supported. The first was that the Commonwealth should support the The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Thank Northern Territory with funding to assist the you. development of an interpreter service to en- Senator PAYNE—In rising to take note sure that young people who could not speak of the government’s response to the report of or understand English would not continue to the Legal and Constitutional References be disadvantaged by the legal system. The Committee inquiry into the Human Rights government has responded to that in a num- (Mandatory Sentencing of Juvenile Offend- ber of ways. The response also indicated, on ers) Bill 1999 I would like to note that two of a number of other recommendations that the senators who played a very significant government senators made, that they would role in the development of that report and in pursue some of those areas. the continuing work of the committee in this Let me first turn to the question of gov- area, former senator Barney Cooney and ernment assistance and the agreement that former senator Jim McKiernan, are no longer the government formed with the Northern members of this chamber, but I am sure Territory. The government agreed to provide would have been very interested to see the $20 million over four years for a range of material which is before us today. The gov- new community based diversionary pro- ernment, in its response to the committee’s grams which would operate in urban, rural report, welcomes the report and indicates and remote communities. They would in- that it contains matters which it has looked at clude the establishment of community youth very seriously. The government said at the development units and drug and substance time, and continues to say now, that it did not abuse diversionary programs. We supported accept the committee’s recommendation that the establishment of juvenile diversion units the bill be passed by the parliament. As a within the NT police service to oversee that member of the committee at the time, I also diversion process and to act as a source of did not advocate the passing of the bill by the information and expertise on juvenile of- Senate at that stage—as Senator Ludwig has fenders for police throughout the territory. referred to. I indicated that my preference We supported a jointly funded Aboriginal was to see the Northern Territory and West- interpreter service with offices in Darwin and ern Australian governments take action of Alice Springs and an on-site interpreter their own volition to address the concerns service at the Royal Darwin Hospital and the which had been made very clear to the com- Alice Springs Hospital. We provided an ad- mittee in this process. ditional $250,000 in the first year for the training of interpreters—in addition to recur- Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3607 rent funding for training—and funding for for progress on the Northern Territory the four Northern Territory Aboriginal legal agreement, and we are advised regularly with services for the purchase of interpreter serv- updates on that. ices. In the report, the government senators The agreement formed between the made a couple of other responses to which Northern Territory and the Commonwealth the government has also responded in the also provided for different levels of response document tabled today. We suggested that to juveniles who were apprehended, de- there be an audit and a review of all of the pending on the seriousness of the offence. available diversionary and other support pro- The commencement of the agreement saw a grams for juvenile offenders. The Common- pretty challenging environment, but since wealth is now undertaking two projects in that time significant progress has been made. that regard. One of them is particularly im- I understand from the government’s response portant and it is very timely to refer to it to- that, by 28 February this year, 1,606 juve- day. The first is a project to conduct a na- niles out of the 2,142 cases of juvenile ap- tional audit of all diversionary programs in prehensions—that is, three-quarters—were place for juvenile offenders, for the purpose offered diversion, mostly by way of verbal or of identifying examples of good practice in written warnings; 113 programs had been diversion. They are then to be presented at a registered as suitable for diversion in 34 national forum to be held next month. That Northern Territory communities; 77 juveniles will be a very good opportunity to look at had been referred to registered diversionary where similar programs in Australia are go- programs; and 63 juveniles had been referred ing, and what best practice actually is. The to informal programs. second is a national profiling of programs The Aboriginal Interpreter Service offers a mentoring youth at risk, also aimed at identi- central booking service for both government fying best practice and also expected to be and non-government agencies that require completed this year. They are both very im- on-site Aboriginal language interpreters. By portant initiatives that the Commonwealth its second anniversary, in April 2002, it had has undertaken in that regard. 250 interpreters covering 104 languages on There are a number of programs in rela- its register, and it had completed more than tion to young people which come broadly 2,400 jobs. The services that have used that under the heading of the recommendation Aboriginal Interpreter Service the most in- that the government senators made in this clude the Territory health services, the report about actively canvassing and devel- Northern Territory Police, the Central Aus- oping options for rehabilitating and deterring tralian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service, the juveniles and young adults from repeat of- North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid fending as alternatives to mandatory sen- Service and the office of the DPP. That is an tencing. The government is committed to a indication of how actively it has been taken range of initiatives which include early in- up as an opportunity in the Northern Terri- tervention in relation to suicide, drug abuse, tory. early school leaving, unemployment and The agreement has been reviewed; I homelessness. A number of strategies have would describe it as one for which the NT an overarching responsibility in that area; government is highly accountable to the they would include the National Drug Strate- Commonwealth for the funds that it expends gic Framework, the National Drug Strategy, in terms of annual audits and reviews of pro- the National Mental Health Strategy and the gress when they have been conducted during National Youth Suicide Prevention Strategy. that time. As Senator Ludwig would know, One program with which I am particularly we also have the opportunity, through the familiar is the National Youth Suicide Pre- estimates process of this parliament, to ex- vention Strategy. It is important for its ca- amine the Attorney-General’s Department in pacity to look at innovative programs, and relation to those services—and we do. very often when we are talking about Indige- Senators on both sides of the chamber ask nous juveniles that is extremely important. 3608 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

The one-size-fits-all approach is not the case into the Hansard today, was the date of it, in that regard. It is important within those really. I think it is rather sad and telling that strategies to be innovative, flexible and open the Human Rights (Mandatory Sentencing of to alternative suggestions, and I think that is Juvenile Offenders) Bill 1999—a bill that what marks that particular strategy. The pro- was introduced and on which we began de- grams also include the National Homeless- bate in 1999—is responded to only today, ness Strategy, the Youth Pathways Action some three years later, by the government. Plan Taskforce, Partnerships Against Do- My feeling and experiences are that there is mestic Violence and so on. Let me just iden- much community anxiety about mandatory tify the Youth Pathways Action Plan Task- sentencing, and that is not reflected in the force report Footprints to the Future, which way in which the government has often re- sets out a policy framework for supporting sponded to this issue. young people throughout their life—through As Senator Payne has said, the govern- school and from school to further education, ment’s response at the time, which is being to training and to work and active citizen- discussed here today, effectively advocated ship. Its recommendations have been wel- that the bill ought not be passed and that the comed by the Commonwealth and are being states or the territories ought to do so them- pursued. selves. Since that time, we have seen that One of the important issues which the en- that has in fact happened in the Northern tire committee and government senators Territory under the new government with identified was the importance of consultation Clare Martin. That has been roundly wel- with Indigenous communities—to resource comed and her government has been con- and develop from within those communities gratulated by my party and others. I have had some of the solutions to the problems which the opportunity to visit the Northern Terri- we saw in our extremely intensive and exten- tory in recent weeks to inquire into how sive reporting process. The agreement that some of that law reform is progressing, and the Commonwealth has with the Northern there are certainly positive signs that things Territory, to which I referred earlier, does are working well. It is not brilliant but, as I recognise that consultation with key people have said previously, there are social prob- within the communities, and particularly In- lems—the underlying difficulties, often with digenous leaders, is imperative in the devel- broken families, of physical and sexual abuse opment and operation of community based and sometimes drug and alcohol abuse. Bro- and community driven diversionary pro- ken families fundamentally seem to be the grams. I think these are all points which, as strongest contributing cause, particularly of part of the government response to this re- juvenile crime in the Northern Territory, port, should be noted by the Senate. (Time amongst Indigenous populations. Funda- expired) mentally, that remains the Democrats’ strong Senator GREIG (Western Australia) and vehement opposition to the whole notion (3.53 p.m.)—Mr Deputy President, I, too, of mandatory sentencing, given that we con- congratulate you on your recent election. I tinue to argue that it must be left to the dis- would also like to follow up from Senator cretion of the courts—to the judges and the Payne in paying tribute and commendation magistrates—to determine on a case-by-case to retired Senators Cooney and McKiernan, basis what the sentencing for any particular who contributed so significantly not just to crime ought to be, allowing them to take into the references committee but to this particu- consideration the extraordinary circum- lar inquiry. stances that many people, particularly young people, find themselves in. The first thing that struck me about the Government Response to the Senate Legal It remains the case that, to its shame, my and Constitutional References Committee home state of Western Australia is now the Report of the Inquiry into the Human Rights only jurisdiction in the nation which main- (Mandatory Sentencing of Juvenile Offend- tains mandatory sentencing, introduced un- ers) Bill 1999, which we have incorporated der the then Labor government of Dr Carmen Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3609

Lawrence. To be fair, the mandatory sen- And so it goes on. It became very clear that tencing regime in Western Australia is dif- the significant and underlying social prob- ferent from that which existed in the North- lems and social causes of this particular of- ern Territory. It is a three-strikes policy fender were such that the court could not rather than a first-strike policy and relates take that into consideration, so the situation only to property offences. Nonetheless, it is remains that judges and magistrates cannot still having a serious effect on Indigenous exercise discretion in sentencing—a situation people, young Indigenous people in particu- which continues to be criticised and con- lar, and remains the topic of heated and condemned by WA’s Chief Justice, Mr David troversial debate on the public airwaves and Malcolm, who said: through the press in my home state. It re- Unless our community can settle on an alternative mains a thorny issue, too, with the parlia- method of addressing crime and the rehabilitation ment which, under the premiership of Dr of offenders, WA will continue to see an increase Geoff Gallop, has seen some exceptional and in the number of alcohol and other drug depend- welcome social reform. There remains stri- ent offenders. Yet as a community we persist with dent opposition from the government, shared such illusionary solutions as mandatory sentenc- by the coalition opposition, to maintain those ing which is only a short term quick fix solution laws in Western Australia—despite the alter- to impress constituents from one election to the next. native dynamic that now exists in the state’s upper house. Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (3.59 p.m.)—This is a government response to the As an example, I would like to bring the report of the Legal and Constitutional Refer- attention of the chamber to a relatively recent ences Committee on the Human Rights case published in the West Australian, where (Mandatory Sentencing of Juvenile Offend- some of these issues were being debated in ers) Bill 1999, which I introduced into the relation to a young, I understand, Indigenous Senate a bit more than two years ago. The girl. The article said: dilatory nature of that response is remark- A 13-year-old Broome girl at the centre of a row able, but it is a response that is written with over WA’s mandatory sentencing laws was sent to hindsight. It effectively says that the Greens detention for a year yesterday— legislation—which was supported by this and this was published on 24 July this year— side of the Senate back there—was right, that for committing another string of home burglaries the outcomes which that aimed at were cor- in the North-West last month. rect and that the decision by Prime Minister The girl, who is not named because of her age, Howard and the government at the outset to stole cash and personal possessions from seven oppose that legislation was not right. houses in Broome not long after being given a What has happened in the meantime is the final chance by Children’s Court president Kate result of a national furore over mandatory O’Brien. In May, the judge ignored prosecution calls to lock up the repeat offender and instead detention, which ensnared primarily Abo- placed her on a 12-month conditional release riginal children in the Northern Territory but order. also in Western Australia, to the effect that it The child returned to Broome to live with her was not conscionable in our country. It was grandmother and siblings but began offending effectively locking kids up, doing them no again on June 8 and was arrested by police two good, potentially leading them to come out weeks later. of detention with a greater likelihood of re- She pleaded guilty to seven counts of aggra- lapsing into petty crime than before and vated burglary in Broome Magistrate’s Court on making them feel estranged from the very June 22 and was remanded in custody for sen- system that should have been helping them. tencing. As a result of that legislation—which I She also admitted being part of a group of brought into parliament at the behest of Abo- teenage girls who kicked and punched a 16-year- riginal communities and also the Northern old girl before stealing her mobile phone in Feb- Territory Greens at the time—the consequent ruary. committee findings got the support of the Senate, the Labor Party, the Democrats and 3610 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 the Independent senators at the time. It HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING passed this place and went to the House of AMENDMENT BILL 2002 Representatives, where consideration of the Report of Employment, Workplace legislation, and even debate of the legisla- Relations and Education Legislation tion, was blocked by the government of the Committee day. I must note that it was put forward there by then opposition leader Beazley and the Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (4.04 Labor Party in the interests of improving this p.m.)—On behalf of the Chair of the Em- situation. ployment, Workplace Relations and Educa- tion Legislation Committee (Senator Tier- Nevertheless, that then caused a serious ney), I present the report of the committee on break in the ranks of the government. The the provisions of the Higher Education more humanitarian-minded people in the Funding Amendment Bill 2002, together government said to the Prime Minister, ‘We with the Hansard record of proceedings and have to do something about that.’ It was in documents presented to the committee. response to that that the Prime Minister then approached the Northern Territory govern- Ordered that the report be printed. ment with considerable money and an COMMITTEES agreement was made to vastly change the Membership terrible situation that had existed up until The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT then. Interpreters were to be brought into (Senator McLucas)—The President has courts so that Aboriginal kids understood received letters from a party leader seeking what was going on and there were diversion- the variation to the membership of commit- ary opportunities created. Most kids have tees. gone to those diversions. Instead of being locked up in effective juvenile jails, they are Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— out learning things which are going to be Minister for Justice and Customs) (4.05 helpful to them and the community in the p.m.)—by leave—I move: long run. That senators be discharged from and ap- In the consequence of that there was a pointed to committees as follows: change of government in the Northern Ter- Community Affairs Legislation Committee ritory from the Country Liberal Party gov- Participating member: Senator Stott Despoja ernment to the Martin Labor government, for the committee’s inquiry into the provi- which had the good sense to lead off by sions of the Research Involving Embryos and abolishing the mandatory sentencing legisla- Prohibition of Human Cloning Bill 2002 tion. It is a great outcome. I pay tribute to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Senate and its committee system and to those Committee— Indigenous organisations and the Greens in Participating member: Senator Stott Despoja the Northern Territory, who first moved, with Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References the legal community in Australia—not least Committee— in the Northern Territory—at the forefront, to Participating member: Senator Stott Despoja put right a terrible wrong. There is still some Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade—Joint road to go—we should abolish the sentenc- Standing Committee— ing in Western Australia. But the outcome Appointed: Senator Johnston has been great, and I thank all those who were involved. (Time expired) Public Works—Standing Committee— Appointed: Senator Colbeck Question agreed to. Question agreed to. TAXATION: FAMILY PAYMENTS Senator MARK BISHOP (Western Aus- tralia) (4.06 p.m.)—At the request of Senator Ludwig, I move: That the Senate— Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3611

(a) condemns the Howard Government’s expecting a tax refund of say, $1,000, and getting decision to strip, without warning, the nothing. tax returns of Australian families who He went on to say: have been overpaid family payments as callous and unfair to parents trying to In one of the few instances where Senator survive under increasing financial Vanstone ever got anything right, she said before pressures; the election this wouldn’t happen. But that promise has been broken—and people are suffering. (b) notes that this is not consistent with the statement of the Minister for Family and That is the context that is being put about, Community Services (Senator Vanstone) being discussed and being well understood in in July 2001 in which she assured the Australian community, from Perth right families that, ‘The Government has also across to the east coast. The design features decided that it would be easier for any of the family tax payment system introduced family who still had an excess payment by this government some two years ago are to have it recovered by adjusting their now causing immense pain, hardship and future payments, rather than taking it suffering to hundreds of thousands of Aus- from their tax refund. This is because people may have earmarked their refund tralian families, all of which could have been for use for specific things’; avoided—all of which would not have been necessary—if a little more care, thought and (c) considers that the Government’s 2-year- old family payments system is deeply planning had been given to the structure of flawed, given that it delivered average the legislation which brings this wonderful debts of $850 to 650 000 Australian benefit to hundreds of thousands of Austra- families in the 2001-02 financial year lian families. But it was not; it is a terribly and continues to punish families who designed scheme, and loads of Australian play by the rules; and families are suffering. (d) condemns the Howard Government and The design features of this scheme that its contemptible attack on Australian gives the family tax benefit to hundreds of families. thousands of Australian families, affecting Before addressing myself to the motion, it two million people or more, are very simple. might be appropriate to put that motion in Proposed recipients of the benefit advise context. I will do that by referring to a dis- Centrelink of their anticipated income and cussion this morning on Sydney radio hosted advise Centrelink of actual variations to their by well-known commentator Mr Alan Jones. income throughout the year. The recipients Mr Jones opened the discussion on family receive family tax payments based on the payment debts by saying: information provided to Centrelink. At the Look I’ve mentioned recently about this Family end of each financial year there is a balanc- Tax Benefit. We were talking about raising chil- ing activity. Overpayments are recovered as dren and the floodgates have opened. I’ve had debts through the Centrelink system and un- letter after letter telling me what a farce this is. derpayments are paid out to the recipients. The most contentious aspect is this business Overpayments are stripped back through the where to gauge your entitlements you have to tax system. Put briefly, when you put in your guess what you are going to earn in the following annual tax return, Centrelink has access to it year. That’s fine when you’re in a salaried job, but if you earn your living through casual work or and, if you have a debt on the books, your commission work or if you are in and out of the tax refund is reduced by the amount that is work force it is impossible. Now thousands of owed as a debt. families are going to be hit because they’ve un- Most people in Australia receive a rela- derestimated their income and Centrelink paid tively modest tax refund. Few get more than them too much. If they said they’d earn say, $1,000—most get between $500 and $800. $40,000 and they’re out by as little as $1,200 The bulk of that annual tax refund, which they’d be hit. And worse, the overpayment is being taken directly from their tax returns. So people anticipate, plan for and intend to use you’ve got low income families—people who are to retire a bit of debt or perhaps to engage in trying to survive on $35,000 or $40,000 a year— a major household purchase, has been taken away—stripped out of the system—because 3612 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 of the design features of the family tax bene- care if people have earmarked their refund fit payment system. So an apparently simple for use for specific purposes. After all, as I system designed to assist families in finan- say, it is not an election year, as last year cial need has resulted in a total mess. was, so the government does not feel that it The scale of the mess is almost incompre- has to make things easy for families this time hensible. When it was discussed in Senate around. This time around, there is not going estimates this year, I could not believe it to be any waiver of debts; not like last year, when they said there were two million fami- the election year, when the government man- lies receiving this benefit and in each of the aged to find up to $1,000 per family that had two years to date 650,000 families have re- accrued debt—that is, 650,000 families. ceived the wrong payment and debts, or When you get that kind of error rate in a overpayments, have been incurred—overpayment system, you have to question the whelmingly debts, not underpayments—and whole system. There must be some pretty each individual recipient has to go through pervasive flaws to achieve such an impres- the system to pay back the money. The sys- sive level of failure. What happened last year tem is designed to assist families and—let us is now happening all over again this year, but not kid ourselves—the family benefit that is this time there is no $1,000 waiver. Families paid to low- and middle-income families is a will find out, if they have not already, that significant amount of money. We are not the government has sneakily decided it will talking about $5, $10 or $15 a week; it can take any overpayment of their family tax be thousands or tens of thousands of dollars, benefit out of their tax refunds. It is for quite depending on the financial circumstances of good reason that I say that the government the individual family. That money is a great has been sneaky. The first that people have benefit, it greatly assists families and it is known about this decision has been either being ruined by this system designed through when they have got their tax refund less the the taxation system. debt or, in many cases, when they received That is the background, that is the context no refund at all or a bill in lieu of a repay- and those are the design features of the sys- ment. tem—and that is what this motion is about. As I quoted earlier, the minister stated last As I said, a number of families will be in for year that she did not want to deduct debts an unpleasant surprise when they submit from tax refunds because people may have their tax returns this year. These families will earmarked their refund for use for a specific learn that the government has changed its purpose. After all, it is the money that the mind about the way it collects debts which government owes the taxpayer. It is not the arise from flaws in its family payments sys- government’s money; it is owed to the tax- tem. Last year the Minister for Family and payer. This time around, the minister has Community Services, Senator Vanstone, as- decided that she will ignore the hardship and sured families: disappointment that will result from her de- The government has also decided that it would be cision to strip families’ tax returns. Nothing easier for any family who still had an excess the minister said in the lead-up to tax time payment to have it recovered by adjusting their this year has given families any clue that future payments, rather than taking it from their they should not earmark their tax return for tax refund. This is because people may have ear- other things. The trickiest part of all of this is marked their refund for use for specific things. the lack of public awareness. The govern- That is an apparently innocuous statement, a ment did not care to let the cat out of the bag sensible statement and one designed to give a until very late in the picture. Most families degree of assurance or comfort to Australian will not find out about it until they get their families. But that was then, that was last year reduced refund or, as I said, no refund at all. in the lead-up to the election, and all of that The government is not giving people any has now passed. Obviously, the government notice of what it is up to; it just takes the has decided that it is not going to be so easy money back. It just automatically has it de- on families anymore. This year, it does not ducted from their annual tax return. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3613

Some weeks ago, the government took the now have accrued a debt averaging $850? decision, very secretly, to strip tax returns. It That is an awful lot of money for a family to did not inform families, the community or have to come up with out of the blue, with- the accountancy profession. Families who out warning and by surprise. It is an awful had budgeted on their accountant’s estimate lot of money to expect in your tax return of their return will be in for a rude shock only to discover that you are not going to see shortly when the truth is revealed to them. it. It might have been earmarked to retire The secrecy shrouding this decision is obvi- some credit card debt, to pay school fees or ous from the fact that Centrelink call centre to give the family a treat—$850 or $1,000 staff were not advised of the tax return strip- budgeted to come in—and the first time they ping until just a few weeks ago. How can will become aware that they should not families be expected to have budgeted for budget for it, that they should not plan to this when they had no warning, when the spend it will be when they lodge their tax government proposed to strip their tax refund assessment and are advised that any amount out of the blue, without any community dis- up to the level of the debt, which otherwise cussion or involvement or community infor- would have been paid to them as part of their mation campaign? tax refund, will be taken out; it will stripped Less than six months ago, in February of out, as if by a thief in the night. this year, the Secretary to the Department of Parents are facing increasing financial Family and Community Services told a Sen- pressure under this government. Household ate estimates hearing that no decision had debts are at record levels and are growing been taken to recover family payment debts rapidly. There is no suggestion that the level by stripping out tax returns. Yet, on Tuesday of average debt is flattening out in any way. this week in question time the minister stated No doubt, many families had plans to use that not using the tax refund offset last year their tax refunds to reduce their debts. Surg- was ‘for that year only, and we are past that’. ing debt has placed Australian families under Why then did the secretary to the department growing financial pressure and will leave not know that in February this year when I them particularly vulnerable to an increase in asked him what would happen this year if interest rates. Unfortunately for families un- not resorting to the tax refund offset was a der financial pressure, the government has one-off? Why did the minister not use some other plans for their lump sum tax refund. of her huge advertising budget to warn fami- The average credit card debt of Australian lies that this would happen, so that they consumers was over $2,150 for April—the would not plan to use their tax refund only to highest on record. I imagine that many fami- discover that there was no money because lies could apply their tax refunds to a lot of the government had taken it all back, very good purposes, including debt reduc- stripped it out of their annual tax refund? It tion. That will not happen under this gov- was because the minister wanted to keep it ernment, however, because the tax refund quiet. A whole year has gone by since her that families thought they were owed, that last announcement about the refund offset— they had planned to use for a range of pur- that is, that it would not be used. Now she poses, is going to be stripped out via the tax does not let people know they will have their system. tax refund stripped. She just lets them get a It is obvious that families are under finan- surprise when they get their notice of as- cial pressure and that the family benefit sys- sessment. tem that this government have devised puts This is a shockingly underhanded way of them under even more. It is an additional dealing with problems that are created by a source of debt for families and one that has design feature in a system of a government been deliberately created as part of a system agency. The problems and debts have arisen through legislation introduced by Senator because of the poor design of the system it- Vanstone into this place some two or three self. Why else would one-third of all families years ago. It is not something that they did who received the family tax benefit last year not have knowledge of. It was not something 3614 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 that was not raised at the time. Plenty of or- The government, I would suggest, has its ganisations and agencies advised the gov- priorities all wrong. At the same time that it ernment of the consequences of this particu- is throwing additional staff at Centrelink to lar aspect of their then new legislation, and chase families for money it is stifling ASIC the government chose to ignore the warned- with a shortage of resources. The govern- of consequences. It is even worse than that. ment allows the business world to operate in Even families that play by the rules and ad- a loosely regulated environment while fami- vise Centrelink of changes to their household lies can barely get a pay rise without suffer- income can be caught in the government’s ing some immediate, direct and harmful con- debt trap. A large number of families relig- sequences. If the government cared about iously and regularly advise Centrelink of families at all, it would fix the debt trap it changes to their own income or to that of has created and stop secretly taking money their partner or spouse. Those changes get from families that they reasonably expect to entered into the system, but the system keeps receive in their tax return. The government working, the debt keeps accruing and it gets needs to take a long hard look at its priorities taken out at the end of the financial year. and stop inflicting pain on families who least Those who change jobs, get a pay rise or deserve it. promotion or have irregular hours and there- I move this motion today in the hope that fore pay, even if they advise Centrelink of this government will stop and think about the changes, can end up with a debt at the what it is doing to Australian families. The end of the year if they are subject to the taper persistent denials that there are flaws in the rates. system fly in the face of evidence that hun- This system punishes families whose ac- dreds of thousands of Australian families are tual income differs by as little as two or three accruing debts. This is an unacceptable mar- per cent from their estimates. Debts arising gin of error where tightly balanced family from small miscalculations can be remark- budgets are concerned. The government able—out of all proportion to the error made. needs to get in touch with the people it repre- Families where one parent returns to work sents and understand the difficulties it is un- midyear can expect to bear the brunt of the necessarily imposing on Australian families. government’s debt trap. This system has The family tax payment system is a remark- clearly failed. In spite of the huge advertising able system with the ability to immediately campaign that the government has been run- benefit almost two million families in this ning, families are still incurring debts. In a country. Most of those families are low- and lot of cases, they simply cannot avoid the middle-income families. Most of them have creation of a debt. I would suggest that a one partner in the work force and one partner system that punishes families in this way is at home. The design features of the system hardly fair. There are so many inconsisten- encourage the creation of debt. (Time ex- cies in this government’s approach to run- pired) ning the country. The government goes very Senator CHERRY (Queensland) (4.26 easy on the big end of town but will chase p.m.)—I rise to speak on the motion moved families for every last cent, even if it means by Senator Bishop. Prior to 1 July 2000 fam- secretly taking money out of their tax re- ily payment was paid fortnightly to families funds. The attack that this government has on the basis of the previous year’s taxable led on Australian families is remarkable in income, known as the base year. While it that it has designed a system that has as its was not without its administrative flaws, it purpose the creation of debt and the recovery generally provided regular fortnightly in- of moneys in such a fashion, but it is also come support for Australian families. There quite contemptible. If only it showed the was a built-in provision for those whose cir- same diligence in prosecuting corporate cumstances had changed significantly from fraud and making sure company executives the base year so that families whose circum- give back the enormous bonuses they unde- stances changed for the worse received servingly award themselves, the system higher payments at the time they needed it. would be a lot more honest and a lot better. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3615

I talk to families in my state daily. They ample, if a person claims family tax benefit tell me they need their regular family pay- on 1 May 2002 they are expected to estimate ment regardless of what it is called. That their own and their partner’s income for the money is always used and rarely put away. It tax year commencing on 1 July 2001 and is needed fortnightly because children’s ending on 30 June 2002. This will involve needs are ongoing and cannot wait until the estimating the income that they and their end of the year. Parents spend that money on partner will earn from 1 May 2002 to 30 shoes, clothing, medication, sporting fees, June 2002 and adding this amount to the schoolbooks and swimming lessons, and in amount they have already earned from 1 July many cases it is needed for the most essential 2001 to 30 April 2002. It remains that pro- needs of accommodation and food. A child viding an estimate is difficult, if not impossi- cannot wait until the end of the tax year for ble, and more so if the person works casu- food, clothing, shelter and medication. If you ally, if they have changed jobs since 1 July ask a sole parent with three children to wait or if they are self-employed. until the end of the tax year to claim their Let me explain what every person who family tax benefit, then you are asking that wishes to receive family tax benefit fort- parent to accommodate, feed, clothe and nightly must actually do to provide an esti- raise up to three children on less than $200 a mate. They must multiply the amount they week—it just cannot be done. The assertion receive before tax—that is, the gross of the Minister for Family and Community amount—by 26 or 52, depending on whether Services that families can avoid overpay- they are paid weekly or fortnightly. Then ments by claiming the allowance at the end they must take into account any pay rises or of the tax year shows just how out of touch other changes in their regular earnings since this government has become with the real the previous 1 July. Then they add any bo- needs of Australian families. nuses, lump sum payments, gifts or extra The family tax benefit system was intro- money they or their partner may have reduced in July 2000, and it was for the most ceived. Then they add in social security in- part generous and positive, and consolidated come support and Veterans’ Affairs service a range of around 12 existing payments and pension entitlements received since 1 July, or rebates into just three. In principle, that is which they expect to receive during the year. fine, and the Democrats have always sup- Then they add the value of fringe benefits or ported simplification, especially when it any salary package for the financial year. comes to the myriad complex rules and leg- Then they add any foreign income. Then islation which comprise that wonderful thing they add any income from rental property as called social security law. But simplification net income. Then they add any pension or for whom? Clearly the fallout from the two benefit paid since 1 July. Having done all of tax years following the implementation of that, they subtract any tax deductions that family tax benefit in July 2000 shows that may be allowed—that is, work-related ex- there was no simplification for those caught penses; for example, a uniform. Once they up in large overpayments. My office receives have estimated all that on the back of an en- telephone calls and letters daily from fami- velope and added them together, they must lies for whom the system has proven to be then subtract their own and their partner’s anything but simple and which has left them child support or maintenance payments for deeply in debt. the year. And that is called simplification! Family tax benefit is based on the re- Bear in mind also that, for the most part, quirement that a recipient estimates their these families are not accountants and they taxable income more than 12 months ahead are certainly not clairvoyants. For the most to the exact dollar, including their partner’s part, they are low-income families. They where they are a member of a couple. I know may have literacy or numeracy difficulties. that I could not estimate the exact dollar of Many, of course, do not even read or speak my income for 12 months hence. In reality I English. Furthermore, in all of this no margin doubt that it is possible for families. For ex- for error is allowed by the government. To 3616 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 make matters worse, if a person’s income release warned families of the potential for increases towards the end of the financial overpayment, not only because of estimates year—for example, because of starting a new but also because their children spent some job—that income is attributed over the whole time with the other parent. Most parents did year, right back to 1 July. not know that they were not entitled to the The legislation abolished the ‘notional full amount of family tax benefit if the child date of event’ principle in the previous leg- spent more than 10 per cent of the year with islation. Prior to 1 July 2000, an increase in the other parent, until they received a Cen- income affected family payment only from trelink newsletter in January 2001, despite the date it increased—for example, because the fact that the changes took effect from 1 of a return to work or the sale of a large crop. July 2000. Additionally, most people had no Not so with this current legislation, where if understanding that the estimate they pro- a person returns to work in May 2002, the vided in March 2000 would remain in force income for that year is attributed right back even if they told Centrelink about changes in to 1 July, and the overpayment starts from their circumstances. Telling Centrelink on that date, some 10 months before the person their dole form that they had returned to even starts work. work, for example, did not constitute a new estimate, so the overpayment continued. In these circumstances, even the most accurate of estimates cannot avoid a debt, and In January 2001 the Democrats called on this is what we are seeing right now. A fam- the government to be flexible in regard to ily whose circumstances have changed, and family tax benefit debts accrued prior to who rightly estimated their income but had January, when the information was finally no way of knowing that the total income is sent out. At that time their information was applied back to 1 July of the previous year, six months too late. Notwithstanding that consequently have an overpayment. This thereafter the department sent out letters to means not only that families, through no families, it remains that it was simply closing fault of their own and despite providing the the gate after the proverbial horse had bolted. most accurate of estimates, can incur an By the time the government realised the in- overpayment debt, but also that their chil- adequacy of their information to families and dren’s welfare can be put at risk through re- the impossible task they were asking of those duced family income to repay government families, hundreds of thousands of overpay- debts. ments were already accruing. It came to a head last year, when almost 500,000 fami- The minister cannot claim that families lies, having submitted their taxation returns, were well forewarned about the impact of received overpayment notices. this change. They were not. Prior to its introduction on 1 July 2000, the change was very The Australian Democrats welcomed the poorly communicated to families. A very government’s announcement just prior to the small paragraph appeared in the March 2000 election last year of a $1,000 leeway for edition of the department’s ‘Families’ publi- families who incurred a family tax benefit or cation, and in another newsletter to parents a child-care benefit overpayment because in July 2000 Centrelink simply said that they underestimated their income or were ‘special rules’ would apply. adversely affected by the new ‘shared care test’ arrangements during the 2001 year. It was the Australian Democrats who, in While the waiver alleviated much of the debt January 2002, after listening to a growing list at the time, it did nothing to fix the underly- of complaining constituents, realised that the ing problems in the administration of the majority of Australian families had no real family tax benefit system, which again led to understanding that for the previous six overpayments in the next year. months they were being paid on an estimate they had provided 10 months earlier. On 9 It is of great concern that the same prob- January 2001 we put out a press release ap- lem of debt overpayments is happening propriately entitled ‘Centrelink information again, and indeed will happen for a third for families 6 months too late’. That press successive year, unless the administrative Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3617 system of family tax benefit is changed. as to whether or not they were going to ar- Clearly the arrangements, which have been rive at a solution to the problem of people in force for two years, are working against being given access to other taxpayers’ money families, and we call on the government to to which they were not entitled. I asked find an ongoing solution. To this end, we whether or not they should be able to keep propose our own solution: the concept of that money at someone else’s expense and ‘date of event’, which the government abol- whether the Labor Party believed that that ished two years ago, so that a family’s in- should be repaid in some way. To date none creased income can be taken into account of us have heard a response. only from when it is earned, will eliminate Here we are yet again, and presumably the many of the problems associated with esti- opposition is now saying that if anyone gets mates and ensure that families receive assis- an overpayment on anything they should be tance at the time they need it. allowed to keep it. I think I referred yester- Notwithstanding the minister’s assertion day to the idea that people should be able to that it is a tax benefit, we assert that the no- refer to it as a lottery win and say, ‘Thank tion of monthly reconciliations exists in tax heavens I got overpaid. It doesn’t matter that law, such as for GST returns, and is a possi- someone else’s tax has been used to give me ble solution. We submit that the same princi- that overpayment. I’ve got it at their expense, ple embodied in family tax benefit—that is, and that’s it.’ the monthly reconciliation of estimates to- The notion that this repayment system has gether with the concept of ‘date of event’— somehow come in without warning could not would eliminate many of the large overpay- be further from the truth. Yes, it was decided ments being incurred by families who are last year that at the end of the first year, de- understandably unable to predict events that spite the best possible efforts, there were might take place 10 months into the future. some people who still did not understand the At the very least, the government must intro- process and therefore had incurred a debt. duce measures to assist families with their Therefore, an allowance was made for that income estimates and explore ways to im- debt. That debt was for one year only. The prove processes for seeking agreement on minister made that quite clear. It is interest- parents’ respective proportions of care. The ing to note that she made that quite clear in a Democrats look forward to working collabo- press statement of 1 July 2001, so we are ratively with the government on such a talking about something from over 12 measure. months ago. She said: Senator KNOWLES (Western Australia) The new family tax system provided Australian (4.37 p.m.)—Today we are debating a motion families with more than $2 billion extra in their from the Labor Party, and Senator Ludwig in pockets. It meant, for the first time ever, top-ups particular, that says: are paid to families who have received less than That the Senate— their actual entitlement because they overestimated their income during the year ... (a) condemns the Howard Government’s decision to strip, without warning, the She went on to say: tax returns of Australian families who ... this first year was always going to be one of have been overpaid family payments as transition where some families need extra help in callous and unfair to parents trying to adjusting to the new arrangements. survive under increasing financial ……… pressures ... That is why we have decided to adopt this lenient I read this with sheer and utter amazement. It approach for the first year ... is remarkable to think that the Labor Party believes that a policy that was announced Yet we have a motion before the Senate to- two years ago is without warning. This is the day claiming that this is without warning. second day on which I have participated in a The minister’s statement went on to say: debate on this particular subject. Yesterday I ... it has been a year of transition and one where asked a rhetorical question of the opposition families have been fed a lot of misinformation by the Opposition. 3618 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

The minister said that in July last year. Look they do want people to be allowed to keep what we are dealing with today. We are still money to which they are not entitled. I find dealing with opposition misinformation. In- that quite curious, because the new tax sys- terestingly enough, the motion before the tem is much simpler, fairer and much more Senate today says: generous to families than anything ever un- ... this is not consistent with the statement of the der the regime of Labor governments. The Minister for Family and Community Services government’s family assistance system de- (Senator Vanstone) in July 2001 in which she livers $2 billion a year more to families. It assured families that, ‘The Government has also does not deliver $2 billion over a period of decided that it would be easier for any family time, such as two, three or four years; it de- who still had an excess payment to have it recov- livers $2 billion a year more to families than ered by adjusting their future payments, rather under the Labor government. Yet we have than taking it from their tax refund. This is be- the Labor Party complaining about that. That cause people may have earmarked their refund for use for specific things’ ... is absolutely and utterly illogical. Isn’t it interesting just to take that paragraph It is not only that. It is also of concern be- out of context of the rest of the press release, cause people should not have to put up with which I have here in front of me? It fails to the misinformation that is going out to con- go on to the very next paragraph, in which stituents. If there is an acknowledgment, as the minister says: there should be by any respectable opposition, that the payments are far more generous Now that the new tax system has been in place for now than they ever have been and that the a year, families have had time to adjust and they should consider carefully their income estimates system is now more fair than it ever has for the 2001-2002 financial year. been, then they should, regardless of their philosophical position, get on the bus and go Why did the opposition not continue the rest down the street and say it is fair. When they of the quote? Why did they just pull out a have people coming to them and complain- part of a very comprehensive press release? ing that they have an overpayment to repay, The other thing that I find quite amazing is they should say, ‘Hold on. You are now get- that the opposition fail to even acknowledge ting more than you ever have. If you under- in any way, shape or form that the family tax estimate your income then, unfortunately, benefit and the child-care benefit replaced a you owe other taxpayers the money they complex system of 12 different social secu- have given you.’ But they choose not to do rity payments and tax rebates that were in that. They choose to make political mileage place under their government. Twelve pay- and say, ‘Isn’t that dreadful. This is the ments were replaced by these two. frightful coalition government and they are The other interesting thing that they have stealing money from you.’ It is quite the re- failed to acknowledge is that there was never verse: they are giving people money that a top-up of anything. If you missed out, you they never have before. missed out. The Howard government be- The family tax benefit and the child-care lieved that that was unfair, so in the devel- benefit can be received during the tax year as opment of this particular initiative it made a fortnightly payment or it can be claimed at allowance for top-up as well as recovery. I the end of the tax year. I heard Senator do not think that anyone can say that that is Cherry’s contribution and his concern about an unfair proposition. If one makes a mistake the end of the tax year. It is a fair concern— in overestimation of their income then they people do have ongoing expenses with chil- will get a top-up. If they make a mistake in dren and families. It is for that very reason underestimation of their income, whether it that families are given the option. They can be deliberate or accidental, then they will be either claim it when they need it, on their put into a repayment situation. Is that fair, or estimations—and they can update their esti- is that fair? mations on a regular basis—or if they do not The Labor Party seem to want it both want to or have no need to do that, then they ways. They do not want to give a top-up but can claim it at the end of the financial year. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3619

Whichever way, it is their decision and the if that is what they are aiming at. Then again, customer’s entitlement is based on their tax- I have been surprised before. The $1,000 able income for that year. Those fortnightly waiver from last year, as I have said before, customers are paid on their estimates. It is was a one-off. It was transitional, allowing not someone else’s estimate; it is their esti- for the new arrangements. Why, therefore, in mate. It is not some government department full knowledge of that fact, are the opposi- sitting there, gazing into a crystal ball and tion still saying that it should go on perma- saying, ‘I believe that Mr and Mrs Jones are nently? Do they think that there should not going to earn X amount of dollars’—whether be any change to the waiver? They are that be right or wrong. It is on the person’s probably saying that the waiver should be estimate. By adjusting for top-ups and over- even more generous. What incentive would payments, reconciliation ensures that all that provide for anybody to get it right? customers receive their correct entitlement What incentive would that provide for the for the year, regardless of how they have integrity of the tax system? claimed. That, of course, ensures a fair and But you can play fast and loose with the equitable outcome for all families—not just truth when you are in opposition and you are for some. the Labor Party—it is a combination—be- The question may well be asked: why are cause it simply does not matter. If people the family tax benefit overpayments recover- have money to which they are not entitled able from tax refunds? The family tax benefit then the Labor Party, when in opposition, is, as the name suggests, a tax benefit. It is believe they can keep it. But it is a curious part of the tax system. It is not some pot of fact that if there is an underpayment and money where people can say, ‘I am a bit someone is entitled to money to which they short of cash this weekend; I am just going to have not been a beneficiary then the Labor put my hand in that pot and pull it out.’ It is Party, when in government, does not believe part of the tax system. Like other entitle- they should get it. I do not understand those ments available through the tax system, it is two propositions. Why would you say that reconciled at the end of the year when tax- someone is entitled to something but they able income is assessed as part of the annual cannot have it, and someone is not entitled to tax assessment process. There is nothing dif- something but they can keep it? That does ferent about this to any other form of tax not make sense to me. Maybe, during the assessment process. Australian families are course of this debate, someone will actually familiar with the tax assessment process that be able to explain the rationale behind the offsets a person’s credits and liabilities for Labor Party’s position. the year against each other, and this now in- I also have to say that it is a fact that over cludes offsetting a family tax benefit over- 400,000 family tax benefit and child-care payment and crediting of family tax benefit benefit top-ups of entitlements for 2000-01 top-ups to ensure that families receive the were paid. As I remind the Senate again, no correct amount. To suggest that there is families received any top-ups prior to this something extraordinarily out of kilter with initiative. The vast majority of customers— the tax system is wrong. It is an integral part 71 per cent for the child-care benefit and 61 of the tax system and it is the way that every per cent for the family tax benefit—had no other part of the tax system works. adjustment, or received a top-up. That is I therefore wonder why the opposition be- quite a substantial amount. That means that lieve this should somehow be different. If 71 per cent of people with child-care benefit one did not pay their correct amount of other and 61 per cent of people with family tax taxes—whether they be company taxes, benefit got it right. PAYG taxes or anything else—would they They got it right, the department got it also say, ‘That is okay, they do not have to right, everyone got it right. But to listen to pay. Just give them holy absolution and let the opposition you would think that everyone them on their way’? That is not the way the got it wrong and everyone has a huge bill. system works and I would be very surprised Quite the contrary: most debts are very 3620 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 small. Half the family tax benefit overpay- continually frightening people about their ments and the vast majority—in other words, liability and their potential for liability. If over three-quarters—of child-care benefit honourable senators opposite had any de- overpayments, before the waiver, were below cency in this matter, if and when they had $500. So they are not large amounts. The constituents call in with a concern on this debts were very small. issue, they would sit them down and explain The Family Assistance Office does assist what is necessary for those families to do to families to get their estimates right. They be able to comply with the tax law. They explain the implications of understating and would explain to them the fairness of it so overstating their income. What could be that they can get the full benefit when they fairer than that? But once again, that does not want it, whether they want it as a regular seem to worry the opposition. There is no payment or whether they want it at the end of limit as to how many times customers can the year. So if constituents are coming in to adjust their estimate. So it is quite stupid for them—if they ever do, and we certainly sus- anyone to suggest that the system is unfair pect that many of the cases they bring for- because people cannot make the adjustments. ward into this place are, by the sheer lack of They can adjust their estimates as frequently information, furphies—and complaining or as infrequently as they wish. There is no about the issue, then I believe it is their re- prohibition on being able to go in and make a sponsibility, in serving their constituents, to statement of their income. Customers can explain to them the fairness of the situation, choose to estimate their income towards the the additional benefits they are getting, and top of the potential range to reduce any po- the liabilities that they hold for other taxpay- tential risk of overpayment. This is strictly a ers so that they can be entitled to taxpayers’ customer choice. If they choose to go to the money based on the information that they top end to reduce the possibility of an over- provide. payment or they choose to go to the bottom Senator BUCKLAND (South Australia) end so that they get maximum payment but (4.57 p.m.)—I rise to speak in the debate on know the risk, that is their choice. This gov- the motion standing in Senator Ludwig’s ernment is not trying to say, ‘Thou shalt do name and to add my condemnation to the X and Y.’ It is just saying, ‘You shall do what government’s decision to secretly strip fami- you know from the information you have, lies’ tax refund cheques without notice. This not what we think you have.’ is really a most callous measure and is an Let us look at the child-care benefit rec- enormous slap in the face to the many strug- onciliation outcomes as at 28 June this year: gling families on strict budgets, and it under- nil adjustment, 46 per cent; top-up, 24 per cuts the accuracy of advice provided by their cent; total overpayment, 29 per cent. I think tax accountants. that is pretty darn good. We are getting there. The Howard government has now ordered People understand it. The average overpay- the tax office to deduct overpaid family tax ment amount was $267. Getting an average, benefits or child-care benefit from the tax as everyone knows, means that there are go- refunds expected by these struggling fami- ing to be some above and there are going to lies. Previously, the federal government had be some below the average $267 overpay- allowed families to pay back the debts ment. Around 85 per cent of all child-care gradually from future benefits. This should benefit debts were under $500 and approxi- continue to be the case. It is a fair way to do mately 95 per cent of all child-care benefit it and a more decent way to do it. In July last debts were under $1,050 and were fully ex- year Senator Amanda Vanstone stated with tinguished by the application of the waiver. assurance: The average top-up amount was around The government has also decided that it would be $170. easier for any family who still had an excess That is not information that the opposition payment to have it recovered by adjusting their would want on the record because it does not future payments, rather than taking it from their suit their purpose of going out there and tax refund. This is because people may have earmarked their refund for specific things. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3621

On 21 February this year, the head of the stay-at-home mums who have decided to Department of Family and Community return to work either part time or full time Services told Senate estimates that no deci- midway through the financial year. The sys- sion had been taken to automatically strip tem actually claws back the benefits mothers family returns. The government is robbing were entitled to for that part of the year that families of their tax cheque—tax cheques they were at home full time. Many women that they depend upon to pay outstanding who have raised a family make the decision bills and school fees, to make car repairs and that they would like to go back to work, if to replace ageing household appliances. for nothing more than some form of social These are fairly standard things for wage contact. But, in the main, they wish to go earners to use their tax return for. Not only back to work to supplement the family’s in- those who are struggling but also the general come, to give their family a better lifestyle population can use this once a year, one-off and to provide for some of those things that payment of their tax return to take care of would not otherwise be available to the fam- those things that are not always easily taken ily. Earlier in July, the government admitted care of through the rest of the year. That is that the baby bonus tax rebate could be why so many schools do not require the fees wiped out because family payment debt to be paid until the second half of the year— would be deducted. so that the parents of the children at the The Howard government, because of their school can pay the fees when they have the contemptible attack on Australian families, money available. need to be condemned. They need to be con- It seems to me that the minister cannot demned roundly. They are a family un- make up her mind. This secret tax grab stems friendly government. They are a government from the Howard government’s unsound that do not care about those who are in most family payment system that was introduced need. They say, ‘We will just take the money with a great deal of fanfare just two years back; they are not entitled to the money if it ago but is now falling apart at the seams. The is an overpayment.’ I do not think we are system is seriously flawed because families complaining about that—it is the manner in are required to estimate their income for the which the government are taking the money year ahead but if they receive an unexpected back. It can be taken back in a more sympa- pay rise or a promotion or they work over- thetic and realistic manner than it is. This is a time they may have to pay money back to the form of taking money when a person is most government. For those people who have been reliant upon something in their pay packet. forced into the casual or part-time work re- The Howard government would prefer to get gime, which is quite common now with their hands into the pay packet first. maintenance workers and people in the Labor approves of and supports the Om- service industries, it is very difficult to esti- budsman’s decision to investigate the federal mate their expected incomes because it is government’s administration of family pay- casual, because it is part time. The nature of ments and its clawback of payments by the work says that there will be overtime on stripping tax returns without notice. Families some occasions but on others there will not were better off complaining to Centrelink in be. It is difficult in those circumstances to the first instance, as Centrelink had its own make regular adjustments as it is suggested, appeals and review process. It was a process because to make regular adjustments there that worked; it did not need changing. It was has to be a degree of certainty attached to the a process which could provide individual adjustment you are seeking to make. remedies, and the Ombudsman’s report could The really unbelievable aspect of this only recommend systemic changes. Since its system is that, even though families advise commencement the flawed system has Centrelink immediately about their changed caused a great deal of distress for Australian earnings, they still face a debt because of the families. Last year the system ensnared flawed design of an extremely clumsy sys- 650,000 Australian families. This statistic tem. It appears those most at risk are the translates to one in three of the families re- 3622 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 ceiving payments suffering an average debt inefficient, poorly administered—and it is of $850 each. unfair. I do not know how any member of the It was only two years ago that the goods government benches can rise in this chamber and services tax was introduced. On top of and defend the actions of this minister and the disastrous introduction of the GST and its this government in relation to this matter. effects on the pockets of all Australians, The Ombudsman should investigate the gov- these clumsy policies are still being intro- ernment’s decision as it is both unreasonable duced by this clumsy government. It is evi- and totally unwarranted. The Centrelink call dent that the proof is in the pudding. The centre staff say that they were also unaware Howard government have got it wrong. They six weeks ago that tax returns would be have shown themselves to be mean and stripped. This is a government that not only tricky and they govern with no care for the does not tell the people, it does not tell its ordinary Australian. This is simply a top end own people within the tax office what it is of town government who look after their doing. It is a secret society. own and forget the rest. Those families affected and their account- Senator TCHEN (Victoria) (5.12 p.m.)— ants were not advised of what was happen- Before I consider Senator Ludwig’s motion, I ing, as this highly political decision was want to deal with one of the claims made by taken at the last minute with no time to ad- Senator Buckland. He said that people were vise most importantly those affected by this unaware of the family tax benefit reconcilia- measure. That needs condemning more than tion balancing process. I draw Senator anything else. Those affected were not told Buckland’s attention to what Senator Bishop, that it was going to happen. They believed his senior colleague, said yesterday in a that they would get an amount of money be- speech taking note of an answer on the same cause of the advice of their tax accountants, topic. He said: but they got a different amount when the The design features of the scheme are equally cheque finally arrived. That is contemptible well known. Proposed recipients advise Centre- and it is un-Australian. link of their anticipated income and then advise The government seriously need to make Centrelink of actual variations to the proposed an honest assertion that their two-year-old income that occur from time to time in an economy such as ours. The recipients receive family scheme is nothing more than a debt trap for tax payments based on the information provided, Australian families—a debt trap that affects as amended, to Centrelink, and at the end of the most those least able to pay. About a week financial year there is a balancing activity. Over- and a half ago, Senator Vanstone defended payments are recovered as debts; underpayments the government’s debt recovery process by are paid out. And the overpayments are, by and saying that people had had two years to get large, stripped back through the taxation system. used to the system. It does not matter how If Senator Buckland thinks that people are long you have to get used to a system such as not aware of this, or if he is not aware of this, the system is not fair. It is a system that how the system works, I suggest that he is designed to disadvantage ordinary Austra- speak to Senator Bishop. Obviously Senator lians and those who are suffering the most. Bishop has a better understanding of how the Unfortunately for the government, this is system works and he also described it as be- not the only system that has received nega- ing ‘well known’. Given Senator Buckland’s tive scrutiny over the past two years. We see lack of knowledge of how the system works, the same discontent among small businesses I suggest that the Senate disregard the rest of and their accountants with regard to the his presentation because it could be equally BAS. Only recently, thousands of account- as ill informed. ants threatened mutiny against the tax system Returning to Senator Ludwig’s motion, I they described as overcomplicated, ineffec- was struck by the motion’s content because it tive and poorly administered. The same ap- seemed to me that it was a curiously disin- plies to this scheme: it is overcomplicated, genuous—or perhaps a disingenuously curious—motion for Senator Ludwig to move. It Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3623 does not surprise me that he decided not to The $1,000 waiver will also be available where a take part in the debate and to send others to separated parent has incorrectly estimated their speak in it. The crux of the motion is that he share of the care of their child. claims that in July last year Senator Vanstone Then comes the quote that Senator Ludwig promised that the government were going to referred to: deal with the issue of overpayment, that they The Government has also decided that it would be have gone back on it and that that is cruel, easier for any family who still had an excess unkind, callous, unfair and so on and so payment to have it recovered by adjusting their forth. future payments, rather than taking it from their In the motion itself, Senator Ludwig tax refund. quoted a statement by Minister Vanstone on But the minister went on to say: 1 July last year. He said she assured Austra- Now that the new Tax System has been in place lian families that: for a year, families have had time to adjust and The Government has also decided that it would be they should consider carefully their income esti- easier for any family who still had an excess mate for the 2001-2002 financial year. Customers payment to have it recovered by adjusting their can contact the Family Assistance Office to up- future payments, rather than taking it from their date their details as often as they need to ... tax refund. This is because people may have ear- That is the full context of the minister’s marked their refund for use for specific things. statement and anyone who read through it If that is what Minister Vanstone had said— would fully understand the government’s and only if that is what she said—indeed, intention. That waiver was a one-off to allow this motion may have some ground. But I families to adjust. No government can, year would like to inform the Senate of the rele- after year, make the same waiver. If we did vant sections from the full text of the minis- that, what would the point be of having a ter’s statement. In referring to the new family system? So, as I said earlier, Senator tax system, the minister said: Ludwig’s motion is disingenuous in the The new family tax system provided Australian sense that it quotes something out of context families with more than $2 billion extra in their and without explanation and is trying to give pockets. It meant, for the first time ever, top-ups a totally wrong impression of what the gov- are paid to families who have received less than ernment is trying to do. Given that, it gives their actual entitlement because they overesti- us a much better picture of how the current mated their income during the year. supposed crisis that the opposition seems so However, this first year was always going to be excited about came about. It is simply noth- one of transition where some families need extra ing more than some people’s unwillingness help in adjusting to the new arrangements. rather than inability to adjust to a very clear The Government’s information campaign to tell and simple system. families about the changes has been very effec- It may be worth while for me to explain to tive, with some 800,000 families updating their the Senate how the system is supposed to income estimates during the year. However, it has work—in case Senator Buckland or any of become clearer that more needed to be done. the other Labor senators are still interested. While we know that many families have got their Firstly, we could ask the question: how has income estimate right, and they should be con- the government’s family assistance system gratulated, there are still those whose circumstances mean that it is difficult for them to accu- been of benefit to Australian families? In rately estimate their income. July 2000, the family tax benefit and the child-care benefit replaced a complex system That is why we have decided to adopt this lenient approach for the first year—it has been a year of of 12 different social security payments and transition and one where families have been fed a tax rebates. The new system is much simpler, lot of misinformation by the Opposition. fairer and more generous to Australian fami- I think Australian families are still being fed lies. The government’s family assistance misinformation by the opposition. The min- system delivers about $2 billion more a year ister then said: to families. For the first time, top-ups are now paid to families who are underpaid 3624 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 during the year; it has never been done be- entitlements for the year. No-one will be dis- fore. Under the previous system of family advantaged, regardless of how their benefits allowance, overpayments were recovered have been claimed. This ensures a fair and and no top-ups were paid—and that was the equitable outcome for all families. system that the Labor Party operated under. Because reconciliation of family tax bene- What is the reconciliation process? Rec- fit normally occurs once the customer’s and onciliation of family assistance is a checking their partner’s tax returns have been lodged, process that the Family Assistance Office the Family Assistance Office will advise the carries out at the end of each tax year to see Australian Taxation Office of the result of if customers who receive the family tax this reconciliation, which may be an over- benefit and/or child-care benefit as ongoing payment, a top-up or no change to entitle- payments have been paid the correct amount ment. Any top-up payable is included in the of benefit for that year. Family assistance is customer’s tax assessment, if that can be income tested and if customers choose to done. If the customer has a tax debt, the top- receive a family tax benefit as a fortnightly up amount paid will help pay for that tax payment they will have provided the Family debt. If the customer has been overpaid, the Assistance Office with an estimate of the tax office will recover as much of the over- family income for the tax year. The Family payment as possible from the customer’s tax Assistance Office uses the income estimates refund. It is an extremely simple system and provided to work out how much family as- it is difficult to understand how people sistance to pay during the year. At the end of would not be aware of its elements. the financial year, the Family Assistance Of- One of the issues which Labor senators fice compares these estimates with the fam- have much belaboured in this debate is the ily’s actual taxable income provided by the claim that, when the government acts to re- Australian Taxation Office to make sure that cover a debt from a tax refund, that is a cal- they have been paid the right amount for the lous and unfair way of doing things. But you year. If the customer has been paid less fam- get a tax refund if the government owes you ily tax benefit or child-care benefit than they money because there has been an overpay- were entitled to—for example, because their ment of tax. If you have actually received a income was lower than they thought it would greater payment from the government be—the Family Assistance Office will pay through various benefits, the government the extra. That means that the customer’s does not owe you a tax refund. The govern- benefit payments will be topped up for their ment may need to repay you less than you full entitlement. However, if they have un- expect or in fact you may owe the govern- derestimated their income and they have ment. In the case where you expect a large been paid more than they are entitled to, ob- tax refund and it turns out to be smaller, it is viously the Family Assistance Office will not a case of your money being stripped seek to recover the extra payments. I do not from you; you have had to repay your debt— think anyone has any objection to that. as you should. Much has been made of the A family can choose to receive a fort- claim that people will get a shock that they nightly payment or claim the benefits at the did not receive the tax return they expected. I end of the year. In either situation, the cus- want to raise this question: how many people tomer’s entitlements are based on their tax- actually know fairly precisely the amount of able income for the year. Because fortnightly tax refund they will receive each year? If customers are paid on the estimates of their people know their family’s economy—its incomes while customers claiming at the end income and entitlements—well enough to of the year are normally paid when their tax- know how much of a tax refund to expect, able incomes are assessed, if the income fig- are such knowledgeable persons likely to be ures are not properly adjusted some families unable to follow the very simple rules for will be disadvantaged. By adjusting for the reconciliation of family tax benefits? Yet top-ups and overpayments, reconciliation these are the people over whom opposition ensures that all customers receive the correct senators are baring their hearts. That does Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3625 not quite make sense, given what they actu- cent. A sole parent working part time, earn- ally say. ing half the average weekly earnings, with Earlier we heard my colleague Senator two children, with 20 hours of child care for Knowles go to the heart of the matter when the younger child, and with rent assistance, she said the Labor Party did not have any would have received $467.74 in 1996 and real policy of their own and all they were $536.35 in constant dollars in 2001—an in- trying to do was scare people by giving out crease of $68.61 or 14.7 per cent. In the case misinformation or make people worry that of a couple with only one working full time the government was not doing the right and earning average weekly earnings, with thing. To be fair to opposition senators and two children, no child care and no rent as- members, I do not think any of them indi- sistance, in 1996 the weekly earnings were vidually would actually give needy constitu- $564.66; in 2001, they are $653.09—an in- ents coming to their offices misinformation crease of $88.43 or 15.7 per cent. Let us go a or wrong information about what they are bit further down. A couple, both working full entitled to. If they had, I am sure we would time, earning average weekly earnings, with have heard about it. But the reality is that two children, with 50 hours of child care, opposition senators come into this chamber with no rent assistance, would have received day after day and give out misinformation as $885.46 in 1999 and $953 in 2001—an in- they try to scare the general community, es- crease of $67.54 per week in constant dollars pecially those people who are not in the or 7.6 per cent. A couple, both working part group whose support the opposition needs, time—(Time expired) into thinking that this government is callous Senator DENMAN (Tasmania) (5.32 and unfair. However, those people who re- p.m.)—I rise to speak to Senator Ludwig’s ceive the supporting benefits that this gov- general business motion. This year we have ernment provides have very little concern: seen one of the meanest family policies take they know they are doing well. effect. The government has used legislative To demonstrate that, I will explain to the powers to withhold tax refunds to recover Senate an economic model which has been outstanding Centrelink debts. Australian prepared by the University of Canberra’s families are being made to pay dearly for National Centre for Social and Economic poor policy. It is a policy that relies on fami- Modelling, which has made estimates of the lies being able to accurately estimate their disposable incomes, after paying for child income at the beginning of the year. It seems care, of typical family types between Febru- odd to place this pressure on families when ary 1996 and March 2001. This information we do not require other people in the work was originally published in the Australian force to predict their earnings. Even if a newspaper on 27 May 2001. We have about family has complied with the rules, they can 11 different family models. In the first case still be penalised for underestimating their of a sole parent not in the labour force with income by as little as two or three per cent. A two children, one under five and one aged family may have notified Centrelink of between five and 12, with no child-care changes in income, yet there is still no guar- payments outgoing and no rent assistance, in antee that the family will not receive a debt 1996 this parent would have received at the end of the year. This is a nasty policy. $311.68 per week and in 2001, five years While two to three per cent seems a small later, this person would have received amount, when it is translated into a debt it $370.47 in constant dollars, an increase of can hurt a young family on a tight budget. $58.79 or 18.9 per cent. Yesterday, in question time, we heard the If we take another case, that of a sole par- minister say that families who had been ent who is not working, with two children of overpaid did not expect to keep the money; the same age, with no child care, and who yet who is it that overpaid them? Families receives rent assistance, income has in- did not ask to be overpaid. Perhaps if they creased from $355.95 in 1996 to $421.99 in had the money to pay back, it would not be 2001—an increase of $66.04 or 18.6 per such a big deal. The simple fact is that Aus- 3626 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 tralian families are already hurting. They ... families felt powerless to avoid incurring a cannot afford to have their tax refunds de- debt. Families said it was difficult to accurately ducted. They should not be made to pay for estimate their annual income particularly if they the government’s blunders. This policy is worked on contract or were casual workers. inflexible. Irrespective of how dire a family’s Again, this applies to the majority of people financial situation may be at tax refund time, in my area. A far better system would be one if the money is owed it will be taken away. that is efficient and sensitive to the changing Last year, the government recognised its own work patterns of young families, without outrageous demands and waived the first slugging them at the end of the year. Work- $1,000. It also used fortnightly deductions as ing families struggle to make ends meet, of- a means of recovering the excess. This year ten spending tax refunds before they arrive. there is no election looming, so there will be This is not unreasonable; it is about surviv- no Mr Nice Guy and the government will ing in our current economic climate. Last recover the money regardless. year the minister acknowledged this, and she This is a policy that operates in secrecy. even endorsed it, when she said: The government takes money away without The Government has also decided that it would be warning. While it is true that most of these easier for any family who still had an excess families do not have the additional dollars to payment to have it recovered by adjusting their spare, it seems even more evil that the gov- future payments, rather than taking it from their tax refund. This is because people may have ear- ernment would plot such a cruel policy with- marked their refund to use for specific things. out alerting families first. Early notification would have given these families the oppor- Yet something changed around the time of tunity to try and budget for a debt. A far bet- the election or after it. The government went ter approach would be to allow regular re- back on its word and its commitment to conciliations. This policy shows how uncar- thousands of Australian families. It seems ing and out of touch this government is with that this year the government has forgotten families. It is a policy that is hitting one in that families earmark their tax refunds to use three families—approximately 650,000 on specific things. The expectation of having families—by giving them average debts of extra funds at hand from a tax refund can $850. relieve the anxiety of families who are constantly worrying about how the bills are go- The north-west coast of Tasmania—my ing to be paid, even if only for a week or home region—is being hardest hit by this two. A tax refund can provide a lump sum policy because it has the highest unemploy- that means a family can afford to get a car ment figure in my state. It is very difficult for repaired, do household repairs or buy a new those people to accurately estimate what fridge or washing machine. I doubt that those their income will be. What is it that this gov- of us who are not financially stressed can ernment has against Australian families? If fully understand the relief a tax refund can Australian families are not already struggling provide for a family. under daily pressure, they may now face an annual financial burden as well. Where is the Unfairly, this year there will be no relief incentive for a parent to return to work mid- for many families, as their tax refund will be financial year when this may lead to a family taken away from them without them having receiving a debt at the end of the year? Our had any warning. Why is it that those who current system is administratively cumber- are least financially able should be penalised some for parents and relies on a degree of by the government’s poor policy? These good luck and fortune-telling to escape an families are struggling. They are doing the annual debt. Those are rather undesirable best they can to survive, and they cannot characteristics, I think, for a system that afford to have their funds taken away from should be supporting families. An article in them. As a sole parent for a number of years, the Sun Herald, referring to Centrelink mar- I knew what it was like to look forward to ket research data, described the situation, the tax return. I was a sole parent of two saying: children, and I was on a reasonable income as a teacher. But that tax return provided for Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3627 my family the extra bits that we were not difficult times for Australian families. We able to afford during the year. So I can already know that family breakdowns cost imagine what it is like for those families sur- our welfare system through single parent viving from week to week and relying on payments. It is in our interest to make life their tax income not to get it. In my case, the easier for these families, not harder. Yet is it tax refund was probably an added luxury, any wonder that family breakdowns are enabling me to take the kids on a holiday or growing, when we place families under such something. pressure? But for people in today’s society, it is very I have a friend who lives just out of Mel- different. It is all very well for the govern- bourne. Every fortnight, she works at a food ment to chant the virtues of saving money to co-op on a voluntary basis. She was telling families. But how can we realistically expect me recently how the food co-op has had a young families to save or to raise their stan- greater demand for products. The people dard of living when they are flat out trying to accessing that food co-op have to be recom- survive under increased financial pressures? mended by one of the church charities or by The GST has cost families dearly. It added Centrelink. But it is becoming very difficult costs to essential goods and services. Young for the co-op, particularly because of the sin- families are now finding it harder to find a gle parent families, to meet the needs of the doctor who will bulk-bill, and they are pay- community. ing more to see their GPs. Had it not been for Labor recognises and understands the the Labor and Democrat parties opposing delicate financial situation of young families. changes to the Pharmaceutical Benefits It was Labor who encouraged outraged Scheme, the cost of medicines for families young families to contact the Ombudsman’s would also have risen this year. For families office and voice their concerns. The govern- with mortgages, their financial situation is ment’s policy is flawed and requires urgent only going to worsen when expected interest attention. The government has chosen to add rate hikes take effect. It is in these circum- families to the growing list of economically stances that this mean family policy is taking disadvantaged groups in Australia. This year, effect. the Australian Council of Social Service, An article in the Canberra Times on 6 ACOSS, firmly criticised the government for August noted a Commonwealth Bank com- all its penalties for Centrelink breaches and missioned survey that revealed that, in July also for the inadequate social security pay- 2002, 60 per cent of national households ments paid to university students, to name a were finding it hard to make ends meet and few areas. were finding it hard to save. This is a 12 per- We are told that the government’s plat- centage point rise from the same time last form for this term is ‘work and family’. Yet year. We have to wonder at and think about experience suggests this government is anti- that. Australian families are doing it tough, families. This government seems intent on and it is ironic that at these times the gov- making life difficult for Australian families. ernment chooses to take away vital funds In 1997, the government put a two-year from families. Pushing families into difficult funding freeze on child-care subsidies, leav- financial circumstances will have adverse ing thousands of families unable to afford consequences. The General Manager of the child care. This year we have seen the gov- Smith Family Canberra, Mr Bill Morris, ernment refuse to give a commitment on paid said: maternity leave. If more people are not able to make provision We urgently need policies that address the for any unforeseen event, including illness, re- growing problems in our family and welfare dundancy or a broken relationship, they could find themselves in a crisis situation. system. We need to take away the unnecessary pressure that so many families are feel- Mr Morris also reported that the number of ing as they struggle to make ends meet. At a Canberra residents accessing all the Smith time when we daily hear about our declining Family’s programs had increased. These are birth rate and the need to stimulate popula- 3628 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 tion growth, the government seems intent on they need—policies that are designed to al- penalising the very people it should be sup- low Australians to make the choice between porting. The government talks of respecting having children and working. It is for these the rights and choices of young families but, reasons that the Labor Party condemns the in reality, it is taking away these rights and Howard government and its contemptible choices through a lack of support and assis- attack on Australian families. tance for families. Senator TIERNEY (New South Wales) The government has made much of its (5.47 p.m.)—I also rise to speak on Senator baby bonus initiative which, in reality, falls Ludwig’s motion in relation to the family tax short of providing real assistance to families. system. I was rather amazed by Senator The bonus works out to provide an average Denman’s contribution. As I was listening to of $10 per week to families. It is a token what she was saying, I was trying to tie it up amount—an amount which may allow fami- with reality. I was also trying to relate what lies to afford an extra packet of disposable she was saying to the way in which our tax nappies, but not much else. It fails to take and income systems work for people who are into account the increasing costs facing in these situations, and I have great difficulty families. The baby bonus is also able to be doing that. Senator Denman did not take into accessed by people on very high incomes. It account a number of important aspects of the is unfair and an indication of the govern- way in which we have reformed these payment’s own incompetence that it is unable to ment systems. When we came into govern- recognise simple observations such as: those ment, there were 12 different types of pay- least well off require more assistance than ment systems. People who had to access those in relatively better financial circum- benefits in some way were faced with this stances. It is initiatives like this one that will amazing array of tax and welfare systems, allow the growing divide between rich and and they would need professional assistance poor to increase. It is a disappointing reality to find their way through such a package. when families must be grateful for any as- One of the things we did when we came into sistance they can get from this government, government, and one of the things we did rather than rightly expecting to be extended a with the tax reforms in 1998, was to make fair system that grants them reasonable as- the system far simpler and fairer. We intro- sistance. duced a number of features that did not exist This policy is hurting Australian families. before, which I will refer to later on, that Labor has opposed the policy because it dis- improved the level of fairness. We have put agrees that families who have complied with more than $2 billion into the system that ex- the rules should have their tax returns isted under the previous Labor government. stripped without warning. But it is not only So statements by Senator Denman that we Labor that opposes this initiative. Yesterday, are being unfair and that the way we have set in a media release, my colleague Mr Wayne it up is nasty do not relate to reality at all. Swan quoted from a coalition backbencher’s I would like to explain some of the aspects letter to the minister, which noted: of the way in which the system of payments ... families on lower incomes wait in anticipation works because, obviously, people like Sena- of their tax return to be able to pay off outstand- tor Denman have not read the documentation ing debts and provide extra necessities for their that explains this. If she had done that, she children … I do believe that to take this money would have realised that, in terms of over- from families who are not even aware of their payment and underpayment, it is incredibly debts puts them at a great and unfair disadvan- fair and no different to what we are used to tage. when we deal with the tax system. If you are If you will not listen to the Labor Party, overpaid or underpaid, there has to be a rec- please listen to your own party members. onciliation at some point. If you do not do Australian families deserve better than this. that, what happens to the equity situations? They should be delivered policies that pro- You are getting an advantage over people in vide them with the support and assistance the system who do not have that sort of ca- Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3629 pacity. So I really felt that Senator Denman more sensible and integrated system than did not quite understand how the system Labor ever set up. worked. And she is not alone amongst her Let me make clear one particular aspect of opposition colleagues. If people listened the system that has changed in recent years, carefully to the questions that were asked of and this relates to family allowance over- Senator Vanstone yesterday and listened payments, which were recovered under the carefully to Senator Vanstone’s replies, last government—when I say they were re- where each Aunt Sally that was set up was covered, I mean they recovered some of hit for six—and the opposition adopted a them. The important point is that no top-ups fairly common tactic of saying, ‘Let’s have a were made if the payments went the other look at this person’s case. Isn’t this terribly way: the government won each way in the unfair?’—what Senator Vanstone proved financing of this. Over 400,000 top-ups of quite conclusively, as case after case was family tax benefits and child-care benefits bowled up yesterday, was that that is not were paid in the 2000-01 financial year, true; that is not unfair. As a matter of fact, where families had overestimated their in- she proved—and senators opposite can cer- come. That would not have happened under tainly read the Hansard transcript—that it is the Labor government. I did not note that incredibly fair. It is a lot fairer than what Senator Denman included that in her ‘nasty’ happened when this opposition was last in description—I would not have thought that government. was nasty at all; that is quite sensible and I had a large family at home during that fair. But Senator Denman and other speakers time, and I know what happened to family on the other side have chosen to ignore to- tax and welfare benefits over those 13 years: tally the positive aspects of the system. Some the whole thing was wound back. We found $300 million has been paid in top-ups in the that the support levels from government over 2000-01 financial year under the family tax the period from 1983 onwards were gradu- benefits and child-care benefit entitlement ally wound back. This government has re- schemes. How could the opposition really versed that process, so all Senator Denman’s question the fairness of such payments? rhetoric about nasty governments and unfair- I would like to give a specific, concrete ness does not stack up against the reality of example of the fairness of this, when Senator the current situation. What we did with our Bishop’s question was hit for six by Senator family tax and child-care benefits systems Vanstone yesterday. Senator Bishop asked: was to replace an extremely outdated system. Is the minister aware that a Canberra family, We have made things much easier for all whose accountant lodged their 2000-01 tax return Australians through the set-up of places like three days after the government’s top-up deadline Centrelink, for example, where all these of 30 June this year, missed out on $2,000 worth things are integrated and people have one- of family payments? stop shops they can go to in relation to bene- That sounded unfair. That was Senator fits. Bishop’s question—I see he has looked up None of this existed under the Labor gov- from his newspaper and has developed some ernment. As a matter of the fact, in my own interest at this point in the debate, seeing as I city, they were in separate parts of the city have quoted him. To his great embarrass- and people had to trudge between them. The ment—Senator Bishop will remember last government did not even have the nous Senator Vanstone’s reply; I will bet he to put them in the same building. We have wished he had not asked the question after he integrated them under the one system of got the reply—Senator Vanstone replied: payments. You can go to particular offices, If they want us to rely on their estimates to keep get a response and not have to do the bureau- paying them, all we require is that they put in a cratic run-around. With this system, we have tax return so that we can do the reconciliation, overall benefited 1.8 million Australian and they have 12 months to do that. Families that families and 3.5 million children with a do it late do not get a top-up; you can hardly much better level of benefit and a much complain about that—your previous government never gave top-ups. 3630 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

Do you remember that, Senator Bishop? I terday. She had this to say in reply to yet think you were here at the time when your another silly question, this time from Senator government did not give top-ups. Regarding Forshaw, who was quoting the case of a con- the 12-month deadline, is that really too stituent who had $412 stripped from her much to ask? Dates and deadlines are put in $1,150 tax return when both she and her for particular reasons, and that is so you can husband updated their tax estimate through- run your country and your public finances out the year. Senator Vanstone replied: effectively and efficiently. It is not ungener- ... it is possible for people to say to you, ‘I ... up- ous. The whole point of the question was an dated my income estimates,’ but to forget to say, indication that the opposition did not really ‘I did it on 31 May near the end of the financial understand the way the system works. I year so ... I would have an overpayment of wel- would like to quote a very clear, concise fare ... “I want to borrow this, but I want to pay it summary of how the system does work—for back slowly over time; I want an advantage that the edification of the opposition, as they ob- other people on my income haven’t got.”’ viously do not understand it. This material I think that sums up the failure of the oppo- from the family tax benefit package might sition yesterday in their attack. I was abso- enlighten them: lutely amazed that they wasted their opposi- Family Tax Benefit and Child Care Benefit can be tion business time today on a matter that was received during the tax year as fortnightly pay- so clearly explained in the documentation ments or claimed at the end of the tax year. and when the fairness of the system was very Either way, the customer’s entitlement is based on clearly and amply demonstrated yesterday by their taxable income for that year. the minister, Senator Vanstone. That sounds fair— Debate interrupted. Fortnightly customers are paid on their estimates DOCUMENTS of their taxable income while customers claiming The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT at the end of the year normally are paid when (Senator McLucas)—Order! It being 6 p.m., their taxable income is assessed. we will proceed to consideration of govern- By adjusting for top-ups and overpayments, rec- ment documents. There are 270 government onciliation ensures that all customers receive their documents listed for consideration, starting correct entitlement for the year, regardless of how at page 14 of today’s Notice Paper, and there they have claimed. is a limit of 37 minutes for their considera- This ensures— tion. To expedite the consideration of docu- And let me emphasise this to the Labor op- ments I propose, with the concurrence of position— honourable senators, to call the documents in a fair and equitable outcome for all families. groups of 20. Documents called in each This is an extremely clear explanation. I am group to which no senator rises will be taken very surprised that the opposition did not to be discharged from the Notice Paper. come across this document when they did Documents not called on today will remain their research. If they had done that and if on the Notice Paper. There being no objec- they understood how the system works, they tion, it is so ordered. would not have been here yesterday having Consideration their questions hit for six by Senator The following orders of the day relating to Vanstone. Family assistance is income tested government documents were considered: and, if customers choose to receive family Australian Law Reform Commission—Re- tax benefits as fortnightly payments, they ports—No. 92—The judicial power of the have to provide the Family Assistance Office Commonwealth—A review of the Judiciary with an estimate of their family’s income for Act 1903 and related legislation. Motion of the tax year. Again, the whole arrangement is Senator Ludwig to take note of document quite fair. agreed to. Finally, as my time has nearly expired, I Aged Care Act 1997—Report for 2000-01 on will quote Senator Vanstone in answers yes- the operation of the Act. Motion to take note of document agreed to. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3631

Wet Tropics Management Authority—Report Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade— for 2000-01. Motion of Senator Bartlett to Reports for 2000-01—Volume 2—Australian take note of document agreed to. Agency for International Development Aged Care Standards and Accreditation (AusAid). Motion to take note of document Agency Limited—Report for 2000-01. Mo- agreed to. tion of Senator Buckland to take note of Insolvency and Trustee Service Australia— document agreed to. Report for 2000-01. Motion of Senator Tiwi Land Council—Report for 2000-01. Ludwig to take note of document agreed to. Motion of Senator Ludwig to take note of Bankruptcy Act 1966—Inspector-General in document agreed to. Bankruptcy—Report for 2000-01 on the op- Torres Strait Regional Authority—Report for eration of the Act. Motion of Senator Ludwig 2000-01. Motion of Senator Ludwig to take to take note of document agreed to. note of document called on. On the motion Office of Film and Literature Classifica- of Senator Buckland debate was adjourned tion—Classification Board and Classification till Thursday at general business. Review Board—Reports for 2000-01. Mo- Aboriginal Hostels Limited—Report for the tion of Senator Ludwig to take note of period 25 June 2000 to 23 June 2001. Motion document agreed to. of Senator Ludwig to take note of document Department of the Environment and Heri- agreed to. tage—Report for 2000-01, including the re- Indigenous Land Corporation—Report for port of the Supervising Scientist and reports 2000-01. Motion of Senator Ludwig to take on the operation of the Hazardous Waste note of document agreed to. (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act and the Ozone Protection Act 1989. Motion of Northern Land Council—Report for 2000- Senator Bartlett to take note of document 01. Motion of Senator Ludwig to take note of agreed to. document agreed to. National Oceans Office—Report for 2000- Australian Postal Corporation (Australia 01. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take note of Post)—Report for 2000-01. Motion of document agreed to. Senator Mackay to take note of document agreed to. Defence Force Retirement and Death Bene- fits Authority—Report for 2000-01. Motion Centrelink—Report for 2000-01. Motion to to take note of document agreed to. take note of document agreed to. Department of Family and Community Department of Immigration and Multicul- Services—Report for 2000-01. Motion to tural Affairs—Report for 2000-01, including take note of document agreed to. reports pursuant to the Immigration (Educa- tion) Act 1971 and the Australian Citizenship Health Insurance Commission—Report for Act 1948. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take 2000-01. Motion to take note of document note of document agreed to. agreed to. Department of Reconciliation and Aboriginal Crimes Act 1914—Report on controlled op- and Torres Strait Islander Affairs—Report erations for 2000-01. Motion of Senator for the period 30 January to 30 June 2001. Hogg to take note of document agreed to. Motion of Senator Ludwig to take note of National Library of Australia—Report for document agreed to. 2000-01. Motion of Senator Tierney to take Australian Customs Service—Report for note of document agreed to. 2000-01. Motion of Senator Ludwig to take Australia New Zealand Food Authority— note of document agreed to. Report for 2000-01. Motion to take note of Australian Federal Police—Report for 2000- document agreed to. 01, including a report pursuant to the Com- Witness Protection Act 1994—Report for plaints (Australian Federal Police) Act 1981. 2000-01 on the operation of the Act. Motion Motion of Senator Ludwig to take note of of Senator Hogg to take note of document document agreed to. agreed to. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade— Refugee Review Tribunal—Report for 2000- Reports for 2000-01—Volume 1—Depart- 01. Motion of Senator Hogg to take note of ment of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Motion to document agreed to. take note of document agreed to. 3632 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Australian Research Council—Report for Safety Agency—Report for 2000-01. Motion 2000-01. Motion of Senator Tierney to take of Senator Bartlett to take note of document note of document agreed to. agreed to. Social Security Appeals Tribunal—Report Department of Employment, Workplace Re- for 2000-01. Motion of Senator Bartlett to lations and Small Business—Report for take note of document agreed to. 2000-01. Motion of Senator Hutchins to take Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority— note of document agreed to. Report for 2000-01. Motion of Senator Inspector-General of Intelligence and Secu- Bartlett to take note of document agreed to. rity—Report for 2000-01. Motion to take Forest and Wood Products Research and De- note of document agreed to. velopment Corporation—Report for 2000- Australian Fisheries Management Author- 01. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take note of ity—Report for 2000-01. Motion of Senator document agreed to. Bartlett to take note of document agreed to. Federal Magistrates Service—Report for Fisheries Research and Development Corpo- 2000-01. Motion of Senator Hogg to take ration and Fisheries Research and Develop- note of document agreed to. ment Corporation Selection Committee— Family Court of Australia—Report for 2000- Reports for 2000-01. Motion of Senator 01. Motion of Senator Hogg to take note of Bartlett to take note of document agreed to. document agreed to. Grains Research and Development Corpora- Australian Communications Authority—Re- tion—Report for 2000-01. Motion of Senator port for 2000-01. Motion of Senator Mackay Bartlett to take note of document agreed to. to take note of document agreed to. Migration Review Tribunal—Report for Report on Indigenous funding, 2001— 2000-01. Motion of Senator Bartlett to take Commonwealth Grants Commission—Gov- note of document agreed to. ernment response, June 2002. Motion of Comcare—Report for 2000-01, including the Senator Crossin to take note of document report of QWL Corporation Pty Limited. agreed to. Motion of Senator Hogg to take note of Office of the Renewable Energy Regulator— document agreed to. Report for 2001. Motion of Senator Bartlett Attorney-General’s Department—Report for to take note of document agreed to. 2000-01. Motion of Senator Ludwig to take General business orders of the day Nos 53-268 note of document agreed to. relating to government documents were called on Defence—Report for 2000-01. Motion to but no motion was moved. take note of document agreed to. COMMITTEES Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Consideration Commission—Report for 2000-01. Motion of Senator Hogg to take note of document The following orders of the day relating to agreed to. committee reports and government responses Australian Industrial Relations Commission were considered: and Australian Industrial Registry—Reports Scrutiny of Bills—Standing Committee— for 2000-01. Motion of Senator Hogg to take Report—Work of the committee during the note of document agreed to. 39th Parliament, November 1998-October Federal Court of Australia—Report for 2001. Motion of Senator Ray to take note of 2000-01. Motion of Senator Hogg to take report agreed to. note of document agreed to. Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Office of Parliamentary Counsel—Report for Legislation Committee—Interim report— 2000-01. Motion of Senator Hogg to take Administration of AusSAR in relation to the note of document agreed to. search for the Margaret J. Motion of Senator Calvert to take note of report agreed to. Department of Health and Aged Care—Re- port for 2000-01, including a report on the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport administration and operation of Therapeutic Legislation Committee—Interim report— Goods Administration—Volumes 1 and 2. Proposed importation of fresh apple fruit Motion to take note of document agreed to. from New Zealand. Motion of Senator Cal- vert to take note of report agreed to. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3633

Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport stration by the Department of Transport and Legislation Committee—Interim report— Regional Services of Australian Motor Vehi- Administration of the Civil Aviation Safety cle Standards under the Motor Vehicle Stan- Authority. Motion of Senator Calvert to take dards Act 1989 and Regulations. Motion of note of the report agreed to. Senator Harris to take note of report agreed Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport to. Legislation Committee—Report—The intro- Legal and Constitutional Legislation Com- duction of quota management controls on mittee—Report—Australian Security Intelli- Australian beef exports to the United States gence Organisation Legislation Amendment by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and (Terrorism) Bill 2002. Motion of Senator Forestry. Motion to take note of report Calvert to take note of report agreed to. agreed to. Parliamentary Joint Committee on ASIO, Community Affairs References Committee— ASIS and DSD—Advisory report—Austra- Report (on the inquiry into nursing)—The lian Security Intelligence Organisation Leg- patient profession: Time for action. Motion islation Amendment (Terrorism) Bill 2002. to take note of report agreed to. Motion of Senator Calvert to take note of re- Privileges—Standing Committee—105th report agreed to. port—Execution of search warrants in sena- Legal and Constitutional References Com- tors’ officers—Senator Harris. Motion of the mittee—Report—Outsourcing of the Austra- chair of the committee (Senator Ray)—That lian Customs Service’s Information Technol- the Senate endorse the finding at paragraph ogy. Motion of Senator Ludwig to take note 22 of the 105th report—agreed to. of report agreed to. Privileges—Standing Committee—104th re- Treaties—Joint Standing Committee— port—Possible false or misleading evidence Report 44—Four nuclear safeguards treaties before the Parliamentary Joint Committee on tabled in August 2001 Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund. Motion of the Report 45—The Statute of the International chair of the committee (Senator Ray)—That Criminal Court. the Senate endorse the finding at paragraph Motion to take note of reports agreed to. 65 of the 104th report—agreed to. Legal and Constitutional References Com- Privileges—Standing Committee—103rd re- mittee—Report—Inquiry into s. 46 and s. 50 port—Possible improper influence and pen- of the Trade Practices Act 1974. Motion to alty on a senator. Motion of the chair of the take note of report agreed to. committee (Senator Ray)—That the Senate Regulations and Ordinances—Standing endorse the findings at paragraphs 1.60 to Committee—110th report—Annual report 1.62 of the 103rd report—agreed to. 2000-01. Motion of the chairman of the Privileges—Standing Committee—102nd committee (Senator Tchen) to take note of report—Counsel to the Senate. Motion of the report agreed to. chair of the committee (Senator Ray) to take Legal and Constitutional References Com- note of report agreed to. mittee—Report—Human Rights (Mandatory Senators’ Interests—Standing Committee— Sentencing for Property Offences) Bill 2000. Report—2/2002: Proposed changes to reso- Motion to take note of report agreed to. lutions relating to declarations of senators’ Economics References Committee—Re- interests and gifts to the Senate and the Par- port—Inquiry into mass marketed tax effec- liament. Motion of the chair of the commit- tive schemes and investor protection. Motion tee (Senator Denman) to take note of report to take note of report agreed to. agreed to. Superannuation and Financial Services— Environment, Communications, Information Select Committee—Report—Early access to Technology and the Arts Legislation Com- superannuation benefits. Motion of Senator mittee—Report—Broadcasting Services Sherry to take note of report agreed to. Amendment (Media Ownership) Bill 2002. Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Motion of Senator Mackay to take note of Business and Education References Com- report agreed to. mittee—Report—Universities in crisis: Re- Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport port into the capacity of public universities to Legislation Committee—Report—Admini- meet Australia’s higher education needs— 3634 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

Addendum. Motion to take note of document Orders of the day Nos 5-45 relating to reports of agreed to. the Auditor-General were called on but no motion Australian Security Intelligence Organisa- was moved. tion—Joint Statutory Committee—Report— ADJOURNMENT A watching brief: The nature, scope and ap- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT propriateness of ASIO’s public reporting activities—Government response. Motion of (Senator McLucas)—Order! Consideration Senator Sandy Macdonald to take note of of committee and other documents has now document agreed to. concluded, and I propose the question: Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Refer- That the Senate do now adjourn. ences Committee—Report—Recruitment Unauthorised Publication of Photograph and retention of ADF personnel. Motion of Senator Hogg to take note of report agreed Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special to. Minister of State) (6.06 p.m.)—Last evening it was asserted by an honourable senator that Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education References Com- a picture in a brochure—incidentally, mailed mittee—Report—The education of gifted out only to Liberal Party members in the children. Motion of Senator Tierney to take electorate of Denison—had ‘brought consid- note of the report agreed to. erable pain’ to someone living in Far North Community Affairs References Committee— Queensland. The honourable senator who Report—Healing our hospitals: Report on raised the matter last evening raised the per- public hospital funding—Government re- son’s name publicly in this place on an eve- sponse. Motion to take note of document ning that, as the senator would have been agreed to. aware, the Senate was being broadcast, thus Orders of the day Nos 1-4, 19, 20 and 24-28 re- ensuring that any pain suffered by the lady lating to committee reports and government re- who was in the photograph would be multi- sponses were called on but no motion was moved. plied a hundred times over. DOCUMENTS The fact that it was raised more than two Consideration months after the event and after the total The following orders of the day relating to brochure was publicised by another left-wing reports of the Auditor-General were consid- Labor MP raises the issue of credibility. That ered: is especially the case when one notes this: if the honourable senator were genuinely ag- Auditor-General—Audit report No. 16 of grieved, why on earth would the honourable 2001-02—Performance audit—Defence Re- senator seek to publicise the matter and trawl form Program management and outcomes: Department of Defence. Motion of Senator the person’s name across the airwaves and Hogg to take note of document agreed to. provide exposure of that person’s name to tens of thousands of her fellow Australians? Auditor-General—Audit report No. 24 of 2001-02—Performance audit—Status re- The damage from that stunt will, of course, porting of major defence acquisition proj- be far greater than a very small mail-out in ects: Department of Defence. Motion of the second most southern electorate of Aus- Senator Hogg to take note of document tralia about someone residing in the north- agreed to. ernmost electorate in Australia. The honour- Auditor-General—Audit report No. 26 of able senator who raised the matter has, un- 2001-02—Performance audit—Management fortunately, an unenviable reputation of fraud and incorrect payment in Centrelink. amongst other left-wing MPs for being pa- Motion to take note of document agreed to. tronising of our Indigenous community. Auditor-General—Audit report No. 30 of Senator Crossin—Madam Acting Deputy 2001-02—Performance audit—Test and President, I rise on a point of order. I believe evaluation of major defence equipment ac- Senator Abetz is casting some aspersions on quisitions: Department of Defence. Motion a sitting member of the Senate and I think he of Senator Hogg to take note of document agreed to. should withdraw those comments. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3635

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT always, I indicated that the photographs may (Senator McLucas)—I think that, given the be used in conjunction with my work as a circumstances, there is no point of order. senator and a member of the joint native title Senator ABETZ—The crocodile tears committee et cetera, and there was no prob- that were shed yesterday highlight this. Why lem with that, as expressed to me. broadcast and multiply the alleged hurt hun- Senator McLucas—She didn’t ever say dreds of times over and to thousands of peo- that to you. ple and thus occasion, allegedly, even more Senator ABETZ—I know the discussion hurt? A genuine approach would have been that I had and I also know that the aim of my to approach me—the author of the bro- work with the native title committee has al- chure—to ascertain the extent of its distribu- ways been to try to get the best possible re- tion and then indicate a particular course of sult for our Indigenous community. The bro- action. But why the senator would trawl the chure was entitled A rabbit proof fence full of name through on a broadcast day as a politi- holes. It did detail that Molly Craig said, cal stunt months after the brochure was pub- ‘That’s not my story.’ The brochure con- lished is beyond me. I think it exposes the tained an article by a former distinguished speech last night as being not genuine but a minister for Aboriginal affairs, Peter How- stunt. As the senator indicated, the brochure son, and by Des Moore from the Institute of did have a photo on the back page. I will Public Affairs. I believe it is a sound and read the back page of the brochure into the reasoned article. Hansard. It said: Senator McLucas—Nobody else does. As a former chairman of the Joint Statutory Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal Senator ABETZ—I hear the interjection: and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund, I have often ‘Nobody else does.’ I can assure you that I been asked my view on Rabbit Proof Fence. I do, and I can assure you that a lot of other viewed the film with great interest. Unfortunately, people do. The actual person, Molly Craig, I came away feeling that in an effort to sensation- after a special screening of the film, was alise an already incredible story truth was the first quoted in the media as saying, ‘That’s not thing to go. It would seem that the movie’s sub- my story.’ ject, Molly Craig, feels the same way. When shown a special screening of the movie she Senator McLucas—You are quoting her stated, ‘That’s not my story.’ The facts of Austra- out of context. lia’s shared past can often be hard and unpalatable Senator ABETZ—The Sun Herald, on 17 to address but untruths and exaggerations only February 2002, is also guilty of that. That complicate the matter. Someone once said that if means, therefore, that a few people, other you add to the truth you subtract from it. than just those two people, were of that par- Yours truly, Eric Abetz, Special Minister of State ticular view. What we have seen from the and Liberal Senator for Tasmania. senator in question is the pulling of a stunt. If We can go into the ins and outs of this situa- it were a genuine matter, private contact tion. I was honoured to be able to meet this would have been made with me to ascertain particular person in Far North Queensland in the extent of the distribution and dialogue the circumstances outlined by the honourable would have been entered into. Instead we senator in her speech to the Senate last night. had the shameless stunt of naming this per- The person who was named—and I have no son publicly—to tens of thousands of Aus- intention of naming the person this even- tralians, no doubt—courtesy of the Labor ing—is a renowned artist. When I first came senator. It highlights the lack of credibility of to this place eight years ago I spotted a piece the honourable senator in raising it. As I of her artwork in the parliamentary collec- said, it was a little brochure that had very tion and have had it displayed in my office limited circulation in the second most south- ever since, never having known or met the ern electorate in Australia. artist—I simply liked the piece of artwork. Senator McLucas—How is that relevant? Whilst I was with this person in Far North Queensland, photographs were taken. As The PRESIDENT—Order! Continued interjections and comments from the left in- 3636 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 vite answers from my right and I do not be- that I was giving a one-sided or union based lieve that is in order. I ask the minister to opinion on some of those bills. I thought I ignore the interjections and address his re- was right and in fact I have proven myself to marks through the chair. Interjections on my have been right—I did know what small left are not acceptable either. business was worried about. Senator ABETZ—Thank you, Mr Presi- We have seen the ‘more jobs, better pay’ dent. Anybody who knows me will be fully bill. We have seen the fair dismissal and the aware that I— fair termination bills—I am not too sure of Senator Crossin—That you are cunning the difference between those; I have never and sly and use Aboriginal people for your known a fair dismissal—both of which, own advantage. paradoxically, permit dismissal and termination without remedy. Earlier this week we The PRESIDENT—Order! I would ask saw the compulsory union fees bill, which is you to withdraw those remarks please. a non-issue when there is a whole range of Senator ABETZ—That is very offensive, other important issues to consider for small Senator Crossin. business—important issues that small busi- Senator Crossin—I withdraw. ness raise. The real issues that I have found The PRESIDENT—Thank you. in talking to small business since the earlier debates are the extra administration costs and Senator ABETZ—Thank you for with- workload required as a result of BAS, con- drawing that. Those people who know of my cerns about public liability insurance and the service on the native title committee would confusion small business have over the be aware of my commitment for practical Commonwealth privacy legislation, to name reconciliation for our Indigenous community. but some. My service on that committee was something that I took very seriously, because I am one The unfair dismissal laws are not the main of those people who believes that our In- issues of concern for small business opera- digenous community is without doubt the tors. In fact, of those I spoke with—and there most disadvantaged group within our com- were many—it did not rate a second men- munity and needs the assistance of all par- tion. This leads me to believe, and confirms liamentarians in this place. Trying to use my own belief, that the government is failing them as political footballs is patronising, to address the real issues and is trying to dis- manipulative and demeaning. To broadcast tract us with these various workplace rela- the person’s name publicly as a political tions reforms. They are reforms designed to stunt to tens of thousands of Australians via go nowhere apart from bashing unions and the airwaves, as the senator did, shows that disadvantaging Australian workers. It is what she was on about was nothing but a quite obvious that proper recruitment and cheap stunt. It lacks credibility and I do not staff management practices both lead to think it does the cause of our Indigenous minimising the risk of unfair dismissal community any benefit. (Time expired) claims, and they are also an important element in the growth of a successful business. Workplace Relations: Small Business How often do we find small business without Senator BUCKLAND (South Australia) the ability and the skills to properly recruit (6.16 p.m.)—Mr President, I take this op- their staff and do checks on those staff before portunity of congratulating you on your ele- employing them, or where their own busi- vation to the presidency. It is the first op- ness practices must be questioned? portunity I have had. Tonight I would like to Many a fine tradesperson has started a speak on the concerns of small business and small business to practise their trade, but the various workplace relations bills we have upon employing another person to assist seen in this chamber in recent times. I rise have found that they do not have the skills to tonight because, during earlier debates, it manage and grow the business or to properly was suggested that some, including me, did select those who work for them. It is my be- not know enough about small business and lief that a new employer should always get Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3637 good advice as to their responsibilities in which they describe as overcomplicated, in- relation to prospective employees. We have efficient and poorly administered. Account- to ask: what is the government doing about ants delivered an ultimatum and 300 letters educating, and making themselves accessible of complaint to the Australian Taxation Of- to, small business owners to assist them with fice. That is cause for concern no matter who their responsibilities? It would appear to me is in government. But it does one thing: it that the government is doing very little. La- shows that the focus of this government is bor has always seen unfair dismissal laws as yet again on the wrong thing. being as much educative as regulatory. The Institute of Chartered Accountants In talking to employees, it is interesting to complain of inconsistent and incorrect advice note that they understand their obligations to from the ATO, an avalanche of unnecessary the employer. These same people, the work- paperwork and ridiculous compliance re- ers, always believe that they can turn to their quirements under threat of penalties. They union for advice and, if they are not in a un- complain about duplication of demands due ion, to the department of labour in its various to lack of integration of the ATO’s systems guises state to state—in South Australia I and hours wasted on hold on the ATO think it is the Department of Workplace Re- helpline, hoping for a response. It just goes lations. They can get assistance from their to highlight yet again that lack of focus on union and, generally, they are directed to a the real issues. This government has this union anyway. But the employer does not great ambition to hurt the workers. (Time seem to have that same feeling of obligation expired) to get sound and good advice. They feel that Sugar Industry: Queensland what they do has to be right and therefore cannot be challenged. This government, with Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (6.26 its industrial relations reforms, is promoting p.m.)—At the outset I want to say that I ab- that very thing. Whatever the boss says must solutely refute the shameless response by be right, when many times it is proven that Senator Abetz to my call last night for an the boss and his views are quite wrong. To apology to my constituent whose photograph take away the right of appeal of a worker he published in a brochure without her per- who has been dismissed is negligent on the mission. I will respond more fully to Senator part of the government. Abetz’s comments next week. So whilst the work force understands the Tonight I rise to send a message to gov- system and whilst Labor believes that it is ernment. The sugar industry is a $1 billion really a matter of education more than regu- industry which is facing a crisis. It is an in- lation, the government just does not seem to dustry that needs help and it needs it now. In share the same view. There is no shared or fact it really needed it some months ago. mutual obligation within the workplace un- Two weeks ago I visited sugar communities der the legislation this government wants to between Mackay and Cairns with the Labor impose. It is very one-sided and unfair and spokesperson for primary industries, Senator gives the worker no right of appeal. Kerry O’Brien. Senator O’Brien and I heard first-hand about the difficulties the industry The government should be focusing its is facing and the associated impacts on local energies on the problems that business face communities. with the BAS. It should be focusing on the problems it has caused for small business Since 1998 the industry has been battling and small business accountants. Last week poor seasons, floods, and now, drought, and Kerry O’Brien aired a story on Lateline major pest infestations including devastating about accountants threatening mutiny against orange rust and cane grubs. More than $700 the tax system. Apparently, any backped- million has been wiped from the industry alling the Howard government did on the since 1998. Four bad seasons and unprece- BAS rules last year has not fixed any of the dented low world prices have left cane farm- problems. Thousands of accountants are now ers struggling and many of the associated threatening mutiny against the tax system communities facing economic chaos. Many 3638 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 of these communities are in North Queen- per cent to 30 per cent of more than 6,500 sland, a region which I am proud to say I am cane farmers in Queensland could leave the from. The sugar industry are not asking for a industry in the next few months. I am con- handout, but they do need assistance. They cerned about the impact that this will have are asking the federal government for sup- not only on individual farming families but port, recognising that they do need to change also on the local communities and towns and to restructure. from Nambour to Mossman who depend on Let us put that request for support in con- the sugar industry for so many local jobs. text. Recently I received a letter from Mr Ian Labor understands the interconnection of Ballantyne, the general manager of the or- communities and this is so clearly demon- ganisation Canegrowers, in Queensland. He strated through an industry like the sugar says: industry. You just cannot have 20 per cent to It has become apparent that many are of the view 30 per cent of growers from a mill area not that the raw sugar industry has been propped up plant cane or have their production col- by government financial support over many lapse—because they cannot afford general years. crop management, procedures like fertilising He then goes on to say that this view is and weed control—without putting at risk ‘quite unfounded’, and he provides docu- the other 70 per cent of farmers and the asso- mentation to say that the ‘net support to the ciated mill and communities. Labor under- industry from 1986-2001 has been, after re- stands that. That is why it has already re- payments, $123.7 million.’ I would be sponded to calls by canegrowers and other pleased to provide a copy of that letter to any industry leaders. Senator O’Brien came to senator that has an interest. North Queensland because the Leader of the During our visit the industry made it clear Opposition, Simon Crean, recognises that the to us that they took the issues raised in the sugar industry needs support and wanted a Hildebrand report seriously. Every region we first-hand briefing at Labor’s shadow cabinet visited has already established some sort of meeting in Darwin. Labor is taking, and has strategic industry organisation or board to always taken, the crisis facing the sugar in- look at the local district’s future. Millers and dustry seriously. We met with not only cane growers are actively beginning to work to- farmers but also millers, local government gether to develop more efficient, effective representatives, women associated with the and sustainable ways to grow, harvest, trans- industry and young farmers representatives, port and crush cane within their mill areas. In who all articulated their hopes and visions many respects, Clive Hildebrand has not for the future of the industry. really told the industry anything that it did Labor’s plan commits immediate support not already know. The delay in responding to for the industry. It recognises that the sugar the Hildebrand report though has acted as a industry is vital to Australia and especially convenient stalling tactic for the Howard important to regional communities in Queen- government and in particular for the Minister sland and, in particular, North Queensland. for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Mr Labor will work with the industry to secure a Warren Truss. long-term sustainable future for farmers and Mr Hildebrand was commissioned to communities in North Queensland. Labor write the report on 15 February this year. He recognises that a commitment is needed from reported on 28 June and it is now 22 August. farmers to restructure, gain further business He was specifically given a short time frame skills and deliver better environmental out- to report, apparently in recognition of the comes. But sugar communities cannot be left pressing need of the industry. So the question to do it all on their own. Matching the al- needs to be answered: why hasn’t the How- ready evident industry commitment must be ard government acted on this report? It has a commitment by the federal government to delayed long enough. Without help, Cane- engage in proper consultation, planning and growers, the organisation representing al- funding for lasting change. Labor calls on most 95 per cent of growers, warns that 25 the Howard government to immediately Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3639 make funds available to provide income sup- Senator McLUCAS—I’ve got to take port to cane-farming families who are at their that one, mate. financial wits end. Senator Abetz—It’s a pity that Hansard Sugar growing families who are eligible doesn’t show you laughing! and ready to leave the industry should be Senator McLUCAS—It was only be- able to immediately access exit packages and cause of the pressure that my office and the re-establishment grants. The Howard gov- media put on your government that cane ernment must also immediately make avail- growers met with the Prime Minister on able business support measures equivalent to Monday, because on Saturday they were not. those currently available under the exceptional circumstances program. International Senator Abetz—You believe that? trade is vital to the survival of this industry. Senator McLUCAS—The Minister for The industry and Labor expect the Howard Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry commis- government to ensure that sugar has a place sioned the Hildebrand report in February. It in any free trade agreement with the USA was delivered to him in June and since then and in any international or World Trade Or- he has done nothing to effectively consult ganisation negotiations. with the industry on the ground. Minister One thing that farmers made clear to me Truss took the trouble to fly all the way to during our visit is that the industry needs to Cairns—and I must say it is very beautiful in diversify its risk. At present, over 80 per cent August—but did not take the trouble to re- of the industry’s income is derived from the spond to the Hildebrand report when he was New York No. 11 futures price. This futures in sugar country. You have to ask why not? price, as we all know, is distorted by subsi- The minister has had the report for two dies in Europe and the US. The industry months and we have heard nothing from needs to develop new markets and by- him. Instead of dealing with the serious is- products from sugar. Sugar growing areas sues facing the industry, the Howard gov- like Mossman and the Burdekin in particular ernment used the visit to pull $100,000 in are leading the way with millers and growers funds out of the region for Liberal Party actively working together to investigate the fundraising for the Leichhardt federal execu- potential for ethanol production. I commend tive. I know cane farmers do not want the them for taking this initiative. Labor recog- industry politicised, but I find it a bit rich nises that the industry needs to diversify risk when the Howard government visits a region and has called on the Howard government to where the major primary industry is in crisis immediately form a task force with industry and rather than meet with local people and and state governments to explore the poten- deal with the crisis facing the industry it fo- tial of ethanol as a viable and friendly option cuses on Liberal Party fundraising. I have no for the sugar industry. problems with political parties fundraising but that approach was a bit rich. Matching the industry’s commitment to change should be a Howard government The coalition has been taking primary commitment to improving export market producers and regional communities for access for our sugar farmers. Just contrast granted for far too long. Labor has an- Senator O’Brien’s visit to North Queensland nounced a response to the current crisis fac- and Labor’s quick response with John How- ing the industry to ensure that farmers and ard’s cabinet visit to Cairns on 12 and 13 local communities will have a future. (Time August. Cane growers only received a expired) meeting with the Prime Minister at the last New South Wales: Education minute and I expect that that was only be- Senator TIERNEY (New South Wales) cause Labor—and the media—made it im- (6.36 p.m.)—Mr President, as this is the first possible for him— occasion I have had the opportunity, let me Senator Abetz—Don’t flatter yourself! congratulate you on your election to the presidency. In the last six months in New South Wales there has been the conclusion of 3640 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002 an inquiry into the New South Wales educa- South Wales? That is very unlikely. The most tion system. You might think that such an likely outcome of the suggested Vinson re- inquiry would have been set up by the Carr forms is that the drift to private schools will government in order to figure out ways in accelerate. What is Professor Vinson trying which it could move forward in education. to achieve with this back to the future ap- The inquiry was actually set up by the proach? The real agenda is revealed when he Teachers Federation and the Federation of comes down on the side of what he calls Parents and Citizens Associations. They set ‘communitarianism’ and not on what he calls up this inquiry because they were so con- an ‘individualistic perspective on education’. cerned about the state of public education in But surely education is about trying to help New South Wales. The very respected Pro- children achieve their potential. If that is cor- fessor Vinson from the University of New rect, the philosophical basis of the suggested South Wales headed the inquiry and the in- restructuring in education by Professor Vin- quiry’s report is called the Vinson report. son is flawed and should be rejected by the Professor Vinson suggests that yet again we New South Wales government. Parents do restructure public education in New South not want all schools to be the same. Instead, Wales. The particular way in which Profes- they are busting to get their kids into the sor Vinson suggests the restructuring should academically selective high schools that Pro- occur will be met with dismay by parents, fessor Vinson wants to abolish. particularly by pupils, and by many teachers. Research shows that gifted children shine When you remove the froth and bubble of when they study with others of a like nature what Professor Vinson is advocating, if the and, when they do not, 40 per cent of our proposal were to be adopted by the Carr gifted children drop out—if not physically, government, we would have the wholesale they certainly drop out mentally because re-establishment of the one size fits all com- they are not being extended. Why dismantle prehensive school which the Greiner gov- selective schools when they work and when ernment changed in 1988 to create a more parents want to send their children to such diverse and competitive model for education schools? For many parents of the gifted who than existed under the previous Labor gov- cannot afford private schools, the selective ernment. high schools and the OCs—opportunity When Professor Vinson was reviewing classes—in primary schools are their best education, it is curious that he only went hope. If the government doubled the number back to 1988. It would have been more sen- of academically selective high schools, it still sible to go back to 1962. In 1962 the Wyn- would not cater for all the gifted children in dam scheme started in New South Wales. It New South Wales, because place availability dismantled a very large number of single sex means that only one in five gets in. That is schools, junior high schools, selective why some of the suggested reforms in the schools and it created the one size fits all Vinson inquiry, such as academic extension comprehensive for years 7 to 12 right across programs, selective classes in comprehensive New South Wales. If we move on almost 30 schools, centres of excellence in gifted edu- years, by 1988 parents were voting with their cation and lighthouse schools, should be se- feet and, in an attempt to stem the drift to riously considered as part of the provision private schools, the Greiner government cre- for the academically gifted in comprehensive ated a system which had greater diversity schools. None of those suggested changes and choice. Selective high schools were ex- are in any way incompatible with the current tended, technology high schools were cre- system of selective high schools. We have to ated, single sex schools were reintroduced cater for the gifted in all situations. and centres of excellence in areas such as However, to work effectively, Professor performing arts, sports and languages were Vinson’s new innovations would require established. more resources, particularly in in-service Is yet another restructuring likely to re- training for gifted children across New South balance public and private education in New Wales. Would the Carr government provide Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3641 such resources? If you look at the last seven sion was a very emotive one both for the years of the Carr Labor government, its track veterans making their first return to the site record is very bad in this area. As Chair of of so many traumatic memories and for the the Senate Standing Committee on Employ- native people, some of whom walked ment, Workplace Relations and Education, through that precipitous terrain for many which inquired into the state of gifted educa- days. Their participation and the celebration tion 18 months ago, I witnessed a very poor of their role as the fuzzy wuzzy angels were provision of gifted education across all most appropriate, and there are many diggers states, especially in New South Wales. still alive today who can thank them for Teachers receive very little preparation in saving their lives. the identification and the teaching of the I also pay tribute to the officers from the gifted. The one exception in New South Department of Veterans’ Affairs, the ADF Wales is the outstanding GERRIC centre at and the PNG government who made the oc- the University of New South Wales. In- casion possible. In fact, the logistics of doing service training of teachers is practically this high in the mountains, where travel is nonexistent and the teaching of the academi- largely by foot, meant it was a magnificent cally gifted rarely gets a guernsey on the achievement. It was also a magnificent very few in-service days that teachers attend. achievement of those veterans, who bravely If the Vinson reforms were accepted, the made the trip and who no doubt reacted most likely outcome would be that they emotionally to the flood of memories evoked would not work because of insufficient by the sight of the scene of bloody battle so funding to train the teachers properly to cater many years ago. On this I must compliment for the needs of these children. The academi- the media for their reporting of the signifi- cally gifted would be worse off and parents cance of the occasion and for reminding our would continue to drift to private schools. fellow Australians of the importance of the The ultimate outcome of these suggested battle and of the severity of the conditions in reforms could be that the structure of public which the fighting took place. education in New South Wales would turn It is, of course, difficult to make compari- full circle back to the sixties, with not a new sons on the historic contribution individual fad, but the recycling of a previous fad—a battles made to the conclusion of war, to the system-wide comprehensive system of pub- defeat of an enemy or to the saving of Aus- lic education. tralia from invasion. I intend to make no Battle of Milne Bay: 60th Anniversary such comparisons, simply because they were all important and all consumed large num- Senator MARK BISHOP (Western Aus- bers of Australian lives. Nor will I attempt to tralia) (6.44 p.m.)—Tonight I rise to remind portray, as some are inclined to do, or inter- the Senate that next week—specifically, 26 pret any one battle as part of the formation of August—marks the 60th anniversary of the our national character—(Time expired) Battle of Milne Bay in 1942. Senators will recall from the extensive media coverage Senator MARK BISHOP—I seek leave two weeks ago that the war against the Japa- to incorporate the rest of my speech. nese armed forces in 1942 reached a turning Senator Abetz—Mr President, if the hon- point 60 years ago, commencing with the ourable senator assures us that there is noth- reversal of the Japanese invasion of Papua ing controversial in the rest of the speech, we New Guinea across the Owen Stanley Range are happy for it to be incorporated and we along the Kokoda Track. take his word on that. I had the honour to attend the commemo- Senator MARK BISHOP—I so assure rative ceremony at the village of Isurava on the Senate. 14 August, at which a magnificent memorial Leave granted. was unveiled to those lost in action in what must have been the most inhospitable envi- The speech read as follows— ronment in the history of warfare. The occa- or to breed some kind of mythology about the so- called Anzac tradition. 3642 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

The fact is that we as a nation were at war and I will leave that discussion to the historians, but in everyone pitched in to do their bit. Some certainly closing, Mr Deputy President, I simply wish to did it tougher than others and thousands never draw the attention of the Senate to the bravery came back—but at the end of it all it was a total and the exploits of those who fought. commitment. I also ask that the families of those left behind be And so it is worth reflecting that next Monday is remembered—not to mention the people of Papua the 60th anniversary of the battle of Milne Bay. New Guinea who, as a result of the war, have a Like Kokoda it is described by some as the for- special relationship with all of us. gotten battle, as one in which Australia’s charac- Senate adjourned at 6.47 p.m. ter was again forged, and with the same ingredi- DOCUMENTS ents of poorly trained and supplied troops with little experience, a high command a long way Tabling away with little idea of what was going on, but on The following documents were tabled by the ground a desperate group of young Austra- the Clerk: lians—and Americans—doing what they had to do because they had no choice. Broadcasting Services Act—Broadcasting Services (Events) Notice No. 1 of 1994 Mr Deputy President, I don’t wish to restate the (Amendment No. 3 of 2002). detail of the history of Milne Bay, but on the 25th and 26th of August 1942 the Japanese landed on Civil Aviation Act—Civil Aviation Regu- the northern side of Milne Bay with the clear lations— intention of taking the local airstrips as a base for Civil Aviation Amendment Order (No. their push south. 12) 2002. Fortunately the Australian and American forces Exemptions Nos CASA EX 14/2002- there were a little better placed than those who CASA EX 16/2002. struggled along the Kokoda Track , with the 75 Instrument No. CASA 493/02. and 76 squadrons of the RAAF flying Kittyhawks to give them some support. Class Rulings CR 2002/50 and CR 2002/51. The members of the 25th and 61st militia battalion were also supplemented by elements of regular Product Ruling PR 2002/107. Battalions. Remuneration Tribunal Act—Determina- The defence of Milne Bay continued unabated for tion— 5 days with the Japanese making strong progress 2002/12: Remuneration and allowances towards the capture of the first airfield. But by for holder of public offices. September 1 the retreat of the Japanese began and 2002/13: Remuneration and allowances for another week they were pursued relentlessly of the Australian Securities Investments until by 7 September they had been vanquished. Commission. 161 Australians died in the action, as well as 700 Veterans’ Entitlements Act—Veterans’ En- Japanese. titlements (Treatment Principles—Over- These Australians, like all others who died in seas Treatment for Non-War Caused Con- battle and thereafter from wounds are all heroes. ditions) Repeal Instrument 2/2002. They are the sole focus of our commemoration. Much is drawn from this battle, as it has been from Kokoda, with respect to the turning point in the war on land in the Pacific, and in the defence of Australia from invasion. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3643

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE The following answers to questions were circulated: Indigenous Land Corporation: Roebuck Plains Cattle Station (Question No. 80) Senator Harris asked the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Multi- cultural and Indigenous Affairs, upon notice, on 13 February 2002: (1) What was the purchase price paid by the Indigenous Land Corporation to acquire the Roebuck Plains cattle station. (2) What was the price paid by the vendors of the Roebuck Plains when it was purchased some 12 months prior to the resale to the Indigenous Land Corporation. (3) What was the reason for the substantial increase in sale price over that 12-month period. (4) Was the price paid by the Indigenous Land Corporation for Roebuck Plains within commercial valuation at the time. (5) Was a commercial valuation of Roebuck Plains undertaken prior to its purchase by the Indigenous Land Corporation. (6) Why did the Indigenous Land Corporation purchase Roebuck Plains when there was no registration of a land need or application by proponents. (7) Was there an assessment of Roebuck Plains against National Indigenous Land Strategy criteria before the Indigenous Land Corporation Board considered a purchase proposal. (8) Who negotiated the purchase price of Roebuck Plains. (9) Why did the Indigenous Land Corporation not utilise its usual service provider, KFPW, in negotiating a purchase price. (10) Was a cattle muster conducted prior to the Indigenous Land Corporation’s purchase of Roebuck Plains. (11) Why did the Indigenous Land Corporation enter into a 15-year management agreement with the vendors of Roebuck Plains that effectively locked Aboriginal people out of the arrangement. (12) What capital investment did the vendors of Roebuck Plains (Great Northern Pastoral Company) make to entitle their retaining about 50 per cent of all profits for the 15-year period of the management agreement. (13) Why did the Indigenous Land Corporation pay the Great Northern Pastoral Company $1 million to extricate itself from the 15-year management agreement that still had 14 years to run. (14) Who negotiated the 15-year management agreement. (15) Was a commission paid to the person or persons who negotiated the purchase price and management agreement. (16) (a) Who are the directors of the Great Northern Pastoral Company; and (b) do any of them have a criminal record. (17) Was there any relationship between the Great Northern Pastoral Company and the deceased Max Green. (18) Is there any relationship between David Baffsky, a director of the Indigenous Land Corporation, and the Great Northern Pastoral Company. (19) Is there any relationship between David Baffsky and John Vereker, a director of the Great North- ern Pastoral Company. (20) Was there a relationship between David Baffsky and Max Green. (21) Have there been any money laundering activities evident at Roebuck Plains, or investigations into such activities. (22) Has a commercial crop of marijuana been grown at Roebuck Plains whilst that station was owned or jointly managed by the Great Northern Pastoral Company. 3644 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

(23) When the Indigenous Land Corporation purchased a related cattle property, Cardabia Station, did the corporation assist the vendor in avoiding a taxation obligation by attributing false valuations to land and stock. (24) Did two directors and the Chief Executive Officer of the Indigenous Land Corporation enter into negotiations with the former owners of Roebuck Plains (Great Northern Pastoral Company) to strip the station of its stock without the knowledge or consent of other directors of the corporation. (25) Was the price proposed by the Great Northern Pastoral Company for the purchase of the entire cattle herd of Roebuck Plains in accord with then current market prices. Senator Ellison—The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The price paid for Roebuck Plains Station land; infrastructure; plant and equipment; and cattle in May 1999 was $8 million subject to adjustments for cattle numbers after completion of the muster required under the contract. (2) I am advised by the ILC that it has no direct knowledge of the price paid by the vendors, however it understands that the total price paid by them on 30 December 1997 was $6.35 million but included less cattle numbers than acquired by the ILC. (3) I am advised by the ILC that part of the increase in price may be reflected in an increase in cattle numbers. In addition, the two sales were in fact 17 months apart (not 12 months as suggested in the question). (4) I am advised by the ILC that the ILC did commission an independent valuation, and the price paid for the land was within the recommended range. (5) Yes. (6) The ILC considered the acquisition of Roebuck Plains Station to be strategically important and unique. A number of groups had clearly enunciated their interest in Roebuck Plains Station. The ILC is not limited to acquiring land if, and only if, there is a registration of land need or an application although this is the more usual course. (7) At the time of the acquisition decision the ILC Board was of the view that the purchase of Roe- buck Plains Station met the National Indigenous Land Strategy. (8) I am advised by the ILC that a considerable number of officers and employees of the ILC were involved in the purchase of Roebuck Plains Station including negotiating the purchase price. They included the then Chairman, Mr David Ross; Mr Peter Yu; Mr Murray Chapman (then General Manager); Mr John Wilson, Dr Stuart Phillpot; and Ms Sally Skyring. The Board’s decision to acquire the property was executed by Chairman Ross and Director Djerkurra. (9) I am advised by the ILC that it does not exclusively use the services of any service provider. (10) No. However, I am advised by the ILC that it was a condition of the purchase that a muster take place after completion and appropriate adjustments to cattle numbers and the final price made. Part of the purchase price was withheld for this purpose. (11) I am advised by the ILC that it entered into a 15-year management agreement for Roebuck Plains Station, consistent with commercial advice it received at the time. It is not correct to state that the management agreement “effectively locked Aboriginal people out of the arrangement”, as that agreement allowed for rights of occupation and use of the land by Traditional Owners. (12) The matters referred to in the question have been the subject of an examination and the ILC is awaiting the outcome. (13) I am advised by the ILC that the continuing Directors and the new Board were extremely dissatis- fied with the terms of the management agreement. In addition, there were disputes in relation to the terms and conditions and the performance thereof. The ILC Board resolved to take full control of the property and after legal advice, termination was negotiated. (14) The management agreement was negotiated primarily by Chairman Ross and John Wilson. (15) I am advised by the ILC that it paid no such commission or commissions. (16) (a) I am advised by the ILC that it understands the Directors at the relevant time were Mr John Vereker, Mr Peter McCoy and Mr Rodney Illingworth. (b) I have no knowledge of their backgrounds. Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3645

(17) I have no knowledge of this matter. (18) I am not aware of any such relationship. (19) I am not aware of any such relationship. (20) I am not aware of any such relationship. (21) The ILC advises me there has been no such activities. (22) The ILC advises me it is not aware of this. (23) The matters referred to in the question have been the subject of an examination and the ILC is awaiting the outcome. (24) The ILC advises me it is not aware of this. (25) The ILC advises me it is not aware of such a proposal by the Great Northern Pastoral Company. Environment: Rabbit Calicivirus Disease (Question No. 372) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 13 June 2002: (1) Is the Minister aware of the Taiwanese study by Shien and Lee in 2000 which illustrated that Rab- bit Calicivirus Disease (RCD) pigs inoculated with RCD suffered fever and still had live virus present in their lungs and livers after 14 days. (2) Can the Minister give an unequivocal assurance that RCD will never spread from Australian rabbits to Australian pigs. (3) Given that the use of RCD on food baits would expose a much wider range of non-target species to ingestion of the live virus than has occurred with RCD inoculation, can the Minister give an unequivocal assurance that RCD will not spread from Australian rabbits to humans and any other species of animal. Senator Hill—The Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) I have not seen this study. My Department advises me that it is aware of the study. (2) (3) The National Registration Authority, the decision maker under the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Administration) Act 1992, has yet to make a decision on registration of the use of RCD on food baits. Environment Australia advises the Authority in relation to environmental risks associated with these applications. Decisions on the use of chemicals, pharmaceuticals and biologicals are based on risk assessments. Through these processes, any risks to non-target species are taken into account. Environment: Saemangeum Wetlands (Question No. 385) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 18 June 2002: With reference to the Saemangeum wetland reclamation proposal in South Korea: (1) Is it the case that the reclaimed land is to be used for industrial development and farmland, not housing. (2) Is the proposed migratory birds agreement between South Korea and Australia a treaty similar to those between Australia and Japan and Australia and China; if not, what form will it take. (3) How significant are the Saemangeum wetlands to Korea, the Yellow Sea and the Australasian-East Asian flyway, and to Australia’s migratory birds. (4) (a) Is the Minister aware that Hyundai is the main contractor for the reclamation project which is destroying the wetlands; and (b) has the Minister had any contact with Hyundai Australia to express concerns. (5) Will the Minister ensure that the Saemangeum wetlands are protected as part of any migratory birds agreement negotiated between Australia and South Korea. 3646 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

(6) What other action will the Minister take to help ensure that Saemangeum is protected, including through the Ramsar Treaty. Senator Hill—The Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) I understand that the reclaimed land is planned to be largely used for agriculture. (2) It is envisaged that the migratory bird agreement is likely to be similar to Japan-Australia and China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreements. (3) I cannot comment on the significance of the Saemangeum wetlands to Korea: this is a matter for the government and people of Korea. In regard to their importance to migratory species from other areas, the Saemangeum site supports up to 250,000 shorebirds each year. The wetlands are also an important staging site for several species of globally threatened waterbirds. The Saemangeum wetlands have been identified as an internationally significant staging site for migratory shorebirds in the East Asian-Australiasian Flyway, including those that spend the non- breeding season in Australia. Of the 50 species of migratory shorebirds which traverse the East Asian-Australiasian Flyway to and from Australia, twelve species (24%) are known to use the wetlands of South Korea, including Saemangeum. (4) (a) I have been informed that Hyundai is the main contractor. (b) No. Australia has made representations directly to the Government of Korea. Australian officials have raised our concerns directly with the Korean Ministry of the Environment. (5) The conclusion of an agreement will provide a framework for closer dialogue on the protection of important habitat in our two countries. (6) Australia has supported action taken by the Ramsar Bureau which has expressed its concerns about the impacts of the Saemangeum project to the Government of Korea. The conclusion of an agreement will facilitate dialogue between Australia and Korea on the con- servation of migratory shorebirds and their habitat. Environment: Priorities (Question No. 387) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 18 June 2002: (1) (a) On what basis did the Minister decide that oceans, national governance and sustainable land management are the key issues for Australia; and (b) what is meant by ‘national governance’. (2) Will the government oppose water privatisation, including through the GATS agreement. (3) Will the Government support setting targets and timetables for a substantial global shift to renewable energy sources. (4) Will the Government support the creation of an independent international renewable energy agency. (5) (a) What environmental treaties has the Government signed but not ratified and (b) when will they be ratified. (6) Will the Government support placing international environmental and social rules ahead of trade rules, with the final power of arbitration transferred from the World Trade Organisation to an independent international court. (7) Will the Government support the creation of an international legal framework for corporate social and environmental responsibility and accountability of private corporations. Senator Hill—The Minister for the Environment and Heritage has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) (a) The agenda for the World Summit on Sustainable Development covers a very broad range of issues. In determining Australia’s priorities, consideration was given to the important sustainable development issues which Australia could make a positive and strategic impact in inter- Thursday, 22 August 2002 SENATE 3647

national debate. Our success in ensuring in particular that oceans management receives appropriate attention has been widely acclaimed. (b) National governance is the exercise of power or authority – political, economic, administrative or otherwise – to manage a country’s resources and affairs. Good national governance means competent management of a country’s resources and affairs in a manner that is open, transparent, accountable, equitable and responsive to people’s needs. It includes the creation of domestic policy settings that are supportive and conducive to strengthening law and justice systems; increasing public sector effectiveness; and developing civil society. (2) Responsibility for regulation of the allocation and use of water in Australia vests with the States and Territories. In 1994, the Council of Australian Government (CoAG) agreed on a National Wa- ter Reform Framework to achieve an efficient and sustainable water industry, including through a comprehensive system of water allocations, backed by separation of water property rights from land title, provision of water for the environment, and the adoption of pricing regimes based on full cost recovery. The GATS treaty features no mandatory obligation for governments to privatise or open up public service to competition and it does not dictate any specific role for the public and private sectors. (3) Australia has opposed this proposal in preparatory meetings of the WSSD believing it to be inappropriate and impractical. Future positions will be determined in the context of the negotiations as a whole on this issue and other issues under discussion. (4) Australia has resisted proposals for new institutions in preparatory meetings of the WSSD, on the grounds that existing institutions are adequate for the purposes envisaged. Future positions will be determined in the context of the negotiations as a whole, on this issue and other issues under discussion. (5) (a) The Government has signed the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Proce- dure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides; the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; and the Kyoto Protocol. (b) There is no timetable for the ratification of the Rotterdam Convention or Stockholm Conven- tion. Australia will not be ratifying the Kyoto Protocol unless and until it is demonstrated that it is in Australia’s interest to do so. At present, it is not in the national interest to ratify the Protocol because there is as yet no clear pathway for emissions control commitments by key developing countries under the Kyoto process. (6) The World Trade Organisation provides for a dispute settlement system between its members with regard to the interpretation of WTO rules only. Multilateral environmental agreements also contain provisions for their parties to resolve any differences. Current international trade and environmental and social rules can all be implemented in a mutually supportive manner. The Government does not believe that the present situation needs to be changed. (7) No. Agriculture: Wool Industry (Question No. 454) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, upon notice, on 11 July 2002: (1) What is the total quantum of Commonwealth funding expended on the project to develop the Op- tim fibre. (2) Does the Commonwealth expect to recoup its investment in Optim fibre; if so, over what period of time. (3) What is the quantum of investment provided to the project by Woolmark. (4) What modelling has been done to ensure that Optim will not ‘cannibalise’ the traditional domestic and international markets of traditionally-grown and harvested Australian wool. (5) What is the quantum of international marketing support to be provided by the Commonwealth to the Optim project for each of the next 5 financial years. (6) What is the quantum of domestic marketing support to be provided by the Commonwealth to the Optim project for each of the next 5 financial years. 3648 SENATE Thursday, 22 August 2002

(7) What is the quantum of international marketing support to be provided by the Commonwealth to the traditionally-grown and harvested wool industry for each of the next 5 financial years. (8) What is the quantum of domestic marketing support to be provided by the Commonwealth to the traditionally-grown and harvested wool industry for each of the next 5 financial years. Senator Ian Macdonald—The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry – Australia (the Department), has reviewed annual reports of Australian Wool Research and Promotion Organisation (AWRAP) (prior to 1 January when it was privatised) to ascertain the level of its overall expenditure on the development of Optim. Annual reports from 1997-98 to December 2000 record approximately $3.4 million as having been spent on Optim. This figure includes research and development, overseas technology transfer and commercialisation options. Since the privatisation of AWRAP, the Department understands that a total of $1.895 million has been spent by The Woolmark Company on Optim from funds accumulated from wool tax payments made by woolgrowers prior to the AWRAP privatisation. They have not attracted any Commonwealth matching contributions since the privatisation. Therefore, the only Common- wealth contribution to the development of Optim would have occurred prior to the AWRAP privatisation. (2) The Commonwealth’s contribution to research and development in agricultural industries is through the application of compulsory statutory levies and a matching R&D grant system. The Government relies heavily on the judgement of the Boards of statutory funding organisations that the returns from R&D outcomes (in this case Optim) lead to a more competitive, profitable and sustainable industry. The Woolmark Company has advised the Department that it expects to recoup woolgrower investment in Optim on behalf of shareholders within a 4 to 5 year period from privatisation on 1 January 2001. (3) As The Woolmark Company is a private company, decisions made in relation to Optim and its other projects are of a commercial nature and do not involve the Commonwealth. The Govern- ment does not provide direct levy funds to The Woolmark Company, only to AWI, now a separate company from Australian Wool Services Limited (AWS) and its subsidiaries. (4) The Woolmark Company has advised the Department that extensive market analysis has been done on the potential of Optim. However, it should be noted that Optim is a “new” fibre, not just stretched wool. It has distinctive characteristics and physical structure that distinguishes it from similar micron wool. It is much closer to cashmere in these characteristics. The Woolmark Com- pany does not consider that Optim will in any way cannibalise the market for superfine wool. In- deed, the company believes it will open up the luxury fibre market by increasing competition in that sphere and also increasing the critical mass of non-cashmere fibre that can be used on that sector. (5) and (6) The Commonwealth does not envisage providing international or domestic market support for the Optim project. (7) and (8) Under current wool industry arrangements, no excise levy or customs charge revenue is raised specifically for marketing. The Government’s approach is that this is a matter for individual levy payers and the board of AWI to determine.