Legislative Assembly Hansard 1989

Queensland Parliamentary Debates [Hansard] Legislative Assembly THURSDAY, 8 JUNE 1989 Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy Ministerial Statement 8 June 1989 5349 THURSDAY, 8 JUNE 1989 Mr SPEAKER (Hon. L. W. Powell, Isis) read prayers and took the chair at 10 a.m. ADDRESS TO HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR; REMOVAL OF MR JUSTICE ANGELO VASTA FROM OFFICE Presentation Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise the House that today I presented the address agreed to by the Legislative Assembly at the sitting of 7 June 1989 to His Excellency the Goveraor and His Excellency has advised that he will consider the address and convey to me his response thereto. PAPER The following paper was laid on the table— Regulation under the Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders (Land Holding) Act 1985. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Used-car Salesmen Hon. V. P. LESTER (Peak Downs—Minister for Employment, Training and Indus trial Affairs) (10.02 a.m.), by leave: Mr Speaker, I have a ministerial statement dealing with used-car salesmen. I seek leave to table it and have its contents incorporated in Hansard. Mr SPEAKER: I will be happy to put the question. Mr Warburton interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Sandgate would have heard what it was about if the people behind him had kept quiet. Leave granted. Whereupon the honourable member laid on the table the following document— The fast-talking used-car salesman—the butt of many jokes—is alive and well, and regrettably, living in Queensland. It is a sad fact that while many used car yards carry on business in a responsible manner, there are some notable exceptions. The Consumer Affairs Bureau has had a substantial number of complaints this year against Kingston Star Motor Market at Kingston Road, Slacks Creek. It appears that the current manager, who has been there some five months, is well-known to the bureau. The manager, Daniel Arnott, has been known to the bureau as a "problem" salesman for some years. Any car firm he was associated with was likely to be the subject of complaints to the bureau. I understand that Kingston Star Motor Market's business has increased considerably since Mr Amott's arrival. Unfortunately the number of dissatisfied consumers has also increased, and Mr Arnott has been less than helpful in resolving complaints received by the Consumer Affairs Bureau. There have been numerous complaints of broken promises concerning repairs to vehicles, unsatisfactory workmanship when repairs are done, and serious defects in vehicles bought from Kingston Star Motor Market. It also appears that one customer seeking to return an unsatisfactory vehicle has been subjected to undue pressure to sign away any rights to redress. 5350 8 June 1989 Ministerial Statement I urge used car buyers to steer well clear of Kingston Star Motor Market and its manager. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Waterfront and Shipping Reform Hon. D. McC. NEAL (Balonne—Minister for Water Resources and Maritime Services) (10.03 a.m.), by leave: Virtually two months after the release of the Inter-State Commission's waterfront investigation final report, the Federal Government has finally made a position statement on waterfront and shipping reform. And after two years of investigation through the workings of the Inter-State Commission and two months of abortive attempts by the Federal Goverament to get the waterfront unions and employers to see that real reform is an imperative, not just a passing phase, they have now decided to allocate a further three months to achieving an "in-principle" agreement. The agreement is to be reached between the Federal Government, the unions and employers before any start can be made to implementing reforms. Australia cannot afford the luxury of waiting an additional three months and still run the risk of any reform agreements being thrown out the window. The Federal Government thinks it can dispense a couple of aspirin and the headache will go away. But the Inter-State Commission has identified our waterfront problems as conservatively costing the Australian economy about $620m per year and the Queensland economy up to $100m a year. This means that a three-month delay in implementing reforms will cost the Australian economy at least a further $ 150m, and the Queensland economy about $25m. It is worth remembering the commission's reasons for providing conservative estimates for these cost-savings. Lessons were learnt from the widespread criticism that resulted from the potential resource cost-savings of more than $100m per year claimed by the royal commission into the grain industry which would result from deregulation. However, in the case of the waterfront, there is general consensus throughout Australian industry that a more realistic estimate of the direct benefits to be achieved by waterfront reform could be as high as twice the commission's estimate. Indirect benefits through improved reliability not included in these estimates would also serve to increase the potential advantages to our economy. Most of the current problems on the waterfront have been brought about by dealings between the unions and the employers, which have always been characterised by relentless self-interest to the total exclusion of all other concerns. Unions could not even agree on a submission to the Inter-State Commission through the Stevedoring Industry Review Committee during the commission's investigation. They have not been able to agree on preliminary implementation details since the final report was released, so why suddenly should they start to agree in the next few months on issues on which they appear to be poles apart? It is quite clear that the Federal Government's current gradualist approach to solving the waterfront problem is totally inappropriate. At present, everybody's interests are being protected by the Federal Government, except for the bulk of the population who wear the unnecessary costs of delays incurred on the wharves. The State Government recognises that the "in-principle" agreement would be a desirable basis on which to proceed, but cannot accept that it is a prerequisite for reform. The Federal Government must be prepared to pass appropriate legislation to enforce the reform package proposed by the commission. I consider that the commission's waterfront industry plan constitutes a more than acceptable basis for reforms and should be implemented immediately. While the Queensland Government does not agree with all the plan's details, it is prepared to compromise on some of the minor details, if need be, to achieve major reforms. What the Government sees as the ultimate objective of the reform process must be commonsense work practices by the waterfront industry. Ministerial Statement 8 June 1989 5351 Arguments in support of treating the waterfront as necessarily different because of extreme and hazardous working conditions and variability of workloads all have historical relevance, but do not apply today. Normal industry-wide employer/employee relations must be introduced in areas of— • permanent and casual employment, • training levels provided by employers, • decisions on staff retention and retrenchment, • exposing the market-place to competitive influence, and redundancy arrangements. I am particularly concerned at the level of the redundancy package that has been proposed. For example, the present proposal provides for a total of 247 weeks for a 55-year-old with 30 years' service compared with 13 weeks under normal redundancy arrangements. Furthermore, abnormal rather than normal arrangements are still being proposed for the period after the restmcturing process. There is widespread concem at the excessive level of these redundancy arrangements from the viewpoint of potential flow-on effects to other industries involved in restmcturing. The Federal Government has identified that State Goveraments have a responsibility to assist the reform program by improving the operational efficiency of the port authorities under their control. Queensland accepts this responsibility, but also considers that it has wider interests in the entire reform process and would seek to be kept fully briefed by the Federal Government on the progress of the "in-principle" agreeements. In relation to Queensland's port authorities, the Queensland Government has already decided to initiate a review of pricing policies aimed at providing and documenting policies which are rational and acceptable to port-users. This is not to say that this State's pricing policies must be, or need to be, drastically altered. However, it indicates the State Goverament's commitment to the waterfront reform question by examining current arrangements and poUcies in an objective manner to see whether improvements can be made. We will also continue to provide a strategic overview of port authority operations and encourage and sponsor moves for port authorities to operate in a more commercial manner. However, it must be highlighted that many of the commission's recommendations in relation to port authority operations are already in place in Queensland. Because of the major importance of this industry on the well-being of the State and Federal economies, we have established a waterfront reform task force from the private and public sectors to closely monitor the waterfront reform process and to provide expert advice to the Govemment. The Federal Government's failure to grasp the nettle and immediately implement waterfront reforms will further burden our economic recovery. The three-month delay also mns a very serious risk of losing the

Load more