8 Sep 2000 Legislative Assembly 3197

FRIDAY, 8 SEPTEMBER 2000 's export earnings. But it is an Aussie company that took the risk and the initiative in the first place and I want to congratulate Bindaree Beef, its Chairman John Mr SPEAKER (Hon. R. K. Hollis, Redcliffe) MacDonald and the board of directors for read prayers and took the chair at 9.30 a.m. putting their faith—and their money—in this project. I met with them; they are very decent Australians. I would particularly single out PETITIONS Leigh Belbeck, the human resources The Clerk announced the receipt of the manager, who has invested a great deal of following petitions— time and effort to make today possible. Bindaree has assured us the minimum work force will initially comprise 230 people, with Water (Allocation and Management) Bill plans to expand capacity over the next four From Mr Malone (62 petitioners) years and so create more jobs. requesting the House to delay the passage of In supporting this venture through active the Water (Allocation and Management) Bill and constructive Government assistance, my until an assessment of the impacts are Government is fulfilling two key policy investigated and not until industry is consulted priorities—job creation in sustainable export as to these impacts. industries and rebuilding regional Queensland. In the last year export revenue from the meat industry increased to over $1.3 billion. This Synergy Industrial Park makes it the State's second largest export From Dr Watson (2,554 petitioners) after coal, contributing about half of Australia's requesting the House to abandon the total export earnings from the meat industry. proposed construction of Synergy Industrial These achievements have been made with Park on Formation Street, Carole Park and to the active assistance of my Government and preserve the land and keep the last remaining the assistance that has been provided through green site in the area for the long-term health the Meat Industry Task Force. benefits to the residents in the area. In addition to Murgon, we have helped Petitions received. Consolidated Meat develop processing facilities at Rockhampton, and supported the refurbishment of the Cannon Hill meatworks. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT We are giving a robust industry that Murgon Meatworks participates in a fiercely competitive Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central— international environment the boost it needs to ALP) (Premier) (9.32 a.m.), by leave: Today I ensure its long-term future as a major global will take great pleasure in officially re-opening player. We are showing the rest of Australia the Murgon meatworks and the saving of at that, with determination and the resources to least 230 jobs. The reopening of Murgon back it up, we can play an active role in meatworks is proof of the State Government's rebuilding regional areas. We will not stand idly commitment to regional Queensland and to by to watch regional towns decline and working in partnership with the private sector. whither. The reality is that it is unlikely that we will In cooperation with local communities and ever win seats in this area—although hope business we can help regional Queensland springs eternal—but I promised we would be a survive and prosper. We have committed more Government for all Queensland and proof of than $12m to assist companies wanting to that is Government investment of $1.7m in this establish sustainable export-focused or import meatworks and at least 230 jobs. Government replacement value-adding meat processing support includes $1.7m to upgrade the water activities in Queensland. As a result, the supply for the town and abattoir, as well as industry is committed to capital investment of additional assistance for staff training, an more than $200m, and to the creation of more environmental upgrade of the meatworks and than 2,000 jobs throughout the State. a refund of stamp duty on the sale of the The Meat Industry Task Force has facility. conservatively estimated that, over the next The help my Government will provide with two years, applications for further funding will the provision of specialised value-adding generate a further 2,000 to 3,000 jobs in the equipment will set the Murgon meatworks on a meat industry. These jobs are sustainable in firm footing to become a major contributor to the long term, and represent a broadening of 3198 Ministerial Statement 8 Sep 2000 the State's economic base through value- Labor Government would do everything it adding, another high Government priority. could to create jobs. That is why I set a target I should say that when we came to office of reducing unemployment to 5% within five a report that had been prepared for the years. It has meant we have focused on job previous Government, if I recall correctly, had creation every day, seven days a week. The indicated that the meat industry was in result has been that the National/Liberal enormous difficulty and would be losing has whinged that we should not have something like 5,000 jobs. We have turned set a target. The result has been that we have that around. We have turned that around for created 22,300 more jobs than the the future of this State. We acted, we turned it National/Liberal coalition Government—and we around, and it is one of the significant have not finished yet. achievements of my Government. The result is that we have 22,300 reasons Mr Rowell: What a joke. why my Government should be re-elected and 22,300 reasons why the coalition should be Mr BEATTIE: In two years and four left to whinge on the Opposition benches. months the Borbidge Government— Mr Rowell interjected. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Mr BEATTIE: Let us be really clear. The previous Government's strategy in relation to Olympic Games the meat industry would have seen the Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth— Queensland meat industry exported to New ALP) (Minister for Communication and South Wales or overseas and a significant part Information, Local Government and Planning of it closed down. This Government has done and Minister for Sport) (9.39 a.m.), by leave: In more to assist the Queensland meat industry five days the eyes of the world will turn to than any Government in the last 25 Brisbane as the Games of the 27th Olympiad years—and that is a fact. Both the Deputy officially begin. Two days before the official Premier and the Minister for Training have opening ceremony in Sydney, our very own been key players in making this happen, along Gabba will play host to a gala ceremony for with the meat task force and I want to publicly the football tournament followed by seven thank that meat task force for what it has action-packed matches from 13 to 23 achieved. September. When it comes to jobs, the contrast This afternoon at the Gabba I will launch between my Government and the previous The Look of the Games. Government is clear, and this is very Dr Watson: The look of the Games? interesting. In two years and four months the Mr MACKENROTH: The member should Borbidge Government could create only listen: The Look of the Games. All Olympic 78,900 jobs—78,900 jobs. In the first two Games venues incorporate an image or years and two months of my Government, we design referred to as The Look of the Games, have created 101,200. We are 22,300 jobs which is consistent across all venues but ahead of the legacy we inherited from the unique for each Olympiad. As a host Olympic Borbidge Government—over a lesser period of city, Brisbane streets in the CBD, South Bank time—and we still have two months to go Parklands and the Gabba will be decorated before we have served the same period. I will with various Olympic Games banners. Non- repeat it: 22,300 more jobs under my competition venues such as the Novotel Government than were created under the Brisbane, the domestic and international Borbidge Government and they were there for terminals at the airport, Lang Park, Ballymore two months longer. and ANZ Stadium will also be dressed in Look What is the difference? The difference is of the Games elements. This will not only we set a jobs target. We set out to do brand our facilities as official Olympic venues something about unacceptably high but also provide a colourful welcome to the unemployment, whereas the coalition just thousands of visitors to Brisbane expected shrugged its shoulders and left it to market during the period of the Games. forces. In May 1997, the Borbidge/Sheldon In the past few weeks we have already Government said it could do nothing about had a taste of what is to come as athletes and unemployment. As it was leaving Government, officials have arrived in Queensland for pre- its message to Queensland was that Olympic Games training. In fact, 170 teams unemployment would rise. from 44 countries are training in the Sunshine But people expect Governments to make State—more than any other State or Territory a difference and I was determined that a in Australia. 8 Sep 2000 Ministerial Statement 3199

Honourable members interjected. The first ever indigenous arts market/trade Mr MACKENROTH: That is thanks to Bob fair will be staged allowing the direct promotion Gibbs starting it off. These teams are using a of local artists and retail enterprises. wide variety of sporting venues and it is terrific, International and indigenous arts marketing especially for children and young people, that initiatives, including those of indigenous Queenslanders have the opportunity to see people in North America and Canada, will be such a high standard of sporting talent in the researched to help develop indigenous arts lead-up to the Games. And next week when industry benchmarks and performance these teams start departing for Sydney, we will indicators for Cape York. International and begin welcoming visitors for the football domestic markets for Cape York indigenous tournament. Seven international teams will arts will be identified and pursued. play their games in Brisbane as part of the There has been a spectacular worldwide tournament—Brazil, Czech Republic, Japan, increase in the interest in Australian South Africa, Cameroon, Slovakia and Kuwait. indigenous arts in the 1990s, reflected in the Six preliminary games will be played between greater number of indigenous works being sold these seven teams, culminating in a at auction at increasing prices. We want the quarterfinal on the 23rd. world to know the quality and ingenuity of our Two of these matches are already sold Cape York communities' arts products so that out—the quarterfinal and Brazil versus Japan. the media, journalists, travel agents, the Sales for the remaining matches are convention industry and others will be targeted progressing well, although some tickets are still through familiarisation events and available and can be purchased via the presentations. Training workshops and the telephone on 13 72 79, on the Internet or at development of web-based commerce will the Ticketek office in the Myer Centre. facilitate that process. So, as the countdown shortens and the Consultation is currently being held across excitement builds, I am sure all my colleagues far-north Queensland with indigenous in the House will join me in extending a warm communities and arts workers to ensure a high welcome to all the visitors from interstate and level of ownership. This will culminate in a abroad who are coming to experience the forum in Cairns on 6 October to discuss the Olympic Games in Brisbane's own backyard. various project components with stakeholders. Most of the projects associated with the Top End Arts Marketing Project will take place MINISTERIAL STATEMENT throughout 2001. Community arts project Cape York Indigenous Arts Industry officers are working in 13 Cape York Hon. M. J. FOLEY (Yeronga—ALP) communities and will attend a training and (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and development workshop in Cairns in October. Minister for The Arts) (9.42 a.m.), by leave: I More than $200,000 has been allocated to am pleased to inform the House of key these communities under the indigenous strategies currently being implemented to regional arts development fund. develop an indigenous arts industry in Cape The Beattie Government's public art York. Arts means jobs and the arts industry is policy, Art Built-in, has already yielded an important generator of jobs for Aboriginal significant outcomes for indigenous and Islander people in far-north Queensland. communities and artists in Cape York. These strategies complement the initiatives of Community justice centres in Bamaga and the Cape York partnership plan in delivering Kowanyama now feature designs by local jobs and sustainable business ventures for indigenous artists and reflect traditional stories indigenous people. and values. A third community, Pormpuraaw, A Cairns-based office of Arts Queensland is about to be included through Art Built-in supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander commissions for the community justice centre arts practice opened in March this year. This this financial year. office is implementing the $200,000 Top End Arts Queensland has provided funding of Arts Marketing Project that will, over the next $75,000 to the Island Coordinating Council to three years, improve the marketing and partner the ICC and the Torres Strait Regional business development skills of artists, Authority in the employment of a project officer producers and retailers of ATSI art products; to support cultural practices in the Torres Strait. assess and clarify consumer expectations of The Queensland Heritage Trails network will ATSI arts and crafts; and develop strategic deliver more than eight projects in far-north collaborations to market and promote ATSI Queensland, including the $1m Torres Strait arts locally, nationally and internationally. cultural centre on Thursday Island, the 3200 Ministerial Statement 8 Sep 2000

$70,000 Coen Cape York heritage centre, and The tilt train has enjoyed tremendous the $2m Laura Quinkan interpretation centre. popularity, reducing the trip time between Queensland Rail scholarships to the value Brisbane and Rockhampton by two hours and of $100,000, being $10,000 a year for each of 25 minutes. On Friday, 4 August, we two persons for over five years, have been celebrated carrying the train's 500,000th awarded to the Lockhart River Art and Cultural passenger, and I acknowledge the support of Gang and were announced during the recent the member for Rockhampton that day on the Weipa summit. This is all about working in platform in Rockhampton. It was a great partnership with indigenous people to achieve morning. good artistic and employment outcomes. Above all, rail services demand a sound rail track network upon which to operate. QR manages the largest railway network in MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Australia. The State's narrow gauge network is Rail Service Agreements the backbone of many industries and our Hon. S. D. BREDHAUER (Cook—ALP) agricultural sector. The network also provides a (Minister for Transport and Minister for Main vital linkage for connecting rural and regional Roads) (9.46 a.m.), by leave: Under the communities and is an important part of the Beattie Labor Government, Queensland Rail is tourism industry. being taken into the 21st century as a world The $1.5 billion Below Rail contract allows leader in transport, spending more on QR to get on with the job of ensuring that this passenger services, rolling stock and vital rail infrastructure is maintained at a high infrastructure than ever before. We are also standard and reflects the Government's desire changing the way we deliver funding to the to maintain services on all of Queensland's organisation to encourage efficiency and operational narrow-gauge lines. The contract's competitiveness while maintaining essential price, increasing from approximately $260m public services. annually through to 2006, is a sizeable Members will recall that last year this commitment for Government to undertake and Government contracted with QR for the provides a substantial funding increase on provision of Citytrain rail passenger services at previous spending. Priced to encourage a cost of $283m a year for seven years. This efficiency in QR, the contract has built in was the first major step in effecting this further productivity improvements. Government's commitment to fully funding at The contract establishes a minimum level efficient prices those non-commercial of track quality and performance not only to operations which QR undertakes at the QR but also to any other above-rail operators, request of the Government. to the freight industry and to urban and long- I am pleased to announce that two more distance passengers. It combines rail service agreements have been signed maintenance work with a range of track covering the provision of long-distance renewal and safety projects. It also contains a passenger rail services and rail infrastructure framework for setting base service levels for across the State. The commitments secured in track performance that relate not only to these contracts give QR and regional engineering standards but also to a range of Queensland much greater certainty in the factors that affect the efficiency of above-rail delivery of rail services. The long-distance operations, including temporary speed passenger rail agreement is for $124m over restrictions, track availability, track condition two years. The contract will allow QR to provide and below-rail delays. the range of Traveltrain services on the For the first time in Queensland, the popular Brisbane to Cairns route and to Government has provided for the development various inland destinations around the State, of long-term strategies for specific including the enormously successful electric tilt infrastructure assets, such as noise barriers, trains running with ever-growing patronage on open level crossings and timber bridges. The the Brisbane to Rockhampton and Brisbane to kinds of funding levels provided in these rail Bundaberg routes. service contracts have never been seen before More than 460,000 passenger journeys in this State and demonstrate that the Beattie were taken on long-distance services during Government is working hard to ensure that QR 1998-99—an increase of 15% over the delivers better performance and better service previous year. In 1999-2000, Traveltrain on behalf of the community. carried 568,000 passengers—a further Finally, having secured Citytrain and increase of 23%. Initiatives such as the electric Traveltrain passenger services, and the track tilt trains have driven this patronage growth. network upon which they operate, I am 8 Sep 2000 Questions Without Notice 3201 pleased to say that the final link in the 4.4%. Spelling performance improved, with the Government's commitment is to conclude a scores rising 4%. Reading and viewing regional rail service agreement, which will improved, with the scores rising 3.9%. The secure regular freight train services to rural and overall general change as indicated by these remote centres outside the commercial north results represents an improvement for all coast line and the Mount Isa to Townsville line. students broadly. Last night, QR won the large employer of My department advises me that the result the year award at the Queensland Training is statistically significant and represents an Awards in Brisbane. QR beat a strong field of educationally meaningful improvement. private and public sector candidates to win the Indeed, the statisticians advise me that the award. The award was presented by the probability is less than one in an imperial Minister for Employment, Training and billion—that is, one in a million million—that Industrial Relations, the member for Kedron, such differences could have occurred by Paul Braddy, and it means that QR will now chance or by typical year-to-year fluctuations. represent Queensland in the national awards Even with these early indications of in Hobart later this year. I congratulate QR and positive momentum and improvement, we are thank all of those people from QR and determined not to rest on our laurels. That is Queensland Transport who have worked so why an independent literacy review was hard on the rail service agreements. commissioned earlier this year. It has involved consultation with over 2,000 administrators MINISTERIAL STATEMENT and teachers around the State and has reviewed the latest research in the field. I will Literacy release the results soon so that we can Hon. D. M. WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) continue to approach literacy improvement in a (Minister for Education) (9.51 a.m.): In the past futures-oriented, integrated manner, as year the Beattie Labor Government has recommended in Queensland State Education provided $114m to improve literacy and 2010. numeracy and that investment is even now We also need to identify those schools showing dividends in student literacy currently exhibiting best practice and support outcomes. New curriculum support materials them in providing assistance to other schools. have been published to support early The basics of speaking, reading and writing childhood teachers with student learning in remain key skills for lifelong learning, work and spelling and using critical literacy text work. For community life. But the literacy basics and the a cost of over $1m, teachers specialising in multiliteracy demands posed by the new indigenous education were placed in 20 communication and information technologies schools as part of an action research program are also important. These new basics are an with emphasis on literacy. important foundation for active citizenship in The Reading Recovery Program, the world of the 21st century. We have laid the providing daily one-on-one support, has foundations for 21st century literacy and we expanded to reach more than 5,000 students. are still on the job. Of these, 86% caught up to the average reading level of their classmates within five NATIVE TITLE RESOLUTION BILL months. We provided an extra $17.5m for additional teacher aide time to assist teachers Remaining Stages; Abridgment of Time with intervention work with needy students Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth— identified in the Year 2 Net. Again, there are ALP) (Leader of the House) (9.55 a.m.), by early indications of improved test results leave, without notice: I move— flowing from this investment. "That so much of the Standing and Between 80% and 84% of Queensland's Sessional Orders be suspended to enable Year 3 students are now performing above the the Native Title Resolution Bill to pass national benchmark standard for reading. This through all its remaining stages at this achievement is comparable with levels in other day's sitting." States and, I point out, is particularly significant Motion agreed to. given that our students have, on average, between 7 and 11 fewer months of formal schooling and, on average, they are one year QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE younger than their interstate counterparts. Member for Townsville Between 1998 and 1999, writing Mr BORBIDGE (9.55 a.m.): I ask the performance improved, with the scores rising Premier: can he assure this House that his 3202 Questions Without Notice 8 Sep 2000 member for Townsville at no time asked any I have a lot of faith in Queenslanders. I resident living in any of the notorious ghost know that Queenslanders are too smart. houses used in Townsville, in particular a ghost Members opposite think they are going to fool house at Eura Court, to collect mail related to Queenslanders, but they will not. bogus Labor Party members? Queenslanders know that an open and Mr BEATTIE: I have already indicated to independent inquiry is the appropriate way to the House that I have had a discussion with go. Members opposite can be the masters of the member for Townsville and he has advised muck, but they will not please Queenslanders me that he has not been involved in any or get their support. To use this place as was improper behaviour—full stop. Under those done yesterday was absolutely despicable. circumstances, yes, I can give the Leader of This House was brought into disrepute and the Opposition that assurance, based on the disgrace yesterday because of the way they advice that he has provided to me. behaved. They should lift their game. Let me deal with some of the events of the past few days. Yesterday, we saw a Electoral Fraud shameful performance when people were Mr BORBIDGE: I refer the Premier to the named in this Parliament, when the fact that the CJC will launch an investigation parliamentary process was abused and when into ALP preselection processes in the East people were smeared without any evidence at Brisbane ward of the Brisbane City Council in all. Is it any wonder that the community has 1993. I also refer to statements made by a little regard for politicians when this place is Mr Tony Reeves, then president of the West used and abused for cheap political gain? End/South Brisbane branch of the ALP, A Government member: It was shameful. published in a newspaper interview in 1996 in which he asserts that out of 140 names on the Mr BEATTIE: Yes, it was a shameful party's voting list in East Brisbane in 1996—not performance. 1993—54 were ineligible to vote. As the An Opposition member: You have for Premier was parliamentary leader, I ask: what years. action did he take specifically in response to the allegations made by the branch chairman? Mr BEATTIE: Hang on. The bottom line with all of this is very clear: if there was not an Mr BEATTIE: Last time I looked I was not inquiry and this place was the only avenue for the parliamentary leader in 1993, although I the venting of these claims, there could be have to say that I would not have minded some understanding of—though no being the parliamentary leader. justification for—what happened yesterday. Mr BORBIDGE: I rise to a point of order. However, a full and independent inquiry has The question related to 1996. He cannot been established. That is the appropriate and squirm. It was 1996 the allegations were proper process. That is what should happen. It made. should not become just a cheap, silly political Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of game. order. Resume your seat. I refer everybody to the first part of an Mr BEATTIE: As the Leader of the editorial in today's Gold Coast Bulletin, which Opposition knows, I was not the parliamentary states that the "Queensland Opposition's leader in 1993, and I have to say that I was tactics of taking pot shots at ALP figures over probably the only person in this place who the vote rigging affair does not advance the thought I should have been. There were not cause of clean elections in this State". These too many other people who would have are the sorts of gutter tactics that we have supported me. If I had run for the seen from a desperate Opposition, which has parliamentary leadership in 1993, I would have had over two years and two months to come got one vote and it would have been my own. up with policies. They have come up with not It would have been a valued vote; it would one policy. They have wasted their time in have been a good vote. I would have thought Opposition. They are not ready for it was an overwhelming vote. Government. The only way they are going to try to get there is through smearing and Mr Mackenroth interjected. muckraking—by becoming the master Mr BEATTIE: The Leader of the House muckrakers of Queensland politics. They are said he is not sure I would have got that vote going to try to get into office by getting into the right, either. If honourable members believe mire and the mud and throwing every piece of the Leader of the House, I would have had no nonsense that they can. votes in 1993. 8 Sep 2000 Questions Without Notice 3203

Mr Hamill: Are you saying Mr Santoro still Party or the member for Moncrieff. I was not has hope? the Lord Mayor. Maybe we could combine the Mr BEATTIE: That is right. Santo and I roles of Premier and Lord Mayor and we could would have been in the same position; he has fix things. What do honourable members his vote. I tell Santo that I understand how he reckon? Maybe we could combine those roles. feels. Maybe that is something I should give some thought to. Mr Hamill: And he can't guarantee his vote, either. The bottom line in all of this is that these matters are all before the CJC inquiry—every Mr BEATTIE: That is right. They tell me single one of them—and that is where they that Santo cannot guarantee his vote, either. I should be investigated. am sorry. If anyone in this place understands Santo it is me, and I have to tell him that it is a horrible thought. Job Creation Mr Mackenroth: We would vote for him Mr SULLIVAN: I refer the Premier to as Leader of the Liberal Party. Queensland's unemployment rate of 7.6%, the Mr BEATTIE: That is right. The Leader of lowest in more than a decade, and I ask: how the House has indicated that we would vote for does the rate of job creation for this to be the Leader of the Liberal Government compare with that of previous Party. At that time none of them would have Governments? voted for me to be Leader of the Labor Party. I Mr BEATTIE: Let us talk about jobs. Let think that I would have lost out all the way us talk about the issues that really matter. As I around. have said, over 100,000 more Queenslanders Mr Borbidge interjected. have got a job since this Government came to office. That is job creation pure and simple. Mr BEATTIE: Here we go, the Leader of Employment growth over the two years of this the Opposition is chirping away over there. Government has averaged more than 3% per The facts of the matter are that, even year. Currently it is running at 3.4%, but the though I would have liked to have been, I was average rate of job creation over the period of not the leader in 1993. It was a young, up and this Government is more than 3%. That is the coming guy called . growth rate. Mr BORBIDGE: I rise to a point of order. What is the comparison with the Borbidge The question clearly related to allegations years? Let us look at the real things that made by a branch chairman in 1996, not matter, not the gutter tactics of today. Under 1993. the Borbidge Government the average was Mr SPEAKER: Order! only 2.4%. It is pretty simple. We deliver, we Mr BORBIDGE: Clearly the Premier knows work; they whinge. Under this Government an a bit more about this than he is letting on. extra 128 jobs are created every day, every week of the year. That equals a job creation Mr SPEAKER: Order! We do not need a rate of 40% higher than the previous debate. The Leader of the Opposition would Government. We work, they whinge. That is also be aware of the Standing Order that says the difference. a Minister may answer a question as he wishes. My Government has created 22,300 more jobs than were created through the whole Mr BEATTIE: I made it clear that period of the Borbidge Government. I can regrettably I was not the parliamentary leader assure Queenslanders that we have not in 1993. The other thing that will come as a finished yet. There is more to come. We will shock to the Leader of the Opposition is that in keep on working to break the unemployment 1993 I was not the Lord Mayor, either. If I cycle while members opposite sit around and recall correctly, this relates to a council ward. I whinge, get in the gutter and do all the things was not the Lord Mayor in 1996, either. I have that they are very good at. In the past 12 to say to him that I am a person who from time months—and this is worth noting—55,000 jobs to time has been noted for having ambitions. were created. That was one of the biggest However, I have never wanted to be a senator years in terms of job creation in the history of and I have never wanted to be the Lord Queensland. Mayor, either. I promised in the election campaign in Mr Hamill: Or the member for Moncrieff. 1998 that we would deliver jobs, jobs, jobs and Mr BEATTIE: Or the Leader of the jobs. What have we done? We have delivered National Party or the Leader of the Liberal jobs, jobs, jobs and jobs! It does not matter 3204 Questions Without Notice 8 Sep 2000 how the whingers opposite carry on, we have Mr BEATTIE: I am not aware of anyone. delivered already 22,300 more jobs than they Who is talking about? He has his mate up the did during their term in office, and we still have back who names people without any facts or two months to go. Under my Government, evidence. I am giving him an opportunity. Who 22,300 more Queenslanders have got jobs, are they? Name them. He has been and we are going to continue that. shameless. We listened to question time this week Mr Mackenroth: Make it up. and the performances that members opposite Mr BEATTIE: He comes in here and he put on, and the contrast is stark. There are no makes it up. policies; there is no direction from them. They have wasted their time in Opposition. They are Dr Watson: Just say no. in the gutter on every occasion. There has Mr BEATTIE: I already have. I am just been not one policy development and no saying to him: name them. Name them; name documents. Whenever they have a them; name them; name them. conference they put out a media release—no policy document, nothing thought through. I have indicated that I know of no Minister The Borbidge years were the worst in the who has gone to Townsville and had any such history of this State and it should never come discussions with anyone. I have said that back to office. clearly. I know of no-one who has done that. I am simply saying to the member that, if he has evidence I do not have: name them. Electoral Fraud Come on. Name them. Those opposite are in Dr WATSON: I ask the Premier: did he, the gutter. I think Di McCauley summed this up the Labor Party or any factional leader in his best in a letter to the Central Telegraph. Do Government recently send to Townsville two members know what she said about the Cabinet Ministers to warn Labor figures in that member for Callide, and this applies to all of city not to talk about electoral rorting? them? She said, "The member for Callide, , made a false and demeaning Mr BEATTIE: I am deeply concerned statement about me." However, they all do it. about what is in the water. I suggest that we One of his National Party colleagues said that do something about the water containers on he goes around making false statements that side of the Chamber. I think they should about people. be tested because, as a matter of privilege, I want to raise my great concern that the water Mr Seeney: You can't do any better than is obviously having a significant effect on the that? Leader of the National Party and the Leader of Mr BEATTIE: He is the National Party the Liberal Party. The bottom line is no successor, not me. He goes around making Minister— false statements. But do those opposite know Dr Watson: Just say no. what: so do you, so do you, so do you and so do you—all of you do. One of these days we Mr BEATTIE: Will the Leader of the will have a unique event in the history of the Liberal Party stop being so rude? Can he universe: the truth and those opposite in the actually have some decency in asking a same room at the same time. However, that question to have the patience— will not happen in the life of this Parliament. Dr Watson interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Moggill will cease interjecting. Fuel Prices Mr Seeney interjected. Mr PURCELL: My question is directed to the Premier. I refer to skyrocketing petrol Mr BEATTIE: I am glad that the member prices. I ask: is the Premier aware of any for Callide raised something. I will come back action by Prime Minister Howard and the to him. Federal Government to deal with a problem In terms of the issues raised, I am not which is affecting the weekly budget of every aware of any Minister visiting Townsville or Queenslander? having any such discussions with anyone Mr BEATTIE: There is a notable contrast suggesting they behave in any particular way between the Government and the Opposition: in relation to these matters. If the Leader of we talk about jobs, petrol and issues that the Liberal Party knows of people, he should matter while it is in the gutter. That is the name them. He has been out here naming difference. I thank the honourable member for people. Who is he talking about? his question. Petrol prices went up 5c on one Dr Watson: I asked the question. day this week without any equivalent rise in the 8 Sep 2000 Questions Without Notice 3205 price of crude oil. That impacts on families and round of price increases shows that it is ordinary Queenslanders. Anyone buying 20 essential for such an inquiry to be held. Every litres of petrol after that rise was paying $1 cent added to the cost of a litre is another more than they were the night before—thanks reason why Mr Howard, in my view, must to , thanks to the Liberal Party, launch an inquiry, and he must do it now. The thanks to the National Party. Those are their public are being taken for granted by the policies at a State and Federal level. Today, National Party and the Liberal Party. This prices are tipped to rise even further after a Government will not take them for granted. By rise in crude oil prices on Wednesday night. the end of today, experts are predicting that Dr Watson: Where's your royal the long-suffering motorist filling up their petrol commission? tank is likely to be paying around $3 more than at the start of the week. Well, thanks to John Mr BEATTIE: What are you bellyaching Howard for that. about? This is what the Liberal Party has done. This is what the National Party has done. Those opposite objected to a national Member for Waterford inquiry. They opposed the Queensland Government all the way along the line. John Mr HORAN: My question is to the Minister Howard did over some people on his for Police and Corrective Services. With backbench because he did not want an reference to the current investigation into ALP inquiry. The Deputy Prime Minister believes electoral rorts being conducted by the CJC, that there should be no inquiry. The National can the Minister inform the House about Party stands for increased petrol prices, and irregularities in the Eagleby branch of the ALP we will tell everyone, don't worry about that. prior to his original preselection for the seat of The fact is that, when public pressure was Waterford? In particular, how many ghosts applied to the oil companies, they responded were added to the branch from the Lakes with price cuts—pressure from us, among Retirement Village to almost double the others. As a result of concerted pressure, branch membership and ensure a particular motorists experienced a fortnight of low prices. result? Yesterday, the Courier-Mail reported that Mr BARTON: This one really defies belief. Fueltrac, the independent price monitor, was My preselection in 1991 was unopposed. saying that the higher prices are due to the oil Therefore, it absolutely defies belief that there companies believing the pressure is now off could have been a stack on in the Eagleby them. I have news for them: it is going to be branch. back on. Even Federal Liberal Senator Ross Lightfoot has broken with Federal Government Regional Forest Agreement policy on petrol by suggesting that Australia Mr ROBERTS: My question is to the unshackle itself from world parity pricing—the Deputy Premier and Minister for State Howard strategy. He has joined with motoring Development and Minister for Trade. The first organisations by calling for the inflation anniversary of the south-east Queensland indexing of fuel to be scrapped. That is what forestry agreement is fast approaching. I ask: we agree with. Where is the lack of leadership can the Minister give the House an update on on fuel? It rests with John Howard, Rob outcomes from this historic agreement? Borbidge and David Watson. They all support higher fuel prices—every single one of them, Mr ELDER: I thank the member for the because they have opposed the national question. This has indeed been a very historic inquiry that we wanted. They support higher period for us, and the RFA is approaching its petrol prices—every single one of them. first anniversary. Opposition members interjected. In all the time I have been in here, I have Mr BEATTIE: Listen to them moan and never seen someone set up as the member groan. They all stand for higher petrol prices— for Toowoomba South was set up with the every one of them. Howard refuses to scrap previous question. If he ever had leadership the next CPI increase in the fuel excise rate. potential, as he has, it has gone. Everyone knows he has been looking long and hard at An Opposition member interjected. that position and he has been doing the Mr BEATTIE: Here is a challenge. We numbers. Every time he has been pushed to have said that the next CPI increase in the fuel the precipice, he has pulled back. If I have excise rate should be dropped. Do those ever seen anyone set up so easily only to be opposite agree? Oh, yeah! Howard refuses to head butted so quickly and knocked out so hold an inquiry into fuel pricing. The latest easily, it was him. They set you up, cobber, 3206 Questions Without Notice 8 Sep 2000 and they set you up nicely. It has been a Electoral Fraud reasonable week, but I have to say that it has Mr KNUTH: My question is directed to the finished on a really high note. Premier. I refer to the bitter factional Mr Hamill: The leadership payback. preselection battle for the State seat of Mr ELDER: I am sure it was leadership Mundingburra involving deals done by the payback. husband of the sitting member. I ask: can the Premier assure the House that the roll used in Mr Bredhauer: That was better than the Mundingburra was not rorted to provide the question on the bus lane. desired factional outcome, as it is now obvious Mr ELDER: What was the question I had that so many other Labor Party preselection to answer? I cannot believe it. Who gave you processes have been? Was the preselection the question? Which one of them gave you of the member for Townsville part of the deal? the question? We can imagine them this Mr BEATTIE: The member for Burdekin morning in their camp as they were thinking must have been nervous. Obviously he got his strategy. They would have said, "We've got a question from the Opposition as well. This is great one for you on Barton. You do it. You do the new Country Party. He is in league with the it." We can imagine the pair of them saying, National Party. Is that the way it is? The "You do it. We don't want to touch it, not us. Country Party is in league with the National You do it, Mike. You get in there and you ask Party! Didn't he have trouble with his pecuniary the question of Tom. You'll love it, because interest register recently? He was still your the Opposition "— registered as being a Country Party member. Mr Mackenroth: Whoever's got the next Mr Mackenroth: One Nation. question over there now will have to be careful. Mr BEATTIE: No, he registered as being Mr ELDER: I have to say to those in the Country Party and he could not be in the opposite: if you have the next question, be City Country Alliance. awfully careful about where you are going. Mr KNUTH: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point Mr Seeney interjected. of order. Could the Premier please answer the Mr ELDER: Oh, it would be you. Who else question? could it have been? We can imagine them Mr SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat. around the table saying, "Pick me! Pick me! I'll Mr BEATTIE: He wanted to join the City do it. Pick me. I'll be in there. I'll look after you. Country Alliance, but he could not because he Any question that you've got that's a little was still the leader of the Country Party. nasty, pick me. I want to get elevated quickly." If you ever learn a lesson, there it is. Mr KNUTH: Point of order, Mr Speaker— To return to the RFA, it has been an Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am not going to outstanding success. Those opposite knocked accept frivolous points of order. it and whinged. It has been an outstanding Mr KNUTH: I was not registered as being success. The jobs created in the first 12 in the Country Party in the pecuniary interest months were beyond our expectations. There register. have been more forests planted than we Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point expected. It has been a great outcome with of order. Resume your seat. the environmentalists. It has been a great Mr BEATTIE: I could be wrong. Maybe it outcome with industry. It has been a great was that he was still registered as a member of outcome for us to be involved in. The only flies One Nation. Maybe that was it. in the ointment have been Federal Government and those opposite. They have Mr Mackenroth: That period of his life in sat there and whinged from day one. We have the Country Party has just gone by. It just continued to work. We have delivered an RFA skipped. which is now accepted by industry, with 28 of Mr BEATTIE: It just skipped that little the 29 mills signed up, and we are still working beat. I reckon today's questions have with the 29th mill. The 425,000 hectares has highlighted exactly where the Opposition is. It been put into a reservation. It has been a is not just in the gutter; it has no idea. The resounding success. We work; you whinge. member for Toowoomba South asked a Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the question about a preselection where the member for Burdekin, I welcome in the public Honourable Minister was simply unopposed. gallery students, parents and teachers of St Some contest! Rita's Catholic School at Point. Mr Horan: Why? 8 Sep 2000 Questions Without Notice 3207

Mr BEATTIE: Why? Because no-one else Fire Safety, Budget Accommodation nominated. Let me tell those opposite about Ms BOYLE: My question is directed to the politics. If no-one stands against you, you get Minister for Emergency Services. I refer to the up unopposed. So why? Because no-one Palace backpackers hostel fire at Childers on nominated against him. It is a fundamental 23 June that claimed the lives of 15 young principle. people, and I ask: can the Minister update the I come back to the question of the House on the result of the fire safety member for Burdekin. I do not know why he is inspections carried out right across in the gutter—I have no idea why he has Queensland, ordered in the immediate joined those opposite in the mire—but he has aftermath of the Childers fire tragedy? joined in the gutter tactics of everybody else. Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the honourable Mr Borbidge interjected. member for the question. Members will recall that within hours of the terrible tragedy in Mr BEATTIE: After what happened to the Childers a couple of months ago I ordered two member today, I do not think he should put his immediate steps to be taken by officers of my head up for 100 years. After his effort this department. The first was the establishment of morning, Vince Lester is looking good for the a high level, multi-agency task force to leadership. Vince, we're with you, mate. examine fire safety, regulatory and planning Mr KNUTH: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point issues arising from the Childers fire to minimise of order. I refer the Premier to page 18, the risk of this ever happening again. The paragraph 37(1) of the McMurdo report. second was the fire safety inspection of all backpacker hostels and other budget Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is no point of accommodation premises throughout order. If the member rises again on a frivolous Queensland. point of order, I will warn him. In relation to the first step, I have now Mr BEATTIE: Those opposite have no received a comprehensive preliminary report hope. He said page 31. The McMurdo report from the task force containing a number of ends on page 30. recommendations. I intend to present this to City Country Alliance members: Page the Cabinet in coming weeks. In relation to the 18. fire safety blitz, I can report that all registered backpacker accommodation in Queensland Mr BEATTIE: Okay. Let us go and look at has been inspected, and fire officers are page 18. Paragraph 31 isn't on page 18. It is continuing the process of inspecting all other paragraphs 37 and 38 on page 18. Paragraph budget accommodation premises, other 31 is on page 14. Does the member know hostels, boarding houses, hotels offering what he is doing here? accommodation and mining and construction Mr Knuth: Page 18, paragraph 37(1). camps. Mr BEATTIE: What is he referring to? To date, QFRA officers have inspected Page 14 is paragraph 31. What is he talking 1,569 budget accommodation premises from about? He does not even know what is in the the 2,205 identified in the State. This includes document. If there are any matters he is all 263 registered backpacker hostels, many of concerned about in relation to anything to do which are now undergoing follow-up with Mundingburra— inspections for defects identified in the original visit. Defects have been discovered in all Mr Knuth interjected. premises. Thankfully, over 90% of them are Mr BEATTIE: What page is it on? Has he minor. Serious defects found in some worked it out? premises include overcrowding, inadequate means of escape, inadequate maintenance of Mr Knuth: I said it was page 18, firefighting equipment, locked or blocked exits, paragraph 37(1). no fire evacuation plans and lack of staff Mr BEATTIE: That is not what you said, training in firefighting and fire safety but paragraph 37(1)— requirements. Opposition members interjected. The overwhelming majority of proprietors of premises inspected have been cooperative Mr BEATTIE: You lot wouldn't know. and have complied with QFRA instructions to There is nothing in paragraph 37(1) that deals rectify all defects. However, a small number of with this question. Any of these matters could premises have refused to comply. As a result, be properly investigated by the CJC. It is that seven backpacker hostels in Cairns have been simple. closed by the local authority, a show cause 3208 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 notice has been served on illegal premises in Mr BEATTIE: Karen Ehrmann broke the Airlie Beach, a show cause notice has been law. Karen Ehrmann betrayed the trust that served on an illegal backpacking operation in she should have enjoyed from a range of Noosa and an unlicensed premises has been people, including the leadership of the closed in Mackay by QFRA. administrative wing of the party and the I warned at the start of this fire safety parliamentary wing of the party. Karen process that I would name in Parliament Ehrmann broke the law, Karen Ehrmann anyone who refused to comply with authorities. betrayed her membership of the Labor Party One such person is the owner of an and Karen Ehrmann went to jail—and so she unlicensed, unregistered backpacker operation should have. Karen Ehrmann let a lot of called the Beachcomber Beachfront people down, including me, the other people Backpackers at 43 Shepherd Road, Eimeo, in this Parliament and the Labor Party. She near Mackay. This illegal backpacking went to jail, and so she should have. operation is being run from a private residence Anyone else who breaks the law should and is owned and operated by Michael Patrick also go to jail. I do not care who they Ettridge, brother of One Nation supremo, are—whether they are in my party, in the David Ettridge. QFRA inspected Ettridge's Liberal Party or in anyone's party. This premises on 25 August and found a long list of Government has the highest standards, and fire and other safety defects that fire officers anyone who breaks the law goes to jail. believed constituted a major hazard. Ettridge Anyone who disappoints the high standards refused to comply with the notice to cease we and I expect from the Labor Party should trading, served on him on 29 August, so QFRA go to jail. I do not compromise on those sought and obtained a Supreme Court things. injunction to close these unlicensed premises. What the Opposition has come in here to Ettridge has been quoted in the local do consistently today is try to drag people into paper as saying it is his "constitutional right to this. It has tried to drag people into the mire. have whomever I want in my house". I say this A Government member interjected. to Ettridge: your rights do not extend to deliberately endangering people's lives at Mr BEATTIE: That is exactly right. This is unlicensed premises, according to the report of sewer politics. The behaviour of Karen fire officers who did this inspection. This Ehrmann which was referred to saw her go to Government will not compromise fire safety jail—end of story. The member cannot draw and that is why Ettridge's unlicensed premises what she has done to try to implicate another have been closed down. member of this House. There are no facts, no evidence, to back up what she has done. Let me just remind everybody what the head of Electoral Fraud; Ms K. Ehrmann the CJC said yesterday. Brendan Butler said Mrs SHELDON: My question is directed to yesterday— the Premier. "... no findings have been made against Government members: Callide! any person. There's been no conclusion Mrs SHELDON: Mr Speaker, will I be that anyone should be charged or allowed to ask this question or not? anything like that." Government members: Callide! That is exactly what he said. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The House will The bottom line with all these things is come to order. very simple. These are all matters that should be considered by the independent inquiry. The Mrs SHELDON: My question is directed to member has no evidence; she has no facts; the Premier. Karen Ehrmann was convicted on she has nothing to substantiate any charges relating to her presidency of the allegations against any member of Parliament, infamous Townsville-based ALP branch of including the member for Mundingburra. All Heatley/Vincent. Relevant documents show she has done is get in the gutter. Frankly, I that 78 of the 97 then members had their ALP thought the member was better than that. fees paid by Karen Ehrmann. Russell Carr, husband of the current member for Mundingburra, subsequently took over as NATIVE TITLE RESOLUTION BILL branch president. Can the Premier guarantee that these rorted party memberships were not Second Reading used in any way in the election of the member Resumed from 5 September (see for Mundingburra? p. 2897). 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3209

Hon. R. E. BORBIDGE (Surfers negotiate was a mere statutory add-on. It was Paradise—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) tacked on at the eleventh hour by Paul (10.30 a.m.): This would have to be one of the Keating to the deal in 1993 in order to achieve most misnamed pieces of legislation ever to a breakthrough in stalemated negotiations with come before the Queensland Parliament: the Aborigines. Native Title Resolution Bill. This particular piece Even as a late addition, it was understood of legislation, the result of a backroom deal in to have a very limited application. The which the sold out the understanding then of the reach of native title interests of Queensland to help Kim Beazley was that it had been extinguished by prior save face, is one of the most frustrating pieces grant on virtually all substantive tenures, of legislation to come before this House, including on leasehold. Native title was thought because it will cause so many problems for the then to exist, almost exclusively, on vacant people of Queensland that it will be an Crown land: land on which there had never absolutely horrendous legacy of this been any prior extinguishing tenure. On that discredited and cheating Premier and this basis, in Queensland, it was to have very discredited and cheating Government. limited application because we have only A few days ago the Premier said that about 2% of the State as VCL, or as defeat of his native title regime by his Labor unallocated State land, as it is now described. colleagues in the Senate would cause a meltdown in the Queensland mining industry. The right to negotiate was to come into Five months ago he said that defeat for the play if mining was proposed on VCL if there scheme would divide Australia and threaten were native title claimants. The justification for the reconciliation process. The existing it was flawed. The suggestion was that scheme, he said, had decimated mineral because native title claimants were the only exploration in the State. Last week the Senate people who could potentially hold an interest rejected the core elements of the Premier's on VCL, other than the Crown, then they regime. We are now being asked by the same deserved to be treated, effectively and man to welcome what he said would bring procedurally, as if they were freeholders. The about a meltdown as a magnificent fact is that the level of rights accorded under breakthrough to a workable system. the right to negotiate were far in excess of the rights that were and are available in this State The Premier was right in what he said a to any other freeholders under similar few days ago. He was right five months ago. circumstances. This in turn was justified as These amendments, which bring what is left of reflecting the special nature of native title, his scheme in line with the demands of Labor which is something that outraged other in the Senate, are a devastating outcome for titleholders, whose links with the land were the mining industry in Queensland. It is a dismissed as lesser and not worthy of such system that is significantly worse than the special treatment. scheme the Premier put up to the Senate. It is even worse than would accrue to the industry All this was in fact ideological code for with a direct reversion to the Commonwealth making the mining industry a major contributor regime, which is the automatic outcome on the to Aboriginal economic well-being in the failure of States to get a State-based regime absence of other income streams for the great endorsed. I will detail those impacts as we go bulk of such people outside the welfare system through, yet again, the mess that has and outside the other vast sums of typically developed because of the paucity of the misdirected Government moneys. It was a template gave this country to disgraceful transference of responsibility for deal with this issue in 1993. Aboriginal well-being onto one industry which, Once again, the key issue around which along with pastoralists, had been singled out the disaster revolves, when we are engaging by cosmopolitan Labor to carry the guilt can. the mining aspects of native title, is the right to Then we had developments in the negotiate. It is the adherence by the Left to common law which greatly complicated the the myth of the alleged centrality of the right to picture. There was a hint from the High Court, negotiate that remains the barrier to any in a reference to the Waanyi case, that a commonsense or just outcome. Labor is future decision of the High Court could extend entirely blinkered, and wrong, on the right to the reach of native title to cover tenures negotiate. It has, relatively recently, adopted beyond VCL; and the Wik decision of the catch-cry that the right to negotiate is the December 1996, by a bare majority of four to core of native title. I think the Premier in his three, declared that pastoral leases in second-reading speech referred to it as a Queensland did not necessarily extinguish all common law right. In fact, the right to native title. The result of that was that the 3210 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 potential reach in Queensland of native title, would have to engage the right to negotiate and thus of the right to negotiate, was not the on high-impact exploration and on mining 2% of the State that was presumed after the development, while we had a Native Title Act initial Mabo case, but upwards of 80%. That which was built on the premise that native title very dramatic variation in the reach of native had been much more broadly extinguished. title required a review of the Act. The National Native Title Tribunal was As part of that review, the accepting native title claims over every tenure Commonwealth, in consultation with the except private freehold. The law, common and States, saw one of the most crucial areas of statutory, was in an absolute and utter mess. reconsideration to be the extent of the We decided that the only possible way ongoing application of the right to negotiate. that we could issue exploration titles at that This was because the right was designed as a point was if industry was prepared to accept form of compensation, applicable to VCL, that responsibility for what might be the position in was to make up for the validation of relation to those tenures if the law ultimately intermediate period acts, or for the very came to reflect that native title did indeed exist widespread extinguishment that was assumed far more broadly than the statutory law then to have occurred, and it was going to apply to catered for. We were roundly condemned for a relatively small area of the land mass. An that at the time, from one quarter in particular, extension of the right across the vast areas of but I note that the current Government faced the country understood post-Wik to be subject no such criticism when it maintained that to native title would turn it into a massive attitude for precisely the same reasons. burden on the mining industry. The mining industry, understandably, then For many of us in this society, the burden and throughout much of the life of this on the mining industry was unjustified, even at Government, was simply not prepared to take the point when it was to be applicable to only that responsibility on any more than my about 2% of the State. It was a right that no Government or the current Government were other Queenslander enjoyed, and the expense prepared to expose the taxpayer. That is just related to it for the mining industry was a form as well, because these amendments ensure of discrimination against that industry by way that the cost to the taxpayer and the industry of guilt shedding about the economic status of of any other course would have been Aborigines that was simply unjustifiable—a incalculable—but massive. good reflection of chardonnay-influenced So when we came to renegotiate the new thought processes. shape of the Native Title Act after the Wik Of course, it was in the wake of the Wik decision, achieving some reasonable decision that we saw the transformation of the perspective on the right to negotiate was a right to negotiate from the negotiating card very high priority. What we tried to do was to that it was in 1993 to now, somehow a new life achieve between Aborigines and all other as a backdated, intrinsic, deep-seated element Australians equality before the law. Our view of native title. Let us deal with that myth. I was that, if mining was to be proposed on land repeat that it has never been that. It was a where native title might exist on a shared political and a statutory add-on in order to tenure, then the native title holders should stitch up a deal for Aboriginal support of the have no less than the rights—and no more Native Title Act in 1993, and as such it was than the rights—that were available to any quite properly subject to review, as is any other other titleholder of that land. That seemed to element of any other piece of legislation. The us to be an intrinsically fair outcome, and message of the failure of the right to negotiate arguably even more than fair when the fact by then was clear. What it had become was a was that in the Wik decision the majority said siren call to native title claims and to virtual that, where native title and leaseholder rights blackmail. That was very apparent, well before clashed, the rights of the leaseholder would the impact of the Wik decision was felt in prevail. Queensland. Exploration and project Notwithstanding the fact that the statutory development in Western Australia, which had rights of the leaseholder were the more about 40% VCL and which was therefore powerful, the native title holder would get pushed into engaging the right to negotiate equal procedural rights. The Commonwealth processes widely, had been in disarray for agreed with that and some important elements years. of that overall package of reforms to the Act In Queensland, the impact of the Wik survived the Senate, which then had Senator decision on exploration was dramatic. We had Brian Harradine from Tasmania holding the a High Court decision which implied that we balance of power. A crucial element of the 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3211 amended Act that finally emerged from the country, were theoretically free of the right to Senate in the middle of 1998 was that States negotiate. Ostensibly, a miner could drive a could establish their own regimes for dealing drilling rig to where he wanted to drill; he could with native title as long as they met minimum clear and level a pad for the rig; he could clear standards set in the parent Act. a few hundred square metres around the pad One of those minimum standards was to create a safe and practical working that in relation to the right to negotiate States environment to lay his pipe; and he could could develop their own schemes as long as access water in a nearby stream or a dam to they provided to native title holders on those lubricate diamond drills, but what he could not non-exclusive shared tenures rights that were do was clear any land to get his rig to the drill equal to those provided to other titleholders. site. If he left a made road or a track, then he That meant that there need not be a right to could only travel across country to the extent negotiate in relation to mining development or that he did not need to grade any section of it in relation to exploration. That seemed to us a or make a cutting to get over a gully or a creek just outcome. bed. As soon as he did that, his exploration became so-called high impact and he had to The current State Government took quite engage the higher set of procedures. a different view. It decided to maintain the right to negotiate for mining development. It also The reality therefore was that most decided to maintain a level of procedural rights exploration that involved a drilling rig was going in relation to so-called high-impact exploration to become high impact and require explorers on non-exclusive tenures that were set at a to go through the more stringent procedures. It very high level—far higher than are the was this set of circumstances that made the procedural rights that will attach to other lack of a full-blown right to negotiate at the titleholders. high-impact exploration stage one of the few potential benefits to industry from the Having said that, there were some slight Premier's package. benefits in the scheme that the current Government proposed and took to the What the Premier had to agree to to get Senate. The Senate had the right of veto over the remnants of his package through in any proposed State-based regime. There was relation to exploration was two-fold: he had to a moderate but still substantive set of beef up his low-impact regime to the level that procedural rights attaching to so-called low- is now proposed for New South Wales and he impact exploration and there was the fact that had to go to the full right to negotiate on high- for high-impact exploration there was impact exploration. The combined impact of something under a full-blown right to these two concessions was to remove any negotiate. advantages to explorers, slight as they were, in the Premier's initial scheme. The mining industry was far from thrilled with the formula but it did see some hope of For example, it will be even harder now to getting the backlog of exploration tenures have any drilling take place under the low- moving, as a result of at least having some impact regime. The clearing of pads for drilling sort of legislation in place and in having a rigs may only be done under this new regime State-based Land and Resources Tribunal to where the levelling that is involved can be work through. There were also some achieved by removing 30 centimetres of soil or potentially reasonable benefits for small less. That rules out a miner setting up a rig on miners, little operators dealing with alluvial anything with more slope than a billiard table if gold, the gem miners and the small tin miners he is going to achieve low-impact status. of the cape. They were potentially going to be Apart from some politically correct and able to avoid the cost of the right to negotiate. environmentally friendly noxious weed slashing All of that is now gone. To get the on a drill site, clearing is forbidden. Drilling in agreement of Labor in the Senate to even the creek beds for water is forbidden under the relatively meaningless remnants of his low-impact regime. Miners will require the package, the Premier had to beef up even his informed consent of the native title holders low-impact exploration regime. The parameters before they can actually fulfil any element of establishing exploration as low impact, and their low-impact exploration licence—before thus free of the right to negotiate, were already they can even have access to the licence tough as a result of the interpretation of the area. Federal bureaucrats, if not the law-makers What the Left has done in imposing the themselves. Carr model for low-impact exploration on the Small-scale drilling operations, which are Premier is to effectively ensure that anything the lifeblood of exploration activity in this more than a geologist working carefully on foot 3212 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 with a geologist's hammer and maybe some negotiate through indigenous land use aerial survey work will be classified as high- agreements. He has been trying that route impact exploration. with the small miners. He is now trying to go Under the model imposed by Labor in the down that route in relation to a Statewide ILUA Senate, high-impact exploration will attract the on at least the backlog of mining tenures. full right to negotiate, and under the model There are some 1,200 of those tenures waiting imposed by Labor in the Senate, virtually all to be dealt with. They represent several years exploration will be high impact. in which the mining industry has largely been marching on the spot. I suspect the Premier's In other words, the Labor Left has chances of bringing off an ILUA on that scale effectively won a complete victory on the right are incredibly slight. It means achieving a to negotiate under the Premier's heavily solidarity of view across every native title body amended State-based regime. There will be a corporate, every claimant group for every claim right to negotiate on essentially all exploration. and every representative body from one end There will be a right to negotiate on mining of the State to the other. And now those development. There will be a right to negotiate negotiations have to go on with people who for the small miners. More than that, there will know that they can achieve a right to negotiate be no cognate negotiations. for virtually all and any activities associated One of the disincentives for State-based with mining over and again. regimes, particularly a State-based regime that The Western Australian model may well is virtually a mirror image of the Keating era be a better route. In the west, the effort is to regime, is that there will not be single sets of establish ILUAs covering mining on a claim-by- negotiation for packages from exploration claim basis. But again, the very fact that the through production. We will see rights to Premier has been sent to the cleaners by the negotiate on renewals. We will see one right to Left in Canberra may militate against goals on negotiate for exploration and another right to that scale. negotiate for production. The Left in Canberra is keenly aware of all of these points. They I do not intend to take up much more of know that what they have achieved with this the time of the House. We have had package is to take the administration of native essentially the same debate in this House for title in Queensland back to, as close as far too many times. The failure of the possible, the Keating model circa 1993 which, Legislatures of this country to have developed given the expanded reach of native title as per a workable and sensible regime for dealing the Wik decision, will fantastically compound with this issue since the Mabo decision in June the negative impact of the Native Title Act on 1992—now over eight years ago—is a industry. travesty. The Left of the Australian Labor Party and their fellow travellers among the One of the great tragedies of this situation Democrats and the Greens carry most of the is that it is so little understood in the wider blame. Paul Keating's rush of blood in 1993 to community. The significance of the mining pull off what Gough Whitlam and Bob Hawke industry to this State is so great that there had failed to do in establishing a national ought to be a clearer understanding of what is regime for land rights led to a fundamentally being done to it. As the Premier made clear in flawed Act that has failed Aborigines, failed the his statements when he still held out some mining industry and failed in particular rural desperate hope of getting some sense from Australia, particularly pastoralists. Along with his colleagues in Canberra, if there is no the miners, they have been asked by a tiny exploration, there is no mining development. If handful of the politically correct to carry virtually there is no mining development, or much- the entire load on this issue. In that in reduced mining development, this State is particular, it has been an intellectually and shooting itself in the foot. Aborigines will miss morally poverty stricken response. out at least as much as any other section of There was a real chance at least after the the community, and probably more so. We do Wik decision and after a change of not need to shoot ourselves in the foot in this Government at the Federal level to restore way to recognise some enlightenment to some balance to that equation. We could Aboriginal policy, to recognise and make up for have learned from the mistakes so apparent in at least some of the mistakes of the past. the initial Act and the thought processes that The native title regime in this country and drove it. We could have come up with in this State is symbolism gone mad. I know something far more practical and sensible that that the Premier is of a view that he may be would have provided better outcomes for all able to avoid some of the problems associated groups. Instead, in the Senate in 1997 and with the conventional route of the right to 1998, the Labor Left extended its grip on this 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3213 issue in that party. The deal that ultimately That determination—to provide an emerged via Brian Harradine retained only extension of time—then becomes a some elements of the 10-point plan. disallowable instrument and the Senate is The subsequent change of the balance of back in. But, apart from that, the Senate is power in the Senate to the Democrats has now locked out of the game. That is why guaranteed even sillier outcomes for as long Labor's Aboriginal Affairs spokesman, Daryl as the Labor Party remains captive of the Left. Melham, quit. It was not in protest at some If anything, it is becoming more captive of the alleged win for the Premier; it was over the Left, which now effectively reflects the view security issue. Mr Melham knows that that, unless native title legislation has the Queensland is now out of the reach of the informed consent of the relevant indigenous Senate. The Premier knows that, too, but he groups, it is unacceptable. The Left has will not buck the system. This highlights that marched in tune with the United Nations until there are sensible people in the Australian committee on the elimination of all forms of Senate, this issue is absolutely unresolvable. racial discrimination, as do the Democrats and When there is a sensible group of people in the Greens. CERD is now the undisputed Pied the Senate and elsewhere, we may see some Piper for the politically correct on this issue. progress on this matter at last. What all that means is that there can be no In the meantime, the Opposition cannot sensible, reasonable resolution of the native support this legislation. We would have title issue as long as the Left dominates Labor, supported the Premier's original position, in the Senate at least, and as long as the without great enthusiasm, if he had been able balance of power in that Chamber is held by to get it through. While it offered only slight the Australian Democrats. Messrs Woodley advantages over the Commonwealth regime, and company are even further off with the which would have been what we would have pixies than Nick Bolkus. been forced to fall back on if the entirety of the In conclusion, I want to say something on Premier's package was rejected in the Senate, the issue of what the Left calls security. we now have a result that we believe is even Security refers to the role of the Senate in worse. We have a State-based Land and being able to dominate State Governments on Resources Tribunal but we effectively have this issue. It is an article of faith across the Left precisely what the Left in Canberra wants, grouping—of Labor, the Democrats and the which is an unworkable regime that, as the Greens—that States should not be trusted with Premier said, will likely bring about a meltdown land management where it engages native in the Queensland mining industry, insofar as title. They want a situation whereby the there is anything left to melt. This is the worst Commonwealth totally controls the issue. It is possible outcome for all Queenslanders, that sentiment as much as any other which including Aboriginal Queenslanders. resulted in the drubbing for the Premier in I wish to make a couple of comments Canberra last week, because the fact is that about the way in which the State of the right for the Senate to veto and shape Queensland was sold out by Mr Beattie in this State native title-based regimes is virtually a regard. Laurie Oakes got it right in an article in once-off right. The Commonwealth Minister this week's Bulletin headed "Beazley, the makes determinations that a State-based dignified victor". He stated— regime meets the minimum criteria of the Act, "Let's cut through the nonsense. Kim but those determinations are a disallowable Beazley had a win in the deal he instrument before the Commonwealth negotiated with Queensland Premier Parliament. However, once a State-based over native title." regime is through, then a State may vary its regime as long as it remains, in the view of the Laurie Oakes went on to say— Minister, within the parameters of the Act. Any "He dragged the Queensland future determinations of the Minister are not, premier kicking and screaming to a according to my advice, disallowable position that is fully in line with the policy instruments. The only way the Senate might Daryl Melham introduced at the ALP's achieve another bite at the cherry is if the national conference in Hobart." Minister determines that what a State seeks to I concur with the assessment by Mr Oakes. do by variation of its regime is not within the parameters set by the Act and he determines There was an opportunity for Mr Beattie to to provide the State with an extension of time demonstrate to the people of Queensland that in which to come back to him with he was not a branch office Labor Premier—the amendments that are within the parameters of Labor Party national convention in Hobart. the Act. Mr Beattie could have used that convention to 3214 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 argue for Queensland, the Queensland point legislation that put an end to employment of view and his Queensland legislation. opportunities for Aboriginals in remote areas of Mr Welford: And he did. Queensland, that will be this piece of legislation. Mr BORBIDGE: He did not. He rolled over. He did not even raise it. He sold out the The Premier likes to talk about jobs, jobs, interests of this State. He would not take on jobs so let us talk about jobs, jobs, jobs. This big Kim at the Labor Party convention in Bill is a jobs destroyer. This Bill says to mining Hobart. He would not take on big Kim in the companies, "Go elsewhere." This Bill says to Senate. He would not take them on, because anyone who makes a living in the mining he did not want a public brawl with Federal industry, "We're going to make it damned hard Labor. He would not engage in a public for you in Queensland." The other day I heard debate in spite of the fact that, according to what was supposed to be a joke: what's the his own words, if his legislation did not go difference between a Queensland geologist through there would be a meltdown in terms of and a pizza? A pizza can feed a family of four! the implications for the mining industry. We That is not very funny. had a Premier who had the opportunity to fight Investment in mining in this country is the good fight for Queensland, and what did already on very shaky ground. A recent world he show? That he is a branch office Premier risk survey of the resources industry rated 20 who rolled over like a little poodle dog while countries that are the major players in minerals Kim Beazley tickled his tummy! Kim said, prospecting. Do honourable members know "Pete, go home. Go back to the doghouse. where Australia rated for land access? Stop yapping and do as you are told." That is Twentieth! We finished last on the world precisely what Mr Beattie did on this most league table when it came to risk in relation to crucial of issues in terms of the economic land access. And now Labor has erected development of Queensland and the another barrier to land access. resources sector of this State. Last week in Canberra, Federal Labor This raises a very interesting question. If completely gutted the Queensland native title Australians ever have the misfortune of being regime by abandoning the proposed section confronted with Prime Minister Beazley, 43A alternative provisions to the right to heaven help this State and its branch office negotiate. There is not much left that enables Premier, because the branch office Premier will workable procedures to operate in do what he is told. He will not stand up for the Queensland. It is worth repeating, as the interests of Queensland, the resources sector Leader of the Opposition hinted at a moment and everyone else. He would not even stand ago, that the coalition did support in this place up for his own legislation, as flawed as it was. the Queensland native title legislation. We had He was not prepared to stand up for it publicly. reservations about it. We did not think it went There can be no greater indictment of a far enough. It is also important to realise that Queensland Premier, unless of course that the Federal coalition Government also Queensland Premier had been part of an outfit supported that piece of legislation. But now, that had corruptly cheated its way into office, with the recent amendments made in the and we know that he fits that bill as well. The Senate, all of that has been thrown out the Opposition opposes this legislation. window. Now all mining applications on pastoral leases in Queensland essentially will Mr FOLEY: I rise to a point of order. That have to run the gauntlet of the full right to remark is unparliamentary and it should be negotiate process. Perhaps Labor, particularly withdrawn. Federal Labor, has forgotten this: the right to Mr BORBIDGE: With respect, it is not. negotiate was never designed to apply to The Premier is obviously not here to take a pastoral leases. point of order. A member cannot take a point A fundamental fact with respect to of order in respect of another. Keating's original 1993 Mabo legislation, which Dr WATSON (Moggill—LP) (Leader of the Labor now likes to try to ignore, is that it was Liberal Party) (11.04 a.m.): I also rise to based on the then clear legal position that oppose the Native Title Resolution Bill. In 50 native title was extinguished by pastoral years' time, when historians look back and try leases. Admittedly, that was modified in the to locate the exact date that spelled the Wik decision. The whole foundation of the beginning of the end of mining investment in original legislation was that this right to Queensland, this will be the day they settle on. negotiate process would never apply to mining And in 50 years' time, when historians look applications on pastoral leases. We have gone back and try to identify the one major piece of a long way backwards since then. 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3215

What a joke it was when Daryl Melham Mr Lucas: You said "Centenary". resigned as Labor's shadow Minister for Dr WATSON: I must have been thinking Aboriginal Affairs! He supposedly resigned on about the next electorate we are going to win principle. What principle? The principle of away from Labor. being famous for 15 minutes? He certainly did not need to resign over anything that was left It is working very well at the Century Zinc in the Bill. Laurie Oakes was spot on in the mine in north-west Queensland. I remember Bulletin when he said that— just last month at the Estimates committee that Mr Braddy, the Minister for Employment "... Beattie should be very grateful to and Industrial Relations, sang the praises of Melham, whose resignation made it look Century in terms of creating employment for as though it was the Queensland premier indigenous Australians. Under an MOU signed who'd won a victory." with Pasminco, by 2003, 50% of the work force The Leader of the Opposition read other at Century Zinc will be indigenous people excerpts from that Laurie Oakes article a drawn from the communities in that part of the moment ago. The real winner out of the world. Pasminco tells us that already 20% of Senate negotiations and amendments was the workers are Aboriginal. As Mr Braddy said, not the Queensland Premier, it was the we can create meaningful trained jobs for the Opposition Leader in Canberra. They were the Aboriginal community of this State, but not any ones who effectively gutted the Queensland more thanks to the sell-out by the Premier and legislation. Any of the odium from the his Labor mates in Canberra. dismantling of the Queensland legislation falls Mr Sullivan: That is rubbish, David, and on their shoulders. you know it—absolute rubbish! This Bill is a defeat for mining investment, Dr WATSON: The member opposite and I for indigenous job prospects and for know that no-one wants this Bill. He did not Queensland. In recent times the Premier has want this Bill and he knows it. We did not want come out in full support of Aboriginal leader this Bill. The coalition in Canberra did not want Noel Pearson and his efforts to end the so- this Bill. We wanted the Bill that was passed by called poison of Aboriginal welfare. I would this Parliament, which was flawed, but he and have thought the best way to end the poison his Labor mates in Canberra sold out. Mining of Aboriginal welfare was jobs. And where are companies do not win. Aborigines do not win. jobs for indigenous Queenslanders most likely Queensland does not win. We oppose this Bill to be? On mining sites in remote areas! The on what is a very sad day in the history of our Premier knows that. In a letter to the editor of State. the Courier-Mail of 20 April this year, Peter Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt— Beattie wrote— ALP) (Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait "I am passionate about jobs resulting Islander Policy and Minister for Women's from mining development which benefits Policy and Minister for Fair Trading) all Queenslanders, and particularly (11.10 a.m.): Today is a momentous day as indigenous Queenslanders. Unless there we conclude the years of negotiation between is mining exploration and mining then Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, indigenous Queenslanders in remote the Government and land users in this State. It communities will not benefit." is momentous for many reasons. Among them Exactly! Unless there is mining exploration and it concludes negotiations about how native title mining, then indigenous Queenslanders in is to apply in relation to mining development in remote communities will not benefit. Federal Queensland. It enables Aboriginal and Torres Labor's logic in voting with the Democrats to Strait Islander peoples to effectively engage in water down the Queensland native title regime economic development on their traditional defies understanding. Was it doing it to protect lands and for the first time in Queensland it indigenous Australians? As my colleague from also creates a basis for an effective Mooloolah has said, the best protection we partnership between a land user and can give indigenous Australians is a job. Is Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. there anyone in this House who would As is well known, the High Court of disagree with that? It is working very well at the Australia in the 1992 Mabo decision Centenary zinc mine in north-west recognised the continuing existence of native Queensland. title. In 1996 the High Court in Wik established that native title could coexist with other rights Mr Lucas: "Century" actually, not on land covered by pastoral leases. In "Centenary". response to those decisions, Governments, Dr WATSON: Century Zinc mine. land users, Aboriginal and Torres Strait 3216 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000

Islander people and the general community of economic self-reliance. This legislation have been attempting to find a legislative ensures that Aboriginal and Torres Strait framework that is both fair and practical. Islander peoples have the full right to The Bill before the House has taken negotiate with miners when exploration is almost four years to resolve and I believe it considered to be anything other than low does establish a fair and practical framework. It impact. Low-impact exploration activities, such also maintains the integrity of Labor's as surveying and field work which does not commitment to advancing reconciliation and involve clearing, will also attract the right to working with indigenous Queenslanders to consultation. Just as importantly, native title improve their opportunities and their quality of claimants will be able to negotiate access life. The Bill underlines the contrast between agreements before low-impact exploration can the Government and the Opposition. The occur. So native title claimants will have the Opposition would rather extinguish native title opportunity to get involved in proposals for and it still seeks to make the basest political exploration of any sort. At no point will they be capital out of indigenous issues, especially left out of the loop. when those issues involve land uses. Unlike Those principles match the principles the majority of Queenslanders, the Opposition enshrined in the New South Wales scheme as is too mean spirited to share this country and agreed by the Premier after discussions with too small minded to promote harmony rather Federal Labor. The Premier, true to form, is than division. It is also so inept that its term in keeping to his word. The agreement with the Government was the ice age for mining Federal Labor Leader, Kim Beazley, also exploration in this State. But industry was not means that four months will elapse before the only group to suffer under the Borbidge access is permitted under the low-impact Government. Aboriginal and Torres Strait exploration tenement. If an access agreement Islander people also experienced confusion is not reached after two months of discussions, and uncertainty. the matter may be referred to the mining registrar for mediation for one month. Having listened to the shameful Ultimately, if division remains, either party may contributions this morning made by the Leader ask the mining registrar to refer the matter to of the National Party and the Leader of the the Land and Resources Tribunal. The Liberal Party, who see this Bill as a defeat, registrar must then refer the matter to the who see this Bill as everything negative, I think tribunal, which must make a decision on an they have learned nothing from the past. access agreement. This decision may include Many indigenous people are now welcoming terms about compensation for the impact of the fact that the ice age has thawed and the exploration on native title and may specify Queensland is the first State or Territory to which areas the miner should access. have successfully developed its own regime under the amended Commonwealth Native Overall, the changes in the Bill will ensure Title Act. consistent rights for Aboriginal people no matter which side of the Tweed they are from. A great number of Aboriginal and Torres It thus avoids one of the pitfalls of the Federal Strait Islander people in this State relish the system. As I have said, the Government's opportunities presented by this Bill, legislation will provide economic opportunities opportunities to enter into joint ventures, to for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander create employment and to develop peoples. It is undeniable that they have high infrastructure and real economies in rural and unemployment rates and low life expectancy remote communities. I cannot speak for compared with the rest of Queensland. indigenous people, but increasingly I hear them say that they want to shed their It is also true that over the past 200 years dependence on the welfare system and strike people have not only been dispossessed of new ground with their own industries or with their land, they have also been denied enterprises established in partnership with the opportunities to participate in the development commercial world. of their traditional lands or to gain any sustainable economic benefit from them. The Noel Pearson is perhaps the most tradition of stockmen working for tea and eloquent and prominent advocate of this corned meat enabled people to live and work cause, but he is by no means a loner. When I on their country, but it did not allow them to travel through communities, no matter how establish long-term enterprises. I do not know remote, I hear similar sentiments to those of any Aboriginal pastoral dynasties expressed by Noel. By giving indigenous comparable with the Vestys or the Kidmans, groups the tools to clearly establish their rights but in recent times we have seen changes in to land resources, this Bill advances the cause attitudes among mining companies as well as 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3217 pastoral concerns. Organisations such as State Development and Trade, I want to say Pasminco and Comalco are engaging with one more thing about the Beattie Labor their Aboriginal "neighbours" in a more Government, and reference has been made to meaningful way than ever before. It could be this by the Leader of the Opposition and the argued that it is not merely philanthropy that member for Moggill. In his Bulletin magazine has brought this on. The High Court's column this week, commentator Laurie Oakes confirmation that native title "lives" has surely made the point that it is the Beazley Federal been a catalyst. Labor Party, not the Beattie Queensland The Queensland regime will enable Labor Party, that is principled and dignified indigenous Queenslanders to build on the and which has won a moral victory on this increasing goodwill of mining companies and State's latest round of native title negotiate jobs and a long-term economic amendments. I applaud Mr Beazley's future for their communities. This regime is commitment to principle. He is wrong on the consistent with the aims of the Council for policy side of the question, but it is absolutely Aboriginal Reconciliation's Australia Declaration to his credit that he has stuck to his principles. Towards Reconciliation. It promotes self- On native title, the Premier has served up a determination for Aboriginal and Torres Strait succession of dog's breakfasts. He has held Islander peoples. It is little wonder that after more positions and gone through more serious consideration it now has the support of contortions than the Indian rubber man. His distinguished indigenous leaders such as Terry principles on native title appear to be that he O'Shane and Noel Pearson. has no principles. It is in this environment that Queensland's This Bill is a successful conclusion of economic and social progress has been held years of negotiation. The day this law takes up—held to ransom, in fact—by the inability of effect will be a brand new day. Both the the Beattie Labor Government to organise its Queensland Indigenous Working Group and legislative program. The guillotines alone that the Queensland Mining Council should be the Leader of the House has trundled out this congratulated for showing such maturity in week are stark testimony to the fact that their negotiations. Both groups have shown all Government business is a giant bottleneck. Queenslanders the way to create meaningful Yesterday, the August unemployment figures partnerships. I commend the Premier and his were released. We heard from my honourable departmental officers who have spent years friend the Leader of the Liberal Party in this negotiating this Bill. I commend the Bill to the debate about the brake on growth brought House. about by Labor's failure to perform as an Mr SLACK (Burnett—NPA) (11.20 a.m.): It economic manager of this State. Yesterday is almost beyond belief that we in this House when the Premier did not want to answer are still debating amendments to this embarrassing questions about Labor rorting of Government's amended and re-amended the electoral system in the anti-democratic native title legislation. It would be nice if this pursuit of its own crassly partisan advantage, was unbelievable, as it seems. However, it is the Premier was applauding the August not unbelievable, is it? It is becoming the figures. He should not have been doing Beattie Labor Government's standard so—not if he is the economic manager of operating procedure. It seems to have got excellence that he claims to be and not if he is hold of a lot of unworkable legislation. We the futurist he claims to be. have seen three examples of this merry-go- If he were any sort of economic manager, round effect this week—the water resource he would know what the figures really show: legislation, vegetation management legislation that Queensland under Labor is dragging the and now native title. When the Premier chain on economic advance against both the promised Queenslanders he would set a national benchmark and Australia's other dizzying pace in Government, I somehow resource economies. If he were any sort of doubt he had this particular sort of circus in futurist, he would have drawn absolutely no mind. Yet again, Labor promises excellence comfort from the fact that the youth and delivers catastrophe. Yet again, the unemployment rate in August was 20%, nearly Beattie Labor Government whips the wheels half a per cent higher than a year ago. The off rationality and then argues until it is blue in fact is—and the Premier knows it, whether or the face that black is white. Yet again, the not he is prepared to say so publicly—that we legislative process is turned into an expensive can no longer take mining exploration for farce. granted in this country. I feel that it is Before I turn to matters relating to native necessary to repeat that statement, drawing title which impact on my shadow portfolio of on my experiences when I was the Minister 3218 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 and my experiences as the shadow Minister Mr NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) for State Development and Trade: we can no (11.25 a.m.): I have been a member of this longer take mining exploration for granted in Parliament since 1992. this country. Dr Watson outlined the figures in Mr Lucas: You have done a good job, relation to what other countries are doing. too. Other countries are making it easier. We are making it harder. Mr NUTTALL: I thank the member for that. I have to say that the Native Title One needs only elementary business Resolution Bill is probably the most complex education to work out from that equation which legislation I have had to deal with in my time in way the line on the graph will be going. We this place. It is certainly legislation which has cannot be complacent. We need the export not been easy for all parties. This morning I dollars from traditional resource stocks more took particular notice of the contribution to the than ever in the new economy if our policy is to debate by the Leader of the Liberal Party promote the welfare of all Queenslanders. The when he said that we should not be debating moral imperative is that the wishes of the legislation before the House today; rather, traditional Aboriginal titleholders be respected. we should be supporting the legislation passed That is also the fundamental law. However, by this Parliament in previous sittings. If my since the original judgment in 1993 that native memory serves my correctly, the Liberal Party title exists in law, resource development has and the coalition in general opposed that gone backwards. We must come to grips with legislation when it was brought before the the brake this places on our progress as a House at that time. community. We must act to remove as many In my contribution to this debate I want to hurdles as possible rather than inventing new refer to the success of native title in reasons to create an even bigger bottleneck. Queensland, particularly in terms of consent, Present arrangements, which will not be determinations and the way this Government improved by this legislation, add time, has tried to negotiate through the issues uncertainty and cost to a range of economic without going to the courts. To that end, I am activities from mining to pastoral and aware that in recent times the Attorney- agricultural extension, even to tourism General travelled to the Torres Strait islands infrastructure. They make it harder rather than representing the Premier at a number of consent determinations for native title rights, in easier. We have an opportunity to come to particular the interests of five separate Islander terms with this and to confront the policy issue peoples in the Torres Strait islands. These that lies before us, which has nothing to do consent determinations are agreements to with feeling warm and fuzzy and everything to recognise native title. Indeed, they are do with building a future for Aborigines and registered in the Federal Court of Australia. every other Australian. The difficulty lies in the practical application of the legislation. It lies in Queensland is a party to any native title the amount of time required to identify and claim. It negotiates with the claimants and then find potential claimants and then get third-party stakeholders about the nature and them together for negotiations. It lies in the the extent of native title rights and their expense of such an operation. It lies in the interests. This Government assists claimants to frequently conflicting claims to traditional research and establish the full extent of their ownership of particular tracts of territory. It connection with the land they are claiming. lies—and let me be absolutely clear about The end result is that claimants become native this—in the fact that the argument is often title holders, not just claimants. Therefore, they about monetary compensation rather than enjoy the full benefits of recognition in the traditional affinity. common law, under the Federal Native Title Act and relevant State legislation, including the It may be time for an inquiry into the Bill before the House today. process by which requirements of proof are One particular native title claim, the met, into the bureaucratic barriers to getting a Dauan native title claim, was lodged in 1996. A sign-off on heritage and other issues and into lot of work was commenced on that claim in the difficult issue of who should actually qualify 1998. The people of Dauan are closely under native title law. If the Premier were a connected with the people of Saibai Island, Premier for all Queenslanders, as he who also secured recognition of their native claims—another untested claim—then he title in early 1999. Many of the Dauan people would know this and he would not have were at the Saibai celebrations, and vice brought this deficient Bill into this House. I versa. The Dauan people have now received oppose the Bill. legal recognition of their native title. They join 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3219 their Saibai brothers and sisters as native title Government are convinced that encouraging holders, rather than merely native title people at the grassroots level to work through claimants. The people of Dauan were the issues involved in their local communities is especially pleased that this recognition the way forward in terms of native title and, occurred on the anniversary of the coming of indeed, Queensland. the light, which is the celebration of the arrival Queensland is leading the way in of the first Christian missionaries to the resolving native title issues, with nine out of the island—another turning point in the history of 10 consent determinations in all of this country their race. The Attorney-General represented being made in Queensland. We expect that the Premier and the State of Queensland at another five consent determinations of native this historic signing. title will be made before the end of 2000. This Under the determination, native title was will finalise half of all land claims in the Torres found to exist on the land and inland waters Strait. The great success we have had in on the landward side of the high-water mark. Queensland in resolving native title issues The nature and extent of the native title rights through agreements is showing the rest of the and interests as determined are the rights and nation how to achieve successful resolution of interests to possess, to occupy, to use and to native title without great cost to the taxpayers, enjoy the determination area in accordance without significant controversy and division and with their traditional laws and customs and the without great time delays. laws of the Commonwealth and the State of Queensland. Under the Dauan agreement, all parties came to the negotiating table with great We should all be proud and pleased to goodwill and brought a focused and practical say that this is the ninth determination of approach to dealing with the critical issues that native title made by agreement—I think are involved in this complex issue. This "agreement" is the important word—reached agreement is proof that native title and other between the State of Queensland and land management issues can be resolved in a indigenous people since this Labor way that affords proper respect for the rights of Government came to power in 1998. The all parties concerned. The State of determinations we are celebrating today follow Queensland and the Torres Strait Regional on from the historic Mabo decision of 1992. It Authority have worked in a cooperative is pleasing to see that these determinations of manner through 12 months of intense native title in the Torres Strait are maintaining negotiations to reach these historic results. the momentum of that decision. I think it is something that we as a Government should As I said at the start of my speech, this is be particularly proud of. a complex issue, but the solution simply is for people to sit down and negotiate. I believe the The positive outcomes we see today native title regime we have in Australia and the demonstrate that the approach taken by this examples I have given are an endorsement of Beattie Labor Government—that is, what we as a Government have been able to negotiating agreements on the ground achieve in terms of native title issues. In my between parties—is the best approach to view, sitting around a table and negotiating resolving native title issues and produces the through the matters certainly beats sitting in a practical outcomes that all parties seek to courtroom every day. I commend the Bill to the achieve. The approach we take underpins the House. Native title has been and continues to State alternative native title regime. Particularly be a complex issue, not only at a State level important in the Government's approach is the but also at a Federal level. I do not believe shifting of focus away from litigation. Millions there is any easy answer. I think it is a matter and millions of dollars of Queensland of people on both sides having goodwill. taxpayers' money gets swallowed up by pursuing judgments through the courts. I pass on my best wishes to all Australian Judgments by the courts have rarely delivered Olympians competing in the Olympic Games, any practical solutions to the on-ground starting in a week's time. It is an exciting time problems. In reality, it comes back to for us as a nation and it is something that I negotiation between the parties directly think we all look forward to. I wish everyone all involved. We believe that is the only way to the success in the world. resolve practical land management issues. Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (11.35 a.m.): The Queensland approach is to avoid The failure of key parts of Queensland Labor's litigation and to resolve native title issues from native title legislation in the Federal Senate the outset through negotiating agreements represents a nightmare situation for the between all the parties. The Premier and this Queensland mining industry—one that could 3220 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 threaten the future of that great industry for Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Does the which I have shadow responsibility. member for Callide withdraw? The decision of Federal Labor senators to Mr SEENEY: Did the Minister find it support a Democrat move to enforce a right to offensive? negotiate provision for native title claimants on Mr McGRADY: I find it offensive and I ask all tenures for virtually all mining activity in for it to be withdrawn. The Hansard record is Queensland will only compound the massive there, and it is clear. damage the mining industry has suffered since the passage of the Native Title Act in 1993. Mr SEENEY: Time is of the essence. I Native title claimants will now have the right to would love the opportunity to argue with the demand fees and payments under a number Minister, but I do withdraw whatever the of guises for almost any sort of mining activity, Minister finds offensive. Perhaps we will get an including all but the most minor exploration opportunity to debate it at a later date. activities—and even those are subject to The result is an almost total surrender to informed consent and compensation. These the Socialist Left faction and the complete are rights not available to any other Australian betrayal of the Queensland mining industry by possessing any other land title, and history has this State Labor Government. The reality is shown us on more than one occasion how this that the mining industry is back to square one, so-called right to negotiate very quickly with no real hope of seeing a backlog of becomes the right to extort. applications dealt with and no real hope or The legislation passed through the expectation that the disastrous decline in Queensland Parliament by Minister McGrady exploration activity will be reversed to levels and requiring Federal ratification was a poor that are necessary to sustain the industry into attempt to solve an impasse that gripped the the future. The alarming free fall in investment Queensland mining industry, but it did offer will now inevitably continue with disastrous some hope in terms of exploration. It may effects on the Queensland economy and have facilitated a workable exploration process Queensland jobs. That will impact on every by restricting the debilitating right to negotiate Queenslander, now and forever. process available to native title claimants to The National Party argued in the the development phase of mining projects. negotiations on the Wik package that there Now the Queensland Premier and Minister should be an equality of rights: both categories McGrady have been comprehensively rolled by of people with an interest in the land, the Socialist Left faction that dominates the Aboriginals and leaseholders, should have the Federal Senate, and every Queenslander will same set of rights. It was one of the better and be poorer as our once great mining industry is more sensible outcomes of the Wik slowly choked by the native title regime that amendment package that a State or Territory has proved to be and was designed to be could devise such a scheme based on unworkable. equality. In terms of relative equality, the The Queensland Premier is trying Queensland scheme had a heavy bias in unsuccessfully to sell this incredibly favour of Aborigines, especially in relation to embarrassing defeat as a compromise exploration. The regime put forward by position. Queensland's Minister, Mr McGrady, Queensland was, if anything, already overly simply went missing when he was most generous to Aboriginal interests. needed. I draw the attention of the House to The first thing that has to be recognised is the record of the Estimates committee. Mr that most exploration, if not all exploration, will McGrady failed three times to assure the inevitably be held to be high-impact Estimates committee that he had even spoken exploration. On the definitions in the Act, low- to any of the Queensland senators who had impact exploration will be restricted to very low- the balance of power on this particular issue. impact activities indeed. It is possible to Mr McGRADY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I theoretically engage in the sort of small-scale rise to a point of order. The Hansard record will drilling operations that are the basic method of indicate that I refused to detail the individuals. most exploration and stay within the definition Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Nelson- of low impact, but only if there is virtually no Carr): Order! Is this a point of order? disturbance on the surface of the land. It is Mr McGRADY: It is a point of order. possible to clear a pad slightly larger than the drilling rig and clear a few hundred square Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: You would metres around it to protect against fire and to like that comment to be withdrawn? provide a safe and practical working Mr SEENEY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I environment for the crew. But any form of would— clearing of a track for the rig means that low- 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3221 impact exploration becomes high-impact grim day for the prospects of Aboriginal exploration. So the reality is that as soon as a employment in Australia's resource industry. It few metres of rocky ground is graded or there is, without doubt, a day of utter humiliation for is some disturbance of a gully or a creek Premier Beattie. Despite the smokescreen crossing to get the rig into position, the being desperately created by squadrons of exploration becomes high impact. That will spin doctors, the mining industry knows only mean that almost all exploration will, by too well the result is a complete gutting of the necessity, be high impact. Queensland scheme by abandoning the In fact, after this Beattie backdown and Queensland Government's proposed section despite the Premier's rhetoric, whether it is 43A alternative provisions on the right to high impact or low impact, it will attract a right negotiate. There is not much left at all that to negotiate, differing only in a matter of enables workable procedures to operate in degrees. Even with low-impact exploration, Queensland. there exists a need for informed consent and a Native title rights have been elevated to a process of compensation for native title level far in excess of what is fair or what was claimants. That is a very significant set of rights ever intended by the original Mabo decision. for the Aboriginal community. It is a set of Those rights are far in excess of the procedural rights way in excess of the rights currently rights of the pastoral lessees. The High Court available to every other land-holder in made it clear in Mabo and Wik that the Queensland, which basically amounts to a statutory titles are stronger than the common right to object and to have objections law titles. When you have a clash between a considered by the Mining Registrar. common law title and a statutory title, the statutory title must prevail. That was clear, and One of the very few ways in which the that is the basis in essence of our whole legal proposed Queensland scheme offered any system. Whether the statutory title is held by hope of renewal of the once-vigorous mineral- an Aboriginal person, an Anglo-Saxon person related activity in Queensland is via the very or an Islamic person, it makes no difference. In fact that there was no right to negotiate on the our legal system, the only way it can operate is exploration stage. Now that is gone, with the if the statutory titleholder's rights prevail where inevitable passage of this amending legislation there is a clash with the common law. today, and the Queensland economy will lose more confidence and the free-fall that we have The disallowance by the Federal Senate seen in recent years in mineral activity will in relation to the core elements of become an absolute collapse and a rout. To Queensland's legislation will result in all mining use the Premier's words, the industry will melt applications on pastoral leases in Queensland down. having to run the gauntlet of the full right to negotiate process, which, it can never be said With the passage of this legislation today, too many times, was never designed to apply the Socialist Left of the Labor Party, here in to pastoral leases. A fundamental fact which Queensland and in Canberra, will have joined Labor always seeks to ignore of the 1993 together to undermine one of the great pillars legislation, which contained this new, incredibly of the Queensland economy and the complex and legalistic process called the right Australian economy. It will have successfully to negotiate, is that it was based on the then robbed thousands of workers of the potential clear legal position that native title was for jobs in the mining industry. The Socialist extinguished by pastoral leases. In other Left faction of the Labor Party, here in words, the whole foundation of the legislation Queensland and in Canberra, will have ended was that this right to negotiate process would the potential for thousands of jobs never apply to mining applications on pastoral downstream and upstream in elements of that leases. industry and thousands more in support industries. Reducing royalty revenue from The right to negotiate process has, as is mining projects will reduce the services offered conceded by many, proved to be a huge by the Queensland Government. stumbling block and an unworkable process in many respects for the development of Queensland now has one of the highest Australia's resources industry, and therefore for unemployment rates in this country. It is still the prospects of employment for Aboriginal almost 8%. The direct flow-on impacts on people who live in regional Queensland. employment from the mining industry are one Despite this Government's best attempts to of the best ways the State has to try to reduce put a gloss on it, the outcome today guts the that rate of unemployment. Today is a very legislation, and it is a disaster for Queensland's grim day for Queensland's magnificently mining industry. It is, as I said, a humiliation successful mining industry. But it is also a very personally for Mr Beattie, who has been 3222 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 beaten by the Left faction here in this where we are and have been world leaders. It Parliament and in Canberra. is progressively being undermined and The fact is that some 50% to 60% of potentially destroyed by the philosophy that is Queensland is covered by pastoral leases or represented in this legislation today. reserved land that would have been covered Today, without doubt, is a catastrophic by this section 43A determination. It is also a day for the Queensland mining industry. It is a fact that about 63% of Queensland is land catastrophic day for the Queensland economy, claimable under native title, and about 90% of and it is a day of abject humiliation for the that has been claimed. In other words, 54% of Premier of Queensland and his Government. Queensland is under claim. This is a huge On 20 April this year, Mr Beattie spoke of the issue for the Queensland Government. consequences of what we now face, that is, if Together with the fact that over half of the Queensland-based scheme were to be Queensland is pastoral lease land, this Bill voted down or substantially compromised. He today really will be a complete disaster for the said that a defeat of this legislation would be Queensland mining industry. the most savage blow for both mining and I think the future looks extremely grim for indigenous communities in more than a the resources industry, not only in Queensland generation. And how right he was! It is a but Australiawide, if this process is allowed to terrible thing that, as a result of pressure from continue. Exploration has, in effect, collapsed the Socialist Left within the Labor Party on its in this country. It is going overseas at an Federal senators, the Queensland legislation increasing rate. A recent world risk survey of will now not remotely resemble the original the resources industry and of the 20 major legislation passed through this House. Let it be nations that are prospective for minerals rated remembered that that legislation, which has Australia equal worst for land access—20th out been destroyed by the Federal Labor Party, of 20 for risk in relation to land access. There was legislation so shocking to the conscience are many other countries that are becoming of the Labor Party that every single member of much more prospective and willing to welcome the Labor Party here in Queensland State investment in their resources industries, and Parliament voted for it—every last one of they are aggressively competing with Australia. them. But they could not get support from the That has enormous implications for Australia's senators from Queensland! economy and for the living standards of every Let me remind the House again, in single Australian, including those in Sydney conclusion, of the importance of the mining and Melbourne. industry to the State of Queensland. As But more particularly, and I think more shadow Minister, I will never tire of reading tragically, it has implications for the prospects these statistics. In 1999-2000 the mining for employment of Aboriginal people in sector represented 38.8% of all export regional Australia and in regional Queensland, earnings sourced from Queensland—almost and that is the tragedy. For those Aboriginal 40% of our export earnings. It was the largest people who live in regional Queensland, the generator of export income of any industry most prospective area of employment has to group. The mining industry represents more be the resources industry. There is no other than 5% of the gross State product of industry in regional Australia that is likely to Queensland, almost a quarter more again give Aboriginal people prospects for worthwhile than the agricultural sector. It employs directly jobs and employment than mining. 19,300 people in Queensland, many of them The Century mine, which was so Aboriginal people who have no other aggressively opposed by so many on the Left prospects for employment, and it employs of Australian politics who think they are doing indirectly in excess of almost 100,000 people. good, has fortunately proceeded. That mine Nobody knows where the Queensland mining has resulted in magnificent employment industry will go from here. Nobody knows! prospects for the local Aboriginal people, who There is a huge unknown ahead. All we know are engaged not only directly in the mine but is that the paralysis will continue and the also in businesses supporting and servicing stagnation will continue. the mine site and the area. While the mining On 31 May this year, there were 1,197 industry today is healthy, those mines that are exploration permits, 235 mining claim operating now had their approvals granted applications, 73 mineral development licence many years ago. There is very little coming on applications and 384 mining lease applications stream. There are very few prospects for the all awaiting determination in Queensland. So future. The industry could quite simply cease there are 1,889 mineral applications being to exist in this country. This is one industry held up right now. That is a figure that should 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3223 cause the current Minister to hang his head in Parliament become operative. Instead, what shame. has occurred is that of the 13 determinations However, equally disturbing is the fact that presented, six were voted down by the between July 1999 and the end of May this Senate. Six were voted down by a year only 94 exploration title permits had been combination of Australian Democrats, Greens granted, compared to the 400 issued each and Labor senators. Each and every Labor year by the Queensland Government before senator from this State sold the interests of the Wik decision. This scandalous backlog of Queensland down the drain when they voted permits, which is growing every month, has to disallow almost half of the alternative State had a devastating effect on mineral provisions. When they did that, they clearly exploration in Queensland. In fact, the demonstrated their contempt for the pleas and Queensland Mining Council says that the the urgings of the Premier of the State to put value of mineral exploration in this State has through what he described as model now declined by more than $300m. legislation when he put it through this place. The 13 Queensland proposed alternative So let us be absolutely clear about that. determinations relate to mining exploration Although the Premier goes about Australia, permits, to these claims and to the leases. The and particularly around Queensland, clearly Labor Party has attempted to pick and choose saying that this is a triumph for him and his and select seven out of the 13 determinations. administration, the people who voted him It is a pathetic mishmash. At absolute best, down, the people who did him over in the the outcome will be a second-rate deal that will Senate, were in fact his own Labor senators. not solve the problems faced by the As a result of that, what they have done is Queensland mining industry, which now faces make the piece of legislation that he put the very real prospect of the meltdown that the through coveting it as model legislation even Premier himself predicted. At absolute best, more unworkable. Let us also be clear about the outcome has been an entrenchment of what was actually voted down. The alternative unworkable native title that the Socialist Left procedures envisaged by section 26B covering designed and that pleases no-one. At gold or tin mining and the alternative right to absolute best, the outcome is an incredibly negotiate schemes under section 43A were all embarrassing failure for the Queensland defeated. The very exploration and mining Premier for which the Queensland lease applications that are of the most people—including, tragically, the Aboriginal importance to the State have been scuttled. It Queenslanders—will be forever poorer in the is important to recall the words that the future. honourable member for Callide has uttered in This is the worst possible outcome for all terms of projects drying up and jobs being lost. Queenslanders. Jobs, of course, is the favourite theme of the Mr SANTORO (Clayfield—LP) Premier and his Government. (11.52 a.m.): This Bill represents the triumph of It is noteworthy to mention, when we are politics and illusion and will do absolutely talking about section 26B covering gold and tin nothing to help the mining industry advance mining, that during the past few years 500 jobs indigenous interests or promote economic according to the mining council have been lost development. in the gold industry of Queensland. Of course, It is an undeniable fact that the alternative what this Bill will do to the mining industry does State provisions that were presented by this not bear repeating in this particular debate Government to the Federal Attorney-General, because it is so obvious that even those all of whose 13 determinations were voted on opposite must admit that it is going to by the Senate, simply did not go far enough. decimate it. The legislation passed by this Parliament did All that the Senate left in place was the not go far enough to assist in breaking up the legislation relating to low-impact exploration logjam in mining applications that has seen permits and modified rights to negotiate over exploration in this State become almost non- section 43 land, which in this State was almost existent. However, we all accepted that the solely national parks and State forests. What State legislation represented at least some the Senate left for the State was, in fact, the advance on what pertains under the right to crumbs—simply a ceremonial token gesture in negotiate provisions contained in the Native terms of what the Premier was pleading for. Title Act. The Premier was pleading for legislation that All people who are genuinely concerned just might have had some workability in it, but about the future of our mining industry wanted the Senate, and in particular the Labor to see the legislation passed by this sovereign senators, let the Premier and the State down. 3224 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000

The honourable the Leader of the Opposition resigned—an act that was as futile as it was very clearly explained the reason for that. It is dumb. That resignation gave the impression all related to Left Wing influences—extreme that the deal struck was a victory for Left Wing influences within the Labor Party at Queensland. In fact, it was more a reflection of both the State and Federal level—that have just how out of touch Melham and the Left of no concern or appreciation for the job-creating the Labor Party, particularly the Federal Labor potential of the mining industry. Party, are with this issue. In fact, I will go further. I think that they do The second is the fact that this understand that the mining industry can create Government prematurely established the Land many more jobs than what it currently does and Resources Tribunal. That would have under the current Federal and State Labor been a very good move if the alternative State Party native title regimes, but they want to provisions had been ticked off by the State. make sure that there is absolutely no This tribunal could have coordinated a range improvement to those regimes, and that is why of mining, tenement, environmental, native they scuttled so many of the provisions that title and cultural heritage matters in a one-stop came from this Parliament under the Premier's procedure. Certainly, we on the coalition side own imprimatur, and in doing so what they had no problems with its establishment as a have done is clearly put thousands and matter of principle. It was a good idea and a thousands of jobs in this State not on hold but sensible move subject, of course, to one big indeed destroyed them. caveat. That caveat was that it would actually So this was no victory that the Premier do something positive for what we are talking obtained, but in fact it was the worst of all about today. worlds. The Senate—and by that I mean the Some 18 months after the Land and ALP—cherry picked the alternative provisions Resources Tribunal was set up, it is a in such a way that any of the provisions that monument to this Government's would be of practical help to the mining incompetence. It is a white elephant and has industry have been discarded. been exposed publicly to be nothing more What remained after the vandalism than that. Instead of admitting that the setting perpetrated by the Federal ALP was nothing up of this tribunal was a bad move, the but shell legislation, legislation that really Premier and this Government are absolutely achieves absolutely nothing, particularly when desperate to try to give it something to do to it comes to achieving jobs. The sensible thing justify this waste of millions of dollars of to do, in my opinion, would have been for the taxpayers' money. This is another example of State to scuttle its remnant legislation and throwing good money after bad to try to rewrite seek to utilise the expedited procedures under history and pretend that the premature the right to negotiate provisions to fast-track as establishment and staffing of this tribunal was much exploration and mining activity as somehow a good move. possible. Using the expedited procedures has I would like to touch briefly on why this Bill worked very well in Western Australia, and is a fraud and why it is so bad. It is bad from my own research it would appear that this because the alternative procedures now is what the Northern Territory Government is proposed offer next to nothing more than also doing. those already provided in the Native Title Act. I am sure that there would be many in the In other words, when it comes to promoting mining industry right now shaking their heads mining exploration and development, this Bill in utter disbelief that the sensible and practical gives the mining industry and the wider approach has not been utilised. Instead of community next to nothing. I have heard some something practical, we are going down a representatives of the mining industry say that different path, a path determined by two at least they have got something out of the factors which highlight just how facile and botched-up resolution of the Federal Senate. I media driven this Government has become. imagine that the reason why they are making those statements, which have been The first factor is the Premier's fixation interpreted as being positive and supportive of with attempting to portray the Senate vote as the Government, is that those people know a victory for his lobbying efforts. If he was to that they have to work with a Government that admit that what was left of this legislation after is so totally anti-mining and so totally anti-job the Senate mauling is next to useless, he creation potential in the mining industry that would in effect be admitting that he was rolled they are trying to salvage whatever they can in by Kim Beazley and the Federal ALP. terms of a relationship with the Government. In fact, the Premier must have really been However, members should make no mistake: counting his lucky stars when Daryl Melham nobody who has any appreciation of this 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3225

Bill—not to mention the previous two or three legislation into this Parliament for which we will Bills relating to native title that we have have to pay for a process that is leading debated in this place—and nobody who has nowhere, destroying jobs and destroying an appreciation of the mining industry could incentive. As Queenslanders, we will have to say that what we are debating today and what foot the bill for it. the Senate, in fact, bastardised in terms of a If I were a student of ancient and classical State regime is good. history, I would say that the Beattie victory was This Bill is bad because it foists on truly a Pyrrhic victory. More of these so-called Queensland taxpayers the cost of paying for victories would, in fact, spell death. So let this another level of bureaucracy, which is not rather pathetic Bill be an epitaph to this needed. Who needs a Land and Resources pathetic Government—all spin and no Tribunal, at a cost of around $4m a year, that substance, all rhetoric and no delivery, all is achieving absolutely nothing in terms of promises of advancement while the body expediting mining exploration and economic politic goes backwards. This Bill epitomises the development? Although this Government has Beattie Labor Government, a Government that given its three members a lifetime job—which is driving business out of Queensland and a many others in the community could only Government which, in the view of the envy—what are they achieving for the miners Opposition, is clearly not up to the task. and the workers of this State? I would Hon. T. McGRADY (Mount Isa—ALP) respectfully suggest to honourable members (Minister for Mines and Energy and Minister that the answer is: absolutely nothing. Assisting the Deputy Premier on Regional This Bill is also bad because it pushes the Development) (12.05 p.m.): This week the mining industry backwards. Under this Government has been saying to the regressive Bill, the mining industry will not have Opposition, "We work, you whinge." Nothing the benefit of the expedited procedure under sums up that phrase better than the the right to negotiate. Let the Premier deny contributions that we have heard this morning that, and I suggest that he will not be denying from the members of the Opposition. that, because he knows that he cannot. Under This legislation is probably the most this regressive Bill, a mining enterprise will important legislation that has been before this have to go through the consultation process, Parliament for many, many years. When the which is not much less than the right to coalition was in Government, it threw the issue negotiate, each time the mining lease is of native title and a resolution to it in the too- renewed. So every time there is a renewal of hard basket. Those of us who have been the mining lease, there will be a time delaying, around for a few years and those of us who incentive destroying bureaucratic process that have an understanding of the mining industry will have to be gone through. Already other will never forget that the actions—or the non- members and I on this side have explained actions—of the Borbidge Government caused what that process is going to do to potential the closure of a number of mines, the Union job creation within this State. mine in particular. Those mine closures threw At least under the Native Title Act the right hundreds of men onto the unemployment to negotiate covers the renewal of a mining scrap heap simply because the Borbidge lease. However, that is not the case under the Government refused to act. alternative provisions. Also under this regressive scheme, there will be no scope for I would be foolish if I stood here today conjunctive agreements whereby the and said that the current legislation before this exploration stage agreements can be reached Parliament is exactly what we wanted. The to cover the whole process. So from the legislation that this Parliament passed had to perspective that I am coming from, today we go before the Senate and of the 13 provisions, are being presented with a Bill that is actually which just a few short weeks ago looked like worse than the status quo. That is something being destroyed totally, we have retained that just simply cannot be denied by members seven. However, politics and Government are opposite. It is worse than the right to negotiate about trying to achieve the best for the people. under the Native Title Act. Just to rub salt into We secured seven of those provisions when the wound, we actually have to pay for the just days earlier it looked like we were doomed process rather than the Commonwealth. So to retain none of them. just like the standards that are being applied in When the legislation came before the terms of funding and compensation in relation Senate and was passed, both sides of the to the Water Bill that we debated earlier this industry claimed that it benefited the other week, the same situation applies here. The side. To me, there is something in that, Premier and his Government have introduced because neither side claimed that they had 3226 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 won. Just the other night I addressed those matter to be resolved by the Queensland Land officers of my department who worked long and Resources Tribunal. This is another great and hard in trying to find a solution to this advantage that the Queensland procedures issue. I said to them, "This must be one of the hold over their Commonwealth equivalent. Any highlights of your career, because you have unresolved issue—native title or not—can be served your State well and I am proud of the resolved in a hearing of this tribunal. I do not contribution that you have made." I am also for one moment believe that most negotiations proud to serve under a Premier such as Peter will end up before an independent tribunal. In Beattie, because I and other members of the fact, the Government need not be involved at Government know the work that he put into all. If the negotiating parties agree to it, achieving the solution that we have today. Government can stay right out of the process Nobody could have done a better job than the and let them reach a resolution among Premier. Of course, he could go that far only themselves. This is yet another advantage to because he had the support of his Cabinet, the Queensland procedures. the support and the loyalty of his personal This Bill is good for Queensland. It will staff, in particular Shaun Drabsch and others, help clear the backlog of applications for and also the support of those public officials exploration permits, it will restart exploration for who worked much longer than what was new mines and it will help bring new major expected of them to arrive at this situation projects into being. It will do all of this through today. negotiated outcomes. This Government is a The Premier has introduced the Native great believer in negotiated outcomes, Title Resolution Bill 2000, and that is what it is. because they work. The Government is After many, many, many years, it resolves the committed to ensuring that any native title issue of native title. Native title is no longer legislation will not only protect community going to be a talkfest. It will no longer be the rights but also provide a workable framework plaything of the Opposition and other people. under which industries can operate and invest. Today, hopefully, this Parliament will carry the If honourable members vote for this Bill Native Title Resolution Bill. today, the Mineral Resources Act can be I strongly support this Bill. It deserves the amended so that processing of high-impact support of all people in the community. The exploration applications and mining lease passage of this Bill today will mean that applications can begin almost immediately. Queensland can break through the native title The Department of Mines and Energy is traffic jam. The backlog amounts to 1,217 resourced to ensure that this happens; it is applications for exploration permits, 72 ready to start work. All that we need now is for applications for mineral development licences, this Parliament to pass this Bill. All that is 379 applications for mining leases and 243 needed is the passage of this Bill to provide a applications for mining claims. We can break workable legislative framework. the gridlock that has been in place for years Exploration is the lifeblood of the mining and we can get the industry moving again. industry. It is the next generation of mines that This Bill will mean that Queensland can will be coming on stream. In Queensland we set up its own procedures to deal with native have a proven mineral wealth and high title and mining—practical, sensible procedures prospectivity and we need a streamlined that all parties can work with successfully. We procedure that will get explorers back into the certainly need our own procedures when the ground again. In an environment of interstate only alternative is the Commonwealth right to and international competition there is all the negotiate process—a process that both more need to ensure that administrative industry and Governments have found to be a processes encourage exploration. Given time consuming burden. Queensland's high potential with our vast There is an alternative, and that is to pass mineral deposits, we need to maintain a focus this Bill today. Passing this Bill will allow us to on exploration using new techniques and new amend both the Mineral Resources Act and geological concepts. This will surely result in the Land and Resources Tribunal Act to reflect discoveries and ensure that new development the outcome negotiated in the Senate. It will keeps happening. allow us to implement sensible and fair The Bill provides clear processes for both procedures for dealing with native title in the low-impact and high-impact exploration and mining industry. But, most importantly, it will mining applications. These processes will be allow miners and indigenous people to sit both manageable and will set time frames that down and come to an agreement that benefits will allow planning to take place. Conclusions all parties. If need be, there is provision for a will be arrived at. If mining companies want to 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3227 do low-impact exploration, this Bill provides an Premiers of this State. I honestly believe that, upgraded process centred on the negotiation when this legislation is passed by the of an access agreement which will protect the Parliament, it will provide the benefits to rights of native title parties. Explorers will notify indigenous people which were designed and native title parties when they apply for their aimed at in the original Mabo decision but will permits, which can then be granted in the also open the gates to allow this State and this normal way. However, before they can enter State's mining industry to prosper so that it can the land to explore, they must consult and bring wealth to all people who live in mining discuss an access agreement with the native communities. At the end of the day, we should title parties. This consultation starts four take away the rhetoric. This will be an historic months after the initial application to allow day for this Parliament and the people of native title holders to become registered Queensland. claimants and secure their entitlements to Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) participate in this process. An access (12.18 p.m.): It is somewhat coincidental that I agreement may provide for details on the parts should rise to speak to the Native Title of the area that may be accessed, an Resolution Bill immediately following the acceptable time period for exploration, the contribution of the member for Mount Isa, the types of activities that may be carried out, Minister for Mines and Energy, the Honourable things needed to protect the environment, Tony McGrady. All honourable members are compensation and dispute resolution. aware that Mr McGrady represents an The definition of low-impact activities that electorate similar to mine in area, can be carried out is similar to the initial disadvantage and remoteness. However, it Queensland proposal but has been clarified boasts perhaps the greatest mineral deposit in with a few definitions of conditions related to Australia, if not the world. drilling. Drilling and activities associated with We have seen what has happened in the drilling are restricted to those that do not mining industry over the past few years all involve clearing or excavation other than the because of native title. We have seen a minimum necessary to establish a drill site or complete shutdown. I hope that that word excavation for access to a drill site; do not "resolution" is to have some meaning in the include clearings for a road or track; do not legislation under debate, the Native Title include side hill excavations for access to drill Resolution Bill. I have just heard what the pads as would be necessary on steep slopes; Honourable Minister has had to say and the do not including drilling in a watercourse or rhetoric— stream diversion; and do not include clearing in densely vegetated areas. Mr Foley: A good speech, too. I understand that other honourable Mr JOHNSON: I take on board what the members wish to speak on this Bill so I will limit Honourable Attorney-General has said. The my contribution. But let me conclude by saying Minister has made a speech, and I hung on that it is all very well for Opposition members every word he said. But the point I am making and others to criticise what has been achieved is that the Minister has now said that we are by this Government, but we are now on the going to see some action, that the rhetoric is eve of one of the most important pieces of over and the action is going to start. I am legislation passing through this House. There hanging on that. has been lots of rhetoric, allegations, talk and I have had two deputations with the conferences. It is the Beattie Labor Honourable the Premier and I have had one Government which has achieved justice for with the Premier and the Minister for Mines indigenous people but which will also allow the and Energy in relation to the small opal mining mining industry to continue to prosper and areas and also the gem mining industry within provide jobs for the people of this State. It has my electorate. Three parts of western not been easy; it has been difficult. Queensland in my electorate—the Winton Once again, I pay tribute to a man who, in Shire, the Barcoo Shire and the Quilpie shire, my opinion, has proved himself to be a as well as the Boulia Shire and the Paroo leader—a man who was prepared to take on Shire—rely a lot on the small opal mining all comers over an issue which the Cabinet industry. The Minister knows full well the believed was in the best interests of our State. importance of the opal mining industry to Mr Speaker, I believe that this legislation will regional western Queensland and of its go down as one of the great pieces of similarities with the gem mining industry legislation which has come out of this around Emerald, which is in the eastern end of Parliament. I believe that Premier Beattie will my electorate. We know how the go down in history as one of the great procrastination that has occurred over a long 3228 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 period has hindered those two small mining the gem mining industry; we are talking about industries. the multinationals who have shut down, who In relation to the gem mining industry I have gone offshore, because Labor cannot see any differentiation at all between Governments have procrastinated over the the small miners and the big multinational issue of native title. miners. Those people all have to live by the We have heard here today that small same set of rules; they have to go through the mining is not high-impact exploration. The low- same due and proper process. Again, it comes impact exploration miners have to get down to one thing: if this is a let-down, the informed consent and then have Socialist Left faction in this State has to wear compensation claims brought against them. It total responsibility for it. I say to Steve is the same situation with high-impact Bredhauer, and Judy Spence in exploration; they can claim extreme this Queensland Cabinet— concessions, but have no right of veto. This is Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Mickel): applicable to both sides of the industry—the Order! If the member is going to refer to those big miners and the small miners. Ministers, he will refer to them by their correct In western Queensland we see people titles. such as James Evert, one of the leaders in the Mr JOHNSON: It is the Honourable opal mining industry of western Queensland, Minister for Transport, the Honourable Minister who followed his late father, Vince Evert, into for Families and the Honourable Minister for that industry. We see the great work that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and people such as Vince Evert and the late Des Minister for Fair Trading, as well as the wife of Burton did in bringing to reality the opal mining the Minister for Transport, the Socialist Left industry of western Queensland. Many other senator for Queensland, the honourable Jan great families out there—private individuals— McLucas—who is a member of the Socialist have not only given credence to this industry in Left faction and who has determined, along the west but have given some purpose and with her Labor colleagues in the Senate, the another form of income to some of those outcome of this legislation—and their western communities that have suffered colleagues in the Socialist Left who are because of low commodity prices and ongoing responsible for the business and social drought over the past 10, 15 or 20 years. agenda programs in this State today. Although the small mining industry has been An Opposition member interjected. shut down, those people put gem mining in Mr JOHNSON: That is right, it is the Australia on the international stage and they partnership. sell their products not just in Australia, Asia and America, but all over the world, in places If we see a further shutdown of the mining such as Germany, France, Italy, the United industry in this State, the Socialist Left and the Kingdom, the United States and Japan. They other members of the Labor Government can are up amongst the big players in the world. take full responsibility for it. I am going to give They have put this country on the map. this legislation the benefit of the doubt. I am going to be watching very, very closely to see I say to the Minister for Mines and Energy how many of those 1,189 exploration permits and to the Premier that when people such as are going to be processed in the near future. Bruce Collins, the Mayor of Winton Shire, who is a no-holds barred operator, come to Mr Braddy: Are you going to give it the Brisbane to try to get some purpose and benefit of the doubt and vote for it? determination for those people in the opal and Mr JOHNSON: No, I am going to vote gem mining industries, they certainly want with the coalition. I will give it the benefit of the some results. I say to those on the other side doubt afterwards and we will see what of the House that we cannot have any more happens. impediments put in the path of those mining Mr Braddy interjected. companies, whether they be the big players or the small players. Mr JOHNSON: The Minister for Industrial Relations should listen for one half of one I know that the Aboriginals have an minute. He is laughing. I am a bit surprised integral and very important part to play in this that a man of his intellect and his ability is State. However, we are one people, one laughing at something that has caused so State, one nation, trying to pursue a common much heartache and concern to so many cause together as we go into the 21st century. people for a long period. We are not talking If this legislation that we are debating here about just the small miners here, we are not today is not going to resolve the situation just talking about the opal mining industry or before Christmas, the backlog of claims will 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3229 grow and some of these EPs, mining leases The member for Kallangur will cease and mining claims are going to be doomed to interjecting. failure. I hope and pray that the industry is not Mr Seeney interjected. doomed to failure. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I have I urge everybody on the Government side asked the member for Callide to cease of the House today to make absolutely certain interjecting. I now warn you under Standing that they work beyond all limits to make sure Order 123A(3). that those claims and EPs are processed so that our gem mining industries and our big Mr KNUTH: Thank you, Mr Deputy mining operations can get back into full swing Speaker. They were getting to me at one so that, as the member for Burnett said here stage. It was a set-up job from start to finish, today, we can take full advantage of the engineered to produce a result that would lead potential flow-on benefits and gains from these to racial division in this country for many years great industries of which Queensland has to come. The problems inherent in Labor's been proud and about which we have been policy of providing unequal rights for boasting for so long on the international stage. Aborigines has been exacerbated by the model thinking of our courts that led to the Mr KNUTH (Burdekin—CCAQ) Mabo and Wik decisions. The situation did not (12.27 p.m.): Perhaps with the Premier's appear so bad after the Mabo decision, indulgence we could rename this legislation because it was quite apparent to normal, the "scrambill". That is quite appropriate. After logical thinking people that it would only impact all, it has the Premier scrambling for on a very small area of the State that was cover—scrambling for excuses and scrambling classified as vacant Crown land. for somebody else to blame. It is more like a It was thought that freehold title, dog's breakfast than well thought out leasehold title and even mining leases would legislation. The whole sorry saga of native title effectively extinguish native title rights, thereby is a disgrace. Native title is a result of Labor's leaving the country to move forward with historical preoccupation with giving Aborigines relatively little interruption from native title a massive say over mining developments, claims. Probably nobody, not even the Labor which also explains that fixation of providing Party, foresaw what would happen next. The the right to negotiate. Wik decision completely blew the lid off the Before Mabo, the Labor Party's mining whole concept of rational thinking with regard policy included an absolute veto right for to native title claims and the right of native Aborigines over mining on Aboriginal land. For land-holders and registered claimants to many years the Labor Party has based its re- negotiate with mining companies over access election strategy on pandering to various to the land in question. The Wik decision came minority groups. It works on the theory that, if it up with the cockeyed view that, if a person has makes promises to minority groups, then those a lease over a block of land, that does not same minority groups will vote for it. The down necessarily give them exclusive rights to the side is that somebody has to pick up the tab. It occupation and use of that land. is very important to make sure that the groups I can imagine how this decision would be of people who have been selected to pay for received if it were applied to the leaseholders the Labor Party strategy live outside Labor's of Australian cities. For instance, say a person traditional inner city power bases and, has just moved to a new town and has taken importantly, that they have the capacity to pay. up a long-term lease on a house for As every dedicated bleeding heart knows, themselves and their family. However, one cow cockies, miners and farmers have money morning that person wakes up and finds that coming out of their ears! So who better to bear there are people they have never met in their the brunt of the country's socially engineered house. They would probably politely ask them guilt over the historical treatment of Aborigines what they were doing there, because it is their than the very same cow cockies, miners and house. However, they would reply, "No. It's not farmers? your house as you only lease it from the owner." They could claim that they have the Mr Hayward interjected. right to coexist on the premises. Naturally, that Mr Sullivan interjected. person would next contact the owner of the Mr Seeney interjected. premises to complain about this unwarranted intrusion in their life. The landlord quietly Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The explains that, even though the person is member for Callide will cease interjecting. The paying good money for the lease, it does not member for Chermside will cease interjecting. give them exclusive rights to the use and 3230 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 occupation of the premises. In fact, so long as opinion, this is an entirely proper use of the the landlord agrees, the intruders are able to powers of the Parliament. Put simply, use the house as if it were their own, just as Parliament should have buried native title the long as they do not interfere directly with the moment it was born. person's use of it. The people of the Burdekin are sick to In other words, they can coexist in the death of hearing about native title. They are house without making any monetary sick to death of uncertainty that the ongoing contribution. They can cook in the kitchen so native title saga brings. They are sick to death long as it is not being used at the time. They of listening to the ramblings of minority group can sleep in the bed while the person is at supporters as they continue to push for greater work. They can watch the TV at times when it and greater inequality of treatment. Native title is not being used. Can members imagine the is killing off development, investment and commotion if this admittedly somewhat fanciful small business opportunities in the Burdekin scenario was to be played out in suburban and elsewhere in the State, due largely to the Brisbane? There would be riots in the streets, lack of planning ability and complete lack of yet this is exactly what is happening to grazing confidence engendered by the maze of leaseholders and farmers across Queensland. legislation and conflicting opinions on this They are being forced by a confused court and issue. a weak Government to share what has always People in the Burdekin are fed up. They been their exclusive leasehold property with are fed up with being treated unfairly. At the strangers. Not only that, these strangers have moment my electorate is asking for a boat been given greater rights over the property ramp at Wunjunga. Due to native title, we than the people who have been paying the have to go through a maze of red tape. lease, sometimes for generations. People in the area have been going out of If this were to happen in Brisbane, there their wits for the past two years. The issue would certainly be a new Government. I tell keeps going around in circles, and it is going this Parliament right now: the day will come nowhere because of native title, not to when native title will be aimed at major cities. mention other problems. The people of the That will happen in my lifetime, because Burdekin are fighting back. They and many people will never be satisfied. This is not going thousands of others like them will bring this to stop with rural communities. The greed and corrupt Government down at the next election. monetary value driving this force will continue The Premier and his crooked mates have towards cities. Sooner or later, it will start been caught red-handed raiding the electoral encroaching upon the people in this great city cookie jar, and for that they will not be of Brisbane. It is very likely that the new forgiven. Government would have the spine to do what Mrs LAVARCH (Kurwongbah—ALP) should have been done immediately after the (12.36 p.m.): Before speaking to the Native original Mabo decision: change the law. The Title Resolution Bill, I take this opportunity in Government of the day shirked its my capacity as chair of the Scrutiny of responsibility to the electorate in the vain hope Legislation Committee to lay upon the table of that the courts would find against the idea of the House the Scrutiny of Legislation native title, thereby shifting any blame and Committee's Alert Digest No. 12 of 2000 and recrimination for the result firmly on the courts. move that it be printed. The inescapable fact is that the Parliament makes the law and the courts Ordered to be printed. interpret those laws. If the courts deliver an Mrs LAVARCH: It is with much pleasure interpretation that is different from what the that I rise to speak on the Native Title Parliament intended, then it is surely a simple Resolution Bill. This Bill marks the end of a matter for the Parliament to pass amending journey. It is therefore appropriate in this legislation to ensure that its wishes and debate to spend time reviewing and summing intentions—which, after all, are supposed to be up the longstanding debate on native title in the wishes of the people—are properly this State and the journey it has been on. In reflected in court decisions. That is normal reflecting on the history of this Bill, as well as procedure. At this very moment, there is a Bill the native title debate generally, it occurred to on the Notice Paper of this House designed to me that if there is a legislative equivalent of do just that. Of course, I refer to the Evidence hell then it has been visited upon the Native Amendment Bill, which has been developed to Title Resolution Bill and the Queensland native effectively reverse a decision of the title statutory scheme. Not only has this law Queensland Court of Appeal in R v. Morrison been put through hell, and unnecessarily so, it and to return that to the status quo. In my has also had all of the seven deadly sins 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3231 visited upon it. Stakeholders, decision makers that all people should have the same rights and commentators have all had their go at when it comes to mining activity. Feelings of shaping this law while proclaiming their good envy are never rational, and this is clearly the intentions to make the law workable, fairer or case when it is argued that native title holders legally compliant. should not have the right to negotiate on I know that Mr Deputy Speaker Mickel is a pastoral leases when the same right is not person familiar with the classics. As such, he afforded to pastoralists. Yet it is never argued would know that the seven deadly sins are that a landlord and a tenant should have the greed, envy, sloth, lust, pride, gluttony and same rights, even though they share rights in wrath. I believe elements of all these sins can the same property. Also, I do not see too be found in the way in which the Queensland many people being envious of the health native title regime has evolved since 1993, conditions, unemployment rates, education particularly since the Wik decision in 1996. levels and life expectancy of our indigenous Today, I will reflect upon the Bill, its history and people. But there is plenty of envy about the the future of native title and legal development right to negotiate. by using the characteristics of the seven This Bill applies the State-based right to deadly sins. negotiate to all land tenures. While this was The first sin is greed. Greed is often an not the Government's preferred position, it is allegation thrown about in the native title consistent with the policy direction, and the debate. Today in the debate we heard some scheme and its procedures should be founded speakers say just that. Some people argue upon the nature of the activity rather than the that greed drives the resource industry for type of land on which it occurs. wanting the ability to access and exploit land The third deadly sin is sloth. Sloth is about and its resources at minimum cost and fuss. complacency and inaction, and accurately Others say that native title is about one describes how the coalition responded to the segment of the community having the capacity Wik decision. Its response while in to extract money. Almost everyone alleges Government in this State was to place all that a flaw in the native title regime is the fact mining activity into a deep freeze. It stopped that greedy lawyers are the only real winners. all processing of mining applications—all of The native title debate does seem to bring out them—stone dead. Instead of a considered the worst rhetoric in people, and greed does public policy response, the then Premier and play its part. However, the aim of the law now Leader of the Opposition, Mr Borbidge, should be about respect and generosity, went on to personally attack the High Court generosity of spirit and respect that all and tell his own constituency in rural stakeholders have their legitimate rights and Queensland that the world was about to end. entitlements. It is one of life's ironies that his behaviour led The principal component of the Bill is that in no small part to the upsurge in ignorance, the right to negotiate will extend to all mining fear and loathing which spawned the One and high-impact exploration activity, regardless Nation movement and which in turn so of the statutory land interest with which native traumatised the National Party. title holders or registered claimants share rights to land. The right to have a say about activity The opposite of sloth is zeal. It is fair on country has long been recognised as a comment that the Premier, Peter Beattie, has core and common feature of Aboriginal law applied virtual zealotry to reforming and and custom. The right to negotiate is the modelling the State's native title laws. I think means of reflecting this feature of customary this is the fourth time I have spoken in a native law. It need not be the only means, as the title debate in two and a bit years. Northern Territory land rights regime contains a When the Bill is passed Queensland will right of veto and the previous Queensland have: validated titles which may have been regime in places contained a say about invalidly granted over pastoral leases; country, but through a procedure not as established a State tribunal to integrate the extensive as the right to negotiate. native title regime in the State's land The operation of the right to negotiate, or management processes; established a State more particularly where it should operate, right to negotiate; and developed a framework brings me to the second deadly sin of envy. for extensive use of indigenous land use Envy is about resentment—about what others agreements. It should also be mentioned that are perceived to receive. Envy strikes home there have been several native title when on the one parcel of land native title and determinations finalised with Queensland's statutory rights coexist. Arguments are raised consent. 3232 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000

This leads me to the next sin of lust. This heart. For native title to work and for there to is about the loss of self-control and pursuit of be reconciliation between indigenous and non- power and money. Unfortunately, the native indigenous Australians, there must be a victory title debate has been marked by poor self- of kindness and respect over anger. It is to be control on behalf of the participants. Self- hoped that this law will bring to an end a control is understanding that you cannot difficult debate and that all stakeholders will always get everything you think you want or get on with the job of making it work. need. The loss of self-control has marked a The final sin is that of pride. Pride has range of initial comment to the Senate's taken many falls in this long journey. A refusal decision to disallow six of the 13 to accept compromise, an insistence that there determinations applying to the State regime is only one way to address an issue, is an which this Bill amends. example of pride standing in the way of The critical comments by Terry O'Shane progress. Last week the Federal shadow and Michael Pinnock were from people who Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and good friend, did not get everything they wanted. I am Daryl Melham, resigned his position because pleased, however, that both Terry and Michael he believed that to support the Queensland have accepted the final outcome. It must also law breached his principles. While I respect be said that the Queensland Government did Daryl's decision, I cannot help wondering not get its first preference, either. The goal whether it was not an example of pride as now is to make the system work. Gluttony is much as principle. the sin which attacks the limits of good sense The key issue for Daryl apparently was and demonstrates the lack of temperance. It is that of guaranteeing the Queensland regime linked to the other sins of greed and lust. would not be altered in the future to water The difficulty many people have had with down the rights of native title holders. Yet now accepting native title is the sense that it has there appears to be a way forward to give disturbed a balance which has long prevailed comfort on this point. This will involve the in the legal and land management system in determinations being resubmitted to the Australia. I have quite a few people say to me Senate in a manner which makes later that they find it hard to understand how the changes by this Parliament conditional on High Court could invent native title, that it was subsequent approval by the Senate. This is a not there one day but there the next. I explain good compromise, and I hope the Federal that the court did not invent native title but that Labor Party is able to bring Daryl back onto the it was always a part of the relationship of front bench in the near future. Aboriginal Australians and their land. The journey of the State native title The court no more invented native title regime has not ended with this Bill. It is my than Isaac Newton invented gravity when the understanding that this Parliament is still to apple supposedly fell from the tree and hit his see that part of the Petroleum Act reform head. Gravity was always there; Newton simply which goes to native title, and the related area expressed the concept in a way in which it of an adequate cultural heritage law is still could be adopted into scientific reasoning. being developed. It is my sincere wish that the Equally, the High Court overturned the lie of rest of the journey experiences human virtues terra nullius and expressed the concept in a and none of the deadly sins. way the legal system could accept. This Bill Mr FELDMAN (Caboolture—CCAQ) also accepts the reality of the situation the (12.47 p.m.): It is with pleasure that I rise to Government confronts but, like all the speak on the Native Title Resolution Bill. Government's native title reforms, it aims to Really, all I can say is: here we go again. Yet balance the interests and resist the temptation more amendments are being made to the of excessive pandering to one group of Land and Resources Tribunal Act 1989, the stakeholders over another. Native Title Act 1993 and the Mineral The sixth sin is of wrath, or anger, and the Resources Act 1989. native title debate has been marked by angry The Premier was right when he said that exchanges from its beginning. Too often the most Queenslanders are sick of the endless media has been able to focus on the angry political debate about native title procedures. response of an Aboriginal advocate, a farmer That comment is recorded on page 2817 of or, sadly, a political leader who should know Hansard of 5 September this year. Indeed, this better. Anger is often a reaction to the debate has been going on for far too long. problems of others when patience and Perhaps we should consider why. Perhaps it is kindness is called for. The best laws in the because the issue of native title has caused world cannot change what exists in a person's considerable insecurity and uncertainty over 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3233 land tenure in this country. Perhaps it is If the Aboriginal activists truly believe in because the native title process is highly equality and equity, the only solution is total discriminatory and that only a small proportion extinguishment of native title, except that over of the Australian population actually has existing indigenous-owned land and proven access to it. Perhaps it is because native title is legitimate sacred sites. Australia today is not not the solution to reconciliation. If anything, it the same piece of land that it was over 200 is detrimental to the process of reconciliation. years ago. The British colonial settlement of Let us take a moment to look to the Australia is an irrevocable historical fact, and future and see how native title is going to one that cannot be changed. Our history and affect the future generations of Australians. the treatment of Aboriginals 200 years ago They have no links to original settlement and may not be seen as desirable by today's to the dispossession of Aborigines, so how is standards; nevertheless, it was the standard of native title going to be fair to them? that time. Indigenous Australians are no different from the native people of every other While doing my research I stumbled part of the world who have been colonised by across a web site of Mr Selwyn Johnston, the others. Even Britain itself was the subject of independent candidate for the Federal seat of colonisation, looting, raping, pillaging, etc., Blair. I am very impressed with the research Mr hundreds, if not thousands, of years ago. So Johnston has done in relation to the issues much has changed since then. Australia is no concerning ordinary Australians. His views align longer a vast, vacant piece of land. It is now with those of City Country Alliance on native occupied by more than 18 million people who title—and many other issues, I might call Australia home. Australians are here to add—and I have included many of his stay, not as guests, but as bona fide citizens observations in this speech. and residents who expect and deserve the Members will be aware that 15% of same rights as their neighbour on every side Australia's land mass is currently under some and everyone else. form of native title control, including some 40% Our indigenous population is of the Northern Territory. This land mass is approximately 2%. That leaves the remainder owned or controlled by indigenous Australians of 98% of non-Aboriginal Australians, a and equates to approximately the size of New population that comprises a diversity of South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania cultures and ethnic origins. I simply cannot see combined. We all know that native title has the logic behind 2% of the population being become a hot issue following the historic Mabo given the right to mount native title claims over decision in 1992. That is quite ironic when one approximately 79% of the country. It seems considers that the Mabo decision referred to totally ludicrous. How is that fair and equitable the Murray Islands and made absolutely no to the remaining 98% of the Australian reference to mainland Australia or the population who do not have and cannot mainland Aborigines. Despite this fact, the express that right? How is native title to benefit issue gained momentum and has certainly got the wider community? It clearly is not. out of control. Parliaments make laws by an Act of Parliament. These laws are then administered Over the last few years, Australians have by the courts, as the member for Burdekin heard a lot about Mabo and subsequent Wik said. Governments are elected to make decisions of the High Court. In no way should decisions on the laws in this country for the the outcome of these cases have been benefit of the community and, indeed, for the allowed to lead to the outrageous and benefit of the wider community. The Wik High disastrous native title claims enshrined in the Court decision reflects the reluctance of the myriad complicated laws that we have today. If then Labor Government to do what it was anything, Mabo, Wik and native title have all elected for. It instead chose to take the easy been rolled into a single issue of whether way out and assigned the issue to the court Aborigines in general have been well or badly system to determine the outcome, which has done by, rather than the content of the subsequently become law. So in this instance decisions themselves. Despite the onslaught the court made a law, by way of its ruling, of media reports, heated parliamentary instead of the Parliament, and why was this debates and public confrontations that have so? The answer is quite simple: Labor, along subsequently arisen, not many of us have with the coalition and other political parties, actually read the hundreds of pages involved were unwilling to accept the risks of a potential in each of those decisions to develop a clear loss of votes at the next election. These picture of the elements of each of those political parties place enormous value on decisions. power and the holding of power, which 3234 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000 ultimately leads them to pandering to minority legal aid for Aboriginal claimants to resolve groups. We see it every day. only two claims. $200m to resolve two claims! It is unfortunate that successive Just think of the taxpayers' dollars required to Governments did not introduce legislation to resolve the thousands of claims that are eliminate the possibility of the current debacle, currently lodged. which serves the best interests of nobody. The On top of that, the Prime Minister made Government still had the power it so much an announcement in December 1997 that an loves to overturn the Wik decision. After all, it extra $1.3 billion has been allocated for would not be the first time Parliament Aborigines who do not have legitimate land overturned a court ruling. One only needs to claims. Not a bad way to further abuse the look back at Hansard to the Transport taxpayers' money! And it does not end there. (Southbank Corporation Area Land) Bill 1999 Since 1980, over $120m has been spent to see evidence of that. Within the framework purchasing approximately 350 properties for of the original native title legislation, Aboriginal Australians. In addition, the Keating unscrupulous and disturbing characteristics Government established the Indigenous Land have emerged. I will let the facts speak for Fund, which will grow to over $1.2 billion by the themselves. year 2004. This will give indigenous Australians $45m per year forever to buy and manage As I mentioned earlier, about 2% of land. And finally, under the Northern Territory Australia's population is Aboriginal. Of that 2%, Land Rights Act, Aboriginal people in the at least half could be truthfully considered as Territory have already received $350m in being urbanised and detached from their royalty payments from mining. Considering this Aboriginal origins. That leaves approximately is what this Bill is mainly about—mining—how 1% of what could be truthfully classified as is all this expenditure, primarily comprising traditional Aboriginal Australians, those of taxpayers' dollars, justified for only 2% of the remote Australia who still perform the traditions population? It certainly is not equitable, and it of the Aboriginal culture. Evidently these is no wonder many Australians are feeling traditional Aboriginals have not been consulted quite angry about the whole process. by the ATSIC Aboriginal activists seeking their input on their future. They, after all, are the As I said earlier, much of the background people to whom native title really applies. to this speech is based on Mr Johnston's Evidently, it is these traditional Aboriginals who commentary on native title. I would like to are not receiving the estimated $3.2 billion of finish by agreeing with his very appropriate both Federal and State funds allocated to conclusions on the native title issue. Along with them annually. It is clear that the majority of my fellow City Country Alliance colleagues, I these funds are absorbed by ATSIC and the call on the Government to take the initiative by Aboriginal industry for non-welfare related seeking to establish a bipartisan parliamentary expenses. committee, headed by the Prime Minister, to conduct a national conference with traditional Mixed-race Aborigines are jeopardising indigenous elders to pursue an amicable the native title processes by their outrageous solution to the current flawed debacle. The land, sea, compensation and numerous other only solution is the total extinguishment of claims. This group can only, at the most, native title, the establishment of a allege 50% Aboriginal parentage, which reconciliation fund, accessible on a once-only consequently should remove them from any basis by Aboriginal Australians whose both discussion process. Why? Because they are parents were direct descendants of the using one parent's heritage to denounce the allegedly dispossessed Aboriginals. City other's for personal gain, all at the expense of Country Alliance definitely does not support the Australian taxpayer. native title or any associated legislation and It is obvious that the most vocal therefore will not be supporting the Native Title advocates of native title are those who have Resolution Bill 2000. the most to gain. Let us for a moment Hon. K. W. HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) examine how many taxpayers' dollars have (12.57 p.m.): Today it is my pleasure to rise in gone towards native title and the Aboriginal the Parliament to express my support for the industry. Firstly, it should be noted that, as of Native Title Resolution Bill 2000. This 15 November 1997, there were 667 native title Government's proactive approach to native claims lodged with the National Native Title title legislation is not only to protect community Tribunal. There are now thousands of claims rights but also to provide a workable framework registered, with more being lodged daily. As at under which industries can operate and invest. 28 February 1998, over $200m of taxpayers' The Queensland Government has taken funds had been spent, which includes free advantage of an amendment of the 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3235

Commonwealth legislation, which was set positives that come out of this legislation. As I down in 1998, which allowed the States to understand the Bill, it provides a great introduce simpler procedures than the right to opportunity for small to medium sized negotiate for low-impact exploration activities, explorers. As this Act now stands, they are at a but it is important that it is understood that it is specific advantage due to their negotiation provided they meet minimum Commonwealth skills because small miners are much more on criteria. The State-based regime maintains the ground and in touch with a particular rights of negotiation for mining leases but exploration area. In dealing with native title streamlines the process of exploration. claimants, farmers and graziers, they adopt a As we have seen, the Bill was introduced more personal approach. It is very rare to see in Queensland. It then went to the Federal a complaint about a small explorer. Parliament on the basis of 13 separate One of the effects of this legislation is that determinations which were made. The when explorers do make application for an Democrats tabled a disallowance motion exploration permit they will tend to go for against them, and the Senate allowed seven smaller permit areas. The logical effect of of the 13 determinations. The six needing to undertake the processes required determinations that were disallowed related to by this legislation would seem to me to be to sections 26B and 43A of the Native Title Act. take on smaller process areas. This Bill results The Bill amends the low-impact exploration in an opportunity for more explorers to have scheme under section 26A, and I think this is access to areas. important, because it brings it up to the What happens now is that larger explorers standard agreed between all parties in New tend to tie up substantial tracts of land, and as South Wales. Essentially, it provides an access the process stands under this legislation, that agreement for an explorer. would require much more effort. We need to I think it is important to consider some of focus on who are the particular native title the points that come out of this Bill. What this parties within a particular area. The result of Bill establishes is—importantly, I think— this legislation will be that explorers will tend to consistency between States; for instance, in concentrate on smaller, more defined areas. I this case, between New South Wales and think that is important, because that will Queensland. That consistency works very provide an opportunity for more exploration much for the advantage of mineral explorers activity in Queensland. and native title claimants, because the clear Another important feature of this Bill is benefit that comes through that, which is that there is a defined time frame for granting obvious to everybody in this Parliament, exploration permits, which is set out under the should be a consistency of approach in Act, and explorers are given certainty in the relation to native title matters for all parties. An process of granting an exploration permit explorer in Queensland which has or is because of those defined times frames. proposing operations in New South Wales knows that the regime under which it works So let us consider our progress. We have and under which it applies will be the same in worked to establish a State-based Act, and New South Wales as it is in Queensland. with the negotiated amendments that have come from the Senate we have in place the Between those two States, which are two Native Title Resolution Bill 2000. That has to important mining States, particularly from the compare favourably with what has happened point of view of exploration, there is great with the Opposition, because it has lacked opportunity under this legislation. It means, of effort in understanding and dealing with this course, that exploration is able to proceed complex issue right from the start. I think its after complying with the requirements which original proposal was something called a one are defined with clear time lines spelt out, and point plan. I think it basically argued for the the legislation spells out those time lines. extinguishment of native title without thinking Importantly, the effect is to clearly distinguish about the enormous exposure of taxpayers to low-impact exploration activities from other billions of dollars in compensation payments. requirements, such as mining leases or mining claims. The other night in this Parliament we were debating a private member's Bill, the Mineral Sitting suspended from 1.01 p.m. to Resources Amendment Bill, and the purpose 2.30 p.m. of that Bill was to extend the equivalent of Mr HAYWARD: Before lunch I outlined native title rights to leasehold farmers and issues in support of the Native Title Resolution graziers. I had the opportunity to listen to and Bill 2000. This debate is an opportunity to talk then read the speech of the Opposition about what I think are some of the important Leader. He signalled the support of the 3236 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000

National Party to that. It is strange, is it not, I think there was a suggestion by the that members of the National Party were Leader of the Opposition that the Western supporting something that actually extends Australian model is better. That is simply not native title rights to farmers and graziers, yet true. Western Australia negotiated one they have difficulty in supporting this Bill that indigenous land use agreement the other day establishes a Queensland State-based and suddenly it has all the answers. My regime. I believe that the Opposition has Government has done large numbers of them. nothing to contribute to this issue and no role We have led Australia. I think of the last 12 to play, and I think that is very, very that have been negotiated in Australia, unfortunate. including the most recent one from Western The Queensland Mining Council is Australia, we have done 10. I think that is right. another organisation that deserves a particular The bottom line is that Queensland had mention here, because right from the start it led Australia in this approach and we will has not played a proper role in the process. It continue to do so. This Government has has opposed State-based legislation. We have negotiated dozens of these agreements had absolute silence from that council on the covering nine determinations of native title, the independent member for Gladstone's Mineral granting of 150 backlogged exploration Resources Amendment Bill that extends native permits for small mining, and the resolution of title rights to all sorts of people, generally local issues such as the relocation of the surf farmers and graziers, who can demonstrate a lifesaving club at Mackay. strong connection with the land. That is an With respect, if the Leader of the organisation that had an opportunity to play a Opposition is saying that agreements are the role in this process and, from what I have seen way forward for native title, can I say that I and heard, it has refused to do it. agree with him. I agree with him! We have a It is a pleasure for me to speak in this meeting of the minds. It is almost like an Parliament today in support of the Native Title eclipse of some kind. Agreements can be Resolution Bill 2000. extremely efficient in dealing with issues, and Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central— this is a key part of the Queensland strategy ALP) (Premier) (2.36 p.m.), in reply: I thank all for native title. The Opposition Leader cannot honourable members for their contributions to have it both ways. He cannot say that the the debate on this Bill. As members would Western Australian Government negotiated know, I have just been to Murgon to open the one agreement and that was fantastic without meatworks, but I have been provided with acknowledging that this Government has detailed briefings on their contributions. reached more agreements than the Western Australian Government and that that whole I might just say in passing that the model is incorporated in what we do. opening of the Murgon meatworks went incredibly well. I want to put on record my Agreements can be extremely efficient in appreciation to the MacDonald family and dealing with issues, but there is also a need for Bindaree Beef for what is a great day for a legislative fall-back position, and that is how Murgon, a great day for Bindaree Beef and a the model works. We need a legislative model great day for Queensland. to use where indigenous land use agreements may not be in place that has fair, timely and Let me deal with the issue of low-impact certain procedures. The Western Australian mining. A number of matters have been raised Government has no hope of getting its current in this debate and I think it really is time that legislative model through the Senate because we were very direct about the answers. The it completely avoids the right to negotiate. That suggestion was made that the definition of is a fact. low-impact exploration makes it harder for drilling. The truth is this: there is only minor One of the things that we have to change to the definition of low-impact acknowledge in this whole debate about native exploration in this Bill. If excavation or clearing title is that we have to come up with what is is proposed for steep slopes, watercourses or achievable and workable. There are two densely vegetated areas, then it will be high approaches in this whole native title debate: impact. The fact is that the change to the one is fantasy and one is fact. The other side definition is unlikely to exclude those explorers of politics has pursued fantasy. Like Don who would otherwise have taken advantage of Quixote, they are tilting at windmills. It is all our original definitions. That means that there very well for them to have this great, strongly will still be a substantial volume of exploration held view, but if they cannot do anything about activity that falls into the low-impact category. it and cannot achieve anything out it, what is That is a fact. the point? Yes, we have been pragmatic. Yes, 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3237 we have been practical. Yes, we have been However, we have achieved it through realistic and, yes, we have a Queensland sensible, pragmatic negotiations. model. As I said, I have fought vigorously for a The bottom line is that the Democrats are State-based regime in Queensland, and I going to have the balance of power in the have one; Queensland has one. Yes, we have Senate. That is fact number one. Fact number copped some losses along the way, but we two is that the Federal Government's native should look at the final outcome. When I say title legislation was the umbrella under which "losses", seven out of the 13 determinations we all had to operate. Therefore, it was difficult were approved, and we lost six. Seven out of to amend. We had to deal with the practical 13—more than half. Our original scheme had realities. As I said, there is no room for Don a right to negotiate at the mining stage, with Quixotes in all of this. We needed to have a some minor adjustments. That is now the practical, workable outcome and that is what effective outcome. So that is fine. Our original this Queensland Government has achieved. scheme had a fast-track procedure for low- Indeed, our model should become the model impact exploration. We have kept a fast-track for the rest of Australia. procedure for that activity. So that is fine. The I say to Richard Court: stop tilting at only differences are that a right to object about windmills. Follow our model on native title. It is alluvial mining and high-impact exploration is workable, it is practical, it is do-able. As I say, now a right to negotiate. However, we should Western Australia has no hope of getting its consider the context of what else we are going current legislative model through the Senate. to do with native title. The Queensland model is the only practical We have indigenous land use and workable solution. All members have to do is ask the National Party member Ian Causely. agreements, fast-tracking small mining He said that it was. He is a National Party approvals ready to go for Winton, the south- Federal member endorsing what we are doing, west and north Queensland. We are pursuing because he knows that it is practical, he knows a template ILUA, or indigenous land use that it is workable. agreement, to fast-track all exploration activity. It can allow the immediate grant of a permit I will now move on to other issues. The and provide simple and timely procedures as Leader of the Opposition suggested that I explorers progress their investigation of areas. should have debated this matter at the It is not a dog's breakfast, as some have national conference. The bottom line with all of suggested; rather, it is a clear, precise strategy this is that, in relation to native title issues and for the future. It is a comprehensive response indigenous issues generally, I made a that provides better processes for every level significant speech at the national conference of mining activity in this State. There is a and I highlighted the fact that my Government tribunal, which we had the foresight to has one of the most impressive records of any establish, so it would be ready to operate and Government in the history of this State in relation to indigenous issues, in relation to land back this up as a legislative backstop. issues and in relation to native title. All Mr Santoro said that we should dump the members had to do was see the tribute State-based regime and just use the yesterday to South Sea Islanders and their expedited procedures. Obviously, the Borbidge formal recognition in this place, which, to his Government did not think that that was such a credit, was supported by the Leader of the good idea. It could have used the expedited Opposition. I am not small minded about procedure when it was in Government, but it these things. I thank the Leader of the did not. Not once did that Government use it. Opposition for that. So I do not know where Santo is getting his However, the important thing is that we briefings from. Since he is the only one in the were in a tactical negotiating position. If the party, maybe he is talking to himself. The issue had gone to the national conference, reality is that our section 26A low-impact then Queensland would not have a State- regime is a form of expedited procedure only if based regime today. I am no mug. I know it applies to all applications that fall within the that. We have to fight on our own terms, and low-impact category. The member for Clayfield we did. We have a State-based regime. We says that this Government is all spin and no took our time, we negotiated, we got seven of substance. He is entitled to his bit of politics for the determinations through the Senate and six the day, but he should tell that to the 101,200 were disallowed. I was not going to fight that Queenslanders who would not have a job on a platform that perhaps would not have unless this Government was in office. The been able to achieve what I have wanted. facts of life are that we are delivering. 3238 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000

The member for Burdekin claimed that than him taking his drip-feed from wherever he coexistence was like people leasing a house, wants to take it. Like a lot of Federal having someone moving in, sleeping in their commentators, Laurie Oakes is linked to his bed and using their TV and their toothbrush. life-support system and that is Federal The member for Burdekin is noted for his Parliament. I do not expect any State contributions. I thought the best one was the Government to be given a fair go by a national pink bridge over the Burdekin River, but I am commentator. As I said, I read Laurie Oakes' not going to get into that. If the member for article with a sense of great discovery. Things Burdekin does not understand something, he happened in this whole exchange between just dreams up what it could mean and just Kim Beazley and me that really happened only rambles on. The High Court decision in these in Laurie Oakes' mind. But that is fine. matters is very clear on coexistence. Where Mr Borbidge: At least he was more polite there is inconsistency between existing than Terry McCrann. leasehold rights and native title rights, the leasehold rights prevail. The member for Mr BEATTIE: That is true. He was more Burdekin says that people are sick and tired of polite. Laurie Oakes is a great commentator. I the ranting of minority group supporters. If that have enormous regard for Laurie Oakes. I applies to his party, the Country Party and One think that he is one of the great commentators Nation, then he is probably right. What he did of Australia. I read his articles regularly, I watch not say was that those people were referring to his interviews on TV; I have admired him for a him, and I think that needs to be pointed out. long time. However, he is not perfect. He gets In terms of other issues, I think that it is things wrong and that article of his in the important to highlight that I have had Bulletin this week was certainly very creative. discussions with Michael Pinnock. I rang him Yes, he was not as bad as some. I will take after the Senate had made its determination. I that interjection from the Leader of the have met with Terry O'Shane and QIWG and I Opposition. There have been worse. have asked them to work with the Government I want to make this point: Daryl Melham to make this model work. Both of those people did resign, and that was a matter for him. I did have indicated that they are prepared to do not seek his resignation. I did have a long that. I thank Michael Pinnock and Terry discussion with him about this behind the O'Shane for that. fountain at the swimming pool at Weipa for the We are determined to make this model partnership meeting, for which we had work. I just think that it has to be emphasised gathered business leaders from around that our approach to native title is based on Australia, and I tried to explain to him not only cooperation rather than conflict. I will say that what we are doing but also the fairness of it all. again: our approach is based on cooperation I regret Daryl's decision. I do not take any rather than conflict. The negative approach pleasure out of the fact that he resigned, but I from those opposite continues the politics of do emphasise the fact that that was entirely a division, which I think is unhelpful to our matter for Daryl Melham; it was not a matter society. I have to say that my staff met with for me. I think that Daryl will be quite Terry O'Shane in my office today. He has disappointed today as he watches this debate indicated that QIWG will support the State- in the Queensland Parliament, because I gave based regime on the basis that we would be Kim Beazley a commitment. That commitment seeking to enhance its security. QIWG are now was in writing, and I incorporated it in the committed to working cooperatively with the Hansard of this Parliament in the contribution Government and the mining industry to make that I made on Tuesday. the system work. I thank Terry O'Shane for his The legislation before the House today support and look forward to working together delivers significantly on the majority of the to make this model work and to move on from commitment I gave Kim Beazley. I promised this debate today. him that there would be legislation before the A whole lot of issues were raised, which I end of the year. I introduced it on Tuesday think I have basically covered. I think that is and we are debating it today. I should be fair important. I notice that the Leader of the about this. I thank the Leader of the Opposition said that we had sold out Opposition, Rob Borbidge, for allowing a Queensland, which, of course, is not true. I constructive approach to debating this today. read Laurie Oakes' article in the Bulletin, too, Although we have different views on this, he with a sense of discovery. These are matters appreciates the point I made to him when I of great interest. One of these days Laurie rang him on Monday afternoon and said that I Oakes might actually give us a call and we did not want another month's delay and that might actually tell him what is going on rather we wanted to try to help the mining industry, 8 Sep 2000 Native Title Resolution Bill 3239 and he was supportive. We can argue about hardworking and dedicated group of people. the content, but I thank the Leader of the As the Leader of the Opposition knows, they Opposition for supporting us and putting this were there during his time. These are non- Bill through the Parliament this week. political people who do a very professional job We have had enough of this. This has for this State. I thank Shaun. He has done a gone on and on. Whether people agree with marvellous job. I thank Glyn Davis and the the Leader of the Opposition or whether they whole Native Title Unit. I would be grateful if agree with me does not matter; we have to get they would pass on my thanks. They have on with this. This has been around since 1993, done a great job and all honourable members and then we had the High Court case in 1998. should be proud of what they have achieved. We have got a model and we want to give it a Question—That the Bill be now read a go. We have spent two years getting to this second time—put; and the House divided— stage. Frankly, we are at a point where we AYES, 35—Barton, Beattie, Bligh, Braddy, want to get on with it. That is where we are at. Bredhauer, Briskey, Clark, E. Cunningham, I think I have covered most of the points. J. Cunningham, Edmond, Elder, Fenlon, Fouras, If I have missed out any issues, I invite Hamill, Hayward, Kaiser, Lavarch, Lucas, Mackenroth, McGrady, Miller, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, honourable members to raise them. We will be Roberts, Robertson, Rose, Schwarten, Spence, moving some amendments at the Committee Struthers, Welford, Wellington, Wells. Tellers: stage. They have been circulated in the House Sullivan, Purcell and all members would be aware of them. I NOES, 31—Beanland, Black, Borbidge, Connor, had a discussion with the Leader of the Cooper, Davidson, Elliott, Gamin, Horan, Johnson, Opposition last night. Shaun Drabsch from my Knuth, Laming, Lester, Littleproud, Malone, Mitchell, staff briefed one of the Leader of the Nelson, Paff, Prenzler, Quinn, Rowell, Santoro, Opposition's senior staff, so there should be Seeney, Sheldon, Simpson, Stephan, Turner, no surprises. Veivers, Watson. Tellers: Baumann, Hegarty I will conclude by saying two things. Firstly, Resolved in the affirmative. this is a Queensland model that will take Queensland forward and that will drive jobs for all Queenslanders, including indigenous Committee Queenslanders. I say to all the parties: Century Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central— Zinc is a great model. We had to extinguish ALP) (Premier) in charge of the Bill. native title in part to get power in. But Century The CHAIRMAN: Order! The question is— Zinc is now working. Interestingly, when I opened the Century Zinc mine, Murrando "That clauses 1 to 19, as read, be Yanner was there. His brother works for the agreed to." mine. He acknowledged that Century Zinc was Question put; and the Committee producing jobs for local indigenous people. divided— Here we have a mining activity providing jobs AYES, 35—Barton, Beattie, Bligh, Braddy, for young indigenous Queenslanders who Bredhauer, Briskey, Clark, E. Cunningham, would not otherwise have these employment J. Cunningham, Edmond, Elder, Fenlon, Hamill, opportunities. We have a model that we have Hayward, Hollis, Kaiser, Lavarch, Lucas, Mackenroth, to make work. We have had enough politics McGrady, Miller, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, on this. I think we should move on. Roberts, Robertson, Rose, Schwarten, Spence, Struthers, Welford, Wellington, Wells. Tellers: Secondly, and finally, a number of people Sullivan, Purcell worked very hard to make sure that we ended NOES, 31—Beanland, Black, Borbidge, Connor, up with this historic Queensland-based regime, Cooper, Davidson, Elliott, Gamin, Horan, Johnson, of which I am very proud. I want to thank them Knuth, Laming, Lester, Littleproud, Malone, Mitchell, today. I thank Shaun Drabsch, my economics Nelson, Paff, Prenzler, Quinn, Rowell, Santoro, adviser, who worked incredibly hard on these Seeney, Sheldon, Simpson, Stephan, Turner, matters and who has aged probably 20 years Veivers, Watson. Tellers: Baumann, Hegarty during this process. He has done a remarkable Resolved in the affirmative. job. He was in Canberra last week with Dr Glyn Davis, the head of the Premier's Department, Schedule 1— whom I also thank—he has done a marvellous Mr BEATTIE (3.06 p.m.): I move the job—along with Jim, the head of our Native following amendments— Title Unit. They were negotiating on behalf of "At page 13, after line 18— Queensland to get the model up. insert— I thank also the Native Title Unit in my department. They are a professional, '17A. Section 422— 3240 Native Title Resolution Bill 8 Sep 2000

insert— 'or drill pads'. ' "registered indigenous land use Item 41— agreement" means an indigenous land At page 45, lines 6 to 8— use agreement registered on the register omit. of indigenous land use agreements.'.'. Item 57— At page 16, after line 13— At page 49, lines 23 and 24— insert— omit, insert— '39A. Section 472(5), 'also'— 'land that will be affected under the omit.'." licence, and to obtain any necessary The first amendment inserts a definition of access agreement for entry'.'." "registered indigenous land use agreement" Amendment No. 3 changes the wording into the Mineral Resources Act 1989 to better about the purpose of consultation to better reflect the term as used in the Commonwealth reflect the wording in the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1992. The second amendment Native Title Act 1993. Amendment No. 4 makes a consequential grammatical change ensures that, if a mining registrar is asked to resulting from the omission of other refer an access agreement to the Land and subsections. Resources Tribunal, then the mining registrar Amendments agreed to. must refer the access agreement and the tribunal must decide the treatment terms of Schedule 1, as amended, agreed to. the agreement. Amendment No. 5 makes a Schedule 2— consequential grammatical change resulting Mr BEATTIE (3.06 p.m.): I move the from amendment No. 4. following amendments— Amendment No. 6 removes a proposed "Items 13 and 33 omission to give effect to my commitment to provide substantive and procedural rights no At page 34, lines 6 and 7 and page less favourable to indigenous interests than 41, lines 18 and 19— those in New South Wales. That was the omit, insert— understanding and commitment I gave to Kim 'land that will be affected under the Beazley. It was tabled in the Senate. permit, and to obtain any necessary Amendment No. 7 corrects a minor access agreement for entry'.'. typographical error. Amendment No. 8 removes a proposed omission to give effect to Items 18, 38 and 62— the commitment I gave to provide substantive At page 36, line 25, page 44, line 14 and procedural rights no less favourable to and page 52, line 15— indigenous interests than those in New South omit, insert— Wales. Amendment No. 9 changes the wording about the purpose of consultation to '(2) If the mining registrar is asked to refer better reflect the wording of the the matter to the tribunal for a decision— Commonwealth Native Title Act of 1993. (a) the mining registrar must refer the Amendments agreed to. matter; and Schedule 2, as amended, agreed to. (b) the tribunal must decide the terms of the access agreement.'. Bill reported, with amendments. Items 18, 38 and 62— Third Reading At page 37, line 1, page 44, line 15 and page 52, line 16, 'If"— Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central— ALP) (Premier) (3.09 p.m.), by leave: I move— omit, insert— "That the Bill be now read a third 'When'. time." Item 21— Question put; and the House divided— At page 37, lines 19 to 21— AYES, 35—Barton, Beattie, Bligh, Braddy, omit. Bredhauer, Briskey, Clark, E. Cunningham, J. Cunningham, Edmond, Elder, Fenlon, Fouras, Items 24 and 44— Hamill, Hayward, Kaiser, Lavarch, Lucas, Mackenroth, At page 38, line 8 and page 45, line McGrady, Miller, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, 16, 'for drill pads'— Roberts, Robertson, Rose, Schwarten, Spence, Struthers, Welford, Wellington, Wells. Tellers: omit, insert— Sullivan, Purcell 8 Sep 2000 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 3241

NOES, 31—Beanland, Black, Borbidge, Connor, offices he has held. Yet this Bill will strip him of Cooper, Davidson, Elliott, Gamin, Horan, Johnson, his jurisdiction as the mining referee. Knuth, Laming, Lester, Littleproud, Malone, Mitchell, Nelson, Paff, Prenzler, Quinn, Rowell, Santoro, This Bill, taken in conjunction with the Seeney, Sheldon, Simpson, Stephan, Turner, Coal Mining Safety and Health Act and the Veivers, Watson. Tellers: Baumann, Hegarty cognate Mining and Quarrying Safety and Resolved in the affirmative. Health Act, will have the cumulative effect of depriving the Mining Warden of any future ongoing role. All of his jurisdiction will be Title of Bill eventually taken away or expire. He will be left Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central— with nothing to do within a very short period. ALP) (Premier) (3.14 p.m.): This is an historic Let there be no mistake about it: this day for native title. I move— Government is by stages and stealth removing the entire jurisdiction of a judicial officer. It is "That the title of the Bill be agreed abolishing a court and leaving the judicial to." officer of that court high and dry. Motion agreed to. Australia has rarely witnessed such a state of affairs in its modern history, and this is LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL possibly the worst case since the notorious AMENDMENT BILL treatment handed out to Mr Justice Staples by the Hawke Government in 1988. I think that Second Reading this instance is even more serious in that Resumed from 19 July (see p. 2149). Justice Staples had not been doing any work Hon. R. E. BORBIDGE (Surfers for years and was a controversial figure and Paradise—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) the Hawke Government was up front and (3.14 p.m.): The Land and Resources Tribunal honest about what it was doing and why it was Amendment Bill is a graphic illustration of both doing it. In this case, the Mining Warden is Labor's get-square mentality and the working full time and has no cloud over his administrative incompetence of this head. In fact, the irony here is that, because Government. It is a get-square exercise the Mining Warden has so much work to do, because it is aimed fairly and squarely at the Government is taking away his jurisdiction further marginalising the Mining Warden, so that members of the Land and Resources whose jurisdiction has been progressively Tribunal will be gainfully employed until cases whittled away by this Government by means of develop under their native title jurisdiction. a series of legislative measures since 1998. It I will now deal with each of the concerns is an illustration of administrative that the Opposition has with this flawed piece incompetence, because the Premier made it of legislation, which not only is a prime clear in his introductory speech that it is a example of policy on the run but also sets a direct result of Courier-Mail reports which serious and dangerous precedent by highlighted that the Land and Resources undermining judicial tenure. Firstly, I refer to Tribunal, which was prematurely established knee-jerk reactions to media reports. When and staffed by this Government, had no work considering this Bill, the first matter that needs to do. It has been, since its inception, a court to be dealt with is the reason for its with no cases. It has been a body costing the introduction. The Explanatory Notes circulated taxpayers millions of dollars but is yet to hand by the Premier are less than helpful. Under the down one decision. It is a bit like the famous heading "Policy Objectives of the Bill", the episode of Yes, Minister about the hospital following statement appears— without any patients. Premier Beattie "In order to expand the role of the managed to create the court with no cases. Deputy Presidents, the Bill extends the I want to make it clear at the outset that role of the Presiding Members of the the Opposition is not critical of the members of Tribunal to include dealing with non-native the tribunal. Each of them has particular skills title mining matters (including matters and is a respected person in the legal and otherwise to be dealt with by the warden wider community. However, so too is the becoming the mining referee), and that Mining Warden. He is a judicial officer. He was the two existing mining wardens not and, as far as I am aware, remains a automatically become members of the stipendiary magistrate. He has served this Tribunal." State for a number of decades and has, That may well be the legal effect of these throughout his professional life, attempted to amendments, but they do not explain why the do justice in the manner befitting the high position of the mining referee is being 3242 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 8 Sep 2000 abolished and why a specialist jurisdiction is "Mr Kopenol"— being transferred to the deputy presidents of I interpose here that Greg Kopenol is the the tribunal. president of the tribunal— The Premier was much more forthcoming "said only one matter, a dispute involving in his introductory speech. His comments are the Dawson River Jiman native title worth quoting in full. He said— application, which fell outside the "In spite of the work that the staff concerns of the Senate was being heard and members of the tribunal have in the court." undertaken, concern has been raised in Perhaps I am being a bit unfair. There is one some quarters about the limited work the patient in Peter Beattie's hospital. Land and Resources Tribunal Act currently makes available to the presiding As soon as the media turned the spotlight members of the tribunal. In a response to on the inactivity of the tribunal, the Premier those concerns, the Bill extends the role and the Government responded by king-hitting of the deputy presidents of the tribunal to the Mining Warden. It is quite extraordinary. include hearing of non-native title matters, This is not a well thought out piece of including matters it was proposed would legislation that has been produced in a careful be dealt with by the yet to be appointed and responsible fashion but a rushed job by mining referees." an incompetent Government stung by negative media reports. Just two days short of I congratulate the Premier on his honesty a month after this article appeared in the in this instance. He at least admitted that the Courier-Mail this Bill was introduced into this real reason for this Bill was not some well Chamber. I think any sensible person can thought out policy response to the problems of judge just how embarrassed the Government the tribunal or following input from interested must have been to have moved so quickly and stakeholders but a knee-jerk reaction to in the manner that it has. adverse media reports. In fact, on 21 June on page 1 of the Courier-Mail there appeared a The second issue the Opposition has story written by Chris Griffith with the headline concerns with is the manifest lack of "All dressed up with nothing to arbitrate". It consultation that went into the preparation of was a damning story about how this this Bill. The Explanatory Notes highlight that Government had established a bureaucratic the only persons and bodies consulted were white elephant at enormous cost to the Government departments and the Land and taxpayer which had absolutely nothing to do. Resources Tribunal. I guess the Land and The story started off as follows— Resources Tribunal was looking for work! It is abundantly clear from those Explanatory Notes "It occupies one and a half floors at that the Queensland Mining Council was not Brisbane's MLC Centre, employs 12 staff even contacted. No outside person or body and has a president paid the wages of a was involved in this matter. Supreme Court judge and two deputies paid like District Court judges. But despite It is clear that the Chief Stipendiary being built in September last year, Magistrate was not spoken to—nor, for that Queensland's Land and Resources matter, was any other member of the judiciary. Tribunal is yet to deliver a single native No representatives of land-holders title decision." associations were approached, nor were any indigenous representatives. I mention The story is all downhill from there for the indigenous representatives because, surely, Government. Griffith then writes— extra non-native title work being imposed on "The courtrooms are fitted out in soft, the deputy presidents would have the potential earthy reds, lightly coloured timber and to slow down the native title jurisdiction of this sandstone bench features. Free of the tribunal when it does kick in either late this year clutter of books and documents except for or early next year. I mention land-holders carefully placed new bibles awaiting their because the mining referees will be making first witnesses the courts exude a new-car decisions on compensation payable to land- smell rather than a musty legal one. The holders. registry's wooden desk panels are However, the most damning omission of beautifully carved and Aboriginal art work all was the Mining Warden himself. It is now adorns the walls." clear that Frank Windridge, the Mining I digress for a moment. Yes, Minister gave us Warden, was not even given the courtesy of Jim Hacker with the hospital with no patients. being told that he was being removed from the Peter Beattie has given us the court with no position of mining referee. He was deliberately cases. The Courier-Mail article continues— left in the dark. Frank Windridge wrote to the 8 Sep 2000 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 3243

Premier on 20 July—the day after this Bill was considered that I am performing quasi introduced into the Parliament—and set out judicial duties, and presumably, a position his concerns. I place on the public record the like that of the Mining Warden should be fact that Frank Windridge did not speak to the treated by the Government of the day as Opposition about his letter. As the Premier an independent office performing an knows, a carbon copy went to a number of important function for the people of this persons including the Attorney-General, the State, especially those engaged in the Minister for Mines and Energy, the president of mining industry." the Stipendiary Magistrates Association, the There can be no greater charge levelled president of the Land Court and the president against a Government when it introduces of the Land and Resources Tribunal. I make legislation which tinkers with the judicial fabric that point because the Premier subsequently of the State than that it has not consulted attempted to dismiss the very serious nature of those members of the judiciary who are this correspondence and implied that the exercising the jurisdiction being tinkered with Mining Warden had leaked it. The ABC quoted and has not properly taken their opinions into the Premier as saying— account. That is what this Premier has done. "It's no surprise to me when I Yet what we have with this Bill is a measure received it that it would end up in the cooked up within a few Government public domain. I mean, sometimes letters departments, with undue haste and without are written for that purpose and I any of the major stakeholders even being understand that this was a comment that spoken to. he wanted to make." The way the Mining Warden was As befitting a person in his position, the deliberately kept in the dark defies logic. The Mining Warden did not enter into the political Explanatory Notes disclose that the Land and fray. So I would not like any cheap shots Resources Tribunal was consulted, and I would aimed at Frank Windridge, because he has have thought the Mining Warden, as the done the right thing and not entered into a mining referee, was an integral part of that public and political slanging match with the tribunal. Yet he was not even briefed on what Government. At all times, from what I have was going on. I ask the Premier why the seen, he has acted responsibly and properly, Mining Warden was treated in this fashion and and I would like to see that fact noted during why the Government did not speak to him this debate. In his letter to the Premier, he before presenting this Bill to the Parliament. made this point— Last year the Premier and other members "As the Mining Warden, and as the of the Government talked long and loud about person who was ostensibly intended to justice in the workplace and about unfair carry out the duties (in whole or part) of dismissals yet, as Frank Windridge points out, the mining referee, I find it surprising and it is manifestly unfair for the Mining Warden to very disappointing that I was not find out after the event that the Government consulted at any stage about these has introduced into the Parliament a Bill which changes. in effect renders him surplus to requirements. The Explanatory Notes to the Bill Accordingly, the Opposition believes that not disclose the limited range of persons only has there been inadequate consultation whose views were sought, and quite during the preparation of this Bill but also that accurately reflect the fact that I was not the Mining Warden has not been accorded one of these. any form of natural justice. Clearly, his right to In preparing specialist legislation on a present his side has been denied by a matter which goes to the heart of my Government which is intent on bulldozing this current responsibilities, and which, in Bill through, irrespective of the consequences effect, will deprive me of the jurisdiction or the injustices it will cause. which I am exercising, I would have The third area of concern relates to the thought it polite, and prudent, to have at capacity of Land and Resources Tribunal least sought some input from the Mining members to perform Mining Warden duties. I Warden. mentioned at the outset that the Opposition, Unfortunately, this has not occurred, while having serious concerns about the Land and I think any person would find it and Resources Tribunal, is not criticising the unacceptable to learn that their future has members of that body. Nevertheless, a very been sealed by a Bill introduced into the serious issue that the Premier must deal with is Parliament, after the event. This is the capacity and experience of those especially disconcerting when it has to be members, no matter how well regarded, to 3244 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 8 Sep 2000 immediately perform the task which the mining The second point is that, while referees referee was to exercise. are appointed for no more than five years, this Recently a paper prepared by Deputy Parliament made a specific exception to that President Kingham of the tribunal was brought rule. Section 85 deals solely with the position to my attention. It is titled, perhaps aptly, "The of the Mining Warden, Frank Windridge. New Dinosaur on the Block", and outlines just Subsection 2 appointed him automatically as what the tribunal will be doing. She deals at the mining referee. Subsection 3 provided that some length with the native title, the five-year term limit did not apply to the environmental and mining tenure aspects of Mining Warden. Subsection 5 provided that the tribunal's jurisdiction. Under the heading of the Judges (Salaries and Allowances) Act "Mining Tenure", she makes these 1967 continues to apply to Frank Windridge. In comments— other words, this Parliament accepted that the Mining Warden should continue to exercise his "Functions previously undertaken by jurisdiction under the Mineral Resources Act the Warden's Court under the Mineral and his tenure would be in no way limited by Resources Act will be conferred on the performing that task. LRT. These include jurisdiction to: What causes me quite a lot of concern Hear applications for mining are these comments in the letter from the tenements and to recommend to the Mining Warden to the Premier— Minister whether a grant should be "I would not presume to say whether made; and the Deputy Presidents have any expertise Determine compensation payable to in non native title mining work that was to land-holders." be carried out by the Mining Referee, but in my years as the Mining Warden, I She later deals with the various presiding and cannot recall either of them appearing non-presiding members of the tribunal, and before me in the Mining Warden's Court." says— The current Deputy Presidents are Paul "The other non-presiding members Smith and Fleur Kingham. Paul Smith was, are appointed non-presiding members prior to his appointment, a longstanding and referee non-presiding members. Queensland public servant who was elevated Referee non-presiding members are to the Senior Executive Service under my appointed at a level equivalent to administration. He is an experienced native magistrates. They must have extensive title lawyer and very well respected and prescribed qualifications and experience regarded in that field. I am, however, not and are appointed for not more than five aware of Mr Smith having any expertise in the years. Only the referee members are area that the mining referee would be appointed on a full-time basis. There are operating in. I am not aware of Ms Kingham's three categories of referee non-presiding particular legal background, except that I note members—mining, mediation and that the Mining Warden points out that she indigenous issues. The mining and never appeared before him in that jurisdiction. mediation referees must have experience Any Government has to be particularly in those particular fields." careful, when establishing quasi-judicial bodies There are two points that need to be which are empowered to adjudicate disputes made. The first is that the Land and and either make orders or high-level Resources Tribunal Act is very specific about recommendations, that the persons reposed the type of qualifications and experience that a with the authority to preside are appropriately person appointed as a mining referee must qualified and experienced. Frank Windridge have. I draw the attention of the House to has been Mining Warden since 1982. For the sections 17 and 18, which set out the matters last 18 years of his professional life he has that must be taken into account. A person who travelled the length and breadth of this State was to perform the duties of Mining Warden performing, among other things, the duties would have to have a detailed knowledge of that the proposed mining referees will be mining and petroleum issues. Such a person carrying out. would preferably be one with knowledge of I suggest that the Premier, if he and his valuation as well as land use issues. This is a advisers have not already done so, carefully very specialist jurisdiction, and a person examine sections 269 and 281 of the Mineral performing the important tasks of the mining Resources Act. Anyone reading Part 7 of the referee should have extensive experience in Act would be struck by the onerous duty that specialist jurisdiction. placed on the Mining Warden when making 8 Sep 2000 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 3245 recommendations or orders pertaining to he is able to allay some legitimate concerns mining tenures. It is not a simple jurisdiction, that many in the community have expressed and it requires a person with a detailed about this matter. knowledge of quite complicated matters to do The other area of concern relates to the properly the job required by the legislation. view of the Opposition that there is no need for When the Opposition gave its support to these changes. Before proceeding to further the establishment of the Land and Resources substantive objections, it also needs to be Tribunal last year, we did so with the seriously questioned now whether this Bill is expectation that the Mining Warden would be needed. The stated rationale for the Bill was, performing the functions of the mining referee. in effect, that the members of the Land and The legislation was in fact predicated on this Resources Tribunal had nothing to do. It is assumption, and section 85, which I have just now clear that the Government established the referred to, is a prime example of that. Now we tribunal prematurely. It has been, to date, an have a situation where persons who have expensive white elephant. During the 1999- been appointed as deputy presidents to 2000 financial year alone, this court with no perform other functions will be given the job of cases—Mr Beattie's court with no cases—cost the Mining Warden even though, on the face the taxpayers $3,182,000. In an answer to a of it, they have absolutely no experience in this question on notice I lodged, the Premier also area. This is an unsatisfactory state of affairs disclosed that the estimated costs of the and again highlights just why the mining tribunal this year will be even more—in fact, industry regards this Government as incapable some $4,748,000. The tribunal has a staff of of providing the leadership to ensure that the 12. It rents 1,133 square metres of office floor crisis it is facing can be proactively dealt with. space at a cost of $212.50 per square metre I would like to know exactly what per annum. As honourable members would experience Mr Smith and Ms Kingham have in appreciate, the costs for this tribunal will just this jurisdiction and why the Premier has been keep on increasing, especially as I assume the so quick to assume that the specialist Government is locked into renting jurisdiction of the Mining Warden can be given arrangements for some time. to these people. The Opposition wants an Yet despite the fact that this expensive assurance that we are not going to have a experiment has been operational for more situation where we have people with than six months, it is yet to hand down even professional learners plates getting job one decision. It is no wonder that this experience as they go along. The Opposition, incompetent Government is so embarrassed. the mining industry and land-holders generally It is no wonder that this Government is trying expect that persons who are given the to create work programs for members who are authority to determine compensation paid the equivalent of District Court judges yet payments to land-holders and who will be whose only function to date is to travel around making statutory recommendations to the the State engaging in so-called community Minister for Mines and Energy about whether awareness programs—in other words, telling an application for a mining tenement should people what you would like to do if you only be granted will be fully able to exercise their had anyone appearing before you to allow you duties competently from day one. to do it. So I ask the Premier to outline to this Mr Beattie: But as of this week, they will. Parliament just what experience the members of the tribunal have in land valuation matters, Mr BORBIDGE: But not up until now. in making recommendations on compensation Of course, it must be very embarrassing or in dealings with the granting of mining and frustrating for the members of the tribunal tenements and also whether in fact any of to be in this position. It is not their fault that them have, even once or twice, ever appeared this Government appointed them prematurely. in the Mining Warden's Court in their Unfortunately, they have been caught up in professional careers. While we are not critical another prize administrative foul-up of this of the tribunal members, the Opposition Government. As the honourable member for believes that it is essential that any person Clayfield mentioned earlier, this Government is who has the power to determine potentially all spin and no substance. I suspect that by enormous compensation payments and to the time the tab hits the $5m mark, we might have a major say in facilitating or stopping actually see some activity—at least we all hope major mining developments should have the so. Five million dollars to get to the starter's requisite background to do that job properly barrier! That has been the price of the and from the outset. I look forward to the premature establishment of this particular body Premier's response, for I sincerely hope that by this incompetent Premier. 3246 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 8 Sep 2000

Quite obviously it was foolish to provide in that anyone who knows anything about this the Act—and I made this point during the area will know exactly which senior second-reading debate last year—that the Government Minister I am referring to. president and deputy president be given The second reason is that the Supreme Court Justice and District Court Government is not convinced, despite all of Judge status with a tenure that will last until the Premier's rhetoric, that there will be much they turn 70 years of age. When the Premier of a native title jurisdiction for this tribunal. spoke to the Bill last year, he said that the These are the only reasons I can think of for legislation would be reviewed after two years. why this Government is persisting with a Bill That is well and good, but in the when its very rationale as explained by the meantime he and his Attorney-General have Premier to the House is now no longer ensured that the taxpayers will be forking out present. Once again, I look forward to the for up to the next 27 or so years salaries for Premier explaining why he is persisting with the each of these people of in excess of $160,000 Bill. per annum. No matter what the review of the My fifth concern is the undermining of tribunal comes up with, the State is left with judicial tenure. There is no doubt that this Bill three people who will have lifetime tenure. sets a dangerous precedent. To my The Opposition has always been of the knowledge, there is no example in the last view that the status and tenure proposed for century of this State's history where a person the members was disproportionate to the task holding a judicial office has had his or her that they were given. We were also of the view office abolished without clear transition that the Act should not have been arrangements to an equivalent judicial position commenced until such time as it was clear that in another comparable court or tribunal. the tribunal would be gainfully employed. If the There are two preliminary points that need Premier had accepted that advice, he would to be made. The first is the judicial status of have saved $5m. Instead, we have seen this the Mining Warden personally and the second Government prematurely establish the tribunal, is the quasi-judicial nature of the functions prematurely appoint members, prematurely performed by the Mining Warden. appoint staff, prematurely enter into leasing As to the first, Frank Windridge was first arrangements and throughout engage in an appointed as a stipendiary magistrate in 1982. incompetent exercise of throwing good money By virtue of that appointment, he also became after bad. a coroner and was simultaneously appointed a However premature and incompetent the Mining Warden. Over the next eight years or Government's track record on this tribunal has so, he held these positions in a number of been to date, at least we now know what the locations including Longreach, Mount Isa and fate of the alternative State provisions are. At Brisbane. Ultimately, he was the sole Mining least we now know that this tribunal will have Warden for all mining districts in Queensland. some native title jurisdiction and that this As I understand it, though he has not jurisdiction will presumably commence in the been performing the duties of a stipendiary relatively short term. This being the case and magistrate for some time, he still remains a having regard to the many practical, logistical magistrate. The Attorney-General would know and ethical concerns that are brought into all too well that the office of magistrate is a sharp focus by this Bill, I ask the Premier why judicial office and the appointment of a person he is still proceeding with it. If in fact the as a magistrate cannot be administratively tribunal will have a native title jurisdiction of revoked for purely administrative purposes. substance, then the rationale for proceeding However, even if Mr Windridge is not a with this Bill is rendered null and void. If this magistrate, certainly the Office of the Mining Government is confident that the Land and Warden is a judicial one. This was itself Resources Tribunal will have any role in native recognised by the Electoral and Administrative title and whatever the Premier salvages from Review Commission in its Report on Review of the wreckage of this alternative provisions Appeals from Administrative Decisions. legislation, then there is no need for this Bill. The second point is one that does not One can only draw the conclusion if this need any explanation. The Mining Warden Bill proceeds that either or perhaps both of the traditionally and still performs judicial duties. He following reasons is or are motivating this still carries out inquiries into fatal and serious legislation. The first, as I said, is a get-square non-fatal mining accidents. He makes mentality that obviously exists somewhere in compensation orders and he makes this Government against the Mining Warden. I recommendations on the granting of mining could speculate about that matter, but I think tenements. In 1993 EARC said— 8 Sep 2000 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 3247

"The Commission believes that the were repealed by the controversial mining Warden's Court was right to move to safety legislation of last year that I referred to using Magistrates Courts for hearings earlier. The jurisdiction that the Mining Warden rather than Departmental premises ... It has left is a jurisdiction that will go at any time. should be funded through the As soon as the new mining safety legislation appropriation for the courts program to becomes operative, he will have no further the Department of Justice and Attorney- work to do. General (like the Magistrates Court) rather Clause 11 of this Bill amends section 85 than out of the Budget of the Department to make it clear that even though the Mining of Minerals and Energy." Warden is deprived of his mining referee The very fact that the Mining Warden jurisdiction, he can continue to exercise his presides over the Warden's Court highlights inquisitorial powers under the so-called the fact that the warden is a judicial officer designated Acts. What the Bill and the Premier presiding over a court and performing judicial have not made clear is that the Mining duties. Yet despite this, what we are now Warden will soon be left with a title but no seeing is the final stages in the demolition of work. the judicial position of the Mining Warden as This Bill does no credit to the Attorney- an institution and Frank Windridge as a judicial General, who is supposed to be the first law officer. officer of the State and who should be at the Last year when we debated the forefront in protecting judicial tenure and the establishment of the Land and Resources independence of the judiciary. I say that it Tribunal, I pointed out that there was some does him no credit because in the aftermath of dissatisfaction with the Warden's Court in the the Staples affair a joint select committee of pastoral industry following a decision of the the Commonwealth Parliament issued a report Court of Appeal in 1997. I said that remedial on tenure of appointees to Commonwealth action was needed. We assumed on this side tribunals. of the House that any problems, real or I add here that the committee was perceived, were being appropriately dealt with dealing only with tribunals and, quite plainly, by ensuring that the warden's jurisdiction would the Mining Warden holds a much more be exercised within the umbrella of the sensitive and important position. But even so, tribunal. The Opposition assumed from the the following principles that were clear wording of the Bill that the current Mining recommended go to the heart of the matter: Warden and his staff would be able to firstly, abolition of a tribunal should not be continue to carry out their duties, albeit in a used to remove the holder of a quasi-judicial much better and more independent and office unless the removal procedures applying judicial environment. to that office are followed; secondly, legislation The Opposition supported, in the spirit of to change the structure and jurisdiction of the EARC report, the transfer of the Mining quasi-judicial tribunals should, if possible, Warden's jurisdiction to the Justice Department refrain from abolishing the tribunal; and, thirdly, and out of the Department of Mines and where the tribunal is abolished or restructured Energy. It was not long after that that our all existing members of the tribunal should be concerns were raised when the Minister for reappointed to its replacement. As to the last Mines and Energy introduced the mining point, the committee stated further— safety legislation, which comprehensively "All members of tribunals should be deprived the Mining Warden of any role in reappointed to a restructured tribunal or a investigating mining accidents. Now what we tribunal replacing an existing tribunal, see is the final instalment in what appears to unless demonstrably good reasons are be a deliberate strategy to leave Frank given for their non-appointment." Windridge with no judicial duties. My friend and colleague the member for The Premier graciously conceded in his Callide will deal with this matter at greater second-reading speech that the warden's length, but, taken as the minimum standard current jurisdiction for conducting inquiries into that should be followed, it is clear that serious accidents under the Coal Mining Act something terribly wrong is occurring. Here we and the Mines Regulation Act 1964 would have a judicial officer who is being remain. What the Premier did not tell this professionally sidelined by a series of House is just how long that jurisdiction will legislative enactments. Here we have the remain for. As the Premier and the member for legislation being pushed through in the dying Mount Isa know full well, both of those statutes stages of a Friday sitting to evade public have been repealed by this Parliament. They scrutiny. At no stage, to the Opposition's 3248 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 8 Sep 2000 knowledge, has this Government come out I ask the Premier to think very carefully and said what is going to happen to the about this matter, because it goes to the very Mining Warden. The basic standards set down heart of his claim that his Government would by the joint parliamentary committee for set new and better standards and uphold the tribunals are not being followed. Frank dignity of this Parliament. If, in reality, we are Windridge is a person, and Frank Windridge as debating a Bill to destroy the professional life a judicial officer has a right to know what duties of a judicial officer, then it is an issue that will he will be performing, what judicial tasks he will cast a shadow over this Government and the be exercising. Labor Party for years to come. This is not just an issue for Frank We oppose this Bill, because it was Windridge; this is an issue for this Parliament motivated by an endeavour to create work for and for the community. The principle tribunal members who were doing nothing and transcends the person, because it sets a not because of any desire to improve the precedent for a future Government in its quality of work of the tribunal. We oppose this dealings with persons holding judicial and Bill because it removes an experienced judicial quasi-judicial offices. Should we in this House officer, who has been doing this work for 18 sit back mute while this Government removes years, with newly appointed members who this judicial officer from the post of Mining have either no experience in this jurisdiction or Warden and leaves his future totally unclear? I next to none. We oppose this Bill because the ask the Premier to outline in his reply just what major stakeholders have not been consulted. is intended to happen to Frank Windridge We oppose this Bill because the Mining once his remaining functions under the Warden was not consulted. We oppose this repealed mining safety legislation come to an Bill because the rationale for its introduction end. Has the Attorney-General discussed with was removed with the partial allowance of the the Chief Stipendiary Magistrate his alternative State provisions determination by reassignment to the Magistrates Court? Have the Senate, which will mean that the tribunal there been any other discussions with other will be able to exercise a native title jurisdiction. judicial bodies? We oppose this Bill because it strikes at the heart of judicial tenure. We oppose this Bill The reason why these questions are because it undermines the separation of posed and why some answers must be given powers and the independence of the judiciary. to this Parliament is not that the Opposition is Finally, we oppose this Bill because it is unfair, looking at this through the lens of Frank un-Australian, conceived in haste, ill Windridge as a person but we are looking at it considered and petty. through the lens of Frank Windridge as a judicial officer and exactly how this The Mining Warden's concluding Government treats judicial officers—how this comments to the Premier in his letter of 20 Premier treats judicial officers, how this July were as follows — Attorney-General treats judicial officers, how "I only ask, and expect, some this Minister for Mines and Energy treats common courtesies and basic concepts of judicial officers, how this Labor Government fairness. Nothing more or less. I want to treats judicial officers. know what is going to happen to me, and why I have been subjected to this I remember full well in the last decade or treatment. I have given all of my adult life so how the Labor Party has dined out to serving the people of Queensland. electorally on its claim that it understands and upholds the separation of powers, how only I regard the service that I have been the Labor Party understands the entrusted with as both professionally underpinnings of our Westminster system and rewarding and personally fulfilling. It has is squeaky clean. Obviously, with the truth now been a very deep honour to have worked coming out about the rorting of the electoral in the service of this State. roll by Labor Party operatives, those claims are At this late stage of my life, to have now being exposed as being as shallow and received the sort of treatment now as false as could be. Yet even cynics would be accorded to me by your Government is surprised that this Government could be as something that I find hard to express in brazen as to throw publicly and wantonly the this letter, except to say that I am separation of powers doctrine in the legislative profoundly shocked and disappointed. rubbish bin by effectively removing a judicial I trust that you consider this letter officer in the manner proposed by this because I hope that any other person legislation. performing a judicial office for this State is 8 Sep 2000 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 3249

never again treated in such a shabby and saw the resolution of the problems of fashion." perceived closeness to the mining industry and Likewise, the Opposition hopes that we never the Department of Mines and Energy as again see a repetition of this type of action capable of being resolved by transferring and looks forward to the Premier dealing responsibility for the court to the Department of explicitly with the issues raised when he makes Justice. In fact, the Opposition supported the his reply. incorporation of the Mining Warden into the Land and Resources Tribunal. Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (3.56 p.m.): I rise to make some brief comments on this We were of the view that, on balance, it Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill was a reasonable move. We did have which, as the Leader of the Opposition has concerns that the specialist nature of the court indicated, we will be opposing. The immediate and the cost-effective nature of its operations effect of this measure will be to increase the should not be compromised, but we were responsibilities of the deputy presidents of the hopeful that those matters could be dealt with. Land and Resources Tribunal by giving them Instead, since the debate on the the non-native title jurisdiction that was to be establishment of the tribunal in March 1999, exercised by the mining referees. This goal will we have seen this Government introduce three be achieved by providing that the existing separate pieces of legislation, the cumulative Mining Warden will not automatically become effect of which would be to render the a member of the tribunal. jurisdiction of the Mining Warden non-existent within a very short period of time. The fact of the matter is that the Mining Warden is a judicial officer and the Warden's The Government has relentlessly moved Court, as its name signifies, is a court of law. It towards a goal of depriving the Mining Warden is the equivalent of a Magistrates Court. It also of every aspect of his former jurisdiction. This has to be appreciated that there is only one leads me back to the Explanatory Notes to the full-time Mining Warden. From my inquiries, it Bill. We would think from reading those notes would appear that a full-time public servant, at that this was a mere housekeeping piece of the moment the registrar of the Sandgate legislation; that it contained nothing Magistrates Court, has been appointed in an controversial or untoward. We would also form acting capacity as warden for a short period to the opinion that the Mining Warden was in fact help the warden, Mr Windridge, when the being gainfully employed, because the need arises. jurisdiction proposed to be given to the mining referee under the Coal Mining Act and the So the real impact of this Bill falls on Mr Mines Regulation Act was now not going to Windridge as well as the staff of the Warden's the Land and Resources Tribunal but instead Court. It is no surprise that the current Mining remaining with the Mining Warden. Warden, Frank Windridge, was originally appointed as a stipendiary magistrate and a A person not having any idea of the coroner. It is likewise no surprise that the implications of this Bill would think that, while mining referees under the Land and the Mining Warden and the Warden's Court Resources Tribunal Act were to be paid the was not entering into the field reserved for the equivalent of a stipendiary magistrate. Under mining referee, nevertheless the Mining the Act, the mining referees were given the Warden and the Warden's Court were going to responsibility of hearing applications for mining be gainfully employed conducting inquiries into tenements and recommending to the Minister serious mining accidents. The reality is very whether a grant should be made and also different. determining compensation payable to the While it is true that the Mining Warden will land-holders. conduct inquiries into serious accidents under Any person who has bothered to read these two pieces of legislation, what was not section 269 of the Mineral Resource Act, which explained was the fact that these two statutes sets out how the Mining Warden must were repealed last year by the Coal Mining approach the task of making Safety and Health Act and the Mining and recommendations, including public hearings, Quarrying Safety and Health Act. The would appreciate that this is an extremely replacement statutes are yet to be fully important and complicated jurisdiction. There is proclaimed, and as such the work so no doubt that, more recently, problems arose generously given to the Mining Warden is work with the Warden's Court largely as a result of a he is already performing and work which will Court of Appeal decision. However, the cease shortly after the new statutes become Opposition was of the view that the Warden's operational. Any work that the Mining Warden Court was performing a critical function well will perform under the Coal Mining Act and the 3250 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 8 Sep 2000

Mines Regulation Act will be strictly short-term "I want to know what is going to exercises. The reality is that this Bill gives happen to me, and why I have been nothing to the Warden's Court that it does not subjected to this treatment." already have, but deprives it of any ongoing The Opposition also wants to know what is future work by cutting it out of the Land and going to happen to the Mining Warden. If the Resources Tribunal. What is going to happen warden's jurisdiction will disappear within the to the Mining Wardens and the staff of the next 12 months or so, what will the warden be Warden's Court once their limited range of doing? Will his judicial status be recognised work dries up, as it inevitably must? and, if so, to what court will he be appointed or This Bill sets a totally unsatisfactory transferred? How long will it be before Mr precedent. To my knowledge, there has never Windridge is informed of his fate and, if he previously been an example in Queensland of already has been informed, will the Premier a Government abolishing the jurisdiction of a inform this House and table any judicial officer without ensuring that the judicial documentation relevant to that? officer is provided with comparable and The Government is not by this Bill relevant judicial duties. Yet that is the effect of dismissing the warden. However, it is by this this Bill. Once the Mining Warden is removed Bill rendering the warden irrelevant. It is by this from the office of mining referee under the Bill withdrawing from him any ongoing judicial Land and Resources Tribunal Act and as soon role. The Government might as well be as the work of inquiring into mining accidents dismissing him, because this Bill places his dries up after the commencement of the Coal future in doubt. In fact, it is hard to say Mining Safety and Health Act and the Mining whether the Government envisages this and Quarrying Safety and Health Act, the judicial officer having a future. Mining Warden and the staff of the Warden's Court will have nothing to do. The Premier and the Attorney-General have a very serious obligation to come clean The issue here is clear and and tell the Parliament exactly what is straightforward. By means of a series of proposed for the Mining Warden. Nothing less statutes the Warden's Court is being than giving an assurance that his judicial comprehensively dismantled and its jurisdiction status will not be jeopardised will be sufficient. given to other persons and bodies. The The fact that up until this point in time no such Opposition raised concerns during the debates assurance has been given is itself a pretty sad on the mine safety legislation last year about testament to the way that the Government has the transfer of functions from the Warden's mishandled this issue and shown a remarkable Court to persons beholden to the Minister of ignorance of protocol, conventions and the day. On the other hand, we did not common courtesies. Because of the effect that oppose the residue of the jurisdiction of the this legislation has on the office of the Mining Warden's Court being incorporated within the Warden, as the Leader of the Opposition so Land and Resources Tribunal. clearly outlined, we will be opposing it. It is clear that for decades the Warden's Mr SANTORO (Clayfield—LP) (4.04 p.m.): Court has operated in a satisfactory manner. Today I rise to express my very deep concern People occupying the important office of with the policy proposals in this Bill and to Mining Warden have likewise performed their support the comments that have been made functions appropriately. The jurisdiction of by the Leader of the Opposition and the mining referees in the Land and Resources honourable member for Callide. Last year Tribunal will be both complex, controversial when I spoke on the legislation establishing and extremely important both from the the Land and Resources Tribunal I expressed perspective of individual land-holders and some reservations based on the fact that the mining companies but also from the viewpoint Warden's Court was a specialist court and had of the community. It is not a jurisdiction that expertise in quite complex and extremely can or should be tampered with in a flippant important matters for the economic future of manner. Yet it is clear that the Government Queensland. I indicated that the Warden's has introduced this Bill with all of the wrong Court had been subject to some controversy in motives and without any of the necessary 1997, and I was of the view that there were consultation. some advantages in removing the Mining In addition, we still do not know the fate of Warden from the umbrella of the Department the Mining Warden. It is nothing short of of Mines and Energy. amazing that the Mining Warden wrote to the Unfortunately, almost as soon as the Premier after this Bill was introduced into the Parliament passed legislation establishing this Parliament and stated— tribunal the Minister for Mines and Energy 8 Sep 2000 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 3251 introduced new mine safety legislation which very core of the principle of the separation of deprived the Mining Warden of any future role powers. in investigating serious accidents. Today we I have a number of serious concerns with this are debating the final stage in the demolition shallow and inappropriate initiative. job being performed on the Mining Warden. The first is the absolute lack of consultation that When this Bill is passed the only work that the went into this Bill. Clearly all of the major Mining Warden will have left to do is tidy up institutional stakeholders have been ignored. inquiries into serious accidents that occurred From the Explanatory Notes it is clear that before the proclamation of the substantive neither Agforce or the Queensland Mining provisions of the Coal Mining Safety and Council were approached, even though their Health Act and the Mining and Quarrying members will have to deal with the mining Safety and Health Act. This Bill will place the referees on a regular basis. Mining Warden in professional limbo. He will Even more disconcerting is the fact that the be in a professional twilight zone and totally at Mining Warden was kept in the dark. the mercy of the Executive Government. In his letter to the Premier he said, and I quote: This should not be happening to him, for "I find it surprising, and very disappointing that I he is a judicial officer, occupies an important was not consulted at any stage about these judicial office and has exercised the specialist changes." jurisdiction of that office since 1982. It is this What particularly troubles me about this very important point that I wish to develop in statement is the fact that the Explanatory Notes the remainder of the speech, for the disclose that the Land and Resources Tribunal undermining of the independence of the was in fact consulted. judiciary is a matter of great concern to me I would have thought that as a mining and a matter that should be of great concern referee—and the Mining Warden was to all honourable members. However, in view automatically appointed as a mining referee by of the time of day and out of consideration for virtue of section 85—the Mining Warden would those members who have made transport and have been involved in any consultations that the Tribunal had with the government on this other arrangements, I am happy not to bill. proceed with a verbal presentation on my contribution and to seek to have In the Mining Warden was not involved in these the balance of my speech incorporated in discussions, even though they involve his professional future, a number of very troubling Hansard. issues arise. Leave granted. The first is that the Government specifically The stated policy objective of this bill is to precluded the President of the Tribunal from increase the jurisdiction of the two Deputy discussing the proposed legislation with the Presidents of the Tribunal to deal with the non Mining Warden. If there was any such native title mining matters that the mining confidentiality imposed on the President by the referees were to perform. Basically that means government it would amount to a total and the holding of inquiries into whether a mining absolute denial of procedural fairness to a lease should be granted and making judicial officer. It would be a disgraceful and compensation orders for landholders. unacceptable situation and one which in recent times was only matched by the deliberate The reason why the Deputy Presidents are to attempt by the Goss Government to keep the be given this increased jurisdiction is not that then Chief Justice in the dark about the they could do a better job than Frank establishment of the Court of Appeal. Windridge, but simply because they don't have enough non native title work to do. At least then, however, no one was being Obviously stung by the Courier Mail expose of deprived of their whole judicial jurisdiction as is the Tribunal; a Tribunal all dressed up and with case with this bill. no cases, the Premier acted by stripping the So I ask the Premier: when the Land and mining warden of his remaining jurisdiction and Resources Tribunal was consulted, was it on giving it to the two Deputy Presidents who had the basis that the Mining Warden could not be no work to do. informed of what was going on? This is a classic case of bad policy. Of policy The other option is also extremely concerning, on the run. Policy motivated by all the wrong and that is that the President of the Tribunal reasons. kept the Mining Warden in the dark. It is the type of policy that we are becoming If that be the case, then it would reflect very used to from this Government and this Premier. badly on the Tribunal and send out all the Its all spin and no substance. However, in this wrong signals to potential clients of this body case not only is it motivated by shallow and about how it will operate in terms of natural inappropriate factors, but it also strikes at the justice and procedural fairness generally. 3252 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 8 Sep 2000

Whatever be the case, it is highly worrying that Just how unacceptable is it as we enter the new the Mining Warden, an experienced judicial millennium to have a situation where a judicial officer has been treated, to use his terms, in officer and court registry staff are placed in a such a shabby fashion. cone of silence while politicians and public The next issue I come to is the lack of any servants determine their fate in closed room scrutiny of this bill by the Scrutiny of and without any public scrutiny. Legislation Committee. It is corrosive of judicial independence. It is In Alert Digest Number 10 the committee corrosive of judicial tenure, and it tears at the indicates that this bill was examined but not fabric of the separation of powers doctrine. reported on because it raised no issues within One of the ironies of this flawed bill is that it the committee's terms of reference. was produced in haste in response to Courier Subsection 3 of section 4 of the Legislative Mail reports that the Land and Resources Standards Act defines the term "fundamental Tribunal had no work to do. legislative principles" to include, amongst other This Tribunal cost the taxpayers more than $3 things, legislation which is consistent with million last year, and the Government estimates principles of natural justice and legislation that it will cost more than $4 million in the current does not adversely affect rights and liberties. financial year. The Explanatory Notes to this bill claim that no Yet to date it hasn't achieved a thing. That is rights or liberties will be affected because the not the fault of the members of the Tribunal, but mining warden's salary, terms and conditions, a sad reflection on how the Labor Party is rights and tenure of appointment are not dealt incapable of solving native title such that the with. It even goes on to say that the warden's alternative state provisions have yet to achieve jurisdiction to inquire into serious accidents any results in terms of the mining backlog. under the Coal Mining Act and the Mines Nevertheless the Premier's thin skinned Regulation Act will now be retained by the response to damning media reports was to strip warden and not exercised by the mining the mining warden of his jurisdiction so that the referees. highly paid but inactive Deputy Presidents and It is clear, as I have just said, that while this 12 support staff had something to do. legislation does not have provisions denying That is a prime example of policy being natural justice, the whole process leading to the developed for the wrong reasons. bill is a case study of the denial of natural The Deputy Presidents were not selected justice. because they had expertise in the mining However, to claim that the bill does not affect referee area. That area was to be reserved for the rights of the mining warden is just a joke. the mining warden. The reality is that this bill sacks Frank It is a very important and potentially Windridge as the mining referee. He was complicated jurisdiction. Public hearings have already the mining referee by virtue of the Land to be held and a range of factors taken into and Resources Tribunal Act, yet this bill account. For example, before making a removes him from that position. recommendation to the Minister on the granting It places him in a position of uncertainty. He has or otherwise of a mining lease, section 269 of been told he can retain a jurisdiction which will the Mineral Resources Act requires the warden soon disappear. to take into account the following matters: He was quoted on the ABC news on 1 August whether the Act has been complied with; as saying: "Well if it wasn't for the fatal inquiries, whether the land is mineralised or other which we have a couple in the pipeline to purposes for which the lease is sought are complete, the non-Native Title work relating to appropriate; mining industries is dwindling fairly rapidly and if the land is mineralised, whether there will there's only a few minor compensation issues be an acceptable level of development and a few very small lease applications coming and utilisation of the mineral resources; in from time to time." the land sought for the lease is of an Soon even that dwindling work load will dry up, appropriate size and shape; and what will happen to Mr Windridge and his the term sought is appropriate; staff from that point onwards. the applicant has the necessary financial With all due respect to the Scrutiny of and technical capabilities to carry on Legislation Committee, I believe that this bill mining operations; strikes at the very heart of the rights and liberties of the Mining Warden and the staff of the past performance of the applicant has the Warden's Court. been satisfactory; They are placed by this bill in legal limbo and any disadvantage that might flow to left not knowing how they will be treated and existing holders of exploration permits or by whom, except that at the end of the day it mineral development licences; will the Government that will determine their the operations will conform with sound fate. land use management; 8 Sep 2000 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 3253

the extent and nature of the environmental I would also like to place on record my impact caused by the operations; disappointment with the response of the whether the public right and interest will Queensland Mining Council to this bill. be prejudiced; Michael Pinnock, the CEO of the Council, was any good reason for refusing the mining quoted by the ABC as saying: "I guess he's in lease; and the same position as public servants in departments when they get merged. It's whether the proposed mining operation is obviously a sort of similar situation." an appropriate land use. Obviously Mr Pinnock is badly, in fact very, Likewise under section 281 the Mining Warden very badly informed. is required to determine compensation for landholders where a mining lease is to be It is nothing like that at all. granted or renewed. The section differentiates We have here a judicial officer and a Court. Not between surface and underground mines, and a public servant and a Department. We are not then sets out a range of factors that must be having a merger between two courts—that taken into account in assessing the amount of already occurred last year when the Mining compensation payable. Warden's jurisdiction, or what was left of it, I mention these matters so that all Honourable transferred to become the jurisdiction of the Members get a better appreciation of the nature mining referees. No, what we have now, is a of the task that mining referees will be takeover and an extinguishment of the Mining performing. Warden. It is not an easy one, and because it involves This is not just some public service position the rights of people as well as the future of and this is not just the plaything of the potentially multi million dollar projects, it is of Government of the day. extreme importance to all citizens of I would have thought that the Queensland Queensland. Mining Council would have appreciated that, Frank Windridge has been doing this job for and should have shown some leadership in many years. highlighting the dangers that this bill poses. It is not a jurisdiction to be simply handed A number of years ago a New South Wales around like a prize to whomsoever the Judge, Sir Alfred Stephen, said on his Government of the day chooses. retirement: Yet that is what is happening here. "I would beg those who may be disposed to think lightly of judicial office or its work Nevertheless I suspect that the even greater to be assured of one thing; that nothing irony is that no sooner will the Deputy but evil can result from deprecating Presidents get this jurisdiction, that the work either." will start kicking in from the alternative state provisions. This is a clear case of a Government paying no regard at all to the judicial office of Mining The two Deputy Presidents who are paid the Warden or the judicial functions of the same salary as Judges of the District Court, and Warden's Court. who have the same tenure, will go from a situation of having nothing to do to one where It has not listened to the type of warning that I they will be extremely busy. just quoted. In fact in 1993 when Chief Judge McGrath of the New South Wales What will happen then? Who will perform the Compensation Court retired he said: "In many mining referee's task, which is so critical to our cases widespread ignorance has been shown State? of the basic principles of the separation of Will the State have to get Mr Windridge back in powers which is the cornerstone of judicial again to do this job? independence." Yet here is the rub. At the moment under There is absolutely nothing positive I can either section 85 he has got judicial tenure as befits a think or say about this bill. judicial officer. It is a tenure of exactly the same It is fatally flawed, it will achieve nothing and is nature as the Deputy Presidents. However, if he contrary to fundamental principles of justice. All is sacked by this bill but his services are in all it is a very curious measure and one which needed by the Tribunal he can only be could only be the product of an arrogant and employed on a maximum term of 5 years and incompetent administration. not as of right as he currently enjoys. I also believe that this is a "get square" measure Again and again when you carefully think because for some time now the Mining Warden through the consequences of this measure you has been subjected to ongoing attacks by the are struck by the injustice of it, not just for Member for Mount Isa. The fact that this judicial Frank Windridge as a person, not just for the officer has been the recipient of gratuitous separation of powers doctrine but also for the verbal outpourings by the Member for Mount people in the mining and pastoral industries Isa has raised eyebrows in many quarters, who will have to appear before this Tribunal. especially when most of these outpourings 3254 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 8 Sep 2000

have been the result of negative publicity that start work on Monday or as soon as these Bills the Minister and his Department have received are proclaimed. Had we not had that vision on mine safety issues. and foresight, this body would not have been At the end of the day, like others, I want an ready to start work. It would have started six unqualified assurance from the Premier or the months down the track, and that would have Attorney-General that the Mining Warden's cost mining approvals and jobs. On the judicial status will be respected. Government side we have vision and forward I want an assurance that proper protocol will be planning and on the Opposition side we have followed and that the Mining Warden will be nitpicking and a lack of vision. This is about consulted about his tenure and his future role. being prepared. I want an assurance that whatever happens to him, is done in a spirit of cooperation and with An Opposition member interjected. his approval. Mr BEATTIE: The honourable member I also want an assurance that whatever body he was obviously never a boy scout. We have to is assigned to and whatever position he holds is be prepared. This Government not only adopts of an equal status and with equal remuneration the "be prepared motto"; we deliver. We are to what he is receiving. ready to take on the world as of next week. I want all of those things not because of the Let us move on. The purpose of these personality of the Mining Warden, but because changes is to expand the role of the deputy of the position that Frank Windridge holds. presidents of the Land and Resources Tribunal In entering this debate I am motivated not by to deal with non-native title mining matters. We any views one way or the other about the want to apply the skills and talents of the Warden. It would not matter to me who the deputy presidents to the full range of mining Mining Warden was, or which administration appointed that judicial officer. issues, because they are intrinsically linked to native title. We are not abolishing the position What does concern me is that we respect the of mining referee. There is nothing in the Bill to judicial arm of our system and do not treat it as that effect—end of story. The lack of workload plaything that can be tampered with at will. of the LRT—and I should come back to this— The issue that squarely arises here is respect for the separation of powers, and this is the Mr Borbidge interjected. litmus test for this Labor Administration. Will it Mr BEATTIE: If the Leader of the support this doctrine, or is it prepared to flush it Opposition wants to blame anybody, he can down the system whenever it chooses to. blame Daryl Williams, because he took 18 Finally, I also want an assurance that the staff of months to deliver on the determinations and the Warden's Court will likewise be properly the Senate took three months. We had some consulted and not disadvantaged by whatever of these things through our Parliament over occurs. two years ago. Were it not for our skill, Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central— persistence and determination, this would ALP) (Premier) (4.06 p.m.), in reply: That was never have happened. We cannot rely on the the greatest speech Mr Santoro has ever conservatives in Canberra. made in this House—the incorporated part at least, which I have not read. This is a great Jurisdiction for the LRT should be in place day for native title. We have finally come from 18 September, 10 days from now, and it forward with a resolution to this long anguish will be up and running. That will happen that has afflicted land management in this because we have had such forward planning. I State and nation. What we are doing today is emphasise that, if we had not had the part of the mechanism to make that work. preliminary work done, we would not be in a position to do that. Let us be frank about a number of these things. The Leader of the Opposition came in The Leader of the Opposition, who did go here and talked about a court with no cases. on and on, made the point about whether He never, ever gets it right. They have not Paul Smith and Fleur Kingham appeared been wasting time. They have been before the Mining Warden. This related to the developing procedures and educating letter that the Mining Warden wrote. I do not stakeholders on their role and method. If the know the Mining Warden. I have no animosity honourable member understood how the towards the Mining Warden. Life is too short. I system worked, he would know that there are do not have animosity toward anybody. We always set-up costs and mechanisms to be put just get on with good policy and good in place. This is a new tribunal starting from Government. I have no animosity towards the scratch. It is about sensible planning and Mining Warden at all. advancement. The good thing about it is that Let me refer to the letter that was quoted we had the foresight to get it in place so it can on the ABC and that the Leader of the 8 Sep 2000 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 3255

Opposition quite accurately reflected to the fixed for the jurisdiction to end. It will depend House. What was reported on the ABC is what on the complexity of the matters which might I said. If anybody, whether they are a member come before the warden while that legislation of the judiciary, a member of Parliament or exists. I think the Leader of the Opposition anyone else, writes a letter to the Premier and tried to suggest that we had brought this then distributes it widely to a large number of matter on for debate today for some secret people, inevitably it will end up in the public reason or whatever—I cannot recall what he domain. With all due respect to the Mining said. That is not true. This Bill has been on the Warden, it would be naive to expect otherwise. table for the appropriate time. It is on the Let me stress that I have no animosity Notice Paper. Everyone has had due notice of towards this gentleman. I do not know him. I it. There is no surprise about this. I did indicate wish him well in his continued responsibilities to the Leader of the Opposition in my private and duties. I have respect for him and his discussions with him last night that we needed office. But, frankly, I can be excused in the this piece of legislation to come on today so public interest for a little bit of cynicism. The that it could be proclaimed at the same time Leader of the Opposition said he did not as the native title Bill. I have written to the engage in a public debate. The fact that the Clerk asking for that to be proclaimed by next letter was distributed so widely inevitably Thursday. We want these Bills in place and meant that it was going to be linked with and operational. did contribute to the public debate. Frankly, I I say what I said before. The issue of had no problem with that—none at all. He native title has been a political football for too expressed his view. That view has been long. As a result of the passage of these Bills, canvassed by the Leader of the Opposition in the Queensland State-based regime will be up this debate. It has been canvassed publicly, and running. This is a great day for the and that is fine; I do not have a problem with resolution of native title. I believe that our that. So his views are widely known to all legislation should be a model for the rest of members of the House before they vote on Australia. It has been hard work—hard these issues. yakka—getting to where we are, but this has In his letter he said that Paul Smith and produced the result which will take this State Fleur Kingham had not appeared before the forward. We will be—and are—the only State Mining Warden. I am advised that Paul Smith in Australia with a State-based regime appeared before the Warden's Court because we have refused to play ostrich, as frequently in 1982 and 1983 and in several the Opposition did when it was in Government, matters since then. In relation to Fleur as Richard Court does and as the Northern Kingham, we understand—and I am Territory does. advised—that she practised many times in the We have to deal with the practical realities jurisdiction, appearing before the Warden's of the High Court decision and the composition Court. So he is wrong, as I am advised. I do of the Federal Parliament. Whether we like want to come to the defence of both Paul those decisions or not, those decisions were Smith and Fleur Kingham because, frankly, made by the High Court. Whether we like the they are good appointments in my view. I think balance of power in the Senate or not, that is they are going to do an excellent job. the numerical fact and the numerical reality. Mr McGrady: They were supported by We cannot simply walk away and pretend that the Mining Council, too. it is different; we have to get on with it. The Mr BEATTIE: They were supported by the fact of life is that we did get on with it and we Mining Council—both of them. have delivered the only State-based regime in Australia. Richard Court and all the others can I worked with Paul Smith when he was jump up and down and say what they like, but head of the Native Title Services Unit, and he the facts of the matter are that they will not was a very competent officer. Fleur Kingham is have a State-based regime if they continue widely recognised in this area. Both of them, down the course they are taking currently. as the Minister suggested, were supported by Their only hope in Western Australia, the the mining industry. So, frankly, I cannot see Northern Territory and elsewhere is to follow the basis of the criticism of either. I just say to our model. I know that there is an old South the Mining Warden that it is important that he Australian State-based regime of many years continue with his responsibility to get on with ago—before this all happened—but outside his job, as we will in our own particular way. that we are the only State in Australia with a The jurisdiction of the Coal Mining Act and State-based regime, and that came about the mining regulations will continue. This was a because of our skilled negotiation, our question posed in the debate. There is no time determination, our persistence and our clear 3256 Land and Resources Tribunal Amendment Bill 8 Sep 2000 desire to ensure that we had a model—a McGrady, Miller, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Queensland model—in Queensland that would Roberts, Robertson, Rose, Schwarten, Spence, work. Struthers, Welford, Wellington, Wells. Tellers: Sullivan, Purcell I think I have covered all the issues that NOES, 29—Beanland, Borbidge, Connor, Cooper, were raised. There was some suggestion that Davidson, Elliott, Gamin, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, someone in Government had a particular Laming, Lester, Littleproud, Malone, Mitchell, Nelson, vendetta—that some Minister had a particular Paff, Prenzler, Quinn, Rowell, Santoro, Seeney, vendetta—against the Mining Warden. That is Sheldon, Simpson, Turner, Veivers, Watson. Tellers: not true. No-one in Government has any Baumann, Hegarty angst. What we need, though, is to have a Resolved in the affirmative. system that will work. Yes, whenever there are changes there are always disappointments. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Any future divisions But what is important here? Is a personal on this Bill will be of two minutes' duration. position important; or is good policy, good management and good operation of a tribunal Committee important? I would have thought that the latter would have been the case. We have all had The CHAIRMAN: Order! The question is— disappointments in life, but there is an ongoing "That clauses 1 to 13 be agreed to." role for the Mining Warden, and it is an Question—That clauses 1 to 13 be important one. agreed to—put; and the Committee divided— The Leader of the Opposition made some AYES, 34-Barton, Beattie, Bligh, Braddy, reference to the costs of the tribunal. I simply Bredhauer, Briskey, Clark, E. Cunningham, J. state again that, had we not done the Cunningham, Edmond, Elder, Fenlon, Hamill, preparatory work in which there is always a Hayward, Hollis, Kaiser, Lavarch, Mackenroth, cost—a set-up cost—then, frankly, the tribunal McGrady, Miller, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, would not have been able to operate from 18 Roberts, Robertson, Rose, Schwarten, Spence, September. Finally, the delays in approving a Struthers, Welford, Wellington, Wells. Tellers: State-based regime for Queensland have cost Sullivan, Purcell this State billions of dollars. We have lost NOES, 29—Beanland, Borbidge, Connor, Cooper, billions of dollars of mining exploration; billions Davidson, Elliott, Gamin, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, of dollars have been lost since 1993 because Laming, Lester, Littleproud, Malone, Mitchell, Nelson, Paff, Prenzler, Quinn, Rowell, Santoro, Seeney, of the twisted road that has been followed for Sheldon, Simpson, Turner, Veivers, Watson. Tellers: native title. That is now behind us. Baumann, Hegarty A Government member interjected. Resolved in the affirmative. Mr BEATTIE: That is right, the inaction of Bill reported, without amendment. the Borbidge Government and others. They did not solve it. The one-point plan was about an ostrich approach: put your head in the Third Reading sand. There was no solution at all. We cannot Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central— do that. We now have a workable, tangible ALP) (Premier) (4.30 p.m.): I move— outcome and we are going to get the mining industry moving and get Queensland moving. "That the Bill be now read a third We finally have resolved the impasse. That is time." what has happened today by both these Question—That the Bill be now read a pieces of legislation passing through the third time—put; and the House divided— House. AYES, 34—Barton, Beattie, Bligh, Braddy, Having had my disagreements with the Bredhauer, Briskey, Clark, E. Cunningham, Leader of the Opposition, I thank him again for J. Cunningham, Edmond, Elder, Fenlon, Fouras, his support for the facilitation of these Bills Hamill, Hayward, Kaiser, Lavarch, Mackenroth, through the House today. This is a great day McGrady, Miller, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Roberts, Robertson, Rose, Schwarten, Spence, for Queensland, a great day for jobs, a great Struthers, Welford, Wellington, Wells. Tellers: day for the mining industry and a great day for Sullivan, Purcell indigenous Queenslanders. NOES, 29—Beanland, Borbidge, Connor, Cooper, Question—That the Bill be now read a Davidson, Elliott, Gamin, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, second time—put; and the House divided— Laming, Lester, Littleproud, Malone, Mitchell, Nelson, AYES, 34—Barton, Beattie, Bligh, Braddy, Paff, Prenzler, Quinn, Rowell, Santoro, Seeney, Bredhauer, Briskey, Clark, E. Cunningham, Sheldon, Simpson, Turner, Veivers, Watson. Tellers: J. Cunningham, Edmond, Elder, Fenlon, Fouras, Baumann, Hegarty Hamill, Hayward, Kaiser, Lavarch, Mackenroth, Resolved in the affirmative. 8 Sep 2000 Special Adjournment 3257

LEGAL, CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE Report Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (4.32 p.m.): I lay upon the table of the House the Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee's issues paper on the prevention of electoral fraud. The issues paper signals the completion of the first stage of the committee's inquiry into preventing electoral fraud, referred to the committee by the House on 22 August 2000. The committee now calls for public submissions. I move that the report be printed. Ordered to be printed.

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth— ALP) (Leader of the House) (4.33 p.m.): I move— "That the House, at its rising, do adjourn until Tuesday, 3 October 2000." Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 4.33 p.m.

R. G. GILES, GOVERNMENT PRINTER, QUEENSLAND—2000