6 Aug 2002 Legislative Assembly 2569

TUESDAY, 6 AUGUST 2002

Mr SPEAKER (Hon. R. K. Hollis, Redcliffe) read prayers and took the chair at 9.30 a.m.

PRIVILEGE Tabling of Documents; Restrictions on Identifying At-risk Children Mr SPEAKER: Order! Honourable members, I note the matter of privilege raised in the House by the Minister for Families on 1 August 2002 in relation to the tabling by the Leader of the Opposition of a document which named at-risk children. I note the Leader of the Opposition's swift action to rectify the potential harm to the children involved. I therefore wish to report to the House that there is no matter of privilege. However, I have provided advice on the general issue to the Leader of the House. I now call the Leader of the House.

TABLING OF DOCUMENTS; RESTRICTIONS ON IDENTIFYING AT-RISK CHILDREN Hon. A. M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (9.32 a.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— That for this session A Member must ensure that when tabling any documents concerning a child or children subject to the Child Protection Act 1999 or the Juvenile Justice Act 1992 the document be tabled in a non-identifying manner such as by replacing any identifying features likely to lead to the identification of the child with a cipher such as '[name withheld]'. A Member choosing to replace an identifying feature with a cipher when tabling a document shall provide the Clerk of the Parliament with the 'key' to the full identifying features relating to the document. Any Member of the Legislative Assembly who so requests shall be granted access to the 'key' to the full identifying features relating to the document by the Clerk of the Parliament. For the purpose of this order, the term 'non-identifying manner' refers to information which if published would identify, or is likely to lead to the identification of, a child the subject of either the Child Protection Act 1999 or the Juvenile Justice Act 1992. Motion agreed to.

PETITIONS Police Services, Sunshine Coast Mr Cummins from 2,040 petitioners, requesting the House to support the efforts of the community to have a police station constructed (a) in Buderim on the land that was purchased by the State for this reason next to Middy’s Complex and (b) to possibly house the North Coast Police Headquarters as a 24 hour general duties police station and police specialists such as DNA, forensics, photography and other relevant needs.

Port Access Road, Gladstone Mrs E Cunningham from 3,112 petitioners, requesting the House to direct the Minister for Transport to (a) stop the construction of the said Port Access Road, (b) initiate plans to reduce, rather than increase, the number of semi- trailers, B-Doubles and other heavy transport vehicles crossing the centre of the city to or from port facilities and (c) re-asses the further development of the Port of Gladstone to ensure, as opportunities arise, that truck based cargoes are directed away from inner city port precincts to developing facilities at Fishermans Landing and Wiggins Island.

Oral Health Therapists Mr Purcell from 18 petitioners, requesting the House to allow dental and oral health therapists to also treat adults rather than being restricted to children and youth under 18 years.

Rabbits Mr Robertson from 2,967 petitioners, requesting the House to allow the sale and keeping of domestic pet rabbits in Queensland.

PAPERS PAPERS TABLED DURING THE RECESS The Clerk informed the House that the following papers, received during the recess, were tabled on the date indicated— 2570 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002

2 August 2002— Report by the Minister for Environment (Mr Wells) pursuant to section 56A(4) of the Statutory Instruments Act 1992 Report by the Minister for Primary Industries and Rural Communities (Mr Palaszczuk) under section 56A(4) of the Statutory Instruments Act 1992 STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS The following statutory instruments were tabled by The Clerk— Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991— Queensland Building Services Authority Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2002, No. 190 Parliamentary Service Act 1988— Parliamentary Services By-law 2002, No. 191 Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002— Personal Injuries Proceedings Regulation 2002, No. 192 Fisheries Act 1994— Fisheries (BHC) Quarantine Declaration 2002, No. 193 Fisheries Act 1994— Fisheries (BHC) Disease Declaration 2002, No. 194 MINISTERIAL RESPONSE TO A PETITION The following response to a petition, received during the recess, was tabled by The Clerk— Response from the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines (Mr Robertson) to a petition presented by Mr Livingstone from 2,982 petitioners regarding the Coominya Fishing Club and the leasing of land to private fishing clubs along the Wivenhoe Dam shoreline— Queensland Government 2 Aug 2002 Mr R. D. Doyle The Clerk of the Parliament Parliament House Alice and George Streets Brisbane Qld 4000 Dear Mr Doyle I refer to your letter of 10 May 2002 forwarding a copy of a petition lodged in the Queensland Legislative Assembly requesting the House to require the Coominya Fishing Club to remove the locked gate at McLean's Point and not allow further leasing of land to private fishing clubs along the Wivenhoe Dam shoreline. McLeans Road does not extend beyond the locked gate and the portion of land at McLean's Point is not owned by the State Government, but is owned by the South East Queensland Water Corporation Limited, a private entity. As a freehold owner, the Board of the Corporation can lease out its land, as well as issue licences over its land. The Corporation has licensed the portion of land to the Coominya Fishing Club. The petitioners should contact the South East Queensland Water Corporation Limited. Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. Yours sincerely (Sgd) STEPHEN ROBERTSON MP

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT National Jet Systems; Oracle Corporation Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.35 a.m.), by leave: Queensland's push to become the aviation hub of South-East Asia will receive a further boost this afternoon when I officially open the new National Jet Systems maintenance hangar at Brisbane airport. This investment of more than $4 million is further evidence of the state's growing aviation industry. I thank my colleague the Minister for State Development, Tom Barton, for his involvement in helping to make this development possible. I thank also the Minister for Employment, Matt Foley, for his assistance in this general strategy. National Jet Systems already employs 48 highly qualified engineering and support staff in Brisbane and the new hangar means the company is now aiming to double that work force in the long term. In addition, there are 40 pilots and 37 flight attendants who depend on the engineering staff to keep their aircraft in the skies. 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2571

Nationwide, the company employs more than 1,000 people and now owns its own hangars in Perth, Broome, Adelaide, Darwin and Brisbane. It provides a wet leasing service for Qantas's Airlink in Queensland, runs scheduled services to Christmas Island and the Cocos Islands, and provides fly-in fly-out services to remote locations like the Cooper Basin gas fields at Moomba and Ballera and the Ok Tedi mine in Papua New Guinea. It also has air charter and air cargo services. Brisbane airport offers a well-located maintenance zone, good aviation weather, plenty of room for growth—unlike Sydney airport—and proximity to the Asia-Pacific region. Boeing, Smiths Aerospace, Asia Pacific Aerospace, Jetcare, and EADS's subsidiary Australian Aerospace also operate in Brisbane. In addition, Qantas is establishing a heavy maintenance facility for its fleet of 36 Boeing 767 aircraft, while Singapore Airlines will create an advanced flight training facility on the Sunshine Coast. Virgin Blue is headquartered in Queensland, while Australian Airlines will bring 350,000 passengers a year into far-north Queensland from late October. Singapore Airlines, Air New Zealand and Qantas are also introducing new flights. So our plans for establishing Queensland as a major hub for aviation in our part of the world are well on track. Aviation is moving north. That is a great tribute to the strategies of Smart State in developing new industries and new opportunities. While I am talking about new opportunities, Queensland's Smart State reputation has been enhanced further through Oracle Corporation, the world's largest enterprise software company, expanding its Brisbane Software Development Centre. Oracle, which provides enterprise software to many of the world's largest and most successful businesses, achieved revenue for the 2002 American fiscal year of $US9.7 billion. Through this expansion, Oracle Corporation Australia Pty Ltd has created 20 new jobs for software developers. The development centre has also finalised its first contribution of locally developed software to the Oracle E-Business Suite, which is a complete set of business applications that runs entirely on the Internet and is being used by more than 2,000 clients worldwide as of the end of Oracle's financial year 2002. Mr Speaker, to save time I seek leave to include the rest of the ministerial statement in Hansard. Leave granted. Software developed at The Centre will focus on the financial component of The Oracle E-Business Suite. The State Government has been a strong supporter of Oracle's Brisbane Software Development Centre and we are delighted to see it create more jobs for Queenslanders. The export of locally developed software is another example of the outstanding IT developments within our 'Smart State'. It was only two years ago during a trade mission to the USA that I announced Oracle was to establish the centre in Brisbane. I explained the new agreement was a vote of confidence in the ability of Queensland to supply well-qualified staff with expertise and motivation. The fact that more than 1,000 well-qualified people applied for the 20 new positions confirms that vote of confidence and is testament to the large pool of talented IT professionals in Queensland. We have a well-developed academic and research environment at our major universities which is helping to underpin Queensland's reputation as a base for information technology. The message that Oracle's expansion sends to the rest of the IT world is that Queensland is a Smart State and an ideal place in which to do business.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Premier's Year of the Outback Awards Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.38 a.m.), by leave: Today I make a plea to all in this House to ensure that 2002—the Year of the Outback—is a year where those deserving of recognition achieve what they deserve. Apart from the year offering a rightful recognition of those who have worked and lived in the outback, it is also about acknowledging the contribution that the outback and the spirit that abounds out there have made to making a better state and nation. As part of the government's commitment to the year and our having visited there, we are calling on Queenslanders to recognise those great outback contributors for their innovations, their achievements and their commitments in the area of arts and culture. I urge all in this House to be 2572 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 part of this. Those living in the outback often overcome challenges unknown elsewhere in the state. It is important that the rest of Queensland understands and witnesses the commitment these great Queenslanders have made. We have introduced a set of awards. There are five categories in what we are calling the Queensland Premier's Year of the Outback Awards. They are youth, community service, arts and culture, rural medical care, and rural emergency service. They are designed to honour individuals and voluntary groups who have made a demonstrated contribution to the betterment of their outback community. Winners in the five categories will be selected from the state's north west, central west and south west. An overall state winner will be selected from the regional winners. Nominees should be individuals who live in outback Queensland and who can demonstrate exceptional achievement or contribution in arts and culture either in a voluntary capacity or outside their normal duties. Nominations for the Premier's Year of the Outback Awards close on 30 August. The Office of Rural Communities, Department of Primary Industries, will administer the awards. For more information, please contact the Office of Rural Communities on 07 3227 8420 for inquiries about nomination, eligibility or for selection criteria. The web address is found through the Department of Primary Industries' Bush Telegraph June 2002 links. The chair of the awards selection panel is Janet Stone, from the Office of Rural Communities, Department of Primary Industries. I call on all members present to spread the word on these awards. Mr Speaker, we in our small way can each play a part in recognising those men and women who have made for a better Queensland. I look forward to your support. For the information of the House, I table the nomination forms. I also mention—and I am sure the Minister for Innovation will have something to say about this—that the QUT Innovation Train, which he and I launched on Sunday, will be visiting rural and regional communities to ensure that the Smart State and innovation goes statewide.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Salinity Summit Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.41 a.m.), by leave: On Friday, the Minister for Natural Resources, Stephen Robertson, and I hosted nearly 100 representatives of communities, industry peak bodies and the three levels of government at a salinity summit here in the Parliamentary Annexe. We were fortunate to hear addresses from the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage, David Kemp, and I thank him for his contribution; the chief executive officer of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Mr Don Blackmore; and the senior principal research scientist with the CSIRO in Adelaide, Mr Glen Walker; amongst others. The Opposition Leader attended, as did the member for Callide and the member for Warrego, and I thank them for that. A strong theme running through the day was that this issue is too important to be politicised, and I agree. As I said, I appreciated the message of support from Dr Kemp, who said that the federal government will be 'standing beside' Queensland when it takes decisions based on 'the kind of community consultation and involvement represented here by this summit'. While the focus of the summit was the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin—the area covered by the first in what will become a series of salinity hazard maps—we heard much about the experience in other parts of the continent, and I want to share some of that experience with members. The reports from interstate were chilling, to put it mildly. I will refer to comments by Don Blackmore about the engineering works that are taking place in other parts of the basin merely to 'buy some time', as he put it. He said— In 1988 governments agreed to spend $30 million to pump 1,100 tonnes of salt away from the River Murray, and we have salt interception schemes along the River Murray now that run for 80 kilometres. If we switched them off, the River Murray would be unusable now for five months every year. Governments have just agreed to spend about another $60 million to pump another 900 tonnes to buy space for the next 15 years to get land management right. That is all it does. He goes on— An investment of $60 million enables us to just hold the status quo on the River Murray while we get our land management right in the states: no more, no less. That is all it does. It does not improve river salinity; it just enables us to hang on. That description of the here and now for southern parts of the basin—just downstream from us—is from the CEO of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Don Blackmore. His words remind 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2573 us that we are lucky. We do have time on our side, but I highlight that the clock is ticking. The time to act to prevent disaster in Queensland's section of the basin is now. If we dawdle, the environmental, economic and social tidal wave will crash down on us, and our children will not thank us. Participants in Friday's summit developed a range of suggestions that reflected the variety of interests and experiences of those represented, and I thank them all for their contributions. The Minister for Natural Resources, Stephen Robertson, has already committed to take immediate action to get a holistic approach to this issue across the state by establishing an Integrated Natural Resource Management Ministerial Advisory Council. Given the undeniable importance of vegetation management to the long-term salinity threat, the minister will also call together his Ministerial Advisory Committee on Vegetation Management to consider how to strengthen the salinity aspects of the current vegetation management assessment processes. After listening to the reports of devastation from interstate, I am more convinced than ever that we must mount a concerted and uncompromising attack on salinity. I have asked the minister to report to cabinet on recommendations from the summit and he and I will take a further joint action plan submission to cabinet in the near future. I table for the information of the House the documents distributed at the summit. I seek leave to move a motion without notice. Leave granted. Mr BEATTIE: I move— That the Hansard record of Friday's salinity summit here at Parliament House be formally incorporated in Hansard to let the public record show what was said by the Natural Resources Minister Stephen Robertson, the federal coalition Minister for the Environment Dr David Kemp, by me and by all other contributors. The Hansard record details what is hoped to be achieved on the issue as we strike a united blow to ensure that the scourge of salinity is diminished from this state's long-term future. Hansard did record the deliberations on Friday. This will ensure that it is accessible on the Net. Motion agreed to. The summit commenced at 9.26 a.m. Mr BEATTIE: Can I welcome you all here. In doing so, I want to acknowledge the broad representation that is here. I do that deliberately, because what we want out of today are positive things. We want constructive ideas. We want constructive solutions. I want to acknowledge the groups that are here to give you some indication that you are the stakeholders representing the community. You have been invited because we want a positive contribution from every one of you. We have traditional owners. We have got my ministerial colleague Stephen Robertson, the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines. Stephen and I will eventually take a joint submission to cabinet about the initiatives that the Queensland government will pursue here. We will do that in conjunction with Dr David Kemp, the federal Minister for Environment and Heritage. I want to thank David very much for being here with us. We want a strong partnership with the federal government. I want to say up front that we believe that David Kemp is fair dinkum in relation to this issue. We will be working with him very closely in a totally non-political way. I want to put that on the agenda up front. That relationship between the state and federal government here is very important. I want everyone here to understand that right at the beginning of this summit. I want to acknowledge Don Blackmore, the CEO of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. I want to thank you, Don, and others for being here. I want to acknowledge Mike Horan, the Leader of the Opposition. I want to acknowledge Howard Hobbs and Bill Flynn. If there are any other state members here, I want to acknowledge you as well. I cannot see all of you. I see Jeff Seeney. If there is anyone else, put your hand up, give a smile and we will acknowledge you as well. This is inclusive. This is a big love-in. I do not want to leave anyone out today. I do not want anyone to feel that they have been missed out. I want to get off on the right start. I want to acknowledge a number of mayors who are here. I want to say to the mayors who are here that you have an interest in the outcomes as well as I do. We have Roderick Gilmour from Murilla, Rob Loughnan from Bungil, Bill McCutcheon from Chinchilla, Peter Taylor from Jondaryan and Di Thorley from Toowoomba. We have got ATSIC represented. We have got Larry Acton from Agforce. We have got Commerce Queensland. We have got the Queensland Country Women's Association, the QFF, Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers, the Local Government Association and the Queensland Conservation Council represented here. We have got the Local Government Association and indigenous representatives. I think I mentioned the Murray-Darling Committee. We have got ministerial advisory council chairs. We have got the CSIRO. We have got the lot. Again, I mention that to highlight the broad representation that is here. Let me recap about why we have got this meeting of stakeholders. On 10 July Stephen Robertson and I released a salinity hazard map for the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin. The map to my left is the one that we released. We decided to call this summit, which is a summit where we want to get some action to discuss that map and salinity. I expect many of you have given some thought to that map and done your own research. Can I say that there has been a very public debate about salinity since we released that map. While that debate has had it moments, the good thing about it is that we have got all your attention. We needed to get your attention to deal with the problem. The first thing that we have to avoid is denial, and I am going to come back to this. The first thing we have to avoid is denial about the problem. There is a problem. Any of you who know anything about an issue called alcoholism know that the first thing you have to do is recognise the problem. Denial is the first problem you have to overcome. The same goes for salinity. We have to accept that there is a problem, and denial is not on the agenda. It 2574 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 will not be on the agenda. It cannot be. We have got to have an action plan where all the stakeholders have a say in the solution. I want to make it clear that we stand by the science in the map. Its methodology has been checked and endorsed by the CSIRO, the National Land and Water Audit and Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Australia. As I said before, I want to thank Dr Kemp for taking a constructive approach and lending his support to our science in his address to the Agforce conference this week. That is why that relationship for the future with the federal government is so important. In terms of the issues federally, the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality and the Natural Heritage Trust stage 2 are constructive projects that we are a party to. We were the first state to sign on to the Prime Minister's strategy and we will match the Commonwealth's $81 million contribution. On a related matter, I am pleased that the Prime Minister has agreed to exempt Queensland from penalties imposed by the National Competition Council for failure to complete water resource planning in the Condamine-Balonne, and I want to thank him for that. But let me come back to the map behind me. Nothing that I have seen, including the airborne geophysical survey maps that have gained some notoriety in the past week, tell me the salinity hazard map is wrong. I do not question the integrity of the airborne geophysical maps, but as many of you will understand they should not be used to cast doubt on the salinity hazard map. As scientific inputs including the airborne geophysical surveys are verified, we will take them on board as well. We have to go with the sound science that we have. We cannot wait for every report and survey to be finalised before we mount our attack. As I said to the stakeholders when we met on 10 July, the map behind me does not show salinity as it exists today. Rather, it is the potential that salinity poses for Queensland's part of the Murray-Darling Basin within the next 30 to 50 years. That is the point. We do have some time to get our strategies right, and that is why your constructive contribution today and over the next few weeks and months and indeed years is absolutely essential to the long-term solution. We cannot walk away from that. So I do not want to have any argument about misrepresentations on maps. Let us move on today. Let us move on. Let us move on in a bipartisan, non-political way and a constructive way to find real solutions, and that is the challenge I lay down to every one of you right at the beginning of this summit today. Let us think about Queensland. Let us think about a future generation of farmers. Let us think about a future generation that wants sustainability on the land. So let us put the future of the state on the table today and put aside any considerations we may have of self-interest. Let us think about the vision for our children and the vision about where we want this state to be. I am aware that work is under way to address a number of issues, particularly by regionally based groups. I want to thank them for their contribution. But the salinity hazard map tells us that we need to put our foot to the pedal. Regional groups are doing a good job, but they need more help from the rest of us. Those of us in government would be culpable if we did not make an all-out effort to head off salinity in the Queensland Murray- Darling Basin knowing what we know. You know what happened interstate in the Murray-Darling Basin. A lot of that came out of ignorance. The people at the time—the governments, the players—did not have the map that I have behind me. So to some extent they have an excuse. It is not a wonderful excuse, but they have an excuse because they did it out of ignorance. No-one in this room has an excuse. No-one in this room will be able to plead ignorance. We can argue about the degree of salinity, and we can argue about the extent of the science, but no-one can deny the problem. We have time. What we need to do is get the solution within that time. And we have knowledge. We have information. We cannot ignore that information. Later today you will hear from experts about what happened in the southern Murray-Darling Basin. I am not going to stand back as Premier of this state and allow that to happen in Queensland. It is that simple. What I said before is that what I would like to see from today's summit is zero tolerance towards denial of this problem. We can argue about the extent, but do not deny it. I also want to see more horsepower in the efforts of regional groups. Your planned time frames will have to be compressed, and your horizons are going to have to be expanded. Most importantly, I want to see out of today concrete actions to start preventive action immediately—not tomorrow, not next week, but immediately. I have mentioned on a number of occasions that this map scares the daylights out of me, and it should scare the daylights out of any serious Queenslander or any serious Australian. Let me share with you why. I am informed that if you have a catchment with a significant salinity hazard, the worst thing you can do in that catchment is to embark on a program of broadscale tree clearing and extensive flood irrigation. That is what we have done. And yes, the government is just as guilty as anybody else. I am not trying to say that we have not played a role. We are as guilty as everybody else. But today is not about blame. Today is about accepting the problem and trying to resolve it. It is time to reassess where we are going. I mean, we have to ask ourselves: are we going to scale back on massive flood irrigation schemes? Are we going to do that? Are we going to put the bulldozers in the shed for a time? When are the revegetation schemes going to start? Are we going to look at alternative crops? Are we going to examine different land uses? Are we going to restore our rivers to their earlier health and reliability? These are the issues we need to look at. At the launch of this map on 10 July I made it very clear that nothing would be off limits today. If you are going to deal with a problem head on, nothing can be off limits. I will say it again—and I have to be honest—I believe that this problem is so serious that I cannot afford to tiptoe through the tulips. If I offend people today then I am sorry, but we have to face up to this problem head on; and as Premier it is my responsibility to ensure that we do. So if I have offended people or do throughout the rest of my contribution, I am sorry, but that is my responsibility. Queensland is not going to go down the track of the southern states. We are going to prevent salinity taking hold in Queensland. If that requires marked changes in the way that we have been doing things, then so be it. I visited Dirranbandi recently, and some of you may have noticed that I was out there. That was a joke, by the way! Some people out there saw it as a joke, Howard, didn't they? I didn't. It was a very enriching experience. I am a better person for being forged through that. When I visited Dirranbandi recently I dropped in on a property in the St George district owned by the Moon family. This showed me how a very progressive farmer uses land. I had never met the bloke before and had never been there before. He is very, very clever. He was a farmer with a relatively small water allocation of 1,115 megalitres. Not for him a monoculture; instead, he had cash crops from cotton to grapes, rockmelons and onions. At the height of the season he employs more than 100 people, with a year-round average of about 40, and he makes a very decent living. He is a very decent Australian, but he is a very, very 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2575 smart farmer. He is an innovator. His water is precious. So what did he do? He covered it over to prevent the crippling evaporation rates that characterise that semiarid area. If I were to summarise what I want to see out of today's summit it would be more of what the Moon family is doing near St George. I have a couple of things to say in conclusion. I live in the real world. That is what politics is all about. If you are Premier you do not have much choice. I live in the real world. I know that this issue is very difficult. It is very difficult for government, it is very difficult for the land, it is very difficult for farmers, and it is very difficult for certain sides of politics. Mike, I know that this is very difficult for you, as it is for me. What we have to do, though, is just look at the reality of the science and look at what happened elsewhere. Even if you disagree with this map—and I have to say that I do not; we accept this as a government—but even if you do, I just ask you to think about what happened in the rest of Australia. Look at what happened in the Murray-Darling Basin. It happened because of practices. We can change those if we have the guts and we are actually really committed to where we are going. I know that tree clearing is a very difficult issue. As Stephen knows, I attended a couple of cabinet meetings—Larry, you will recall this—at Winton and Roma. We were given a warm reception for our changes to tree clearing laws in this state. I understand how passionately held those views are, but I just ask you to do this: put yourself in the government's position for a minute. We have had scientists working on this for some time. They have produced a salinity map of where the state is heading in the next 30 years. As I said, you can argue about the margins. What do we do as a government, bearing in mind the experience in the Murray-Darling and elsewhere and bearing in mind that the Prime Minister of this country, who is not of my political persuasion—a different political persuasion—started a national initiative to deal with salinity? The Prime Minister recognises the problem. We have had this brought to our attention. So what do we do as a government? The easy way—the coward's way, the smart political way—would be to ignore it, pretend it does not exist and leave it for someone else. That is the easy way. But I want to say to you that we are not going to do that, because like everyone in this room I am a passionate Australian and I am a dedicated Queenslander. And yes, I am being very emotional about this because I want you to think about where we are going to go. I want to say what I said at the beginning. No-one has the latitude to deny the problem. You have a choice today. I want to be really clear about this. You have a choice. You can work with us as stakeholders to be part of the solution or you can snipe away at the sidelines. That is your choice; in other words, you become part of the problem. You know that I am an inclusive person. I am a fair-minded person. But I am not going to allow this problem to be ignored. Cabinet is united on this issue. Stephen has briefed us on many occasions. When Stephen brings his submission to cabinet it will be signed by me because of my support for it. So whatever he initiates, he will have my support in cabinet. That gives it a very good chance of being passed through cabinet, let me assure you. Caucus, which sits in this room, has been briefed on it by Stephen, and it also is committed to a series of actions. The actions and what we do depend on you. We cannot do more as a government than get you in this room and ask for your contribution. Earlier, Terry mentioned the program. This morning you will hear contributions from me, Stephen, David and a number of stakeholders from around this table. There will be a break for morning tea. Then there will be a closed session, broken into groups as you can see. That is your opportunity, without the glare of the media but in a very intense way, to work through some of the solutions. I do not expect today to produce all of the solutions, but I expect today to produce a very important start. I ask you at the beginning of these proceedings today to enter into this summit with the positive, constructive attitude I have asked you to take. At the end, if what comes out of here are positive and constructive attitudes and responses and the process that goes from here today—it will not be completed here today—I give you this undertaking: we as a government will implement them. I thank you for coming. I know that you share my view that this is a very important summit. We want to do this with you together. Good luck today. Mr HOGAN: Thank you, Premier, for those opening remarks. Our next speaker is the Hon. Stephen Robertson, the state Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines. Mr ROBERTSON: Terry, thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen: about three years ago, before I became a minister, I held the position of parliamentary secretary to the then Deputy Premier and Minister for State Development. I was tasked with developing an innovation strategy for Queensland to underpin the Premier's vision about Queensland being a Smart State. During that time I had the pleasure of hosting a meeting of the Prime Minister's Science and Engineering Council, led by Professor Batterham. He came to Queensland with a number of presentations which people were invited to attend. I always remember that at the end of the day, after that range of presentations by PMSEC, Professor Batterham rated salinity as the No. 1 issue affecting Australia. Back then I actually did not know what he was talking about. I walked away thinking, 'What is this man on about? Is this some sort of southern agenda?' What I find myself doing now, some three years on from that, is reflecting that initial introduction I had to the issue of salinity. Now I have the responsibility to do something about it. One of the things that has been brought home to me in the last 18 months as Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines is how engaged the community is in terms of achieving sustainable natural resource management outcomes. I guess as a city boy my initial introduction to rural communities surprised me—just how intellectually sophisticated communities were and their thirst for knowledge, so committed are they to ensuring that the land they work remains sustainable now and for future generations. I am talking about sustainability not just ecologically but also socially and economically. That is why today's summit is such a unique opportunity to move forward on the issue of salinity. We obviously have great representation here today from a wide array of interests. For those of you who are interested in history, I think future generations may look back to today as the start of turning around a problem which, as the Premier said, could well express itself in 30 to 50 years' time. We have the opportunity today to do future generations a great favour. So when our kids and our grandkids who will continue to work the land look back to today, they might just say thank you. I would ask you all to reflect on the opportunity today provides us with. Salinity is not a localised issue and it is not just about today; it is about Queensland's and Australia's future—social future, economic future and ecological future. Collectively we have the opportunity to manage the risk of salinity before it becomes a significant problem here in Queensland. The salinity hazard mapping that has now been out for the last number of weeks provides a focus for examining the problem. It is not an indicator of risk; 2576 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 it is a measure of the inherent characteristics of the landscape which predispose it to land or water salinity. Salinity risk assessment, on the other hand, looks at the likelihood that actions such as land use change will result in an expression of salinity some time in the future. Of course, salinity is only one part of the natural resource management equation. The issue is really about good natural resource management and sustainable use of resources in the broader context. The issue is also about decisions that government and communities need to make about the future of their communities and the social and economic factors that play a part in those decisions. The path we are on today is not about closing down this part of Queensland; it is about ensuring it continues to be productive. It is about ensuring that the rural communities out there remain vibrant. With the opportunity presented by the media being here today, I want to make this observation. We tend to focus a lot on how rural communities are declining and the problems they face. When you go out to communities in this part of Queensland you see a tremendous vibrancy. You see employment growth. You see people actually moving out there. In places such as Goondiwindi, the average house prices mirror those of some of the best suburbs in Brisbane, such is the demand for land and housing to meet the employment growth in those communities. As a government, do we want to stop that? Of course not. We want to see that continue. But we can only continue that growth, we can only secure that economic future, if we make some tough decisions now. That is very much what today is all about. It is not a green agenda. It is not a brown agenda. It is a sustainable agenda. We do ourselves a great favour today if we acknowledge that what we are about is ensuring that communities such as that have a sustainable future. So where are we up to now? Obviously many of the people in the room today are already engaged in a range of activities, particularly in my portfolio—regional vegetation management committees or regional groups underpinning the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality. I often reflect that in the south-west if you are not on some sort of government committee then clearly you have been hiding. In vegetation management also, 500 people have participated in the work underpinning the regional vegetation management plan for part of the state. The level of engagement is there. The level of commitment is there. But we have come to a bit of a stop. We actually need to make the next jump, to move forward from where we are currently. That is what today is all about. We have the opportunity through the Prime Minister's National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality, through programs like NHT2. The funding is there. The engagement is there. What is not there currently is the action agenda. That is what we will be asking you to put your minds to in this afternoon's workshop. The invitation provided by the Premier for me to take to cabinet a submission on moving forward rests very much in your hands today. Ladies and gentlemen, there are a range of challenges ahead of you. I wish you all well. I know that you have come here with the best of intentions. I hope that by the end of today I will be in a position to take up the Premier's offer to take forward an agenda that will meet everyone's expectations. Thank you. Mr HOGAN: Thank you, Minister. It is our pleasure now to invite our guest speaker to address us, the Hon. David Kemp, the Commonwealth Minister for Environment and Heritage. Dr KEMP: Thank you very much, Premier Beattie, Minister Robertson, ladies and gentlemen. I want to acknowledge at the very start of my remarks the great breadth of community representation there is here today. Without the ownership of this problem by all the members of the community—land-holders, those in the towns, the local business people, conservationists, the technical experts—we will not get a solution to what could be a very major problem for Queensland that it presently has the opportunity to avoid. Premier Beattie, I would like to thank you very much and acknowledge the leadership you are showing in convening this summit today. This is a partnership between the Commonwealth and the state governments which is very important to all of us—not just to Queenslanders but also to all Australians. The particular area we are focusing on here today—the Condamine-Balonne area—is the upper reaches of the Murray-Darling Basin. The Murray-Darling is Australia's great river system. It is the basis of the very heart of Australian agriculture and Australian rural society. It is absolutely critical that the action necessary to prevent the emergence in this region of problems which, as the Premier said, are all too evident further south, makes sure that in the future we can move on a national basis to restore the health of this great river system. The Prime Minister has indicated that he regards the salinity issue as the top natural resource priority in Australia. It is intimately bound up with issues of vegetation and approaches to farming, to on-farm management and to issues of water allocation. All of these are very difficult issues. They are difficult issues because of the history, because decisions have been taken in the past which do not necessarily provide a sound foundation for us to move forward. There are difficult decisions involved in this. They are difficult decisions for the Queensland government. They are difficult decisions for the communities, the land-holders and producers in the Condamine-Balonne area. They are difficult for the federal government. We as Australians are faced now with a great opportunity which we can seize if we are prepared to take some tough decisions. I think Australians are prepared to take those kinds of decisions. This is a part of the Australian character. No state in Australia reflects the pioneering spirit of Australians that is still there—it is a strong part of the Australian culture—more than Queensland. I do not think for a moment that Queensland is not going to take these decisions. My message to you today is that when Queensland takes these decisions on the basis of the kind of community consultation and involvement represented here by this summit, the federal government will be standing beside Queensland, because we see that it is necessary to take effective action. Let no-one doubt that the problem is a real one. The Commonwealth's national land and water resources audit suggests that some 5.7 million hectares across the country have a high potential to develop dryland salinity problems. It predicts that by 2050, some 17 million hectares will be at risk. In Queensland, the rapidly increasing body of data on salinity suggests that some three million hectares could be at risk by 2050. The direct cost of salinity to the country at the present time is estimated at around about $300 million per annum. That may well be an underestimate. The 1999 Murray-Darling Basin salinity audit was a wake-up call to all 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2577 of us. It demonstrated that salt is now being mobilised on a massive scale across the Murray-Darling Basin. That mobilisation is just incipient here in Queensland. It is not obvious for the most part on the surface. But it is being mobilised further south and it has the potential to be mobilised here. There will inevitably always be discussion—and there will sometimes be argument—about the results of the science. We need to get the results right. We need to get the science right. The land-holders deserve a sound basis of information and data when they are being asked to take some tough decisions. Premier Beattie acknowledged some remarks that I made to the Agforce conference. I want to say again that the scientific methods that we used to produce this map are acknowledged as sound methods. That does not mean that this map provides a perfect on- the-ground picture that can be mapped paddock by paddock to salinity issues. There needs to be further research. Stephen Robertson and I, under the national action plan, have already taken a decision to make some $12 million available to do further research into this issue in Queensland. But let us not confuse discussion over exactly how the science is going to work out in individual properties with a discussion about whether or not there is a problem, because the problem is real, the problem is very serious and we need to take action—and it does not just exist in this region. I have spent quite a bit of time in Queensland over the past couple of weeks. It is not just because of the bitterly cold winter weather up here that I have come so that I can feel at home—coming from Melbourne; it is because I saw a need to talk to quite a number of the people on the ground—the producers—to see what problems they are facing. Last week I was in Mackay visiting sugar growers, many of whose ground water supplies for irrigation are under threat by the intrusion of ocean water because the freshwater aquifer is being depleted. Some growers are having to shut down bores because the water is too salty to put on their crops. Others in the region are dry. A few days ago I was in Emerald where the local aquifer is also in dire straits and where some bores on the edge of the aquifer are now dry while others are producing significantly reduced volumes. Yesterday I was in the Lockyer Valley where another local aquifer is in trouble both in terms of water quality and salinity. These are just examples of one issue involving ground water from just a few days of travelling around the state. Similar problems are being experienced in every state of Australia. They represent significant natural resource management problems both in the local areas and with significance far beyond those local areas. I do not want to particularly highlight the ground water problem—it just happens to be the one that has hit me in the face in my visit to these particular communities—but it symbolises many other problems. Just taking the Queensland examples on this one issue shows how entwined agriculture and our social structures are. About one-quarter of the Queensland sugar crop is grown in the Mackay area. Emerald is an extremely important grazing and cropping centre. The Lockyer Valley is one of most important areas on the whole east coast of Australia for the production of vegetables. In each of these areas there are significant problems. Water, generally from another source, drawn mostly from unregulated rivers and the overland flow, is a major issue in the Condamine-Balonne, which has achieved a new lease of life from that water. We cannot afford to lose the production, the wealth that flows from any of these areas. Importantly, in each of these areas I have seen people committed to solving the problem. I think the thing that has surprised me the most since I have become the Minister for Environment at the federal level is just how much these issues have moved into the mainstream of people's consciousness. The canegrowers in Queensland made it very clear to me that they see that there are environmental problems and that the industry has a role in solving those problems. That is equally true for every producer group that I have spoken to. Let me remind you—and Larry Acton knows this very well as the general president of Agforce—that the theme of the conference this year for Agforce was sustainability—smart innovative farming to produce sustainability. That is the kind of ownership that in the end is going to produce solutions. This is an enormous window of opportunity that is open now. We have the national action plan, to which Queensland is contributing $81 million; the Commonwealth is contributing $81 million. That is $162 million available for wise investment. That investment will take place, under the agreement on which that whole plan is based, when the communities involved put forward and own the solutions. In the long term, no government is going to solve this problem. The governments can create the frameworks, they can try to put in place wise and sensible laws and regulations—and maybe not all the regulations that we have at the moment are wise and sensible; they will need to be adjusted—but governments can do only so much. In the end, it is the Australians on the ground who are going to have to acknowledge the problem and evince the determination to come forward and solve it. That is not easy, because there are very long lead times here. Some of these problems might not become evident for 20 or more years. Some of them may be evident during the lifetimes of the current producers farming the land. Some of them may become evident in the lifetimes of their children. But today we have something that previous generations did not have: we have the information, knowledge and science available to us that can forewarn us. In Queensland, you only have to look south over the border to see what is already happening in the rest of the Murray-Darling Basin, to the heart of Australian agriculture, to know that this is something that could happen to agriculture here in Queensland. So this generation has a unique opportunity, and the putting into place of the national partnership to solve it is something that is of immense importance. It is quite historic. I get to go to some of these overseas conferences to talk about global issues in the environment. I do not believe that there is another country in the world that is attempting on a continental scale what Australia is now attempting in relation to the salinity, water quality and vegetation issues. No other country is attempting to save a continent in the way that we are now attempting to do. Why is this happening? Because Australians are among the best educated people in the world, they have incredible farming experience, the people on the land know the land and they understand the land and believe in the land and they believe that that land should be sustainable, and we have a culture of change and innovation. Sure, some people say that Australians are at heart a deeply conservative people, and in many respects that is probably true. But no nation is quicker to pick up technological changes than Australia, no nation is prouder of the way this country is carving out the future and no nation has the cultural resources—that energy, that vitality—to seize a problem the way that this country has and to put the solutions into effect. I just want to ask you today to take this seriously, to seize this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity—which it is—to really look hard at the issues, to ask the tough questions. Nobody is saying, 'Just accept a top-down solution to 2578 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 this.' That would be the wrong way to go. Ask the tough questions, 'What is the problem here? What is the nature of the problem here? How do we solve that problem? Why don't you address that law or that regulation and make it easier for us to do this?' These are all the kinds of issues that need to be raised in this discussion. That is what today's summit is all about. Premier Beattie, I am sure, does not want to finish his time as Premier and say, 'This is a problem that I let go.' Stephen Robertson, as minister, does not want to do that; he wants to be able to say, 'I tackled it.' I want that as the federal Environment Minister. The Prime Minister wants that. That is why he has put it at the top of the national agenda. I believe that every responsible person in this room wants that, because it is our problem; and if we do not solve it, our children are going to say some very harsh things about us. So take advantage of the opportunity, take advantage of the information that is here today and know that, in coming to conclusions through the workshops and ultimately having a situation where the community owns it, you have a situation where the federal government, the state government, and I hope the local governments, the local community organisations and the farmers, all are going to be part of the solution. Thank you. Mr HOGAN: Our next guest speaker is Don Blackmore, also from Canberra, here for our Brisbane winter! He is the CEO of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. Mr BLACKMORE: Premier, can I acknowledge my two ministers on the ministerial council, and there are two commissioners in the room as well. So I give you a warm welcome. We live in a basin that you cannot flush and forget. We do not have that opportunity in the Murray-Darling Basin. It has one characteristic that we all should realise: it is one of the lowest energy basins on earth. That means that everything that comes into the basin stays there. So every drop of rain that brings some salt, or salt that is produced from other sources, stays in this basin and gets recycled. That has been a natural phenomena for millennium. We have now in the last couple of hundred years brought about a geologic change that we have not seen since a previous wetter cycle—maybe 18,000 or 20,000 years ago. So this is not unnatural for our basin. It is really a massive issue, but if you are standing up in Queensland in the basin and you are looking to the sea 2,500 or 3,000 river kilometres away, you are only a couple of hundred metres higher. So there is not a lot of energy. There has not been one drop of water leave this basin since last November. The prospect of water leaving this basin in the next year is pretty grim. If we release salt into this environment, we are inviting them to restore it and remanage it in some way. That is a challenge that many of the communities have been facing and facing up to. We have a structure that tries to look at the basin as a whole. I will not talk about structures other than to say that, if we do not take an integrated catchment approach to this basin, we will not have a basin. We will have 24 fragmented river systems breaking up, and fundamentally that would be a very bad legacy. To our ministers' and governments' absolute credit, this is the largest experiment in integrated catchment management on earth. It is recognised as world's best practice, and governments would be commended to put the effort and energy into it. The need is great, and therefore it is justified. It does not take over the role of any of the sovereignties of the states. It tries to get people together to look at what we need to do and to share and understand. I assume that delegates have seen plenty of salt, but in Wagga 500 houses now have salt as part of their life. The community is putting in ground water bores to lower it. If you are in Kerang or just out of Yass or if you are a grower, salt is just a part of what we are doing. We have been used to managing it for millennium. Certainly in the southern part of the basin, we have been managing salt for the last 60 to 80 years. In fact, our early irrigation led us to major problems back at the turn of the last century, and drainage schemes and the like were put in to deal with it. I would like to explain a four-stage sequence so that we can think about salinity management from where I sit. This is common everywhere in the basin. You have an initial awareness where you use what data you have and produce something, in this case a hazard map. They are generally called hazard maps, but it is a preliminary assessment, a call to action. The second stage is then to work out what precautionary actions you take on the basis of that data, but then to be much more focused. I just heard about a $12 million investment trying to focus on data. Then you get into predictive modelling. What happens in my landscape? We mobilise this, but where does that go? The next stage is detailed investigations. What is happening on my farm in my region? You get down to something that might be called a risk map. People have different names for it everywhere, but you get down to where you have done a more complete audit of your area and you start to understand it and start to build confidence. I will give a couple of examples of this from other worlds. Finally, you get into direct action. This is the level of investment we will make and it is targeted. That does not mean that you wait until stage four, because there are a lot of the smart, no regrets investments you make all the way through this. In the end, if you are trying to get, say, an irrigation region to change its behaviour, everybody must do it, otherwise you do not get the benefits. That is pretty much the way we think in the commission about the four stages that eventually get you to an integrated solution. It has to be with an integrated catchment management arrangement, because we have water, trees, biodiversity, salt. But it is one of the many things that are happening in our world. We need to look at the basin and the salt almost everywhere, because there are different concentrations and different hazards and whatever. Up the western side of the divide, we have a large amount of it. The problem is that, if you release that salt up the western side of the divide, it gets into our fresh water supplies. What is the scarcest thing we have in the Murray-Darling Basin? It is water. We already have storage capacity in this basin 50 per cent higher than the average annual flow of every river. We are a highly regulated, highly used basin by any standard worldwide. That is because we wanted to develop and are developing, but we need to manage that now. If we release salt into that system, it might not have much of an impact on a farm, but somebody downstream has to use it on their property and eventually that will affect them. I will give a couple of very brief examples of that. If you go to Victoria—and I have been very careful to keep right out of Queensland—where this maps shows the Goulburn broken catchment, the River Murray at the top and the mountains at the bottom, this is their prediction. I will give three maps in a row. The orange is where the water tables are now, between two and five metres below the surface, or where they are expected to be in the year 2020. This is not in irrigation. The white areas are in irrigation, and they have high water tables now. This is dryland agriculture, a huge area. They have drilled thousands of holes and all of that to get to the predictive modelling 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2579 stage. You find that by 2050 most of that area that was orange is now red. That means we have water in what is called the capillary zone. That means that if there is salt in that water underground, you can start to see salinisation. It will not be over all the landscape but will be leaking into wetlands, into rivers and onto people's properties. This scale of mapping does not let you work out where the fence line is, so you have to go below it. One hundred years out we are even worse off. That is already faced in Victoria. The tree clearing, the farming practices, are already in place. That is ordained unless we do something now to reverse that. That is the opportunity Queensland has—not to have to manage something of this scale. We have also done a fair bit of work—and I will not even try to put these numbers into perspective—to look at what happens to water. As we release salt, it gets into water. Water quality is affected. If people want to go into the salinity audit, they can find out what happens on every river kilometre by kilometre. But if you take the New South Wales rivers, you can see that something like the Bogan River will go from 730 EC units to 1,500. We know that the World Health Organisation upper limit for drinking water is 800. So we can see then that some of these rivers are going to have salinities which will make it very difficult for us to have the benefit of the agricultural production we now enjoy. A lot of the environmental amenity will be lost as well, because wetlands will change in complexion from fresh to salty, and so on. That is the future. Minister Kemp indicated some of the numbers out of the new land and water audit. Quite frankly, they are different from the numbers that we had in our salinity audit because it is better data. We will see different numbers. The numbers to come out of Queensland in the next two, three or five years will change, so do not be surprised. I am not surprised. I have been in this game 30 years. As we get better data, we start to understand it. Eight million hectares in the basin is the size of Tasmania plus or minus a few hectares. That is what we are faced with if we cannot somehow get in there and try to manage that. The ministerial council, after a year or so of negotiation—and this is when we did not think we had a salinity problem in Queensland—developed a salinity strategy for the southern basin. I will just give some elements of it, because it is important to understand that there are six significant resources going in. We have said basically that in South Australia, or least Adelaide, one million people are entitled to have water most of time below the World Health Organisation upper limit—800 EC 95 per cent of the time. As a result, each of the governments has then put targets for salinity back on their rivers—the Murrumbidgee, the Goulburn, the Campaspe—to try and maintain that, but we cannot maintain that without some other interventions. I will go into those. We need to get some new farming systems. The ones we have now across all of the areas are not going to stop this problem continuing. So we have a CRC for plant-based solutions for salinity working across southern Australia with 120 researchers. I would invite Queensland to think about it, because it is an important investment in the future. We have a farming systems approach and it is young, but nevertheless it gives us some chance to see profitable systems that people can pick up. We will have to turn a quid out of forestry. No-one plants a tree in this area because the rainfall is too low generally. We have to work out under the national action plan how we provide some support, a subsidy, so that we can get the commercial people to come in and create an industry—not five trees down the road but 50,000 hectares properly applied. Those landowners must be rewarded for that as a change. We are doing that. New South Wales has 50 trials running right now. People are looking for trees for everything from charcoal to bioenergy. There will be something come out of it because, as Minister Kemp said, we are innovative and people are focused on it. What is probably the most salutary thing to know is that we are investing in engineering works. We have to. We have to buy some time. In 1988 governments agreed to spend $30 million to pump 1,100 tonnes of salt away from the River Murray, and we have salt interception schemes along the River Murray now that run for 80 kilometres. If we switched them off, the River Murray would be unusable now for five months every year. Governments have just agreed to spend about another $60 million to pump another 900 tonnes to buy space for the next 15 years to get land management right. That is all it does. An investment of $60 million enables us to just hold the status quo on the River Murray while we get our land management right in the states: no more, no less. That is all it does. It does not improve river salinity; it just enables us to hang on. I am not saying it is a bit 'five minutes to midnightish', but if somebody does not pay the power bill for the pumps we are in a bit of trouble currently. We have adopted the basin integrated catchment management, which Queensland has adopted. The arrangements in the southern states with catchment authorities are much more well developed, I have to say, because the scale of the trade-off with those communities and the way knowledge flows in those communities best happens through that environment when we get these really difficult issues like salinity. That has been our experience over the last 20 years. I am sure that in Queensland you will find your own way through it, but pretty much you want community engagement, a structured approach, and ICM provides at least a glimmer of a hope of doing it. We are seeing a lot of new technologies come along—airborne geophysics, drilling holes; we are using dozens of them. This is one of them, and this is a good one. It gives you some insights. Thank you to BRS for letting me use this. We can start to find the salt stores and then we can look at what is the next thing that mobilises it and where it ends up. Then we can look at what the remedial actions are. All those things must happen before you have a plan. This is an area just out of Canberra. Then what we do is tailor solutions—no more straight lines on maps. That is something the amateurs did. It is an art form. We are just starting to learn to do it. We still want to put them up the fence line, along the road and whatever else, but we cannot afford to do that collectively. We need some wisdom about how we tailor them. When we all go home tonight we will want to make sure that we leave the place in a state that we are all relaxed about for the next generation. Thank you very much. Mr HOGAN: Our next speaker is Mr Glen Walker, senior principal research scientist, CSIRO, Adelaide, South Australia. Mr WALKER: Don Blackmore gave the big picture of what was happening in the Murray-Darling Basin. I will try to take a different tack and try to give some examples of, I guess, patches of dirt, real catchments, some of the experiences that have happened and some of the analyses that we have been involved in, to see what we can learn from those experiences. I will use three examples from South Australia, but I could have easily chosen three examples from Western Australia or Victoria that show much of the same sorts of things. 2580 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002

This is a map of the mapped area of salinity, with the red areas being those areas most salt affected. The first example that I will talk about is a red patch in the upper south-east region of South Australia. That represents one of the biggest areas of dryland salinity in eastern Australia. This area was originally a swampy-type area that had been developed up fairly late and nowadays has a number of important wetland-type areas for migratory birds. Even before there was any development in the upper south-east, there were already some salinity warnings. In 1937 work done by CSIR in the state land survey departments showed that if development occurred there would be risk of salinity, water logging or flooding in the area and that the agricultural potential would probably not be so high. Nonetheless, the area was developed. It was developed for a number of reasons and it is very hard looking back to sense the type of environment in which those decisions occurred. A lot of the areas in southern Australia were cleared in that post-war era. There was a lot of new science around that overcame a lot of those agronomic impediments that stopped some of the areas being developed—financing schemes. So you had areas that may have been referred to earlier as the 90 Mile Desert suddenly becoming the Coonalpyn Downs. Nonetheless, the incipient problems cannot be hidden. Even within a matter of about four or five years the government reports were starting to report rising water tables in regard to flooding issues and then about 30 years down the track it got to the stage where we were talking about 40 per cent of the land in the area being salt affected. We are talking about 2,500 square kilometres. When you are talking about 40 per cent of the agricultural land, you are talking about most land-holders being affected. You are talking about the towns and roads in the areas being affected—the whole region and its culture. It comes to the stage where you are making decisions about whether we are talking about living with salt for an area such as this or talking about coming in with schemes that may protect the area and trying to reverse the trends. In this particular area we are talking about a drainage scheme that was worth about $30 million. The total package is worth about $70 million. In terms of the cost of environmental repairs to maintain agricultural development, to protect environmental values and some of the social fabric in the area, those are the sorts of numbers that you are talking about. There are a whole lot of other issues, which I will not go into, whenever you go into that sort of scheme. There are some lessons there that we can learn. Even 70 years ago we had the technical advice such that we could have avoided some of the worst of those salinity impacts. By ignoring this sort of advice, we are finding that we can start to incur large costs just to maintain the natural resource base that we have and to protect some of the environmental values in the area. The second case study I want to talk about, which is probably not such a negative case study, is the Mallee area, which is up near the River Murray itself. The important point to make here is that in the late seventies it was generally thought that semiarid areas—we are talking here about 300 millimetres or 12-inch rainfall—did not have recharge and did not have salinity problems. You have some of the same sorts of semiarid areas here; you have probably got some similar conditions. What was found just by pure chance in terms of some of the scientific work done is that we have had up to about a 100-fold increase in the amount of water occurring there and recent studies have shown that one of the major impacts into the River Murray over the next 30 to 50 years will occur from the Mallee clearing. However, because it has been picked up early we are able to put in place policies that offset some of these salinity impacts. So we are talking not only about decreasing the salt loads to the River Murray but also decreasing some of the environmental damage that we find in the river corridor itself. The third case study that I want to refer to is one on the Eyre Peninsula. This is probably the second largest area of salinity, as shown here. This is in the Wanilla catchment. The work was done as part of the National Land and Water Resources Audit. An analysis was done of the ground water systems. To all intents and purposes, the ground water system acted like a bath without a plug hole. A lot of the water went in, it just filled up and you had a lot of the water table rising to the surface. The analysis from some of the predictive tools we used looked at what happened under a range of different scenarios. At present we are looking at something like eight per cent of the area being salinised. If we do nothing, the area of land being salt affected will double in the next 20 years. Even if we make a major land use change—and we are talking about a 50 per cent recharge reduction; that is the equivalent of reafforesting something like 50 per cent of the catchment, a massive land use change—the area of salt affected land will still increase over the next 20 years. Basically, what we have is something equivalent to an oil tanker that is very hard to turn around. It takes a massive effort to turn this around. Again, this is a situation that is very hard to reverse once you have the processes going. The question that we have then is: where do those equivalents of the Wanillas on the upper south-east exist around the country? Work that we have been involved in and that was started in the National Land and Water Resources Audit and work that was being done by other agencies has been trying to identify areas or types of systems where you have similar sorts of behaviour. This is a slide showing the Murray-Darling Basin. What we are trying to do here is learn lessons from one area and look at what lessons we can take to other areas that act very similarly. We recognise that there are differences in the landscapes but also some similarities, and we can take lessons from one place to another. Where we have done equivalent studies—and we have done work on the Darling Downs—what we find is that some of the same processes happen, not surprisingly, as you find in the rest of the Murray-Darling Basin. The physics are no different in Queensland than elsewhere. By using this sort of approach we are able to take some of the lessons that we have learnt in southern Australia and start applying them into the Queensland part of the Murray- Darling Basin. This is work being done on a finer scale using that ground water flow system approach, taking on board the lessons from the studies being done in South Australia. All of that type of knowledge and those sorts of techniques are embedded behind some of the science used in the salinity hazard map. That has not just taken on board work that has happened here, it has taken on work that has happened around Australia. Those sorts of lessons will continue to happen into the future as we go past the salinity hazard map and, as Don mentioned, as we go more towards the salinity management plans. 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2581

I will now make a few points for the discussion this afternoon. When we talk about salinity prediction, we are not talking about something that is new. We are not talking about something that is black magic. We may not always have the data that we like to make predictions, but the techniques are there. The second point is that if we can get the technical advice to avoid the salinity impacts, that is a hell of a lot better strategy than trying to fix up the problem afterwards. With a lot of ground water systems, once we start the process down a certain pathway it is very difficult to turn it around. The third thing that we found in a number of the studies is that there are large costs in maintaining the resource base and environmental repair. That may well exceed the profitability that you are getting from some of these areas. The fourth point is that some of the decisions, once they have been made, are very difficult to turn around and, in some cases, are irreversible under any current arrangements. The fifth point is that use of the ground water flow systems and other types of approaches enables us to learn from some of the southern experiences and perhaps some of the southern mistakes that have been made so that they can be avoided. The last point I want to make—and this is a point reiterating some of the previous speakers—is that salinity hazard mapping is the first step in the salinity planning process. It is really a recognition that the problem occurs and that we are really looking more at a 10-year or so program to develop up salinity management. What we are talking about with salinity management is getting systems in place that are in sympathy with the saline landscape that we have got. Sitting suspended from 10.39 a.m. to 11.16 a.m. Mr HOGAN: This session will give a chance to the major peak bodies in Queensland involved in this debate to have their perspectives put forward. We have eight speakers representing a whole range of different points of view. Our first speaker is Larry Acton, the President of Agforce. He is also representing Peter Corish, the President of the National Farmers Federation. Mr ACTON: Thanks, Terry. Minister and colleagues: currently, natural resource management is characterised by division, duplication and conflict. We must have agreement from the Commonwealth, state and local government for integrated NRM. I have to say that I am disappointed at the political point scoring that has occurred over the last few weeks on such an important matter to land-holders. We have always maintained that the best way to resolve these issues is to include the stakeholders in a process that decides the necessary outcomes for their area. Recent statements have only misled many in the broader community as well as confusing those people involved in the groups who are working towards a solution. We require a fresh approach. We need a new commitment to a regionally driven process that is clearly supported by all levels of government and one that will endure future changes in governments. We need to depoliticise the science, and that means regional groups having access to scientists and all available data. These groups have to be able to thoroughly examine available information and identify gaps. We need to rationalise the existing planning boundaries. Currently, water, vegetation, salinity and water quality are all being done on three separate levels and separately in a lot of cases. We need plans that reflect the range of landscape issues and that are not just confined to issues dealt with in legislation. These plans need to identify development risks and opportunities as well as social and economic impacts. We need to shift away from prescriptive legislation. Laws relying on a command and control approach are very costly to governments to implement and they run the risk of alienating the very people they need to engage. Salinity is clearly one of a number of risks that farmers have to address, and we acknowledge that openly. However, it is difficult to resolve the messages that farmers receive. On the one hand, the Queensland government has said that the need is so urgent that it has saturated the media with statements using terms such as 'wasteland'. On the other hand, the National Dryland Salinity Project makes the following statement— In the subtropics of Queensland, although dryland salinity is known to occur the risks are known with much less certainty. The first thing that needs to happen is an attitudinal change among governments and agencies. We know that the risks associated with the various farming practices are variable. In some landscapes where development is still at an early stage, the risk-weighted consequences of farming may be low. Conversely, the risk in other areas or for more intensive proposals may be higher. In other words, land use obviously is one of the solutions. In our view, the property plan can provide a spatial description of those activities, and we support these plans being backed by a legislative framework. They become binding and set out rights together with responsibilities or obligations. What has become difficult to resolve are the increasingly strident calls for private land-holders to forgo their commercial aspirations in favour of public benefits for which there is no acknowledgment, let alone financial assistance or compensation. None of the above will work without the long-term bipartisan commitment from all levels of government to provide the best scientific rigour and foster the best natural resource planning we can afford. This means less political interference in regional processes but more long-term political support. We need more scientists working with land-holders on providing the information systems and decision support tools on which local people can make risk-weighted decisions. There must be a strong and overwhelming desire by governments to provide incentives and frameworks for community based solutions where regional people can solve regional challenges. Agforce represents 8,000 natural resource custodians whose greatest wish is to have a consistent and transparent policy in which to maintain our land for the future of all Australians. These people cannot do it alone, nor should they. As all Australians benefit from sustainable landscape planning, surely all Australians should contribute to the long-term future of our land. In summary, Agforce's solutions to the conflict and chaos that seem to have plagued this issue are as follows: (1) intergovernment support for a new direction; (2) development of a new knowledge system; (3) creation of integrated planning areas; (4) development of regional plans that identify risks, opportunities and impacts; and (5) new legislation to support a planning framework that protects outcomes at a property level and sets out structural adjustment and compensation. Today's outcome should be a new commitment to a transparent and inclusive process that leads to some real outcomes for the environment, the economy and the people and not a knee-jerk reaction. I have to say that Agforce 2582 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 and the NFF have demonstrated their commitment to addressing salinity and these other NRM processes. Obviously we want to be a part of the reaching of those solutions. Thanks. Mr HOGAN: Thank you, Larry, for those comments. Our next speaker is Felicity Wishart from the Queensland Conservation Council. Ms WISHART: Thank you. I would firstly like to acknowledge the traditional owners on whose land we are currently meeting. Today I want to tell you about a big grey bird called the grey-crowned babbler. The grey-crowned babbler lives in the bushland of southern and eastern Australia—or rather it used to. In South Australia it has gone—disappeared, technically extinct. In Victoria it has all but disappeared—critically endangered. In New South Wales in the south it is endangered; in the north it is threatened. It is definitely starting to disappear there, too. In Queensland it is still babbling, but it is now disappearing on the Darling Downs and is in trouble. The grey-crowned babbler disappears around 10 to 20 years after clearing finishes. There is a wave of extinction going on. It is starting in the south and it is heading this way. The Queensland Conservation Council with our member groups like the Toowoomba and Region Environment Council and the Wildlife Preservation Society and other groups across Queensland and with the Wilderness Society and the Australian Conservation Foundation, the World Wide Fund for Nature and others across Australia is here to speak for the voiceless—the plants and animals that are not otherwise represented here and the future generations—all of our kids. Our test is not for today. It is not for tomorrow or next year. It is for the next 100 years, the next 1,000 years. What legacy do we leave in that time frame? In the past two years half a million hectares of trees were cleared in the Murray-Darling Basin. The loss of the bush, the failure to ensure our rivers are flowing and healthy and the rise of salt in the soil will seal the fate not just for the grey-crowned babbler but for the community in this region and for many further south. I do not believe anyone in this room wants that. I also do not believe that anyone wants to see farmers pushed off the land. Certainly the Queensland Conservation Council does not want to see that. People and agricultural industries are part of the landscape. Of course they are. Today I am not going to talk about the science—that whole debate about: is there salinity or isn't there and what is the real risk? As far as I am concerned, this map is the canary in the coalmine: we heed it or we ignore it at our peril. There are three things that we believe have to happen. We have to stop land clearing in the Murray- Darling Basin. We have to return water to the Murray-Darling Basin system. We have to find a way to do these first two things while supporting the farming community to change where and how they operate. I have talked a little bit about land clearing, which is the principal cause of salinity, but we also cannot ignore the rivers. Half the native fish species in the Murray-Darling system are threatened with extinction. Not one internationally significant wetland—the Ramsar wetlands—is healthy. There is an urgent need for Queensland to return water to the system to meet its national commitment to a Murray River cap. There has been a lot of focus on Cubbie Station, for good reason. It is one of the irrigators in the Condamine-Balonne that will have to take cuts in water, that will need to look at doing things more efficiently and sustainably. Of course there are others. The environment movement is ready and willing to go in to bat for the rural communities affected by these changes, but let me sound a warning: for every tree planted under the Natural Heritage Trust at least 100 were bulldozed. The public will not continue to support state and federal funding and technical assistance to the rural community when it sees no commitment to stop clearing to return flows to the river to avoid salinity in the first place. It is time for hard decisions. Queensland is my patch, and I am getting impatient. We need Minister Kemp, Premier Beattie and Minister Robertson to lay down the rules, to show leadership and to have the guts to say what we know is right. We need the leaders of Agforce, the Queensland Farmers Federation and irrigation and catchment groups in the region to accept the challenge of how we farm under these new rules. With a key policy framework that establishes a rapid reduction in clearing, clear water flow goals and a clear commitment to a funding package, then everyone in this room can get on with the task of working out how we do natural resource management for the long term. Thank you. Mr HOGAN: Thanks, Felicity. Our next speaker is Gary Sansom from the Queensland Farmers Federation. Mr SANSOM: Thank you, Terry. Minister and fellow participants: I welcome the opportunity today to make this presentation on behalf of the Queensland Farmers Federation which represents some 18,000 farmers through 23 member organisations. Some of those are represented here today—Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers, Cotton Australia, Queensland Dairyfarmers and the Queensland Irrigators Council. The QFF strongly advocates sustainable primary production practices but believes that substantial change is required to deliver integrated management of natural resources, a driving force behind our attendance here today. We do not see this as just a salinity summit; this should be a summit about the integrated management of natural resources to address issues of salinity, vegetation management and water access. All of these are interrelated issues and vitally important to the debate. Governments are driving changes in natural resource management via national and state policy and legislation. These reforms are complex and not well integrated. There will be benefits to farmers and the community broadly as a result of these reforms, but there will be substantial costs to achieve the results. We will be required to meet much higher environmental standards over the next 10 years and beyond than we have had to comply with to date. Science is telling us that we cannot continue with current practices because there will be adverse outcomes in terms of the condition and health of our rivers and landscapes. Whilst there has been much debate about the science, we have not debated the appropriate use of scientific data. This is a big issue for our members and it is bound to be discussed in the workshop sessions this afternoon. It is important to recognise that much of the reform agenda, including the COAG water reforms which were launched some eight years ago, has yet to be implemented at the local level. There has been a great deal of debate and policy development within government, but the practical phase of policy awareness, debate and implementation has not yet really begun within farming and rural communities. The reality is that the commercial risk of farming is increasing daily at this stage of the reform process. Catchment-wide planning for water and vegetation is proceeding. Catchment salinity hazard maps are being released, and the impact of rural water price paths is being felt. These commercial risks are now very real if you 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2583 happen to be a farmer in the Balonne facing a 30 per cent cut in developed entitlement, or a fruit grower in the Boyne catchment facing unreliability or possibly no supply at all during drought, a canegrower in the Burdekin unsure of how he is going to face paying higher water charges or projected water charges, or even a cotton grower on the Condamine trying to explain to his bank manager the difference between salinity hazard and risk. As farmers in the rural communities we are part of the need to have the opportunity to engage the reforms and address how these risks to our commercial enterprises may be managed and mitigated. Farmers are asking us—and therefore I am asking this forum—how are our rights of tenure, access and use of natural resources likely to change with the implementation of reforms? If these changes reduce our current rights of access and use, does the community share some responsibility for these impacts? How can science be improved to provide better assessment not only of the need for reform but also the quantum of change required at a regional and local level? How do we then measure this, and what about the lag times? How can we improve our on-farm environmental performance to achieve adaptable and sustainable outcomes? How can we be sure that our efforts on-farm will improve environmental conditions at a catchment and regional level? How can we make better use of the available natural resources once environmental requirements are determined to improve business performance? What will it cost us to access and use natural resources? What are the implications for farm viability? We strongly believe that stakeholders, including governments, industry, conservationists, regional and local communities, must work together to address these questions. But we have to work together within an agreed framework. We have outlined such a strategic framework within the handout that you have. We want to see an integration of natural resource management reforms within policy and planning frameworks. It is critical to us that the policy be revised to address farmers' rights of tenure and access to natural resources together with our obligations regarding the use of these resources. We need to develop and implement regional natural resource management plans in an integrated fashion. We see great environmental outcomes through staged delivery of farm-based best management practice programs by rural industry as an alternative to compliance with regulatory requirements. I cannot stress strongly enough the glaring need for development and implementation of programs to progressively improve the science underpinning reforms. This summit must not be a talkfest. We are at a fork in the road. We can go down the path of reaction and confrontation and waste resources—both human and natural—or we can harness our collective energies and achieve positive outcomes for farmers, for rural communities and for Queensland. In conclusion, I have to say that I welcome the commitment by Premier Beattie and Minister Kemp to pursue a new strategic direction to address salinity and other natural resource management issues. The QFF and other stakeholders must be brought together quickly to be part of setting this new strategic direction for integrated natural resource management in Queensland. Thank you. Mr HOGAN: Thank you, Gary, and hear, hear! The next speaker is Noel Playford from the LGAQ. Noel put this flyer on your seats during morning tea. Mr PLAYFORD: Thank you, Chair. I think the reason for that is that in the papers we received this morning was a one-sided sheet from the Local Government Association. It actually had two sides, but the second side was not printed in what was handed around this morning. Ladies and gentlemen, in his keynote address last Monday at the Agforce state conference the federal Minister for Environment, Dr Kemp, who was with us earlier advised 'that the NAP and the NHT, which sits beside it and which will in the priority areas overlap and support it, rely for their success on effective partnerships between all levels of government involved—federal, state and local—as well as local communities, scientists and land- holders.' In relation to partnerships—success will rely on partnerships. That makes sense to me. Let us get the best outcomes by pulling together. That is not happening in Queensland. To achieve a partnership requires a process for all the parties to participate effectively and for all the parties to be resourced to both engage and represent their constituencies. Land-holders, community and council peak bodies are not being resourced to partner effectively. In the case of local government, state government officers are planning for the state itself, through the Department of Local Government and Planning, to be funded from the NAP program to engage councils. So I ask: can we expect the DPI to represent land-holders, the Department of State Development to represent business interests, and so on? Perhaps the desirable model in the eyes of some state officers is for the state to partner itself. To Dr Kemp I say: your call for an effective partnership between the three tiers of government would carry more weight had local government in Australia been part of a trilateral agreement given the ongoing statutory role that councils will be expected to play and the huge current and past expenditure by local government in this area. But that is now water under the bridge. To Premier Beattie I say: your people need to rethink their current model and processes if we are to have any chance of sustaining our natural resource. For the last 12 months or so the engagement of peak bodies has been through the NAP reference group, but lip-service has been paid to concerns about fundamental issues of the framework and processes required to achieve desirable outcomes. This contrasts markedly with Western Australia, where local government has been invited by the state to be a partner in a three-way development of their bilateral agreement with the Commonwealth. We all want to see the best possible outcomes from this initiative. My message is that the current arrangements will not deliver. Mr HOGAN: Thank you, Noel. Noted. Our next speaker is Dr Barry Traill from the Wilderness Society. Dr TRAILL: I want to focus specifically on tree clearing. Felicity has already talked in a bit of detail about it, but I really want to hammer home what to us at the Wilderness Society, the national environment group and all the other state, national and regional environment groups, are a couple of absolute fundamentals. Tree clearing, removal of native bush, land clearing—call it what you like—is the root cause of dryland salinity. When he talked about the examples from the south, I think Glen omitted a couple of key things. The problems arose because the bush had been removed. Okay? Now, for every hectare that we clear in those coloured areas we risk mobilising salt. That is the threat that we face. I want to focus on this because I think I agree 2584 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 with virtually all the other speakers. The public debate over the past few weeks has been very confused. It has exemplified it as a problem, but obscured is the root cause of most of the salinity risk we face, which is tree clearing. As well as being a salinity problem, of course, it is a major risk to native wildlife in Australia. Depending on the country, soil and water degradation, it causes around 13 per cent of Australia's greenhouse emissions. So I want to be very, very, very explicit about this. This is a fundamental bottom line with us. We believe that tree clearing—removal of bushland—has to be very rapidly phased out in the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin. I just want to leave that very clear message. This outcome that we seek is not complex. Okay? It is very simple to get to zero clearing. As an aside, I stress that I am talking about mature remnant vegetation. Regrowth is more complex and should be dealt with on a site-by-site basis. The outcome we seek is clear. We believe that target, that outcome, should be set clearly by the state and federal governments. Following on from there, once we set that outcome and once we have agreed that that is what we are after, we can then focus on the much more difficult transition period of helping and ensuring that land-holders get as much certainty as possible and that they are helped as much as possible through that potentially quite difficult transition period when stronger land clearing controls come in. Now, we want to help with that transition period. We believe collectively that we have a lot of influence, both in the state and nationally, to help deliver the funds needed through that transition period. But increasingly, our members and our boards are starting to question us. I was talking to Don Henry from the Australian Conservation Foundation. Two years ago, Don and the Conservation Foundation did a lot of difficult hard work with the NFF to produce a $65 billion blueprint for what is needed to make Australia sustainable. That was not easy for Don or his organisation. When I talk to MPs in the mortgage belts of Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne and I say, 'We need federal funds to go into Queensland to help farmers through a transition period when controls come in', I do not get a sympathetic reaction, when they know that hundreds of thousands of hectares are still going down. Be very clear about this. I am very unexcited by saying that we will have more local processes. In the 15 months after the VMA act came out the Queensland government gave out 700,000 hectares of approvals for Queensland. Most of those are on that map. Now, approvals do not equal clearing, I know that; but there is a very strong correlation. That was for the 15 months after. If you add on the last few months, for which we do not have figures, probably a million hectares of approvals have gone out in the current regulatory framework for that area. It is not working. We need to set an outcome. We need to get a transition package in to provide assistance for land- holders who are adversely affected and to provide incentives for the many land-holders who are already doing the right thing. So to finish up, I would really flag this very strongly. I am from the bush, and lots of my colleagues are, as well. I know that environmentalists right across the spectrum, north and south, are very focused on the tree clearing issue in Queensland. They want to help. But we cannot in all honesty go in and lobby hard for the funds needed while the bush is still coming down. Thank you. Mr HOGAN: Thank you, Barry. The next speaker is Wayne Wharton, the chairperson of the Southern Queensland Traditional Owners Federation. Mr WHARTON: I have only five minutes, so I will not make this a long speech. After all, it has taken 203 years to find out that us fellows have a right to sit here at the table as well as the rest of you. Firstly, I pay my respects to the Turrubul people and the Jagera people from this country, and I pay my respects to the rest of the delegates who found the time to come along here to the most important discussion that I think has faced our people within my country for a long, long time. I am a traditional owner from the area that we are talking about. There are 12 to 15 other traditional owner groups in that specific area. I guess that what I want to focus on is indigenous participation, seeing as it has taken us so long to get it to the table. Indigenous participation, I guess, equals traditional owner involvement. Unless you have traditional owner involvement in any of these discussions and any development it is basically flawed. The importance of having indigenous involvement and indigenous participation through traditional owner involvement is law. Traditional owners are the holders of native title rights. They can give consent, or not; no-one else can. The traditional owners are now also land-holders. We have dual responsibilities in terms of the native title rights that were entrusted upon our people as well as the general rights of being major land-holders in this specific area and our responsibilities to the general community, as well. We are not pure conservationists. We have a desire to obtain a certain level of economic independence through the proper use of our country and the development of the country we have been able to get back. To participate, traditional owners must be resourced. I have heard it from a lot of other groups and from previous speakers. Looking at this issue and progressing the process must be done in a partnership or on a tripartite basis between the Commonwealth, the state and the relevant community groups at the local level. To get this partnership going there has to be equity. Without equity—every stakeholder participating at the table—the process is flawed and it is not a true partnership. To have those partnerships, each one of the stakeholders has to be resourced to be able to sit at the table and contribute to the general discussion. This issue is not unique to Queensland. It concerns the whole Murray-Darling Basin and the rest of the country. It is an issue that traditional owner groups and indigenous people are taking up in South Australia. Many other groups involved in the basin are also participating. They are talking about models and we are talking about participating in a proper manner. Our land is not land that is bought or sold. It is land entrusted to us through the native title process. It is land that comes back to us through the ILC. This land is held in trust. It is not something that we give away. We do not look at our land in the same way as everybody else. It is not something to be bought and sold. It is our mother country. It is our homeland. We do not have anywhere else to go. My children do not have anywhere else to go. My grandchildren have nowhere else to go. They cannot go to their motherland overseas. They trace their roots back to the country we come from, where we live right now. We look in the long term to ensure our people's survival on our own land. That is basically where we are at. 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2585

One of the things I am pleased to hear that other people are thinking about is the idea that the salinity problem is a disease. How do we address the symptoms of that disease? As we have heard from other speakers this morning, there are a number of symptoms. Each one cannot be seen in isolation. It has been the fashion of state and federal governments in the past to look at funding to address one particular symptom and not the many symptoms that make up the disease. It has been the fashion in the past to find money to go back and fix mistakes but never to find money to implement a process that takes a holistic approach to curing the disease in the first place. The challenge everyone in the room has to face is whether we look at each individual symptom and attack each one of those symptoms and come up with a solution, or whether we go about doing something, make mistakes and then look for money to go back and fix the mistakes that should not have been made in the first place. The only way we can address each one of these symptoms is to take a holistic approach—between the Commonwealth, the state, the stakeholders and local government authorities—and address each symptom in a package that satisfies everybody. This takes resources. It does not take politics. It does not take politics at a local government level, at a Commonwealth level or at a party level. If we are really sincere about addressing the problems, we will address each one of the symptoms and come up with a holistic approach. One of the issues is drip irrigation, as trialled in the Namoi Valley, versus furrow irrigation. It is something we have to look at. A lot of people have been talking about resources. We have to look at alternatives. In terms of drip irrigation, if we have money to look at funding buybacks and so on then we have to look at the main problem of salinity, that is, environmental flows. If you do not have environmental flows then you do not have an environment. How do you get environmental flows? It takes a reduction in water usage on present levels. How do you reduce water usage at the present level? You look at new methods of farming. One of the challenges is to look at the pros and cons of drip irrigation and furrow irrigation. This is just one of the elements. It is only one of the symptoms. There are many other symptoms of this and there are many other methods. The challenge is there to come up with a holistic approach that satisfies every one of those needs and is long term and sustainable to everybody's benefit, both economically and socially. Mr HOGAN: That just about sums it up, I think. Our next speaker is Hugh Brown from the Queensland Murray- Darling Basin Committee. Mr H. BROWN: Mr Chairman, Premier Beattie, Minister Robertson, fellow attendees: the threat of salinity in the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin is old news to many community, industry and regional agency people. We have been working together to generate salinity management tools. These tools include the development of the salinity hazard map, the establishment of a network of monitoring boards and at least $1.5 million worth of on-ground works in the targeted areas being implemented over several years. The science of our natural resources is not exact. The best available science is the basis for us to apply our practical knowledge and to plan the way forward. Waiting for perfect science or playing one scientific view off against another will not help the community of our region to progress. We in our regional planning processes are using the best available science and will readily adopt better science into our planning and management processes as it becomes available. We have designed state and Commonwealth government approved natural resource management processes which adhere to the recognised ICM principles based on integrating environmental, social and economic factors. The planning processes will result in community ownership and will deliver targeted investment to achieve long- term on-ground outcomes. The success of these processes is conditional on gaining the respect and confidence of the community and government. This confidence will be gained through the continuation of current consultation processes used in existing regional NRM planning, although it will easily be undermined by actions based on agendas not consistent with delivering good regional NRM outcomes. To reduce the likelihood of this happening we would recommend that the government consider developing stronger and enduring regional relationships or partnerships for natural resource management policy development and implementation. An option for consideration is expanding the scope of the regional agency managers forum in partnership with regional NRM bodies to develop initiatives to combat the salinity issue. We would be recommending to the forum today that we need to deliver planning and, where identified, change at a scale which is relevant to land managers. This can be done through well-established linkages between our regional planning and the 140 landcare and subcatchment planning groups which exist throughout the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin. Land managers are in the best position, given appropriate technical support and information, to implement change. Australian land managers are amongst the most innovative in the world and in the face of a threat to their natural resources will adopt change. It needs to be recognised that in many instances change does not come cheaply and that issues of private versus public benefit—who pays and at what cost—and issues of equity need to be addressed. Our regional NRM plans are in progress. Some of them, to be completed by the end of the year, will have options and solutions that take a long-term strategic approach to managing salinity and other threats to our part of this state environment. These plans will be the basis of the state investing in sustaining the rural community and ensuring that our valuable natural resources are maintained. Mr HOGAN: Thank you, Hugh. Short and sweet. Last but by no means least will be Rod Gilmour of the Regional Vegetation Management Committee. Mr GILMOUR: Our chairman, Terry; our Premier, the Hon. Peter Beattie; our Minister for Natural Resources, the Hon. Stephen Robertson; the Leader of the Opposition; state members; federal members; our local government colleagues; and ladies and gentlemen: thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of a number of vegetation management planning groups. We have been very much in the spotlight over the last three-quarters of an hour, and we understand that. As a long-serving member of local government, a former grazier and one who has taken part in the debate on the regional vegetation management planning that has been ongoing for the last 18 months, I would like to emphasise the need to continue that process. It is a process that is moving us forward, dealing with the issues that are critical to the long-term viability and future of our community. It has involved more than 1,200 people, I am 2586 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 advised, throughout the region over those couple of years and it has generated much trust and support. A lot of good ideas have been put forward. It is working because it is based on a strong partnership between land-holders, farmers, local government catchment management, industry, the local conservation movement and, last but by no means least, our indigenous community. The process is not yet complete. However, all of the regional vegetation management plans are now in their draft stages. Let me share with you some advice that our community has put forward from that process. In the mulga lands, for example, the community wants, among other things, to protect catchments with a high salinity risk. It has identified fodder harvesting as a separate issue from tree clearing. It proposes a modified assessment and approval process for fodder harvesting. It wants to protect high nature conservation regional ecosystems and find a way of allowing the thinning of remnant areas to remove invasive native plants. The community across the whole south-west region has asked that it be allowed to manage areas of remnant vegetation which are retained to avoid salinity. This includes fodder harvesting in mulga country, thinning areas that have thickened up in recent years and allowing selective weed and pest control in those areas. We need to use the science and the scientists. Areas identified as being at risk of salinity must either be protected from broadacre clearing or revegetated. That can be done through a combination of voluntary and regulatory processes. We need a system of property and local landscape scale planning which will give us flexibility and the capacity for equitable negotiations that do not penalise good land managers. Such plans must consider appropriate use of vegetation to deal with management issues such as salinity, biodiversity conservation and economically sustainable development. Through the regional vegetation management planning process the community has said that it has a preference for declaring high salinity hazard areas that have significant potential to cause economic and environmental harm under the existing legislation but with certain provisos. These are that the areas need to be based on good science and shown at a scale that provides land-holders and others with a clear picture of exactly which areas are affected. The community does not want to lock up land that will not be affected. We have to recognise that salinity is not just a vegetation management issue. It affects us all. There is also a preference to encourage regeneration or replanting in critical areas and to provide more information and extension to affected land-holders. When the community looked at the options, self-regulatory approaches were also considered. These would rely on voluntary retention of vegetation based on good science, industry best practice and community education. The conclusion was that it is a good idea but that it would be very hard to achieve and manage. How should we get there then? Again, the community has come up with a range of proposals. Suggestions include the use of incentives, tax credits, tax relief, extension and communication, and the promotion of alternative land uses that are less risky from a salinity perspective. In summary, the community is asking for greater planning certainty, for accurate scientific information to be used as the basis of both regional and property planning. The community is asking for a more equitable distribution of responsibility and a more flexible approach to solving problems such as vegetation retention for multiple purposes. There is a need for financial incentives and for support packages, greater access to planning support and extension services to land-holders. Most of all, there is a need to recognise the importance of the economic viability of the rural sector in both the long and short term through well-planned registration management. The community has much to offer. As we move forward together to solve these issues, let us all endeavour to be part of the answer and not part of the problem. Thank you. Mr HOGAN: Thank you for that. That is the voice of a practitioner. I think we ignore that at our peril. (Workshop Session) Mr HOGAN: This section is where we will pull together the outcomes of the working parties. MR INALL: My group looked at policy matters, policy changes or policy initiatives. Much to my surprise, this group believed that there was not a general knowledge about salinity in the wider community. Unfortunately, they do not seem to have any Wagga Waggas up here because when you go there they do have that appreciation, but I do not wish that upon you. The feeling was, 'Let us get salinity more on the agenda in Queensland.' There was a proposal that there be a moratorium on tree clearing in Queensland. There was one dissenter in the group to that. He is a land-holder, but he said he would go along with it. I am sure the whole matter of property rights will come up again and again this afternoon. As we know, that is a national issue. The matter of trading rights in water, in habitat and salinity certainly was top of the agenda in our group. It just wants us to keep moving ahead to see that we get into these market mechanisms in water habitat and salinity. There is a lot of worry that the community is not being empowered sufficiently to get on with the job at hand. Of course, that in part is resourcing, people and finance. There was in my group a considerable feeling that the government has taken away far too many extension workers and that there is not enough support for community groups dealing with salinity. There was a request that there be an ongoing commitment to resourcing regions with a suite of options as to how they were delivered and how they were to operate. Let me move on to the long term. There is a request that we have a policy for the management of regrowth and forests which are thickening up. I should say that the management of regrowth is a huge issue in New South Wales as well. One of the points was: a holistic approach by the community, industry and government to establish NRM principles and implementation. They want to work towards a new RM act in Queensland. It was proposed that the New Zealand act is a good model for us all to look at, reflect on and see whether its principles would be useful or could be applied in this state. Mr JENSEN: I was in the other policy group. The group itself expressed concerns about the effectiveness and application of the existing legislative framework and the policy framework to do with natural resources management. They suggested that we require an integrated approach, a policy framework, based on shared principles and values. They looked at accountability and stewardship as issues that reflected shared principles and values. There needs to be a recognition of the rights and obligations of farmers, property rights, et cetera. They wanted the policy to be outcome driven, community-owned, and to look at adaptive management as part of that. The group expressed the desire that it be integrated throughout government and that there be linkages with levels of government. Following on from that, there needs to be an alignment of national, state and local legislative policy 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2587 frameworks. A dot point under that: support for best practice by bottom line regulation. Finally, there was a conversation about models and what it might mean in the implementation of the actual policy. They wanted to be flexible there. That could be a regional model, a community model or a local model, and it was contextual to the catchment area they were dealing with. Mr CHILDS: Firstly, our group identified three major issues. I do not want go through all the detail, but the first was about making knowledge readily accessible. It needed to be in usable formats, in ways that could be understood. It needed to be at a level that people could use and make decisions about. There are some issues there. There was a particular emphasis in relation to regional groups and process, that it needed to include agencies and certainly include regional groups. I will come back to that. The second major issue was that we started off as stakeholders guiding science but in actual fact we are talking about a partnership between stakeholders and science. This is to build a trust and a relationship in relation to science and the way it is conducted and the way that the results of science can be readily utilised. There was a need for that and for resourcing of both the conduct and delivery of science, again involving regional processes. The third aspect in relation to science was to do with risk assessment and target setting. In other words, knowledge and information has a particular value that is related to what impact it has on you. It is not just a straightforward thing. There was an issue here about using existing data. We have data; let us use it the best we can. There is a need to understand or improve our knowledge about the cause and effect of these things. If I do this, this is what happens. In order to make decisions, we need to do that. There is a need to relate land use and hazard. Again, there were issues about building on existing groups so as to have a good relationship across issues. There were four major points that our group came up with. The first is that within the conduct of science and its role—and including extension and information—we need to use existing groups, to reinforce them and to assist them in this particular role that they might have. The second thing is that there should be a partnership between stakeholders and science so that it is not all run from one end of that. The third point is to understand the cause and effect. Having a description of where salinity exists or where issues exist at certain levels is OK and necessary. We need to understand what happens when you do something; what is the impact? It has to be at a range of scales. A lot of things are done at regional and catchment stages, but it is at the decisionmaker level—property, park or whatever else it might be—that science needs to be applicable. Mr DRINAN: In the process of identification of matters that people wished to speak about in my group, it became apparent very early that we were keen to identify the outcome being sought, namely, the management of the water balance on farm to avoid deep drainage. That goes on then to identify two key priorities that came out of the list that I have. I will in fact provide all the cards that I collected, along with many other initiatives that might be done as well. Essentially, there were a set of points that were raised which were consolidated into a statement: that people wanted science-based local salinity information to support farm and local action. There was a strong emphasis on having local knowledge. That priority was then examined and one aspect of it further developed. People believe that they are looking at risk at the local or property level. The ways in which it might be addressed are through monitoring on property, identifying gaps, and feeding that information to researchers, technical assessment and extension support. The view was that it would be well managed locally by Landcare and catchment groups with government support and that it should be done by every local Landcare or catchment group right across the state, because the point is that it is about risk assessment. This is something that should be done immediately. The other priority arose out of another set of points. The priority was summarised as being facilitation of interchange of science knowledge into regional and local decision making. Again, that was developed further so that the issue being addressed was essentially about communicating the problem and solutions at local level and that that should involve novel approaches and improvements to existing farm systems. The how and who was as follows: using participative processes in science and management involving land-holders and science agencies, private sector and all three tiers of government. It should be done where the risk is greatest and within the NAP time frame, with priority activities implemented and communicated immediately afterward. Mr INALL: We have talked a fair bit already about local groups. I invite Don to tackle the regional/local issues. Mr LUNDIE-JENKINS: I would like to start by saying that the group that I worked with was particularly enthusiastic and positive and certainly not in denial. I would like to make that point, because I was very pleased to have the opportunity to work with them. We made three points. We have made a lot more points, but there are three in particular that we want to put to you at the moment. The first one essentially is saying let us get the politics out of this issue and deal with the issue. We need good policy and planning that covers the three levels of government. An added point is that the interchange of information between those three levels of government needs to be free and open. The understanding came up that local government often finds it very difficult to access information and even pay for that information. That planning should clearly set goals, targets, time lines, and be reviewed biannually. The implementation process that would follow that at the subcatchment target level should be facilitated by the use of some transitional funding. The second point is really to do with community organisations. It is looking at helping and assisting to make them more effective, looking at what we have got and reviewing and, where necessary, revamping, and generally taking the steps that might be needed to make those local community organisations more effective. A 'bottom up' approach was the catchword that was mentioned. 'Local solutions to local problems' has also been a popular catchcry today. They were seen as being very important. The process of doing this review and providing support and assistance to these groups needed to be resourced not only with dollars but also with personnel who have some expertise and experience in the development and operation of community groups. The final point is to establish regional planning and implementation teams. These are essentially, dare I use the word, extension teams but holistic extension teams which, like the old New Zealand whole farm advisers or teams of whole farm advisers, can assist land-holders and other people involved in the situation with not only water and salinity advice but also vegetation management, soil conservation issues, perhaps even the economic and other issues that might be involved in making a change. So we are looking at going back. They have even gone as far as suggesting where those teams might be located. This was a point that I think came out in the comment that 2588 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002

Neil made in his first report. The final transparency I will give you a look at is one that you may have seen before. This in no way reflects the group that I worked with. They rose far and above this. It reads as follows: The intelligence quotient of any meeting can be determined by starting with 100 and subtracting five points for each participant. So if you have got one person the project is good. If you have got two persons, the result of the interchange is that one guy says, 'What do you think?' And the other fellow says, 'There are many issues.' If you have got three people, one guy says, 'What are the issues?' Another guy says, 'Is it our mission to think of issues?' The third one says, 'That is an issue.' If there are four people, one says, 'Let's write a purpose statement.' A second guy says, 'That could be our mission.' The third guy says, 'Is that like an objective?' The fourth guy says, 'What is an issue?' Mr INALL: Peter Johnstone was the other facilitator looking after integrated regional natural resource management. Mr JOHNSTONE: There were certainly some very significant similarities between what Don has raised in his group looking at integration and what our group considered as well. I notice that Don talked about the very positive nature of his group. Our group did look forward with some hope, but they also asked that I raise some concerns. Many of them had been involved with similar processes regarding integration of natural resource management issues in the past and had some concerns but were hopeful that we could follow through and progress in regards to the discussions that have been had today. We categorised the integration issues at the planning, implementation and funding levels. They were considered to be the most significant issues that needed to be addressed in terms of integration. Much of the discussion involved the existing natural resource management bodies that were in place—the catchment committees, vegetation management committees, et cetera. There was strong agreement that the principle of regional management was an important one and that the use of those existing bodies should be continued. It was suggested that certainly ownership in these areas of these issues was strongly dependent upon the continued use of those groups. There was also a suggestion, however, as a safety net that there also needed to be other considerations and base lines in place and also processes to address regional boundaries. Whilst there was general acceptance, those safety nets were still considered to be important. There was some concern raised, however, in regard to the effectiveness of those NRM bodies. One of the issues that was discussed was how effectively they communicate amongst themselves. There was not any great detail given as to how that communication could be improved, but it was certainly suggested that those communication lines needed to be addressed and some strategies put in place so that communication was effective. In relation to consolidation, there was a suggestion that in some cases effective communication and lines of communication would be sufficient to make those groups as effective as possible. It was not ruled out, however, that in certain cases those NRM bodies perhaps could be consolidated or joined and that that might be a more effective use of their resources and may make them more effective. However, it was considered important that this be considered on a case-by-case basis depending upon the needs of those regional areas and that that would be taken into account before that step was taken. There was also the issue of consistency. Again, it was a divided issue. There were some in our group who had some concern about the level of consistency between the various NRM bodies across the region. It was suggested that there could perhaps be some planning frameworks put into place that were perhaps a little more stringent and transparent. That was not necessarily the unanimous decision of the group, but it was proposed. There was also discussion about the role of local government in terms of integration. Again, it was a somewhat vexed issue. There were some who believed that local government was being excluded to some extent at present and that it needed to have an increased role for its overall effectiveness. It was suggested, however, by others that the current role that local governments played in terms of being consulted in the overall process was sufficient and that those current processes had not really had a chance to prove their worth at this point and that that was going to be a satisfactory arrangement. There was some discussion of the importance of the Commonwealth role. The Commonwealth representative in our group certainly spoke about future developments in very close and ongoing feedback provided by the Commonwealth so that the other stakeholders were certainly aware of the Commonwealth's position. Finally, the issue that we started with and got back to right at the end of our discussions was resourcing. That was dollars and HR resources as well. That is an issue that Don mentioned before. They needed to be sufficient if effective integration was to take place. There was a suggestion that you needed to firstly scope the bucket. I am talking about the overall amount of money and amount of HR resources available. Taking into account particular time frames, they needed to be allocated appropriately and in the most effective way. Mr INALL: Ladies and gentlemen, you will know that the other group was concerned with secure futures. Ms TUCKER: What I find interesting is that a lot of the information that has been fed back by the previous groups also reflects some of the discussion, thoughts and ideas that came up from the group that I was working with. It was very difficult distilling the information from the card process, because there was an incredible amount of valuable information produced with that process. However, we managed to bunch that down into three headings. The first was process and planning. The other was the issue of property rights and funding. There was another issue, which is probably captured in what we have done, concerning water access. I will go through what we have up there at the moment. I think this reflects, once again as I said before, what others have said. The overall feeling was that they want the local resource—the people, the groups and the committees there already—on the ground to be involved in setting targets. The statement 'with adequate knowledge and funding resources' applies to adequate knowledge resources as well as funding resources. The idea was that that was coming top down from government. Once again, the feeling was that they did not want politics to come into it. They wanted government to support it but not to 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2589 use anything that happened for a political slant. That is then reflected probably more in the second outcome, which is the desire for cooperative and bipartisan support from state and Commonwealth governments. The 'think globally, act locally' statement seems to be reflected in some of the other workshops. Once again, we need to think about this on an Australiawide process but we then need to tailor whatever plans, outcomes, et cetera, to a local level using the local infrastructure and people who are already there. In relation to linking the local and regional processes to basin-wide processes and outcomes, it was stated that there was a concern that maybe Queensland at times was being blamed for some of the things that were happening outside the state but still in the basin. So that was also part of the global thought. In relation to the NRM integrated planning framework for land, water and biodiversity, the comment I need to make here is that no-one in our group denied that salinity is an issue. However, it was seen to be echoed fairly consistently across the group that it was a resource issue as well. It was not just salinity; it was looking at the whole process of vegetation and land use as well. I will move on to the other two points that we covered. Once again, these are issues that came up in some of the other groups. In relation to property rights, I need to say that there was a fairly strong—lively might be too strong a word—discussion as to what the collective group wanted to bring back to the forum. With regard to the first statement—that is, secure tenure to water entitlement and access based on sustainable on-farm practices—that was specifically focused at farm practices. There was a dissenter in the group who said that they did not wholly support that. They saw the issue of water entitlement—access to water—as being larger than that, but the group as a whole agreed with that statement. However, the other person did want it reflected that they were not in total agreeance with that and that water was a bigger issue. In relation to water and vegetation rights and responsibilities, that needs to be clearly defined in existing legislation. There was not the request for new legislation, but what water and vegetation rights means and what responsibilities for those water and vegetation rights means actually needs to be in current legislation. That would require a transparent consultation process involving once again the groups who are already out there. Words such as 'trust' and 'transparency' were certainly reflected in our workshop. The funding issue was certainly a big one. One of the main key points that came out and concerns that people expressed related to the actual efficient use of funds, whatever that be. There was the acknowledgment that it was public money and that we need to be accountable. Basically, the efficient use is to achieve outcomes on the ground, not to have money tossed into a particular area or concern and for it to be seen that there are no outcomes. I think that covers a huge amount of accountability wanted with the use of funding. Federal and state funds are required. Looking at issues such as stewardship, incentives, structural adjustments and compensation was also mentioned in our workshop. Thank you. Mr INALL: Bob Macadam also looked at secure futures. Mr MACADAM: Within our group there was a very high level of agreement I think on what the agenda actually is and the issues then were how to progress the agenda. We went through a process, as happened in the other groups, of asking people to write on a card three high priority aspects of the situation that they hoped were going to be addressed. They came into the following areas: institutional structures, nine cards; tenure rights—that is, access to natural resources—four cards; informing the community, four cards; cost sharing, eight cards; database, four cards; and implementation, both setting targets and methods for achieving it, six cards. We then went through a process of discussion within the group of what that meant and that led to a realisation I think that there was a very high level of agreement about the underlying issues within the group to the extent where the group was quite content and happy to break up into small groups—some as small as one—to address one or other of these issues. The thrust of their addressing them was the notion that there was to be a submission go forward to cabinet, so what would they like to see incorporated into that submission in relation to these headings? The only one that was not addressed was the final one, implementation. What I will do is just put up what those groups actually produced. In relation to institutional arrangements, there is no way of achieving aims or objectives without having structures—that is, science policy integrated into planning integrated into implementation. Structures should be bottom up community based producing leadership and accountability. The community is represented at both the regional level and at a lower level. Community has these two levels, if you like. All these levels need resourcing. So you need resourcing at all those levels—that is, regional, state and local. We need a consultation process rather than a bureaucratic process. The institutional structures should have the effect of empowering people, land- holders and others and building their self-confidence. The system for implementation must have monitoring of reporting of achievable outcomes and milestones incorporated into them. That was the statement that the subgroup of about three or four people produced relative to the institutional arrangements issue. As far as cost sharing is concerned—and that was then reframed as sharing the burden as we shift to sustainable natural resource management—there were three elements to that. Firstly, there is commitment to state- federal cost sharing and funding. Secondly, there is structural adjustment for the element of change which produces public benefits—that is, incentives for change in farming systems in that there needs to be financial incentives for change in farming systems. Thirdly, the development of principles for private and public funding for changes in natural resource management and use—that is, the notion of a public levy. As far as the issue of a database is concerned, the focus that the group who worked on that was to concentrate more on social and economic impacts—the need for a database that relates to social and economic impacts. It came up with the statement that there is a need for the development of an information resource to underpin an economic and social modelling tool that will allow the impacts of natural resource management planning to be assessed. As far as access rights were concerned—and the group advisedly did not use property rights; it was really access to natural resource management and tenure rights—it came up with the statement to review existing legislation to provide rights of tenure in perpetuity based on current entitlements subject to implementation of property plans, management systems and BMP based on stakeholder input. There was some debate around that statement. I must say that each group reported back to the large group and everyone put their hand up and said, 'Yes, that's fine.' There was some debate about this issue. My understanding of the nature of the debate is whether the rights to tenure are before or after this sort of transitional period. 2590 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002

The last theme addressed was the one of informing the community. There was a strong sense coming from within the group that the community at large had to be brought on board, that there was a need for an educative and informative process to bring the larger community on board. The agenda is well understood here but perhaps not well understood or accepted in the wider community. The group that worked on that came up with a plan based on the notion of ground up education—bottom up education—and a need for an awareness learning program; to use existing programs to fund learning activities, for example FarmBis and TAFE funding; provide funding for extension programs through existing organisations, and with Agforce, Landcare, Bushcare and Greening Australia to strengthen what is happening there by additional funding; involve local government in salinity awareness programs through the Department of Natural Resources, the EPA and DPI—I think the idea there is to again utilise their programs; long-term education through schools, colleges and universities underpinned by the best science available; and education of stakeholders in remedial action to address and fix problems. So there is a very strong emphasis there on the need for an educative informing process. Mr INALL: I thank everyone. Terry has asked me to try to see if I can pull that down into two or three issues. But before I do that, is there anybody in the room who feels they have been wronged, that their very important matter has not got up there? Is there something we have forgotten about? Something we have ignored which is mighty important for us all in considering this matter of the threat, if you like, of salinity in southern Queensland? Mr HILLARD: Clarrie Hillard from Border Rivers. I was quite surprised. I know we are talking about $162 million for all of this process. I would like to say that I consider that chickenfeed when we take into consideration that some of those Collins class submarines that are likely to sink and not be very useful at all are costing billions. If we want to throw some money at correcting our problem that we have throughout Australia—it is not only Queensland—it is going to take billions to do that. Mr WILDMAN: I am Errol Wildman. My background is in sawmilling and my comment relates to sawmilling. We did not mention it in our group, but I think it needs to be brought forward. Agroforestry is one thing that can certainly be developed further in western Queensland. Despite what people think about forests or our trees growing slow, given the right conditions in the west, they do grow fast and agroforestry should be high on the agenda. Mr INALL: Thank you. Anyone else? So lack of dollars from Border Rivers and agroforestry. It seems that we have talked about agroforestry in this country for a long while, Errol, but we have not made much of an impact yet, have we? Anyone else? Mr WHARTON: Yes. I would like to commend the Premier. Nobody has given much thought to the Premier. I would like to commend him on his stand on an issue that affects us all. I commend him and everybody in this room. It is good to sit down here and see all the people, whatever their interests are, come together to resolve an issue. I am Jim Wharton, one of the Kooma elders from the Murray-Darling region where the problems are. Thank you. Mr INALL: Thanks a lot, Jim. I am going to take a risk. In the last week I have read a report from the Australian Landcare Council to the federal ministers involved in land care—obviously Warren Truss and Minister Kemp, whom we heard from this morning. It came through so strongly in that document about the resourcing and the independence of local groups—let me call them catchment groups, community groups, regional groups; the labels do not matter so much at the moment. It seems to me that what has come through very strongly here today is that people are worried that they are not effective enough because of the lack of money or the lack of a close relationship with scientists or not having enough extension people to help them. Now, having made that assessment, am I right or is there some disagreement with my judgment that that is really top of the agenda? Mr ACTON: I think that is very much one of the concerns. There is one word that I suggest maybe you left out, that is, trust in the process. Mr INALL: Trust? Mr ACTON: Trust in the process—confidence in the process. Mr INALL: Tell me more. Mr ACTON: There has been a range of processes. Obviously the concern that I hear most of all is that the agendas are set before the process starts; you get some of these unilateral things coming over the top from time to time, that loses confidence in the process, and so on. I just wanted to add that one word to what you said about the regional process, that is, there needs to be confidence that what they are doing is going to be listened to and that the outcomes they come up with are going to be given a reasonable go. Mr INALL: I have to say that I hear the same sort of thing in New South Wales—certainly from veg. committees at least. Does anybody else want to talk about this whole matter of support for regional communities? Mr BLACKMORE: At the risk of being career limiting, I think it is the absolute central issue. The issue is on governance, basically. People need to know what they are expected to do and what is the form of the regional community. If you do not establish the governance rules around it—say I am running the Murray-Darling Basin Commission—if I do not know what my rules of racing are, I am going to be like a ship in the night all over the place creating havoc. I do know the rules of racing, because I have 138 pages of them written down. What we find, looking at the 24 rivers in the basin, is that in those valleys where governance arrangements have been worked through with their community there is still plenty of active debate and discussion. Governments from high put down the markers on what they want, which is very important, but the people know what they are doing. I think that is a very important issue. I think we are moving from what I would describe as a facilitation model, which is where we have been for the last decade. We have been working together trying to put our shoulders to the wheel, but we are finding that the problems are much more complex. So I think the rules around governance are going to be important, so people will have some certainty of what their contribution is and how it will be respected in the process. Mr INALL: What about the accountability of those groups? Do you think those guidelines are well in place now, or do we need to revisit them? Mr BLACKMORE: Don has talked about Queensland, but I think they are a mixed bag right across the basin. We have many of them. I make a point to go to a lot of them and sit in at meetings and listen and understand what they are trying to do. What you find is that it is more than rules now; it is people knowing. Governments are saying, 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2591

'This is what you are going to do. Here are your resources. We'll provide knowledge resources under these conditions. Here is the marker. Our tree policy is going to be that, or we are going to negotiate it.' So we do not go in with a false hope of where the boundaries are, and governments do what they are paid to do: govern. The other groups know within those rules what they are entitled to do, as well. Mr INALL: One of the things that concerns me about regional groups—whatever label we are going to put on them—is that local governments are often saying, 'We are not involved.' Does anybody in the room have a view about that? If we were to empower regional groups more, what do we do about local government? Do we leave them out altogether? Do we involve them, or what? How do we do it? Ms WILDEN: What you do with local government is you develop a really strong regional strategy group that starts moving ahead at a fairly rapid rate; and local government look around and think, 'Hell, we've been left out of this. We'd better get involved in this.' And before you know it they have formed themselves into four subgroups and want four positions on the board and they are giving a commitment to work well on a regional or subregional basis. That is what you do with local government. Mr INALL: Is there another view? Mr GILMOUR: I think it is absolutely important that local government be kept in the loop. I think we are in the loop to a reasonable degree. But as our president said this morning—and I support him 100 per cent—it is really important, minister, that we do keep local government well in the loop. I know you understand that. Thank you for that. Mr INALL: Anybody else? Ms THORLEY: If local government is not part of the loop it is their own fault. They have the ability, they have the knowledge, and they have been doing this and spending more money than both the state and federal governments combined for a long time on anything to do with NRM issues. And if local government does not get itself out there, they have no-one to blame but themselves. Mr INALL: Tell me how you do that. Ms THORLEY: Local government is the closest that you will ever get to the community. We should be involved in all those issues. NRM issues are now called local government business, and we have to take it up. We should be involved, because they are our community. It is very simple. Mr INALL: But do you get into conflict with the local regional NRM committee? Ms THORLEY: Neil, do you get into conflict with your wife every morning? You most probably do. Mr INALL: I try hard not to. Ms THORLEY: There is always going to be some sort of conflict, but you sit there and you negotiate, because at the end of the day it is not about any single person here; it is about a river and a country, and all of us have to eventually get to that. Mr McCUTCHEON: I think there has been a perception for a long time that local authorities have been dragging their feet getting into natural resource management. I think a lot of it depends on the pressure that their communities put on them to get them involved. In our particular area, on the Western Downs out there, we had flood plain problems which the council came in and tried to fix from the council's perspective. We nearly created a range war out there to do it, but it turned out fairly successfully. It moved on to a much larger group with the Brigalow- Jimbour Flood Plain Group, which might have been heard of by a few of you here. They have won state and national awards for the work they have done. What we found essential to make that work was that it be driven from the ground up. We wanted the people out there on the ground telling us what they required, forming their own committees, doing the work from a local level up and then asking us what we could do to help them. We have cooperated and assisted with that out there all the time. I am a little bit concerned about this NAP process that we are going through at the moment; that all the guidelines are being handed from the top down, and they are not giving us much of an opportunity to get our community involved or to find out how we are going to engage with our community. I think this is the position that local authorities are in at the moment, too. We are still feeling our way, and I am damned sure that our local community are not feeling their way out there. Our local Landcare groups in particular are starting to feel very lost and lonely. I think we need to keep that in mind as we progress along from here. Mr INALL: I want to move on to the next area that hits me between the eyes. I will stick my neck out again. You heard that in the group that I was with there was a proposal for a short-term moratorium on clearing in Queensland. What is the feeling of the meeting? Mr DRYSDALE: You have a choice, Neil, basically. You can have a short-term moratorium on tree clearing or you can have a reasonable planning process. If you bring the first in without going through that full process, we are telling our community, 'We will take you through a process, but we will pre-empt what you are going to come up with and basically we are not going to listen to you.' Mr INALL: Andrew, the proposal was put in our group, too: yes, but we really need to get on with our regional veg. plans first. You are seeing it as a regional issue rather than a state-wide issue; is that right? Mr DRYSDALE: I think you can come to the same end and get the full community going with you by going through the regional planning process. They are not silly. If the need exists to have a moratorium or a stock tree clearing or whatever else in certain areas, they will soon identify that. Mr INALL: I can see two zealous conservationists wanting to have a say about this. Let us have the man who promised us transitional money this morning. Dr TRAILL: I wish we could do that. But in no district, region or state in Australia has that actually ever happened where a regional veg. committee process has stopped clearing in salinity prone areas before the salt started. Unfortunately, in the areas where there is still vegetation on arable land which someone wants to clear, even if there is a longer term salinity risk or other land degradation problems, the consistent theme again and again is that the wishes of that minority of individuals will prevail in some way. That is the unfortunate experience. I have thought about this for five or six years. I do not lightly—and nor do any of my colleagues—suggest coming in with 2592 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 rapid phase-outs and quick moratoriums, because we know very, very clearly what that means in terms of confusion, lack of certainty and suffering by local communities. But the hard reality we have seen again and again and again is that there needs to be a clear outcome and a goal set for cessation of clearing where it is needed to protect environmental values. That needs to come from government, because it is the government's job to make the hard decisions, not to give the hard decisions to regional committees where you might have often a high degree of conflict from people who might want to make a dollar potentially in the short term and other people who may suffer the consequences of those people. Mr INALL: There is probably a different view up the back. I am not too sure about that. Mr FISHER: When you look at that map behind that whiteboard over there you have to realise that the salinity is going to get worse no matter what we do. No matter how quickly we stop clearing, it is going to get worse. The only way we are going to halt or slow the rate of increase in salinity is to do things like put more trees in the ground. But if I am the federal government, why would I put money into those sorts of measures—like putting more trees in the ground—while other people are pulling them down? It is just throwing good money after bad. We have danced around this issue a bit. We need to tackle land clearing, and we need to tackle it quickly if we are serious about salinity. That is not the only issue. Mr INALL: So you are a supporter of a moratorium on clearing in Queensland? Mr FISHER: Absolutely. I think we have to start thinking seriously about what it will take to satisfy land-holder concerns about the implementation of stronger controls and a rapid phase-out. Mr INALL: There is another view up here. Mr GOODRICH: There are two issues for me. One is that the governments have had a habit of consulting—and that has been all the governments—then unfortunately not taking as much notice as the land-holders want, and that puts the land-holders off. But the big issue in relation to moratoriums is: are the trees in the right place? If they are not in the right place then we are making a poor strategic decision. Mr INALL: Can you expand on that for me? Mr GOODRICH: We do not have enough science to absolutely know where the recharge areas are. Do we know whether the trees we are proposing to keep at this stage are in the right place to prevent any future salinity? Perhaps they are in absolutely the wrong place. Mr BIDWELL: My understanding from talking to Ian Gordon is that those maps are not saying, 'Don't clear.' They are saying, 'In those red areas you need to be careful about the land uses that occur.' There are other land use systems. It is not saying, 'Don't clear.' It is saying, 'Be careful.' That is what the regional process is going to determine. Mr DOUGLAS: Moratoriums, moratoriums. I remember suggesting to an ag leader in this state that the industry organisations should consider a voluntary moratorium until such time as certain measures were put in place. That is still my view. In other words, if we are going to have a moratorium, let us have a negotiated moratorium on certain grounds. The grounds would be that you would have agreement from the industry sector that the catchment processes were going to be backed and that property rights compensation issues were sorted out. A given time should be put on that—a year and a half or two years—and if they were not achieved then all bets would be off and we would be back to where we were. So we should use the moratorium not just as a win for the greenies and a loss for someone else but as a means of arriving at a management of the position. Ms WISHART: There is no suggestion, I do not think, to have a moratorium and not go through the regional planning process. I think the simple point is this: if the trees are in the ground you can always clear them next year or the year after if the regional planning process decides it is okay to do that. But once they are gone they are gone for good, and it costs zillions of dollars to get them back in the ground, depending on country. Sometimes you cannot even do it. I reject the suggestion that you are pre-empting the community's outcome. I think you are giving them an option to actually have an outcome to protect the bush instead of the other way around. Mr ARMBRUSTER: We took over some of the oldest agricultural land in Queensland in 1950. All I can say is: before you clear a tree, make sure you do it for the proper reason. We have spent over 40 years rebuilding our country. It will definitely be in better condition than it was in when we bought it. We have suffered through it, but it was our active decision as a family to do that. I am happy with the result. Before you push, pull or plough, make sure you do it for the right reasons. Mr INALL: Ladies and gentlemen, I want to go on now to discuss the whole matter of stewardship and incentive payments. Our group certainly talked a lot about incentives, and indeed even compensation. Does anybody want to address that matter? Where are we in all of the discussion about incentives? Don, the MDBC has done a lot of work in this area, hasn't it? Mr BLACKMORE: Yes. Mr INALL: Let's hear from you. Mr BLACKMORE: We are going to hijack this session a little and move into market based instruments. Leith Boully, the chair of the Murray-Darling Basin Community Advisory Committee, and I have been asked to take the issue of market based instruments and go over where we have been and what the issues are. Market based instruments in natural resource management only work when you have an intelligent purchaser—that is, you know what you want. If you go to the shop to buy a shirt and you come out with a pair of shoes, it is not much good. Market based instruments mean that you have engaged yourself long enough to be an informed purchaser of the outcome you want. Therefore, you have specified it. I will give a couple of examples and then Leith can give the community view on it. Let us take vegetation for a moment. I think Neil made the point that we have been on the agroforestry hop for as long as he and I have been around. And we do not have an industry. We do not have it matched to natural resource degradation. We have it aspiration led. There are a lot of very good things happening with agroforestry, so do not belittle it. But show me where we have one industry in the basin which has matched agroforestry with resource degradation to get a critical mass which is of benefit for everybody. We have to get a different sort of instrument that deals with that. Just 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2593 putting out government money and saying, 'Let's go out and plant trees,' is not going to be helpful. We have to get a concept like a vegetation bank. The ACF has done a huge amount of work with Allen Consulting and come up with a package that looks pretty impressive as well. We have to get to the point where we have said, 'We want 20,000 hectares of trees in this region,' and the catchment authority has denoted land suitable for purpose so we are not putting it everywhere. What does 'land suitable for purpose' mean? That means land that, if we deal with it, will stop a hazard becoming a risk and becoming a nuisance at some stage. That means we have to be intelligent. We have to move to know where that is. The commission and the ministerial council have been thinking about getting up a vegetation bank. But there is no critical mass of enthusiasm for it yet. You have to ask yourself: what is the alternative to that as a proposition? I will ask Leith about vegetation, economic instruments in vegetation and the CAC view on that. Ms BOULLY: I will start with an observation about much of the discussion today. Quite rightly, the discussion has been around how individuals actually change what they do on their land to deal with salinity. But it is not just about individuals. Individuals can work as hard as they like and they probably will not be able to on their own address the broader issues, whether they are salinity or vegetation issues. So you have to aggregate in some way and you have to have some incentives to do things. If it is managed on a small scale, you are not going to get the level of change that is required. If you assume—this is a big assumption because we do not yet have a risk map for Queensland—that you have to put some land back into vegetation somewhere in the catchment and it is a significant area, how do you do that if you just have 1,000 willing land-holders out there working on their own? You have to think about what will drive that change. Will it be through the market? Will it be through some process that is managed jointly by community and government? Concepts such as vegetation banks start to spring to mind, because you want accountability and you want outcomes. You want to be able to contract individuals and groups of individuals to deliver outcomes. You have to think about ways to make this work at the scale you need it to work. Of course, at the end of the day it will be the individual who does the work, but somehow those individuals' actions have to be aggregated and they have to be able to operate in a market where they can see the incentives and the opportunities and they can also measure the costs and make informed investments. Mr BLACKMORE: A vegetation bank is just an instrument that tenders for vegetation services on behalf of government. We know that many forestry operations are not viable in the 500 millimetre to 800 millimetre rainfall zone, although I think some people in the room would say that we are starting to get a glimmer for some particular industries. The vegetation bank just treats trees like roads. If you want a road you go out and say, 'I want a road there.' You ask for tenders and five people say, 'I want to build that road,' and they put in a price. Part of the deal is that they have to be able to respect landowners. So there is no compunction, but they will offer something and you will make a decision—five per cent of capital value as an annuity for access to that land over 20 years or however long the trees are there. The vegetation bank becomes just one instrument that tenders, whether it is at Benalla, Toowoomba or Orange, so that we do not have 16 of those instruments in Australia because we cannot afford it. The international people who want to invest in Australia, as well as the national people, want to make sure that they have a legal entity through which they can get the subsidy. When they are tendering they are tendering for the subsidy. At the moment we are guessing the subsidy we pay for a tree to go into the ground. When they tender, at the end of the day they want maybe $100 per hectare to actually invest in this activity. That is what a vegetation bank is. There are lots of other ways to get trees into the ground. That is probably not the clearest explanation you will ever get, but it is an important change in mind-set. It sees trees as infrastructure and it sees us calling for tenders. So people who want them for carbon or for whatever can build their critical mass of industry and collect their money from whatever capital they can get to actually participate in it. Therefore we do not scramble along trying to put in government money and match it with farmers' money when farmers are trying to run their enterprises and the competition is just too great. That is what we are trying to do. The work we have done has shown that we can create 100,000 new jobs in the basin, based on New South Wales Forestry economics. Find me another thing that will do that. And we can match it with the areas that are degraded. The catchment authorities, with their farmers, work out the land that is suitable for purpose. There will be no compunction for anyone to participate because there is no shortage of it. Mr INALL: Where is this at? Mr BLACKMORE: It has been approved by the ministerial council for us to work up, but there are not many advocates around for it. Bob Smith in New South Wales clearly is and others are, but it is a new concept. Like any new concept, people are nervous about it, want to know more and so on. If you want to change culture without affecting landowners' rights and protecting them—there is no compunction for landowners at all—it forces those who want vegetation to identify land suitable for purpose. Ouch. Mr HENRY: It is a linked point, but I think it is a very important point. It is essential that there is very good support and incentives out there for local communities to be empowered to implement. I think that is essential. It has to be linked to clear government regulation that benchmarks environmental outcomes. The Australian community is concerned about the future of rivers, salinity and the bush. There is an important compact here. In this room we are jointly—that is, people from the bush, conservation groups and others—putting up our hands to government and saying, 'We agree that hundreds of millions of dollars of Australian taxpayers' money should be going in to help people fix these problems.' I strongly support that. But the Australian community, including those people sitting in cities, will only agree to that if they know it is going to deliver the outcomes they care about. I have talked there about the environmental outcome—bringing our rivers back to life, tackling land clearing and tackling salinity. They also care about communities in the bush and want to support them. It is essential that strong support and incentives are linked to governments being fair dinkum and saying, 'We are going to show leadership and really lay down some environmental benchmarks here to deliver the goods.' 2594 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002

I think then we will find, if we can get that balance right, if we are prepared to say, 'Okay, this issue is so critical that we have to come together and we have to empower and support the community and also commit, through our governments, to environmental benchmarks, we will find that there is very strong support in the Australian community to put the huge amount of dollars that are needed to tackle these issues and support people as they tackle them. Mr INALL: I just see a bit of conflict here. It seemed to me that the feedback that I have been getting this afternoon is that local people want to set local targets. You are saying that governments ought to set targets. How do you work that through? Mr HENRY: We are dealing in this case with quite large catchments. Local communities can do very, very important work, but that work has to add up to make a difference to the whole. For instance, in this case there are people just over the border who will care about what the water quality is coming down the river. There are people working the land down river who will care about it. I think that there is a bottom line that governments have to give leadership for and then, beyond that, what I think we would all hope is that individuals in the community will strive for excellence and go well beyond the benchmark and they should be encouraged and have flexibility to do that. Mr INALL: Thank you. Ms BOULLY: I think human nature is that none of us look downstream. We are all busy doing what we are doing and we look upstream, because there are people who affect us upstream. So who is going to take responsibility for the downstream, or the off-site impacts? Is it written into our obligations in tenure as land-holders or into the licence that we hold as irrigators? No, it is not. You could do it in that way, but that would still require someone to make a decision about what is fair. If you look at the Murray-Darling Basin, it is a very big place and looking 2,000 kilometres downstream is impossible for an individual, because you still would not know what to do on your own place. There is a real tension, and this is what is being expressed here today and across communities—everywhere in Australia—about how much responsibility do you have to make decisions on your place or in your community and how much should you accept the decisions of government on behalf of society. There is going to continue to be tension, but at the end of the day if it is the Murray-Darling Basin, or the Border Rivers, or a small component of the basin, we cannot just make individual decisions and add them up; we have to say, 'How far can we go?' I think government is the only institution that we have that can make those decisions. They need to be informed. It is not possible for me as an individual land-holder to make decisions in an informed way that will prevent me polluting someone downstream. That is what it is all about. If Don comes back and talks about other market based instruments and talks about salinity, what they have in the southern part of the basin is a pollution entitlement, or trading scheme, which is probably the biggest in the world, I think Don would claim. People are trading pollution. That is where we are going to get to with some of the salinity debate—probably not in a hurry in Queensland. Mr BLACKMORE: Just take one example at the moment. Each state has a pollution entitlement. Queensland has none, but it is signed on to be accountable for the change in salinity crossing the Queensland border from 1 July or January 2000. So every five years, that will be reviewed and Queensland will be accountable for what that is and have to make good, however you make good. The rest of the states are already buying that, because they know that they cannot make good. So they are purchasing their pollution entitlement. That is an economic instrument. That is governments deciding to protect their landowners from downstream impacts by buying some space in their lives without ever having to go and tell them and explain every detail to them. That scheme has gone a lot further in the southern part of the basin in that if you trade water now in Victoria onto a new development and you spent $1,000 a megalitre and that turns up on your block and you spent $1 million, the day you buy that water you are fined $123 capital to pay for the salinity consequences of that water. So there are very sophisticated economic instruments being developed. I can see that Neil is going to beat me behind the ears. That is more than appropriate. Mr INALL: Jim, you wanted to have a word and then we will hear from the minister to wind things up. Mr WHARTON: I would like to make a recommendation. We come here today, we have sat here and we have rattled our bones to come up with solutions to assist the government. I believe that, with all the policies and things that we put up on the paper today, I would like to recommend that a working group be appointed to work with the government—all the key players. Without that machinery to drive the action plan, nothing will happen. I do not like to believe that they would not, but where are our safeguards—all of these people sitting here today! Let us hope that the Premier will listen to what I am saying and establish a working group from all the people. I do not care who they are, but I would like to see that body there to make sure that the wheels are driven in the right direction. Thank you. Mr INALL: Thank you, Jim. Great. So you are suggesting a working group to pull all of this together and move things forward. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we have come to the time in the program where the minister is going to sum up what he has listened to and taken part in today. Thank you, Minister. Mr ROBERTSON: Neil, thank you very much. First of all, can I genuinely thank everyone for the spirit in which they have participated today. I think that it has been an important day for us all. It has focused our minds on a range of issues. Whilst in many respects it confirms some existing processes that we have in place, it does provide us with some guidance on how we move forward from here. What I am about to say is not dramatic. The reason for that is that what you have come back with has not been dramatic. I do not mean that in a critical sense; I mean that in a positive sense. There is a view that we need to be careful in how we move ahead. The very strong message that has come through today is that, in moving ahead, we need to take a far more integrated approach than we have done in the past. We need to find the mechanism to bring water, vegetation, salinity, indigenous issues and others together to come up with long-term solutions. To that extent, can I thank Jim Wharton for his timely suggestion just prior to my standing up. I want to look for your endorsement of the following—and please allow me to work through them. Some of this has been prepared earlier; others, as you have seen me walking in and out of the meeting for the last half an hour, I 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2595 have tried to distil and get some preliminary endorsement for where we go from here. I think that it is fair to say that, firstly, there has been an acknowledgment by some participants that salinity is a real problem in Queensland and action is required now to prevent degradation in the future. We also accept that actions need to be underpinned by good science, but action should not be delayed to wait for better information. However, there is a recognition that, as better information, better science becomes available, strategies should be adapted as that new data emerges. Although there are existing processes, they need to be accelerated and go further than was previously envisaged. We recognise that the future security of rural communities depends on developing a suite of short-term and long-term solutions that are targeted, integrated, able to be implemented and affordable. I think what we have also done today is to reinforce that the partnership approach that has underpinned a lot of the work that we have done so far needs to continue, but perhaps needs to be better targeted to local action on the ground. To that extent, in terms of moving forward, I announce that there will be, as part of an overall cabinet submission that I will take to cabinet in the next short while, the creation of an integrated natural resource ministerial advisory council. Basically, what we have adopted, Jim, is your suggestion. A review of ministerial councils under my department has been, of course, under way. Many of you have been part of that review. What was not part of that review until today was the acknowledgment that we need to be focused on better integration and, to that extent, for the purposes of getting the processes within my department right to respond to what you have been telling us today, is the creation of this new, integrated natural resource ministerial council. I emphasise that part of that integration—and it is appropriate that I mention this, given that recently native title has become part of my department—requires a greater consideration of indigenous issues in the framework of natural resource management. Part of the cabinet submission will also address a number of other issues. This is by no means a final list, but a list that I hope meets your expectations, that is, that there will be work done on better and more targeted integrated science across government. We have got a lot of people in white coats running around the government—not just in my department but in EPA, DPI, and others. We recognise that there is a need to bring at least those groups closer together in a way that responds to the needs of the community. Cabinet will also be informed of your very strong views about the need for additional resources for community based action and extension services. However, the answer to that does not just rest with the state government; it needs to be recognised that we will obviously have to engage the federal government in terms of addressing those issues. It is not appropriate that I make promises here today in regard to that at this stage. All I can do is recognise what you have told us today. Finally, we recognise that what is happening on the ground at the moment is that there are significant numbers of people—people such as yourselves in the room today—who are already committed to participation on a range of bodies, regional vegetation management committees, et cetera. It is not our purpose today to steamroll those processes; rather, it is that we recognise the continuing importance of those bodies. But I say this in relation to vegetation management: in terms of the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin, I am expecting that the regional vegetation management committee for this part of Queensland will be reporting to me with its plan by the end of this year or early next year. However, there is a need for action now. As a result, I will be calling together my ministerial advisory committee on vegetation management within two weeks and, if need be, to involve other major stakeholders who are here today to consider the performance requirement under the Vegetation Management Act—performance requirement No. 5, which addresses the issue of salinity—to recommend ways in which that performance requirement can be tightened using the knowledge that we currently have available to us today. That, ladies and gentlemen, is the extent of the recommendations that I have put to you today. Neil, I am happy to take questions on that for perhaps 10 minutes to wrap it up. Mr INALL: Are there some burning questions for the minister? Ms GODFREY: With regards to anything with performance requirements, namely tree clearing, does that include fodder harvesting, or is that issue separate? Mr ROBERTSON: I would consider that that issue is separate. Too much work has gone on over the last 12 months in terms of the construction of a policy with respect to mulga harvesting. I would not want to impact on that work which I think has delivered a very good outcome, an outcome which land-holders accept. Given the conditions that we are facing in many parts of Queensland, I would not want to change that at this point in time. Mr MAHER: What does the government intend to do about the 1 million hectares of clearing that has already been approved? Will you be considering that in the next couple of weeks as well? One of the things that I think the previous sale of half of Telstra proved is that money cannot beat bad policy. We have seen $1 billion of taxpayers' money spent. The problem has gotten worse. Your government—and I am very grateful that you are taking this initiative here—has approved 1 million hectares of clearance in the same time. Unless we directly address those policy problems head-on, the rest will be very academic. Mr ROBERTSON: That is perhaps where you and I disagree. I have great faith in land-holders in terms of their commitment to adopting best management practice. It is fair to say in terms of BMP that some industries are more advanced that others. But simply placing a moratorium on tree clearing does not fix the problem. It does not provide for a sustainable future. I mentioned very early on in the piece what we are committed to. It is not a green issue or a brown issue; it is sustainable issue. Long-term sustainability as far as I am concerned—and you may disagree with me—is based on sustainable communities, sustainable environment. You cannot have one without the other. Long- term sustainability comes through improved practices. If I was to use a big stick today, it would empty this room in five minutes—probably even less. They would not be going to the bar; they would be going straight down to the Premier's building and protesting. We would have lost a valuable opportunity to continue to engage with people who are at the coalface in terms of proper land management practices. The answers are out there. I do not believe one of those answers is a moratorium. Ms CASEY: First, can I welcome the minister's commitment to having an integrated resource ministerial advisory council. We strongly support the approach as part of our commitment to sustainable primary production practices and sustainable farming. I am never amazed by the level of commitment shown by the stakeholders to work together towards a common goal. Despite some of the spats, for want of a better word, that we may have had 2596 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 in the workshops this afternoon, there was a genuine commitment by everyone to work towards a sustainable landscape in terms of the Murray-Darling, in terms of Queensland, in terms of this country. I congratulate everyone for that commitment, because we have come a long way today. In terms of the recommendations you made this afternoon, I refer to performance requirement No. 5 with respect to land degradation. Was that a commitment to look at the tightening of those controls with respect to the state code or with respect to Murray-Darling only? Mr ROBERTSON: What is going through my mind is the fact that for this part of the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin we have some additional tools which are currently not available in other parts of Queensland but which will become available within the next six or 12 months. If there was to be a tightening of the code using the new tools available in parts of Queensland, you could not extend them to the rest of Queensland because those same tools do not exist. In terms of the tightening of that code, it is in the interim until we receive the final regional vegetation management plan, which will then provide us with guidance on where we go there. In recognition that we need to do something in the short term, it would apply to the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin only. Mr TOPP: In respect of tightening up PR 5 in the vegetation management applications, what do you envisage happening to all the applications currently sitting in your departmental offices throughout the region? There is quite a number of them. I have one in particular, and I am only one of many. In fact, I have signed an extra 20-day extension for your department to process. Will what you are tightening up affect that application, or will that only happen concurrently as of today with new applications? Mr ROBERTSON: I will pass on that at the moment, simply because I think we would need to really consider how that might be implemented one way or the other. I will pass on that at this time, but clearly one of the things that will come out once that work is completed is clarity on that issue. Ted is nodding. I guess he is acknowledging that that is an issue he will have to take on board. Dr TRAILL: We appreciate that you are going on the front foot with this. As a response, I have to say that this is still very inadequate. On behalf of the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Wilderness Society, Queensland Conservation Council and I suspect many if not all of the regional environment groups, we will be certainly seeking more. Mr ROBERTSON: I respect what you are saying. The summit concluded at 5.23 p.m.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Energy Sector Hon. T. M. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport) (9.46 a.m.), by leave: On Saturday, the Courier-Mail published an article entitled 'Power plays' which purported to detail the current state of the energy sector in Queensland and the role of government owned corporations in that sector. As the minister responsible for energy, I found the article to be misleading and I take this opportunity to clarify several points. Firstly, just because the state government has decided not to privatise electricity assets does not mean that the industry's players are rudderless. The Courier-Mail would do well to remember that those people pushing for privatisation are the same people who will benefit most if the government's interest in the electricity industry is sold off to the highest bidder. Despite the self- seeking campaign of some vultures who sit ready to swoop in, I can assure members that this will not happen. We currently have an energy sector that is the envy of other states and that delivers cheap, reliable power supply for all Queenslanders. Why would we give that up? Our government owned corporations have just delivered excellent returns for the previous financial year. In fact, indications are that net profit after tax for all energy GOCs will exceed their original estimates for the year and in total will exceed the forecast by more than 50 per cent. GOCs operate within a strict governance framework where business performance and investment decisions are assessed against commercial standards. Consistent with the private sector, GOCs are directly answerable to their shareholders. As the shareholders for GOCs, I can assure the Courier-Mail that the Beattie government takes a great deal of interest in what they are doing and the continued excellent health of the industry. The excellent returns are evidence that our approach is working, and we will continue to give clear guidance and direction to GOCs. For example, both the Premier and I have been firm on GOC investment proposals that increase risks to the state or erode shareholder value. Joint ventures are now a feature of the generating sector for this reason. Private investment in new generating projects also frees up valuable capital for government to invest in other areas while still providing the necessary investment in future electricity supply. However, the reason why joint ventures were not approved in the retailing arm is the fact that they are existing businesses—not new ventures—and they do not require significant capital investments like the generation companies. Retail GOCs will continue to compete against each other. Many companies have subsidiaries competing against each other—just as the Courier-Mail competes against the Australian for 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2597 readership. In the case of electricity retailers they compete both locally and interstate. Where these investment proposals are located interstate or overseas we want to ensure that they complement a GOC's core business and that their investments bring a clear benefit to Queensland. All proposals are assessed on a case-by-case basis. I do not want to see a repeat of the poor decision making endorsed by the previous government which resulted in decisions such as building a power station in China. I would also challenge the assertion in the Courier-Mail that full retail competition is in limbo. Queensland does have a competitive market, and customers like the Courier-Mail are probably benefiting from the government's approach to competition. Contestability has been introduced for larger customers who use over 200 megawatts per annum and represent 50 per cent of the total electricity load. However, in the case of customers under 200 megawatts—households and small business—we have chosen not to introduce competition. After a rigorous assessment it was found that costs significantly outweighed the benefits and the Beattie government will not allow national competition policy to be blindly pursued if it disadvantages regional and rural Queenslanders. The health of Queensland's energy sector has never been better. We are currently undergoing a period of unparalleled growth, fuelled by the combination of a strong energy market and Queensland's natural advantage in energy resources. Since 1998, Queensland has seen investment in more than 2,500 megawatts of generation capacity—much of it supercritical coal- fired plant. This has resulted in estimated investment in the Queensland generation sector of $3.4 billion of which around 68 per cent has been from the private sector. In fact, the national electricity market management company's recent statement of opportunities forecasts that electricity reserves in Queensland will be sufficient until at least 2007-08 based on generation plant currently committed. This is a very favourable position and contrasts with some of the other NEM states that are facing much tighter supply/demand balances. Our strong reserves combined with energy market reforms such as our Cleaner Energy Strategy—which is aimed at diversifying Queensland's energy mix—have enhanced our attractiveness as an investment location for national and international business. In addition, projects such as the Townsville power station will provide a significant boost to north Queensland as well as strengthening the coal seam methane industry. As you can see, Mr Speaker, the sparks are clearly burning brightly for the future of the electricity industry in Queensland. It was claimed in the Courier-Mail—and some people say—that we do not have policies. They say this for one reason, that is, because we do not agree with them. We do not agree with selling off our assets. And in some cases, some proposals that GOCs would like us to follow we do not agree with because we do not believe that it is good for the value of our assets for Queenslanders, and we will make tough decisions when they are needed.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Water Resource Planning Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines) (9.53 a.m.), by leave: At a public meeting at Dirranbandi on 18 July, the Premier agreed to commission an independent review of the science underpinning government water resource planning in the Condamine-Balonne section of the Queensland Murray-Darling Basin. This review is being conducted as a result of the agreement reached between the Premier and stakeholders at Dirranbandi to address perceptions that the science being relied upon by my department in its water resource planning needs improvement. I also remind stakeholders who attended the Dirranbandi meeting that all parties have agreed to abide by the decision of the independent umpire. The independent review will be undertaken by a scientific review panel chaired by Professor Peter Cullen, an internationally recognised expert on water reform who recently retired as chief executive officer of the Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology. He will be assisted by two other highly experienced and respected panel members: Professor Russell Mein, who recently retired as chief executive of the Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology; and Dr Richard Marchant, Curator of the Department of Invertebrate Survey at the Museum of Victoria. A community reference group of stakeholders will also be established to work in conjunction with the review panel and to provide it with community and stakeholder input throughout the review process. 2598 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002

The scientific review panel will be required to present its independent report addressing the key issues in its terms of reference to the state government by the middle of December this year. The review's terms of reference are— 1. To review the Department of Natural Resources and Mines' Integrated Quantity and Quality Model (IQQM) for the Condamine-Balonne Basin. 2. To review the current ecological condition of the Lower Balonne river system, including its flood plains and wetlands. 3. To review the current relevant scientific information in order to propose an ecological definition of the healthy working river applicable to the Lower Balonne context. 4. To review the range of likely future ecological conditions and trends in the health of the Lower Balonne river system, including its flood plains and wetlands. 5. To review the reversibility or the lessening of the predicted trend in ecological condition outlined in term of reference No. 4. 6. To advise on river health monitoring and risk assessment frameworks for determining the future ecological condition of the Lower Balonne river system. As part of the review process, the scientific review panel will advertise in national and regional newspapers seeking public submissions on matters relevant to the review. The scientific review panel will also undertake a field inspection of the Lower Balonne river system and convene a series of two-day workshops to ensure that affected communities have adequate opportunity to provide the panel with information and feedback. This review is evidence of the Beattie government's commitment to ensuring that the Lower Balonne communities have a long-term sustainable future. I trust that local stakeholders will play a positive role so that the water resource planning process can be finalised in the near future.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Education and Training Reforms Hon. A. M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education) (9.57 a.m.), by leave: In March this year our government announced sweeping new reforms to Queensland's education and training systems. The reforms include trials of a full-time preparatory year before year 1, increased funding for information and communication technology in our schools and proposals to make senior schooling fit better with further education, training and work, including an option to raise the school leaving age from 15 to either 16 or 17. These are significant reforms which will impact on all sections of the community—students, parents, teachers, employers and training providers—in many ways. That is why the government invited the community to tell us what they thought about the reforms and how they might impact on them. The formal consultation concluded last week, on 31 July, and I am pleased to report that the response was overwhelming. There were more than 100,000 requests for information from the education and training reforms web site and more than 1,700 calls to the hotline. At the close of the consultation period the government had received more than 600 submissions, completed questionnaires and letters about the reforms from a range of groups representing parents, teachers, industry, tertiary institutions, young people and the community. Almost 8,000 people took the opportunity to register their feedback in person at the 39 community forums held across Queensland between 26 March and 30 July. I am pleased to report that the forums—held in centres stretching from the Torres Strait, west to Mount Isa and south to the Gold Coast—were attended and supported by both government and non-government members, and I thank them for their participation. I would like to acknowledge particularly the commitment of my parliamentary secretary, the member for Bundamba, Jo-Ann Miller, and that of the parliamentary secretary to the Minister for Employment, Training and Youth, Neil Roberts, the member for Nudgee, who represented the government at many of these forums. Education and training providers, including teachers and principals from state and non-state schools along with trainers from TAFE and private vocational education and training providers, made up 45 per cent of the total attendance. Importantly, the voice of young Queenslanders was heard, with young people from state and non-state schools, TAFE and other education institutions as well as young people who have dropped out of the system also recording high attendance rates, making up about 38 per cent of participants. The community sessions attracted about 10 per cent of the total attendance while parents, early childhood teachers and other 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2599 community members accounted for about seven per cent of participants at the information sessions on the preparatory year trials. A range of views emerged from the forums. There was general support, in both urban and rural locations, for proposals to provide more flexible and relevant senior schooling options. A key issue discussed by teachers and educators in rural and remote communities was improved access to schooling and training opportunities. Students were supportive of a proposal to record a broader range of achievements on the senior certificate, while educators discussed the type of learning that could be recorded and how it might be done. All feedback and submissions received through the consultation process will be considered in the development of a white paper for the government to consider later this year.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Private Health Insurance Rebate Hon. W. M. EDMOND (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Minister for Health and Minister Assisting the Premier on Women's Policy) (10.00 a.m.), by leave: I want to correct an attempt by the Commonwealth government and others to convey an impression that the 30 per cent private health rebate has reduced pressure on the public hospital system. Nothing could be further from the truth. While overall hospital admissions might indeed be stabilising because of modern clinical practice such as increased day procedures and community care, what cannot be disguised is the fact that there is ever greater pressure on public hospitals. For example, Queensland public hospital emergency department attendances in our top 20 hospitals alone have increased 10.3 per cent in the past two years to 743,000. The big increase in emergency department attendances is in category 4 and 5 patients, many of whom could be seen by a GP. The reason they are not being seen by a GP is the difficulty in accessing GPs, particularly after hours, as a direct result of the Commonwealth's failure to maintain a reasonable Medicare rebate. So the burden falls to public hospitals. On 4QR last Thursday night, Mr Russell Schneider from the Private Health Insurance Association said that the private health insurance rebate was costing about $2.3 billion a year. However, it was also pointed out on the program that a study by the Commonwealth itself revealed that the real cost of the rebate could be as high as $3.8 billion. Monash University health economics expert Professor Jeffrey Richardson agreed with this blow-out. He rejected on air the quite amazing claims that the rebate was actually saving taxpayers money. Professor Richardson said— ... we know that the increase in funding to private hospitals from private health insurance was about $1 billion. So we've used somewhere between $2.5 billion and $3.5 billion to pump an additional $1 billion into the hospital system. When asked where the money actually goes, Professor Richardson said as an example that about 12 per cent went into administration costs. Just think: that is $360 million that could be going to public hospitals and to general practice. Clearly, the Commonwealth government's policies are disenfranchising GPs, putting an intolerable burden on public hospitals and failing those taxpayers who can least afford treatment.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Small Business Management Skills Workshops Hon. T. A. BARTON (Waterford—ALP) (Minister for State Development) (10.02 a.m.), by leave: My Department of State Development is taking a proactive approach to supporting new business owners and operators with an opportunity to build up their management skills. Anyone who registers a new business or who has registered a new business name in the last 12 months in the Toowoomba and Caboolture regions will receive a voucher that entitles them to free entry into a Department of State Development management skills workshop. The voucher will be valid for a six-month period from the date of issue. My state development centres will work with the business operator to determine the appropriate workshop based on the previous business experience and expertise of the voucher recipient. The voucher program will be known as 'The Right Start' and will be piloted in Toowoomba and Caboolture. It reflects the government's current priority on small business issues and its push to enhance the sector's capabilities. The program will commence in August 2002 and run until at 2600 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 least January 2003. Assuming the pilot's success, the program will then be expanded throughout the state in 2003-04. Enhancing the management skills of small business is a major priority of the Queensland Small Business Advisory Council, and this pilot project is another step closer to achieving this. The member for Kurwongbah, Mrs Linda Lavarch, the Deputy Chair of the Queensland Small Business Advisory Council, will launch this initiative on my behalf, firstly in Toowoomba, at the City Golf Club on 27 August 2002, and then in Caboolture, at the Pine Rivers Memorial Bowls Club on 28 August 2002. The first 12 months of operation is a critical time for any business in terms of getting off the ground. Business owners are all too often caught up in the whirlwind of day-to-day activities. As any successful business owner will acknowledge, there is more to running a business than that. The voucher system will complement the current services offered by the Department of State Development as a tangible way of encouraging businesspeople to access government services and improve their chances of business success. Ninety-seven per cent of Queensland business is small business, and sound management skills are critical to their success. This initiative will act as a catalyst to encourage new business starters to actively pursue success.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Speed Cameras Hon. T. McGRADY (Mount Isa—ALP) (Minister for Police and Corrective Services and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Carpentaria Minerals Province) (10.05 a.m.), by leave: I rise today to talk about the importance of the government's road safety and traffic enforcement initiatives. Fatal road accidents are a harsh reminder to everyone in this House of the importance of remaining vigilant when it comes to addressing issues of road safety. As a father and a long-time member of a close-knit community in the remote north-west, my heart goes out to any family that has to endure the loss of a loved one through a road accident. It also brings home to me the importance of my role, along with that of the Minister for Transport, in warning people of the dangers of the fatal four, particularly speeding. In fact, a little later today I will be travelling to Nundah with the members for Nudgee and Clayfield to discuss traffic safety with children at the local state school. Speed cameras are an important part of the government's effort to reduce the road toll and have prevented an estimated 1,050 crashes since their introduction. The use of speed cameras is balanced with targeted traffic operations, breath testing and other speed enforcement by police. It puzzles me that there are some people who wish to perpetuate the myth that speed cameras are the sole focus of our traffic enforcement strategies. In fact, it might interest members to know that in 2001-02 Queensland police spent almost four times as many hours conducting breath tests and almost three times as many hours conducting targeted traffic operations than they did operating speed cameras. In 2001-02, 45,517 hours were dedicated to speed camera operation. In the same period, nearly 175,000 hours were spent conducting breath tests, about 145,000 hours were spent on other speed enforcement and over 135,000 hours were spent on targeted traffic operations. As can be seen from a graph I happen to have with me today— Mr Schwarten interjected. Mr McGRADY: I did. This graph sets out the figures quite clearly for anybody prepared to study it. The government road safety strategies encompass a range of initiatives. There is no doubting that speed cameras are an important part of this. I get a little sick and tired of hearing the ill-conceived and ill-informed arguments put forward by members opposite, as recently as today, about speed cameras being used for revenue raising and, further, that they are the sole focus of the government's road safety efforts. I again ask the House just who introduced speed cameras into this state. Mr Bredhauer: The member for Gregory. Mr McGRADY: The member for Gregory. And which government did he belong to? Mr Bredhauer: The National Party. Mr McGRADY: The National Party government. I believe that as a government we are obliged to do all we can to get people to slow down so that we can save lives. Speed cameras are helping us to do exactly that. At the end of the day, all we are trying to do is save lives. I make no apologies to the opposition, or indeed to anybody else, for pursuing a range of strategies in our attempts to do just this. 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2601

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Whale Watching Hon. D. M. WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (Minister for Environment) (10.09 a.m.), by leave: On Sunday, the honourable member for Burnett and I launched the 2002 whale watching season in his backyard in Wide Bay. On that occasion I released a report on the distribution of humpback whales by Liz Vang, a senior conservation officer with the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service. The report demonstrates clearly that the eastern Australian humpbacks have made a significant recovery from a low of around 500 in the 1960s to more than 4,000 in 1998. While the eastern Australian group is increasing at about 11 per cent a year, there is still a long way to go. Numbers in the 1930s were estimated at around 22,000. Since 1997, the humpback has been managed in Queensland waters under a conservation plan and management policy for whales and dolphins. The Hervey Bay and Moreton Bay marine parks are the only two areas where the Queensland government allows commercial whale watching, with 18 permitted operators in Hervey Bay and two in the Moreton Bay Marine Park. In Moreton Bay, people can view the whale migration from both Point Lookout at North Stradbroke Island and Moreton Island. Already, record numbers of whales have been sighted off the Queensland coast this year. The whales keep coming back in greater numbers. Whales have also been sighted off the Swain Reefs complex, the Whitsunday region and as far north as Cairns. The Whitsunday region is the main calving ground of the eastern Australian humpback whale stock whilst Hervey Bay is considered a resting site of humpbacks migrating south to Antarctica. Emerging population statistics provide scientists with an ideal time to get baseline information and track them into the future. Evidence is also emerging that when they encounter each other in the Antarctic leg of their migration, the western Australian populations mix with the eastern Australian herd and they swap songs. This is a cultural and genetic mixing—a bit like human behaviour at a pop concert, I suppose. I would encourage people to go and view the whales over the whale watching season in Hervey Bay. I would also ask honourable members to send this message to their constituents out on the water: please keep a safe distance from the whales. Do not drive your boats or watercraft closer than 300 metres to the whales. In addition, if people come across a pod of whales, please phone my rangers so that we can update our research in an attempt to keep a record of these gentle giants of the ocean.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Indigenous Communities Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services and Minister for Seniors) (10.11 a.m.), by leave: Today I will introduce into the parliament two bills that respond to Justice Tony Fitzgerald's Cape York Justice Study and the urgent need to address the unacceptable levels of alcohol abuse and violence in indigenous communities in this state. New laws will provide the foundation for reform in communities that suffer the most appalling health and welfare indicators—mortality rates two to three times higher than that of the rest of the population, a median age at death that is 20 years below that of non-indigenous people, death rates from alcohol that are 21 times the general Queensland rate, and the highest prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases in the state. Indigenous women in Cape York are 57 times more likely than other Queensland women to be subject to assault and injury by another person and for indigenous men the rate is 19 times higher. We know that indigenous children are three to four times more likely to suffer from abuse and neglect than non-indigenous children and girls as young as seven or eight are being diagnosed with sexually transmitted diseases. The prevention of foetal alcohol syndrome is also a child protection issue. It is incumbent upon this generation, those of us who have the power today, to make a difference by redressing the injustices of the past and the present. The new laws that I will introduce today will underpin the success of a range of other initiatives in the government's response to the Cape York Justice Study. Before we can properly address the health, education, unemployment, child protection and economic development imperatives, we must deal with the primary causes of dysfunction. We need to empower 2602 Ministerial Statement 6 Aug 2002 indigenous communities to get tough on violence and to restrict the availability of alcohol and we need to inflict suitable punishment on sly groggers who profit from the misery and penury caused by their unethical practices. We will be helping to establish a new power base in indigenous communities, one with justice as its brief. Community justice groups will have the legislative backing to regulate alcohol and community liquor licensing boards will implement their recommendations to ensure that licensed premises are run in a socially responsible manner. Comprehensive strategies for managing alcohol will include restrictions on supply in relation to quantities and areas where alcohol can be consumed, restrictions on the carriage of alcohol and tougher penalties that can be more easily enforced. We have already been working with community justice groups to plan alcohol management responses and have allocated an additional $1 million per year to strengthen and support the groups. Communities will determine and drive the new alcohol regimes and government will ensure that the laws are enforced by the state justice system. I want to congratulate those communities that have already taken the government's lead and instituted restrictions to reduce alcohol supply. The results are already evident in decreased violence and improved health and welfare outcomes. These new laws will not necessarily be universally popular, but I am confident that current and future generations of indigenous Queenslanders will benefit from them. We must ensure that our fellow indigenous Queenslanders enjoy equal opportunities for prosperity and wellbeing. It will ultimately benefit all Queenslanders and create a legacy that we can all be proud of.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Premier's Year of the Outback Awards Hon. H. PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Minister for Primary Industries and Rural Communities) (10.15 a.m.), by leave: I commence by saying that I commend the Premier for his encouragement and support of the Year of the Outback Awards. As an ambassador for the Year of the Outback, the Premier has been very active in ensuring the success of the celebrations. As a matter of fact, more than 50 per cent of the celebrations for the Year of the Outback are being staged right here in Queensland. These awards are an opportunity to recognise the people who have contributed so much to life in outback Queensland and, in turn, our great state. As the Minister for Primary Industries and Rural Communities, I know that many of the achievers in outback Queensland are very modest about their contribution. Therefore, I am urging those achievers, their families and friends to nominate for these awards. The awards are in five categories: outback youth, outback community service, outback arts and culture, outback medical care and outback emergency service. The winners in each of the categories will be selected from the state's north west, central west and south west. An overall state winner will be selected from the regional winners. As the Premier said, nominations for the awards close on 30 August 2002. Nomination forms have been sent to the electorate offices of all honourable members representing outback communities as well as shire councils in those respective regions. For nomination forms or inquiries, as the Premier has said previously, please contact the Office of Rural Communities on 3227 8420 or on the departmental website at www.dpi.qld.gov.au.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Inbound Tourism Industry Hon. M. ROSE (Currumbin—ALP) (Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading) (10.17 a.m.), by leave: Cleaning up the inbound tourism industry has been a priority of mine since I was appointed Tourism Minister. I have been able to convince my federal and state colleagues of the need to take action against the minority of people who have tarnished the hard- won reputation of our industry. I put the issue on the agenda at my first tourism ministers council meeting back in 2000 and the council endorsed the development of a tourism export code of conduct. The code has been 6 Aug 2002 Ministerial Statement 2603 developed under the direction of a joint industry and government steering committee. At the time, I said that the national code needed to be given teeth and I promised that, if necessary, Queensland would go it alone with state legislation. Cabinet yesterday approved the drafting of Queensland legislation, which will address a number of key concerns, including heavily controlled shopping tours and secret commission arrangements; exorbitant prices and low-quality tours; tour guides taking control of passports and guarding hotel and shop doorways; defamatory comments about other retailers; and tour guides preventing visitors from shopping around. The introduction of a regulatory scheme for tourism services in Queensland will send a clear message to China and other developing source countries where there has been some concern about the treatment of tourists in Australia that we are determined to ensure that our visitors are treated fairly. Our new legislation will regulate ITOs in two ways. It will make them subject to registration and it will regulate their conduct, firstly by a code of conduct and, secondly, by prohibiting unscrupulous conduct. It will regulate tour guides by prohibiting unscrupulous conduct in the provision of services to tourists. ITOs will be required to register with the Office of Fair Trading before they can conduct business in Queensland. Failure to do so will be an offence. To obtain registration, all ITOs will be required to undergo fitness and propriety checks. Registered ITOs will have to comply with a code of conduct. The proposed code was compiled with a great deal of industry input and complements the industry based voluntary code, the tourism export code of conduct. Any breach of the code will result in enforceable undertakings or injunctions. Under Queensland legislation, it will be an offence for ITOs and tour guides to engage in unconscionable conduct. Unconscionable conduct will cover a number of areas, including the exertion of undue influence or pressure on tourists, the failure to disclose necessary information to the tourist, the failure to disclose relevant business relationships to the tourist, and the failure to provide options for the acquisition of goods and services. ITOs will have to have an understanding of the act, code and fair trading legislation, be committed to honesty, fairness and professionalism, and ensure that tours are not dominated by shopping. They will be required to not charge for free services or goods; deliver the agreed service or product; maintain adequate records of promotional material, itineraries and quotations for two years; and establish a complaints handling procedure. The code will be enforced by the Office of Fair Trading. I warn those few who have given the industry a bad reputation that there is no place for them in Queensland.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Electrical Safety in Rural Areas Hon. G. R. NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) (Minister for Industrial Relations) (10.21 a.m.), by leave: This government has been very outspoken about its efforts to reduce the unacceptable level of deaths and injuries from electrical shock in workplaces and in homes in this great state. A significant part of the government's proposed reforms of electrical safety is the issue of electrical safety in the rural industry. It is critical that as many Queenslanders as possible have their say on this very important issue. My department will be issuing a discussion paper today seeking public comment on ways to reduce the hazards of working with electricity in rural Queensland. Of the 61 electrical deaths in Queensland since 1995, more than half occurred in regional and rural areas, and almost a third involved contact with overhead power lines—from heavy machinery to moving irrigation pipes on properties. The regulations proposed in this discussion paper include: the management of risks from overhead electricity lines; compulsory installation of safety switches; inspection, testing and tagging of specified electrical equipment; prohibitions on the use of double adaptors and piggyback plugs; and, the protection of cord extension sets and flexible cables. Under the new regulations, the rural industry will no longer be exempt from some safety requirements and will come into line with all other industries. I am pleased to say that the proposed regulations are the result of significant consultation with stakeholders through the Rural Sector Standing Committee, a group established under the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995. The government is confident that these proposed work practices can help make rural workplaces safer for all workers. A copy of the regulatory impact statement is available on my department's website and I call on members to encourage their constituents to be a part of shaping a very crucial area of the electrical safety legislation. 2604 Private Members' Statements 6 Aug 2002

PARLIAMENTARY CRIME AND MISCONDUCT COMMITTEE Report Mr WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (10.23 a.m.): I lay upon the table of the House a Crime and Misconduct Commission research and issues paper entitled Drug use and crime—Findings from the DUMA survey. DUMA is the Drug Use Monitoring in Australia program. The publication details the results of a survey of drug use conducted among detainees in four watchhouses in three states, aimed at examining the relationship between drug dependency and crime. This publication is not a report of the CMC for the purposes of section 69 of the Crime and Misconduct Act 2001. The Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee stresses that it has not conducted an inquiry into the matters the subject of the publication. However, the committee is tabling the document as it believes that it is in the spirit of the Crime and Misconduct Act that it be tabled in the parliament.

OVERSEAS VISIT Report Hon. V. P. LESTER (Keppel—NPA) (10.24 am): I wish to report to the parliament and table a report of a recent study mission to China.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS Parliament House Security Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.24 a.m.): Last Thursday there was a very serious breach of security in this parliament, an incident which says a lot about the declining security standards. I notice that members of the government do not take this matter seriously. It could have affected the Premier, any member of parliament, any member of staff or any member of the media. It speaks volumes about the declining standards of this particular government. It is all right for the Premier to increase the staff in the propaganda unit of his department from 170 to 180, while over recent years we have seen declining numbers of personnel on the ground to protect this parliament and the people in it. Other states take security seriously. In other states, if someone gets into the parliamentary precinct, it is taken seriously. This is a very serious matter. The small number of staff on the ground is absolutely appalling. Five security staff, including one in the camera room and one at the VCR, were on duty. Only three points in this whole premises are under the control of security during the sitting of parliament. Members opposite are treating this as a joke. We need look only at the number of protests occurring regularly outside this parliament. The George Street precinct has always been a good, secure place for a protest. However, on many occasions protesters now enter the portico of Parliament House. It is just another good example of the declining standards of this place. Members opposite laugh. The security service of this parliament should have been based upon experienced personnel, but it has been replaced by plastic swipe cards. It is just another example of the declining standards of a government which is in financial trouble.

Senate Vacancy; Mr S. Santoro Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (10.26 a.m.): Recent decisions within the Liberal Party are linked to changes occurring in Dublin, Canberra and Brisbane. I believe that in the past few days Federal Cabinet has finally signed off on Senator John Herron taking over as the new Australian Ambassador to Ireland and the Holy See. I personally have a lot of time for John Herron, and I know that he will do a good job. However, let us hope that he can persuade the prime minister to reverse a ludicrous decision made by the federal Liberal government. Last week, the Irish Times carried a story about the Australian government closing a section of its Irish embassy, stating— From October 1st, Irish people wishing to travel to Australia will have to apply to London for their visas. However, a small consular staff will remain in Dublin. 6 Aug 2002 Questions Without Notice 2605

This inept move has been made at a time when several thousand Irish people travel to Australia each year, and trade between Ireland and Australia is worth over $1 billion annually to the Irish economy. The link to Brisbane in these events lies in the Liberal Party finding a replacement for Dr Herron. This is where the personal ambitions of three Brisbane Liberals comes into play, involving the in-fighting within the Santoro-Carroll faction of the Liberal Party. While this faction has the numbers and will ultimately determine the outcome, the question is who to choose? Debbie Kember, Russell Trood or Santo Santoro? While Santo Santoro has ingratiated himself successfully to get the numbers, Senators Brett Mason and George Brandis are worried that Santoro's ruthless ambitions will undermine their own fanatical quest for promotion. They are fearful that Santoro will slime his way into federal Liberal prominence ahead of them. How will this power play within the dominant Liberal Party faction resolve itself? My bet, judging from what we have seen of Santoro in this parliament, is that he will appease his doubting colleagues by faithfully promising to behave himself, and he will assure the other senators that he will wait his turn and let them share any federal Liberal spoils first. However, my advice to Brett and George is: do not trust Santo Santoro. He is one leopard who will never change his spots.

Expert Witnesses; Comments by Chief Justice Mr FLYNN (Lockyer—ONP) (10.28 a.m.): It seems to me that part of our legal system appears to be under threat—not from the usual sources outside the profession and not necessarily from the bottom. Surprisingly, in this case it comes from the top in no less a form than Chief Justice, Paul de Jersey. This is not an attack on de Jersey J, it is not a criticism of his conduct as a judge; nor does it cast doubt upon his judgments in the court. De Jersey J is an eminent and respected jurist. I refer to the opinion expressed by the Chief Justice that for the purpose of eliminating expert bias and time wasting, a presiding judge should be empowered to decide which experts may be called and how many. On the face of his reasons, the intent of his proposal appears to have merit. However, scratch immediately beneath the surface and we see that although the issue of experts has been a problem for some time, in the interests of justice and democracy we must not allow judges any more control over the conduct of trials than they already have. Therefore, who decides which expert is better than another, because we would be giving our judges the authority of deciding not only if an expert witness is qualified and therefore competent but also the right to decide who is better than another in a particular field. This is a dangerous suggestion by the judiciary and one we must ensure fails before it starts. I hope that this government, made up as it is of many former legal practitioners, sees that. We must balance cost and expediency against justice for the parties in courts. Our judges must remember that they above all are the arbiters of the law, not fact.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Speed Cameras Mr HORAN (10.30 a.m.): Since the Premier promised no new taxes or fees and charges he has ramped up payroll tax and land tax, and introduced FOI charges, tick inspection charges, the pub tax and now $10 million worth of new transport fees. The Premier's government has already shattered its promise of no new taxes and now the Premier has sent the spin doctors out to float the idea of even more taxes to pay for the budget deficit. Will the Premier now commit again to no new taxes, fees or charges and actually mean it instead of more deceit and dishonesty? Mr BEATTIE: I can recall when the Leader of the Opposition was in government and when the then Treasurer Joan Sheldon brought in seven new taxes and charges. People in glass houses should not throw stones. Mr Hobbs interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I am happy to do that. Hang on, Howard; do not get too excited. Let your little heart beat away gently, son! I will get to the question. I do not want to rub salt into the wound, Howard. Let us get to the issue. Opposition members interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I will actually give an answer. I am waiting, too. If members opposite keep this up we all will be waiting and members will never get an answer. Last Thursday I took the opportunity through questions asked of me by the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the Liberal Party to spell out exactly the full ramifications in relation to the changes to transport 2606 Questions Without Notice 6 Aug 2002 charges. I also spelled out very clearly that any motorist renewing a licence for five years would not incur any additional costs. There were a number of user-pays charges which we brought in and which we felt were appropriate, one of which involved inspections where people simply were not turning up when arrangements had been made. If I recall correctly, we brought in a fee for that of $20. What is wrong with that? Why should public servants at taxpayers' expense be sitting around when someone has made an appointment but does not turn up? That is a bit rude. We are talking about commercial vehicles. That is not an unreasonable thing for a government to do. Frankly, it should have been done a long time ago. Let us take the instance of the $15 charge we brought in for tests for learner drivers. I know exactly what happens in this respect because, from personal experience, my two sons went through this exercise very recently. Applicants for learner drivers licences turn up with their mates, do not do any study for the test and have about five or six attempts at it. What happens? Who pays the bill for all that? The taxpayers. There is a 60 per cent failure rate. All we are saying to young children is, 'Go home and study.' Let me come back to this point. Eight people died on the roads in the last few days. Until midnight Thursday, we had 15 fewer fatalities than we did at the same time last year. Per capita, we had the lowest number of fatalities in Australia. We had eight fatalities over those few days. The most dangerous people on the road are young men. Frankly, it needs to be harder to get a licence. There needs to be some charge, a bit of reality, so that people understand the rules of the road and so that we can educate young people. This is user-pays and this is a sensible charge. I will defend it.

Speed Cameras Mr HORAN: I refer the Premier to the tragic death of eight people on Queensland's roads on the weekend and to his claims on radio that he is at his wit's end trying to come up with solutions to reduce road deaths. I also refer to reports 10 days ago which cited Department of Transport advice that speed cameras used on the Gold Coast motorway were operated in breach of the guidelines for their use and not located at sites with a history of speed-related crashes. If the Premier is looking for solutions to save lives, will he now revert to using speed cameras only at known black spots? Will the government publish the details of those black spots at which speed cameras can be located and signpost those spots to restore community confidence in the honesty of the speed management program and stop using speed cameras as revenue raisers? Finally, will the Premier also consider transferring speed camera operations to the Department of Transport so that more police can provide a real presence on the road through mobile patrols instead of sitting in speed camera vans for thousands of hours on end? Mr BEATTIE: I will deal with this issue very seriously. I would appreciate the courtesy of the House, because I did say a number of things on television and probably on radio to which the Leader of the Opposition referred. I share the distress of all members of this House. When eight people are killed over a short period of time any government and indeed any opposition would obviously be at its wit's end. We have introduced a number of strategies, including improving roads and, yes, dealing with black spots. The deputy leader opposite introduced some of these options in terms of speed cameras, because we all have one thing in mind: we are trying to save people's lives on the roads. We are spending millions of dollars on education. We have the Extra Kilometres Kill strategy. We have brought in shock television ads to try and convince people to drive sensibly. We have brought in a whole range of measures. At the end of the day, unfortunately and tragically, when some people get into cars—and it distresses me that I have to say this—they leave their brains on the sidewalk. Unfortunately, we need to get the community to understand that in fact a car can be like a lethal weapon. We do have tough penalties. Mr Horan interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I am about to come to your point. In terms of where cameras are located, this is not a political decision. The member knows this. It was never a political decision when the member was in government and it is not a political decision now. As I understand it— Mr Bredhauer: We use the same guidelines. Mr BEATTIE: Yes. Can I just make this point: in terms of the location of speed cameras, I take the Transport Minister's interjection. We use the same guidelines that those opposite used, because those guidelines are sensible. The minister has just informed me that those guidelines 6 Aug 2002 Questions Without Notice 2607 are determined by a committee made up of Transport, Police and the community. At the end of the day, their location should never be a political decision: they should be where there are dangers. They should be where there is a risk to public safety. Mr Horan: They are not. Mr BEATTIE: Hang on. Mr SPEAKER: Order! We will hear the answer to the question. Mr BEATTIE: They are the same rules that applied when the opposition was in government. We have followed the same rules because they are non-political. The Police Service are not mugs. They have a responsibility to save lives. The same applies to the Department of Transport and the community. The Leader of the Opposition has to ask himself: if the rules were good enough for him, why are they not good enough for us? What is wrong with that? Mr HORAN interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I am at my wit's end because of the way people are driving on the road. But what do we do? We have an advertising campaign and preventative and penal punishments. We will review where we are. The Minister for Transport will come into cabinet in the not-too-distant future with a number of interstate options. The minister is doing that with the Police Minister. We will be doing everything we can to fight this toll. The bottom line is that we need people to change their attitude. That is why we need to depoliticise this and to do it in a sensible way. Mr SPEAKER: I welcome to the public gallery students, parents and teachers from Wellers Hill State School in the electorate of Greenslopes.

Tarong North Power Station Ms MALE: I refer the Premier to an investment at Tarong North Power Station by two Japanese companies. What is the purpose of this deal and what will it mean for Queensland? Mr BEATTIE: This adds to the ministerial statement made by the Deputy Premier and Treasurer earlier in relation to our energy policy. Queensland's reputation as the Smart State and as a growth state has resulted in a massive investment in a piece of our infrastructure by two major Japanese companies. The Deputy Premier, the Minister for State Development and I were present for the announcement of this on Friday. On Friday, the Treasurer and I signed a formal agreement to mark a $325 million investment by two leading Japanese companies—the Tokyo Electric Power Company, TEPCO, and Mitsui and Co. Ltd—in the Tarong North Power Station. The fifty-fifty joint venture between TEPCO- Mitsui and the government owned corporation Tarong Energy will come into effect after the commissioning and handover of the power station in February 2003. The $325 million investment by TEPCO-Mitsui is a long-term commitment for some 30 to 40 years, which is the expected operating life of the Tarong North Power Station near Nanango in the South Burnett. I welcome this investment by two of Japan's foremost and most respected companies. TEPCO is one of the world's biggest private electricity utilities and Mitsui and Co. Ltd is a leading international trading company that has considerable investments in Australia but in particular in Queensland and has been here for many, many years. In November 1999, state cabinet approved the construction of the 450 megawatt Tarong North Power Station. At that time, we encouraged Tarong Energy to seek private sector participation in the project. Now, two and a half years later, this has become a reality and the state government sees this as a first of a series of potential partnering arrangements between the three parties. It is a smart partnership decision by TEPCO-Mitsui to invest in the Smart State because of the opportunities that exist and will arise in one of the fastest growing regions of Australia. The Tarong North Power Station is now more than 95 per cent complete. Its construction has generated considerable employment, with a work force peaking at almost 900 people earlier this year. Local content was a key aspect of this project, with more than 100 Queensland and Australian companies being awarded contracts. Tarong North will be one of the cleanest coal-fired power stations in Australia because of the advanced technology employed. Carbon dioxide emissions will be about 10 per cent to 12 per cent lower for each unit of electricity generated compared with conventional coal-fired boilers. I table a copy of the speech by the representative of Mitsui at the ceremony on Friday. Members will see his glowing reference to the partnership with this state. 2608 Questions Without Notice 6 Aug 2002

The reason this announcement is so important is that it is investing millions and millions of dollars in power and in the infrastructure of this state. We have turned a significant corner in power generation. When we came to government a number of our generators had the potential for being isolated and therefore at risk from competition. We fixed it, and this is one of the ways we fixed it.

Hale Street Closure; Suncorp Metway Stadium Mr JOHNSON: I refer the Treasurer to community concern regarding the lack of notice about the closure of the Hale Street exit from Milton Road for five months. I refer to the Stadium Update newsletter, issue June-August 2001, a copy of which I table, which reassures local residents that much of the work will take place outside business hours. This newsletter does not even mention closure of this access to Hale Street but does reassure residents and businesses that they will be notified in advance of any potential disruptions. Why is it then that local residents and businesses were not notified of this major impact on traffic in the area? Mr MACKENROTH: They were. When that newsletter was done, the closure of the on-ramp from Milton Road to Hale Street had not finally been negotiated with the Brisbane City Council. We were negotiating with it over that particular part of the road closure so therefore it was not possible to include it in that newsletter. I watched television last night where the Leader of the Opposition and the Brisbane City Council claimed that there was going to be traffic chaos this morning as a result of this closure. I turned on the radio this morning at 6.30 to listen to the traffic report. The report stated that the traffic on Milton Road was proceeding as normal, although they were expecting traffic chaos. That was updated later on, when the major traffic was there, to 'slight delays'. That is on the very first day of the closure of that lane. So things can only get better. One cannot build a major project such as we are building at Suncorp— Mr Johnson: We are talking about the consultation. Mr MACKENROTH: The member asked the question; I will give the answer. One cannot build a major piece of infrastructure such as the Suncorp Metway Stadium without some disruption. In relation to the walkways down to the Milton Railway Station, we are doing the majority of that work at night-time so that we create the least amount of disruption to traffic. The majority of the work is being done between the hours of 8 at night and 4 in the morning. The workers are there at that time so we get the least disruption to the traffic. In relation to the on-ramp from Milton Road to Hale Street, it is necessary to close that lane for the safety of the workers and so that we can build the pedestrian plaza across Hale Street. We consulted with the council in relation to this closure. As I said, it has taken some time to negotiate with it exactly where the closure would be effected so that we could do that work. That is why it was not in that newsletter. There has been a sign there for two weeks. Anybody who drives there every day has had two weeks to see that sign. Anyone who lives in the vicinity of and uses that road has had two weeks to see the sign. There was an advertisement in the Courier-Mail. I know not everybody reads the Courier-Mail, but it was a requirement that we do that. We did that. We have had a sign there for people to see. I believe we have fulfilled our obligations.

Liberal Party Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: I refer the Premier to the Liberal Party's desire to govern Queensland. What evidence is there, if any, that it can govern itself? Mr BEATTIE: Not a lot. A couple of letters have come into my possession that I think I should share with the House. The first is from Michael Caltabiano—some members might have heard of him—the president of the Liberal Party, who has written to party members saying— Dear Party Member ... included in the package of reforms was Bob Quinn's model (word for word) for State seat based pre-selections. These reforms, although not recommended by the review committee, are included to give all members of the Party the opportunity to rigorously examine both Bob Quinn's State based pre-selection model and an FEC based model. So the president is writing to the membership saying, 'I am sending out Bob's material for you to have a look at.' Bob wrote to the Liberal Party membership, stating— Dear fellow Liberal, ... 6 Aug 2002 Questions Without Notice 2609

On 25th July the State President wrote to you claiming that one of my proposals relating to preselections would appear 'word for word' on the agenda. I can assure you that none—not one—of the six attached key reforms I called for have been included. Mr Mackenroth interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Yes, if you can't trust the president of the Liberal Party, who can you trust. The truth is that one of them is a fibber. One of them is not telling the truth. But who do I believe? Let me make it clear that I believe Bob Quinn. I have read his letter and I have to agree with a lot of it. He states— But to be honest, unless we have the courage to take the next step and reform ourselves, we will not be able to match Beattie's Labor Party machine on the key issue of electoral credibility. Is he right? Hear, hear! I am with Bob. I agree with Bob. He said further, 'Put simply: to be elected we must be respected.' I agree with Bob. He went on, 'Let me be frank, brutally frank!' I thought he was Bob! He continued— We have started the good work. We have runs on the board but I cannot win seats at the next election unless we have the guts to reform our Party. I am with Bob. But that is not all. He outlined his '6 Commonsense Reforms to clean up the Liberal Party'. I agree with every one of them. He wants 'An End to Branch-Stacking ... & letting locals choose', 'More Power to the Members ... time to reduce State Executive's influence'. I agree. The third is 'Locals Choose Regional VPs ... empowering country & northern members'. I agree. The fourth is 'Cleaning Up Senate Preselections ... closing the loopholes'. What does that mean? It means: 'I don't want Santo.' Do members remember the Roman Emperor Caligula, who put his horse in the Senate? What does this mean for the Liberal Party in Queensland? If Caligula can put a horse in the Senate, what is the Liberal Party going to do to Queenslanders by putting Santo in the Senate? Mr Speaker, I have to tell you: give me Caligula's horse!

Airlines, Government Policy Mr QUINN: For the second time, fate can be awfully cruel. I refer the Premier to his announcement on 1 December last year that he would be introducing a no-frills airline policy where ministers and senior government bureaucrats would be encouraged to fly economy in a bid to save taxpayers $5 million per year. Indeed, the Premier himself offered to lead by example, declaring 'I couldn't care less if I travelled economy. It wouldn't bother me.' I ask the Premier: is it true that in the eight months since launching his no-frills airline policy he has not given up his government jet to fly economy on a commercial flight anywhere in Queensland on any occasion? To date, how much has the government saved by ministers and senior bureaucrats flying economy class? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for his question because, frankly, it is a good question. It is one of the best questions we have had this term. We have to treat these questions with the sort of courtesy and respect they are entitled to, because if we do not give Bob respect no-one else will. I will come to the member's question in a minute, but one of the Liberal aspirants for the presidency of the Liberal Party, a guy called Bill Hartigan, said this on the Susan Mitchell show yesterday— So we've got a party with a faction, a small faction, a small peak if you like, whose prime objective is to secure preselection for a safe seat, have no policy attitude at all and not very much interest. Now, that is not the sort of party that you can successfully take to a state election. I have to say, Bob, this presidential aspirant is obviously your man. He is right. What do we have? We have a faction-ridden Liberal Party that has no interest in policy. It is only interested in getting people elected. I know one person who is seeking to get elected to the Senate. The downside is that the Liberal Party will get Santoro. The good side is that he will never return to this parliament, because the current member for Clayfield is such a star that she would retain her seat. It would not matter if the Liberal Party were to move Santo down to Bob's seat. If he goes to the Senate he will not return here, and that is a great thing. Mr Mackenroth: For Queensland. Mr BEATTIE: It is a good thing for Queensland and the parliament. Let me come back to the issue of flights. As I have indicated—and I have said this publicly—when we go to Townsville a number of ministers, including myself, will be flying Virgin. I have already made that arrangement and I have said publicly that we will. In terms of the savings, there has been a new system introduced. I do not have the figures off the top of my head about savings, but there have been savings. We have shared the flight arrangements and we are determined— 2610 Questions Without Notice 6 Aug 2002

A government member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: That is right. During the period when we first announced this there were a number of changes. Ansett, which was part of the competition, has obviously gone out of existence. We are ensuring that Virgin Blue gets a share of the act, as it should. I indicated the other day that there will be opportunities for Alliance now that it is operating into places like Rockhampton. The local member and minister has indicated that he is quite happy from time to time to fly Alliance. The important thing is this: while we have had upheavals as a result of what has happened with Ansett, we have shared around the flights. I have made it clear that when we go to Townsville we will be travelling Virgin Blue. This system is working. I have just been given a note that we are currently saving up to $2 million by consolidating our agreements and there could be savings of a further $3 million to $4 million. I am not quite sure over what period that is—I assume over the year—but roughly that is the sort of saving we are getting. I said that there would be savings, and there will. The import thing about competition is making certain that we use both carriers. This is not an anti-Qantas statement. Of course not! We are very supportive of Qantas. This is about getting the best and cheapest flight for the day. We are going to continue to do that.

Teachers, VERs Mr LINGARD: I refer the Minister for Education to Education Queensland's career change program and the fact that she continues to mock any criticism of the program. Ongoing reports have revealed that the scheme has been abused and the supposed burnt-out or unmotivated teachers have used it as a bonus and actually re-entered the work force in the private system. I ask: why doesn't the minister have a problem with this when the scheme is obviously being exploited? Why doesn't she think it is important to implement mechanisms into such schemes to ensure teachers who have accepted the $50,000 package are using it as was intended by her department? After all, we are talking about nearly $10 million of taxpayers' money. Ms BLIGH: I thank the honourable member for the question. I know that he has had a number of concerns about this program. The government continues to be of the view that this program has achieved the aims that we established for it. What was the aim of this program? It was clearly and simply to provide an opportunity to renew our teaching work force in our public schools, and we make no apologies for it. It provided an opportunity for those people who wanted to leave our public classrooms and go to other sorts of jobs to do so, and to do so with some degree of dignity after having made, in many cases, a long-term contribution. It further provided us with an opportunity to replace them with bright young graduates whom we were unable to employ. What it also did was pay for itself. So any suggestion that this was funds that could have been used for some other purpose is complete and utter nonsense, and the honourable member knows that. In relation to this particular teacher, it was never the aim of the government—I repeat, never the aim of the government—that a teacher who took this incentive package would never get another job. It was not our intention that they should remain unemployed for the rest of their lives. We made it absolutely clear that one of the conditions of accepting the package was that they would not be eligible to return to a job in the public education system having taken this incentive to leave it. If they are able to secure employment in a private school, that is entirely a matter for the teacher and the private school involved. If the private school is satisfied that the teacher meets its standards, that is a matter for the private school—not a matter for myself, for Education Queensland or for the government. Private schools are their own private employers and they make their own judgments and decisions. I can advise the parliament that the teacher referred to on the front page of the Courier-Mail today met all of the eligibility criteria for this program. Have no doubt about it: he met all the eligibility criteria for this program and I am completely satisfied about that. In relation to whether we should have some process of following this up, the honourable member seems to suggest that I should be committing Education Queensland resources to pursuing the 183 people who took this package—less than one per cent of the teaching work force—and that I should pursue them for the rest of their lives to find out what jobs they have taken. Mr Lingard interjected. Ms BLIGH: We are not going to do that. I will not dedicate one single cent. Mr SPEAKER: Order! 6 Aug 2002 Questions Without Notice 2611

Ms BLIGH: I said to the House the other day that I understand the member is obsessed by this program and I suspect that he might actually be looking for a career change himself. Mr Lingard interjected. Ms BLIGH: I am sure that members on this side could provide some very useful and interesting options for a career change for the member for Beaudesert. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Beaudesert has asked the question. Mr Lingard interjected. Ms BLIGH: If there is anybody who needs to think about a new career, I would have thought the member for Beaudesert would be someone who would be supporting it. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Beaudesert will cease interjecting. This is my final warning to the member for Beaudesert. Mr SPEAKER: I call the honourable member for Bulimba. Government members: Hear, hear!

Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement Mr PURCELL: I was very rapt in the Premier's last answer and missed my jump. I refer the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing to the article entitled 'Funding control plans for states' on the front page of the Courier-Mail yesterday and ask: can the minister outline how the Prime Minister's plan to 'adjust Commonwealth-state financial arrangements affects social housing in Queensland'? Mr SCHWARTEN: I thank the honourable member for his question. I actually thought you were giving them a bit of a leg up there, Pat. They certainly could do with all the assistance they can get. I believe that it is time that the Prime Minister took— Mr Horan interjected. Mr SCHWARTEN: Anybody who is frightened of Kenny Koala has no right to stand up in here and give me a bad time. The fact of the matter is that it is about time that the Prime Minister of Australia took some leadership from that well-known, blue-blood Tory Abbott, who yesterday, looking down his nose and indicated that people who were divorced should take some responsibility for themselves and some responsibility for their actions and we should not have this 'walk away' mentality. If anybody needs to have that rammed down their throats, it is the Prime Minister of Australia, because that is exactly what he is seeking to do with the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement. There can be no doubt at all from the way that he telegraphed his punches yesterday what his intentions are, and they are clear: he will use any excuse he can to walk away from funding responsibilities that are the province of the Commonwealth, and the province of the Commonwealth alone. Since 1945 housing funding in Australia has been the province of the Commonwealth, and he plans to walk away from it. I already know that the member for Gregory supports me on this, because two years ago when the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia came to central Queensland I handed him a letter and said, 'Look, you give us $20 million and we will build Abbeyfield-type accommodation right throughout your electorates anywhere in Queensland. You nominate them, because it is the people in those electorates west of the Great Divide who need to stay with their loved ones and families.' I said, 'This is the deal. You get the credit for it. You tell us which electorates you want to put it in. I will deliver them and you will get all the credit.' I could not be fairer than that. So my challenge to the Prime Minister is: give us the money, for example, that he is spending on the first home owners scheme, because that is $200 million more than we are getting into Queensland already. We know that people get $10,000 to buy a $1 million home, so it is not even means tested in this state. The reality is: give us that $200 million and I guarantee that we will spend it where it is needed—that is, on the down-and-out in this state, the people who are at risk of homelessness and the people who need crisis accommodation. I will give him that guarantee.

Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders, Wages and Savings Mr WELLINGTON: My question is directed to the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and involves the government's repatriation offer relating to lost wages and savings of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. I understand the minister's offer to the people of 2612 Questions Without Notice 6 Aug 2002 either $4,000 or $2,000 by way of compensation for lost wages and savings requires the claimants to satisfy appropriate criteria. How did the minister determine that the offer of $4,000 or $2,000 was fair and reasonable compensation to the people involved for their lost wages and savings? Ms SPENCE: The honourable member is quite right. The offer is for a $4,000 or $2,000 compensation payment depending on when people were born. That was really assessed according to how long people would have worked under the acts. I think that some facts about this offer need to be stated. Firstly, the government has been engaged in consultation and negotiations about this issue with QAILSS and other representatives from the indigenous community for four years now. So this is not an offer that came out of the blue from the government. It is something that we have been attempting to negotiate for four years. At times those negotiations have broken down for various reasons. But we decided to push the issue and to put a final offer on the table because we were not prepared to sit around and continue to negotiate with people who clearly were unwilling to reach a conclusion to those negotiations. During that process it was put to the government that there were different groups of people according to how long they worked under the act. Now, is this amount of money satisfactory—the $55.4 million offer that we have put on the table? Various people would say no. In fact, many people have stated that an offer of $50,000 compensation per individual would be a more satisfactory offer. I have heard larger amounts than that stated. Obviously the government had to consider what the Queensland taxpayer could afford to pay. I want to make the point that we do not have this $55.4 million sitting around in a fund. This money will come from future Queensland budgets. What we do have is just over $8.6 million sitting in the Aboriginal Welfare Fund. That is not part of the $55.4 million. The $8.6 million that is sitting in the Aboriginal Welfare Fund has been put on the table, as well. We want to distribute that for the betterment of indigenous people in this state. Part of the negotiations that we are undertaking are attempting to ascertain how people want to see that $8.6 million spent. Various amounts have been floated around as satisfactory to resolve this issue, but at the end of the day the Treasurer, the Premier and I and the Queensland government had to consider what this state could afford. How much could the present generation afford to pay to try to redress the wrongs of the past? I guess all of us would have liked to have made a more significant offer, but we believe $55.4 million is a good offer, a reasonable offer, and it was offered in the spirit of reconciliation. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the member for Gaven I welcome to the public gallery students and teachers from Ormiston College in the electorate of Cleveland and a second group from Wellers Hill State School in the electorate of Greenslopes.

Breaking the Unemployment Cycle Mr POOLE: I refer the Minister for Employment, Training and Youth to the government's Breaking the Unemployment Cycle initiatives and ask: will the minister inform the House on how this program is addressing the issue of unemployment, especially for disadvantaged job seekers? Mr FOLEY: It is absolutely vital that our programs address the disadvantaged unemployed as well as generating jobs in the overall economy. It is true that there has been strong jobs growth in the Queensland economy, and our annual employment rate is growing much faster at 2.7 per cent than the national average of 1.7 per cent. That has meant 145,100 new jobs since this government first came to office. But simply generating extra jobs is not enough. We have to reach out to the long-term unemployed, to the youth and to the disadvantaged to make sure that they get an opportunity to participate in the labour market. That is why we are so strongly committed to the $470 million Breaking the Unemployment Cycle initiative which has produced more than 44,400 jobs across the state. The commitment is reflected in the injection of more than $107 million to create more than 15,600 jobs and training opportunities during 2002-03. I am delighted to be able to invite Queensland communities to apply for a share of this state budget funding. The Breaking the Unemployment Cycle initiative is demand driven, and money is distributed according to applications by community organisations, councils and employers. The budget earmarked $25.4 million for the Community Jobs Plan and Community Employment Assistance Program to create job placements for long-term unemployed people for up to six months in public works, 6 Aug 2002 Questions Without Notice 2613 community and environmental projects. Let me give honourable members some examples of this work: projects such as the Logan employment expo being organised by 13 local unemployed women; the Stanthorpe Shire Council's heritage centre clerical traineeship recording the history of the famous Queensland-New South Wales border town of Wallangarra; and the Bush Challenge project at Mount Isa, where young unemployed indigenous participants— Mr McGrady: Hear, hear! Mr FOLEY: I note the strong support of the member for Mount Isa. Those young unemployed indigenous participants undertake training in survival skills at the Carlton Hills campsite. We have set aside $6 million as cash incentives for 3,000 new private sector apprenticeship and traineeship places in areas of skills shortage, including building and construction, furnishing, agriculture and seafood processing and, very importantly, a number of programs for young people, including young early school leavers at risk of long-term unemployment, who will benefit from a $2.5 million allocation. It is absolutely essential that governments intervene in the labour market to ensure that disadvantaged people, the long-term unemployed, the mature-age unemployed and youth get a fair go and a chance.

Sale of Water in Nightclubs Miss SIMPSON: I refer the Minister for Tourism, who is responsible for liquor licensing, to her statement warning liquor licensees of profiteering by going so far as to remove cold water taps to force customers to pay exorbitant prices for water in nightclubs. Considering the minister was reportedly fuming about this, why has she not followed through by introducing controls ensuring that free water is provided on demand for nightclub patrons? Mrs ROSE: As the member quite rightly points out, I was furious at the time when we discovered that some licensed premises had removed cold water taps. As a consequence of that our liquor licensing officers visited those premises. They reminded licensees of their duty of care under the act. Most licensees act quite responsibly. Most of them freely provide water or they sell bottled water at a reasonable cost. The concern that was brought to our attention was not only that some of the cold water taps had been removed from a couple of licensed premises but also that bottled water was being charged at exorbitant rates. The Liquor Licensing Division circulates a regular bulletin to licensees not only to advise them of any changes but also to remind to them of their responsibilities as licensees. As I said, they have a duty of care to their patrons. I appeal to all of those licensees—the Liquor Licensing Division certainly has—to make sure that they do provide water freely and also have bottled water at reasonable prices. As the member would be aware, we cannot control the prices they charge for water or for their drinks. That is really up to the consumer. If they go into a licensed premises and they find that the charges for water are exorbitant, then they should make the decision to go to another licensed premises. As I said, most licensees do act responsibly. I have not received any recent complaints since there was publicity about those premises that had removed the cold water taps. The provision of water for patrons is a matter for licensees in terms of whether it is provided free of charge on the counter or by request for sale in a bottled form as a precaution against drink spiking. Drink spiking is another issue that concerns some licensees. Because it is such an issue—I have issued warnings to young women in particular about it—there is a fear on the part of some licensees that if they provide jugs of water on the bar somebody could come along and put something in the water. I assure the member that it is an issue I am keeping an eye on and one about which we will continue to remind licensees of their responsibilities.

Road Safety Mrs CHRISTINE SCOTT: Can the Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads advise what efforts Queensland Transport is making to reduce Queensland's road toll? Mr BREDHAUER: I thank the honourable member for the question. The Opposition Leader has asked a number of questions of the Premier today. The Premier has capably handled those—he is well briefed on these issues—but I do suggest to the Leader of the Opposition that if he wants detailed answers to questions he might ask me as the line minister. I note that he declines to do so. 2614 Questions Without Notice 6 Aug 2002

There were 10 people killed in three days on Queensland roads in seven fatal crashes. I preface my remarks by saying that the information I am about to provide was current as of late yesterday afternoon and based on the preliminary findings of the investigations into those crashes. Five of the 10 casualties were in the 17- to 24-year-old age group. For three of the casualties the age had not been determined. Of the seven fatal crashes three involved speed. Fatigue was a factor in four. At least two fatalities were not wearing seatbelts. The relationship with alcohol had not been determined. The Police Minister, the Police Service, the RACQ, all of the stakeholders in road safety and I have been targeting our efforts in recent years on the fatal four, because the fatal four are the major contributors to road fatalities. The information I just provided shows that speed, failure to wear seatbelts and fatigue were factors in basically all of those road crashes. Five of the crashes occurred in 100 kilometres per hour speed zones. Five of the seven fatal crashes were single vehicle accidents. The Minister for Police talked about the amount of effort made by police in relation to random breath testing, to targeted traffic operations and to other speed detection and speed management strategies. This effort is three and four times the effort put into speed cameras. I know that speed cameras is a good issue on which to get out there and give the government a belt. I know that it is easy to say in the Courier-Mail, on the TV news at night or here in the parliament that it is a revenue raising exercise. When the member for Gregory introduced speed cameras he had the support of this side of the House. I know that the member for Gregory and every single member opposite is serious about road safety and wants to reduce the road toll, as do all members on this side. Speed cameras are only one part of our road safety strategy. As those figures demonstrate, notwithstanding the fact that we have had 10 fatalities in the last three days, we are still a little better than we were last year. As the Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads, I feel the death of every person on our roads. I am constantly renewing my efforts, in consultation with the police and other stakeholders, to improve our road safety. I am robust about this—I do not mind criticism—but I ask members opposite to consider seriously how we are going to improve road safety. I know that it is easy to get out there and give the old speed cameras a belt as being about revenue raising. The Courier-Mail has been an important partner in road safety in recent years, but there are a couple of people down there with a fixation on speed cameras. All I ask is that people get them into perspective and help this government, in working with the members opposite, to reduce the number of fatalities on our roads.

Speed Cameras Mr FLYNN: My question is directed to the Minister for Police. At the risk of this side of the House being repetitive, I put my stance on record and reiterate a previous question asked of the minister. We support any sensible road safety initiative, and that includes the use of speed cameras. I am sure that speed cameras do save lives. The issue is whether we can use them better, and I think we can. The minister will recall that I asked a similar question in the estimates hearing. Again I ask: would the minister not agree that the primary focus of speed cameras is to save lives and that in known black spots the known location of these speed cameras should prevent accidents due to speed? Could we not therefore address the other governing criteria for the cameras by maintaining random use from time to time in addition to use in the advertised sites? Mr McGRADY: I thank the member for the question. I acknowledge that during the estimates hearing the member did put forward these suggestions. As the Minister for Transport and I have tried to indicate today, road safety is part of a strategy. Government, whether it be through the Department of Transport or the Police Service, can do so much. It is not a decision to be made by politicians. I know that there are some people in this parliament who have difficulty separating the role of a minister and the role of the Public Service. Mr Schwarten: I understand that. Mr McGRADY: Of course. We are dealing here with the lives of Queenslanders. The Minister for Transport has stated that he is affected by every single death on Queensland roads. Death is one part of the problem; other people are maimed for life. This is the tragedy the Minister for 6 Aug 2002 Questions Without Notice 2615

Transport and I see almost on a daily basis. Last Sunday the Police Commissioner was almost in tears as he reported to me the deaths of those people on our roads. It is not just a matter— Mr FLYNN: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. I take offence at the implication that I do not care about the lives of people who die. I spent 24 years lifting off the road people who had died. That was not the point of my question. Mr SPEAKER: Order! You have asked the question. The minister will answer. Mr McGRADY: I was certainly not implying that. As the Minister for Transport has said today, it is an easy headline-grabbing activity to suggest that speed cameras, or indeed other forms of control, are simply about revenue raising. It is about time people started to understand that there is a genuine effort at a ministerial level and also at a department level to try to reduce the carnage on our roads. I was not being flippant this morning when I held up this chart. This chart shows that there are four main areas in which we are trying to combat the deaths and the carnage on our roads. The first area relates to breath testing. An integral part our campaign is to keep drunks from getting behind the wheel. I do not hear criticism from the opposition or from other people when we start imposing these fines. The next area relates to the activities of the Police Service in other forms of speed enforcement. This graph shows the number of hours being spent by the police on operating cameras in fixed locations. This parliament should be saying with one voice that we need the help and assistance of the media, political parties, organisations and members of the general public. Let us have a debate about this, but let the people of Queensland understand that we speak with one voice.

Innovation Train Mr HAYWARD: I direct a question to the Minister for Innovation and Information Economy. After listening to the Premier this morning, I understand that the Queensland government is sponsoring an initiative called the Innovation Train for school students across the state. Can the minister explain what this train is and where it will travel? Mr LUCAS: I would be delighted to do that. I saw the Innovation Train on both Sunday and Monday. On Sunday, I was delighted that the Premier officially launched the Innovation Train. Not only did he launch the Innovation Train; it is also a major initiative of the Year of the Outback. We on this side of the House realise that the Smart State is not just about what happens in Brisbane, as proud as we are of what happens; it is not just about what happens in south-east Queensland, Toowoomba, the Gold Coast, and the Sunshine Coast, as proud as we are of what happens there; it is also about what happens in rural and regional Queensland where we have top, world- class universities, great schools, great innovators in all areas of the state. Yesterday, I was fortunate to be up in the electorate of the member for Toowoomba North—I am always delighted to be in Toowoomba—where I met the Innovation Train. I had the great pleasure of being with about 60 students from Rockville State School and also St Saviour's College in Toowoomba, where we went through a number of exhibits on the Innovation Train. The Innovation Train will be going throughout Queensland—of course, wherever there is a railway line; it is a bit difficult to do other than that—and 11,000 students will be visiting it from 140 schools in Queensland. The state government has provided about $125,000 in sponsorship towards the Innovation Train and we have done that for a very good reason in this International Year of the Outback. Kids often find science at school dry. They often find the classroom experience a little bit boring for them. But they can get onto the Innovation Train, get up there and see exhibits. There are exhibits about health and colour blindness. I could read only one of the numbers and all the kids could read all of them, because they were not colour blind and I am. There were some brochures about bones, some about creative industries and how that applied to computer, some about animals and some about biodiversity—all showing our young schoolchildren what this meant in a practical way, in a hands-on way, because we want those schools to produce the scientists of the future. When we talk to some great scientists we find they are from rural and regional Queensland as often as they are from Brisbane. As I indicated, the train itself was the idea of the Queensland University of Technology. I pay great credit to QUT. I also attended an alumni function for QUT in Toowoomba. There are a number of very proud graduates from QUT, including the member for Kurwongbah, in this House. 2616 Questions Without Notice 6 Aug 2002

It has been a university that has been at the forefront of innovation in Queensland. Of course, the Premier announced the support for the institute for health and biomedical research—$22.4 million towards a $70 million institute there. QUT is a world leader when it comes to diagnostics. They are some of the things that we are doing. But it does not just stop there, because shortly we will be having science in parliament. I am delighted that so many members of this House—from all sides of the House—have given their commitment to participating with scientists. We have 89 members and we have about 140 scientists who want to come here and experience what we are doing. That is really important. We need to understand more of what scientists are doing and they need to understand more of what people need to do as members of parliament and about some of the issues that confront us. That is a great initiative of the Premier and the Speaker and I warmly compliment both of them in that regard.

Police Methods; Comments by Member for Redlands Mr SEENEY: I direct a question to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services. I refer to the comments that were made in this House last week by the member for Redlands, who I understand is a former policeman. He stated— The police still need to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that that person was behind the wheel driving a vehicle or in charge of a vehicle in order to prosecute successfully. This bill does not solve the inherent problem of putting the person behind the wheel. The member went on to say— I personally believe they are quite inventive and creative when it comes to finding ways to put people behind the wheel. I support the police in their activities in that regard. Can the minister tell the parliament what inventive and creative ways the police use to, as his colleague said, put people behind the wheel? Does the minister support this method of policing? Mr McGRADY: I was not aware of the comments made last week by the member for Redlands or, indeed, any other member, because I was not here. Mr Mackenroth: Don't you read Hansard on the weekend? Mr McGRADY: I knew that I had something to do. I do not know what sort of activities the member for Redlands was referring to. In fairness to the question, I will read Hansard and, if need be, have some discussions with the member and I would be happy to discuss it some other time.

Far-North Queensland Indigenous Communities Mr PITT: I refer the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy to a number of recent commendable initiatives undertaken by the indigenous community of far-north Queensland in the area of sport, and I ask: what is the Beattie government doing to promote participation in sporting competitions by indigenous communities in far-north Queensland? Ms SPENCE: I thank the member for Mulgrave for the question. The Beattie government is doing a lot to promote indigenous sport. Before I talk about some of those general initiatives, I would like to congratulate the member for Mulgrave, who is the chairman of the Fretwell Park Sports Association. This is a large association in north Queensland, which has just formed a partnership with the Indigenous North Basketball Association to establish a headquarters and match-playing facilities at the Fretwell Park establishment in the southern suburbs of Cairns. The Indigenous North Basketball Association is a real success story. This year, they have fielded four teams in the basketball league. I understand the women's team is coming second in the league and the men's team is coming fourth. I congratulate those teams. They play under the name Kuijan Pride or Warrior Pride and they have a lot of support in north Queensland. For example, we know that there are large numbers of obviously indigenous people in north Queensland who are underrepresented at elite sporting level. The indigenous basketball league will certainly change that and help redress that focus. I understand that this association is focused on assisting children and young people. They run health promotion programs, they are pursuing scholarships in tertiary institutions, and they are creating traineeships and cadetships. For all of those reasons, the Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy was pleased to approve $20,000 to establish an administration unit and purchase training aids for their junior players. 6 Aug 2002 Matters of Public Interest 2617

I understand that one of the reasons the teams are so successful is that they are coached by Danny Moreau, who is the only indigenous player to represent Australia in basketball. The general manager, Rod Popp, who was the inaugural coach of the Cairns Taipans, is looking after this club. He tells me that one of their strategies is to discourage alcohol and drug use in the sporting teams. This is a club and a team that is well worth supporting. The government has also committed $38,000 to the Cape York Rugby League competition to assist them cover the costs of their player insurance premiums. Without this money the competition could not continue. It is another organisation that is well worth supporting. They have fielded 19 teams. Hundreds of players are involved in this Cape York league. They are implementing a lot of strategies to address alcohol and violence issues. For example, in some teams, people cannot play in the game if they have a domestic violence protection order against them. All of these games are alcohol free and we are pleased to support them. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the member for Nanango, could I welcome to the public gallery students, parents and teachers from the Pacific Paradise State Primary School in the electorate of Maroochydore. Welcome.

Public Liability Insurance; Local Governments Mrs PRATT: I refer the Attorney-General to last year's High Court decision that councils are liable for injuries on roads and paths, whether or not they have created the danger, and I ask: as many rural councils are struggling to meet costs due to a small or diminishing rate base, what measures is the Attorney-General implementing to ensure councils are not excessively financially exposed, and does that include a cap on claims? Mr WELFORD: I thank the honourable member for the question. The government has been approached by the Local Government Association of Queensland and a number of councils in relation to this issue. It is being dealt with in a number of forums. Transport ministers across the nation are looking at the issue, as is the expert panel which has had referred to it the general law of negligence in the context of the public liability issues which have arisen as a result of the collapse of HIH Insurance. Our government has been actively involved in looking at that issue. Indeed, the Local Government Association has provided the government with a lengthy submission on its views about how the law has changed to the detriment of councils in this regard. However, it must be said that over a long period of time the law relating to the liability of councils for what was called non-feasance in relation to the maintenance of road and footpaths has been subject to many court decisions which have reduced its effectiveness. In any event, we are looking at this issue in detail and we hope to have a response for the local government associations towards the end of the year. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The time for questions has now expired.

MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST Beattie Government Performance Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (11.30 a.m.): If there is one thing that Queenslanders look for in a leader and a government it is honesty. People expect their leaders to be principled, ethical and truthful. This Premier promised honesty in 1998 and again in 2001. In 2002 he has delivered dishonesty, deceit and deception. At the 1998 state election this Premier promised that a Beattie Labor government would not introduce any new taxes or increase fees and charges above the consumer price index for two terms. That promise to the people of Queensland has now been broken, not once but on numerous occasions. As this Beattie Labor government follows the well-worn trail to economic ruin which has been steadfastly followed by so many Labor governments over so many years in this country, it is breaking the Premier's promise time after time. The Premier promised no increases in taxes, fees and charges above CPI. He then brought in a new pub tax on poker machines. The Premier who promised no increases in taxes, fees and charges above CPI has actually widened the payroll tax base to trap more businesses in the payroll tax loop. Some $75 million extra is forecast to be collected this financial year. The Premier who promised no increases above CPI has just handed himself another $48 million land tax windfall by scrapping the rebate for companies, trustees and absentees. The Premier who 2618 Matters of Public Interest 6 Aug 2002 promised no fee or charge increases above CPI only last week reluctantly came clean and admitted that he was bumping up transport charges by another $10 million—an entirely new tax; an entirely new charge. The Premier who promised no fee or charge increases above CPI actually ticked off on a 100 per cent increase in DPI's tick clearance and plant inspection fees. The Premier who promised no increases in charges above CPI has also ticked off on significant new increases in charges for freedom of information applications, all the time seeking more money to boost his coffers, as well as stifling accountability. All these new taxes, fees and charges will impose a further burden on the bottom line of Queensland businesses and a drain on the wallets of every Queenslander. Of perhaps even deeper concern for the people of Queensland is not so much the financial impost that these cash grabs will have on them but the fact that the Premier has betrayed the trust placed in him by Queenslanders at the 1998 and 2001 state elections. He made a promise and he has broken it. He promised to be honest but he has been dishonest. Nearly every single one of these new taxes or increases in fees and charges has been imposed by deceit. The new transport charges, the new cattle tick clearance charges and the new plant health inspection charges were not included in the state budget. They were not even foreshadowed in the public arena. There was certainly no consultation with the stakeholders that they would most affect. There was no consultation and there was no warning that the Beattie government was about to scrap the land tax rebate for companies, trustees and absentees—not one single scrap! In fact, the government only came clean about its $10 million transport tax grab after it was leaked to a radio station. All these measures were simply a blatant revenue grab by another Labor government that has ridden the state's finances into the ground. But wait, there is more! Remember the Charter of Social and Fiscal Responsibility? Remember the promise called affordable service provision? For the benefit of members opposite, it stated— The government will ensure that its level of service provision is sustainable by maintaining an overall general government operating surplus as measured in government finance statistics terms. We do not hear too much about it any more because the Premier has exposed that promise as yet another con on the people of Queensland. Under the Beattie government, Queensland has recorded consecutive whole-of-government operating deficits. For example, we saw deficits of $820 million in 2000-01 and $883 million last year. Of course, the $820 million was an operating deficit and the $883 million was a whole-of-government deficit. For the first time since 1977-78, Queensland has recorded not one but two deficits on the trot. The consecutive budget deficits recorded by this Beattie Labor government have broken another of the Premier's much-vaunted promises to the people—his own Charter of Social and Fiscal Responsibility. One central plank of the charter is down and another is on its way down as we speak. In that document the Beattie government also promised it would at least maintain and seek to increase the total state net worth, yet the budget papers for this year reveal a drop of approximately 4.8 per cent in per capita net worth, with a prediction that it will keep dropping over the next three years. Queenslanders are getting poorer under the Beattie government. What about the Premier's infamous 'jobs, jobs, jobs' promise? Remember these words from his 2001 state election campaign launch— I committed to an ambitious jobs target, and I stand by it. I will not forsake all the unemployed Queenslanders who are desperately wanting to work. You know the mantra—jobs, jobs, jobs. My number one job is to get Queenslanders into jobs and to keep them in jobs—real jobs. Let us look at the real story. Queensland's unemployment rate stands at 7.5 per cent, well above the five per cent target that the Premier claims to stand by. It has been the worst result in mainland Australia for 22 months in a row. In the last few weeks, the Premier has tried to sack 2,000 public servants. He has sat on the sidelines and watched 700 jobs disappear at the Lakes Creek meatworks. He has tried to throw 220 Dirranbandi workers onto Labor's unemployment scrap heap. The Premier who claimed he would go to bed thinking about jobs and get up in the morning thinking about jobs has not been thinking about creating more jobs but about ways of getting rid of existing jobs. He has promised the 2,000 public servants he is pushing out that it will not affect front-line services such as policing, teaching and health care. Who will provide the support and services that those front-line workers provide to the public? Who will provide the backup for transport, families, police, education, public works, health and DPI? 6 Aug 2002 Matters of Public Interest 2619

The Premier said in his leaked caucus letter that after 10 years of enterprise bargaining and workplace reforms, the government is close to exhausting the majority of productivity gains and reforms within the Public Service. However, it now seems that the Premier believes there are some productivity gains still to be squeezed out of those remaining public servants after the 2,000 have gone, or does he want us to believe those 2,000 people were sitting there doing nothing? The net result of these sackings is that the people of Queensland will bear the cost of the redundancy payouts and the cost of the loss of services. More taxes; less services. Another day; another dishonesty from the Premier. The Treasurer's clanger last week and the government's surreptitious softening up of the public in the weekend newspapers was a warning that there are more broken promises to come—more new taxes, fees and charges. The Premier's kite flying harked back to memories of his long-held desire to introduce new taxes under the guise of taxation reform. The Premier and his government are not satisfied with the increasing revenue from GST. They cannot make do with the existing taxation base and the natural growth of that base as the population grows. They cannot curb their spending and they cannot balance the budget. This government is incapable of making the hard budget priority decisions required to run the state. It thinks it can cruise through by racking up more debt and robbing the reserves. The public has seen the government's financial mismanagement and that is why the Premier's argument that he does not have enough money to pay the public servants or to provide the services that Queenslanders expect and has no other option but to pinch more money from taxpayers' pockets will not wash. Queenslanders have seen the Premier's dishonesty on tax and they will not be fooled again. I announce today that the Queensland Nationals will put a stop to the Beattie government's financial dishonesty. I make a commitment that a National Party-led state government will introduce new rules to ensure future governments comply with an honest and accountable set of disclosure principles in the budget process and throughout the budget process. We will put an end to the dishonest Beattie Labor government practice of hiding new Labor taxes or changes to fees and charges from the people, particularly during the budget process. We will put an end to springing new taxes, fees or charges on Queenslanders by the sort of deceitful and dishonest means that we have seen from the Beattie government. A National Party- led state government will restore honesty to the budget process. A National Party-led state government will require any changes to taxes, fees and charges to be included in the budget papers where they should be, where they can be clearly seen and where they can be debated in the budget process and in the budget estimates process. Taxpayers should not have to find out about mean and sneaky new fees and charges from radio gossip. The government of the day should be accountable. The government should be up-front and, most importantly, honest. In failing to be honest with the people of Queensland, the Premier has failed the test of real leadership.

Liberal Party Mr MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (11.40 a.m.): The airline industry is abuzz with expectation following the announcement by Senator Herron that he will be appointed ambassador and that there will be yet another Senate Liberal Party preselection in Queensland. Through good management I have just obtained a copy of the Liberal Party constitutional review committee document, and the airlines have every reason to be confident that the same old fly-in fly-out Liberal Party branch stacking operations of the past will be entrenched in the new constitution. The most blatant branch stacking in Ryan, Moreton and Rankin is enshrined. Members are aware of the Johnson and Ciobo stacking in Ryan and Moncrieff. Less well known is the role of the federal Ethnic Affairs Minister, Gary Hardgrave, in the phoney Liberal branch creation in Rankin. Over 100 members of the Moreton FEC were cleaved off to create a branch in Rankin. This gave the 10 preselection votes that enabled Senator George Brandis to win the Senate preselection. Just as importantly, it gave the people of Logan something they had never had—their very own Liberal Party branch. After the vote, the branch predictably folded and became the Algester branch, and of its 54 members 27 are family members of the legendary Deen brothers. In a letter to Liberal Party members on 15 July, which fortuitously I have copy of, Mr Caltabiano said that the new measures would 'remove the ability to branch-stack'. But that is not what amendment 60 of the constitution says. It actually entrenches the worst aspects of branch rorting. Take the case of the Springwood business branch. Years ago—and some of the older 2620 Matters of Public Interest 6 Aug 2002 members here will remember—there was an ad in which the coffee giant Nescafe boasted it had 43 beans in every cup. In Springwood, that slogan has been applied to the Liberal Party. Logan City councillor Tom Sandman signed up 43 new members to the business branch in just one night. It has become known as the Nescafe branch of the Liberal Party. Not one of them lives in Fadden. All of them were signed up at the cheaper rate as either students or pensioners. They are discount Liberals but all branch-stacked. Yet they will still be able to vote in Fadden under the new constitution because they live in an adjacent federal electorate, the electorate of Rankin. It is a rorted provision in the existing constitution that will be preserved in the new one. I understand that Councillor Sandman, who poses as an Independent on the Logan City Council, will be rewarded for his branch stacking efforts by being placed on the Santoro ticket for party vice-president. If that is first prize, I would rather be asking for the third prize even without knowing what it was! There are two reasons the member for Robina's reform proposals, Connecting with a Modern Queensland, which I had faxed to me yesterday afternoon, will be opposed by Caltabiano, because the rule changes move the Liberal Party closer to democracy. First, Caltabiano needs Michael Johnson's ethnic vote in bulk in Ryan to win the Moggill preselection and become the Liberal Party leader in exile. Secondly, with Herron's vacancy, the former member for Clayfield will need the entire rorted apparatus to gain the preselection just as Brandis, Johnson and Ciobo did and as Boland is trying to do on the Sunshine Coast. This is why we have witnessed the breathtaking arrogance of the Liberal Party organisation denying the leader of the party branch member lists. In a spirit of goodwill, I am prepared to hand over these branch membership lists and make them available to the member for Robina. The member for Robina certainly could have saved money on postage if he had adopted another of my proposals. The member need not mail the list to all the members. He could simply go down to the valley and wait for one of the Deens to fall asleep in his car and slip the brochures under the windscreen! They could then be given out to the family members. With a new preselection under way, the airlines will be busy again. For the Ryan members, the member for Robina could have left the brochures at one of the inbound duty free shops and the Liberal members from overseas simply could have picked them up on the way through. Under the new constitution, Caltabiano's Liberal Party sees things differently from us. We look up in the sky and see an aeroplane. They look up in the sky and see a mobile polling booth with wings! That is why branch membership democracy will be denied in the Queensland Liberal Party. But I say today my promise is still this: I am prepared to hand over these delicate lists to the member for Robina should he come calling for them.

Cabotage Mr MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (11.46 a.m.): Cabotage is the practice of limiting access to a country's coastal waters to national ship operators or national flag vessels. Cabotage in Australia is an issue that has recently come to the fore with the controversy over the Canadian Steamship Lines vessel the Yarra. Despite attempts by unions to prevent it, the Australian registered and crewed CSL Yarra was sold to a related overseas company, re-flagged and the Australian crew replaced with Ukrainians. We now have a situation whereby CSL has applied for damages from several unions through the Federal Court. Unions fought hard to get a fair deal for Australian shipping workers, hindered at every turn by inconsistent federal laws. The circumstances surrounding the CSL Yarra clearly identify a need for cabotage laws in Australia to be addressed. The federal government's inaction in allowing underhanded tactics to destroy Australian maritime jobs sets a dangerous precedent for other Australian industries. International shipping is characterised by flag of convenience ships designed to avoid national taxation, labour and other regulatory standards, and the federal government seems unwilling to act to ensure the Australian industry is protected. The Howard government cannot continue to allow Australian jobs to be destroyed by these ships which do not even pay Australian taxes. Under his government, Australian fleets and major trading ships have been reduced to 45, down from 78 six years ago. The Australian coastal trade is regulated under the Commonwealth Navigation Act 1912, which makes it an offence for a ship to engage in coastal trade unless it is licensed to do so or holds a coastal trade permit. Vessels may be licensed to participate in Australia's coastal trade regardless of flag and crew nationality. Though, in effect, cabotage exists as licensing conditions, such as the seamen being required to be paid Australian wage rates, 6 Aug 2002 Matters of Public Interest 2621 safety standards, crew qualifications, rehabilitation and compensation provisions can be met by very few foreign vessels. The permit provisions were not brought into force until 1921 under the Navigation Amendment Act 1921. This was seen as necessary at the time due to a number of factors, including the requisitioning of Australian vessels to World War I. Since that time, the permit system has been made considerably more open in the interests of greater competition. The permit system allows unlicensed ships to operate in Australian coastal waters, and it is this system that has been exploited by foreign vessels, with assistance from the federal government and in particular the Transport Minister, John Anderson. There are two kinds of permits: single voyage permits, issued for a single trip between ports to transport specified merchandise or passengers; and continuing voyage permits, which allow a ship to carry designated cargo between certain ports over a six-month period. Unlicensed ships are to be granted permits where it can be shown to the satisfaction of the minister that no licensed ship is available for the service or the service available from a licensed ship is inadequate. Also, the minister must be satisfied that allowing an unlicensed vessel to participate in trade in our waters is desirable in the public interest. It is my contention that his deliberations were not long enough when considering whether to grant the Ukrainian manned CSL Yarra a permit to sail back into Australian waters. It was certainly not in the best interests of the sacked Australian crew that the CSL Yarra, now renamed the Stadacona, was allowed to take advantage of our system. From 142 single voyage permits issued in 1990-91, there were 628 permits issued in the year 2000-01. The number of continuing voyage permits jumped from none in 1997-98 to 108 in 2000-01. If John Howard is truly committed to protecting Australia's borders, why is he letting his transport minister issue an unprecedented number of foreign shipping permits, increasing the number of foreign ships in our waters? Crews of foreign vessels are automatically issued visas and therefore bypass the usual scrutiny applied to tourists or so-called boat people. John Howard uses security as a reason to spend up big on the defence budget at the expense of other areas. The strongest economy in the world, the United States of America, allows only US built and US citizen owned vessels to participate in coastal shipping. Waivers are granted very rarely and only in the interests of national defence or for a vessel in distress. The legislation is designed to encourage a strong US shipping industry to benefit both national and economic security. While John Howard seems content to be buddies with the president and, it seems, willingly commit Australian troops to the war on terror, he has not seen fit to take the lead from our ally in tightening security and protecting our national interests. The federal government seems unprepared to work to guarantee the security of our waters and the Australian shipping industry.

Flood Insurance, Suncorp Metway Mr BELL (Surfers Paradise—Ind) (11.50 a.m.): I rise to speak on the subject of insurance, which has been in the news lately. However, my address does not relate to public liability insurance. I am indebted to a constituent of the electorate of Surfers Paradise for drawing to my attention the matter that I now raise. Apparently Suncorp Metway insurance has made a subtle change to the wording of policies relating to flood insurance. Perhaps other companies have done so as well. That I do not know. But it has been done very quietly. It is a very subtle change and a change that has apparently been made without any notification whatsoever to policy holders. This change relates to flood surges or perhaps tidal waves. Once upon a time the insurance policies of Suncorp Metway and perhaps other companies had an exclusion that flood extension was not applicable where the flood was caused by storm surge alone. That is quite reasonable. If one is expecting to insure against tidal waves, one should surely take out insurance specifically for that possibility. But now the change has been made to say that there is an exclusion from the flood insurance extension where the event has as a contributing cause storm surge. In other words, if there is any storm surge component at all the flood insurance extension is voided. The advice that I receive from engineers who are experienced and knowledgeable in matters relating to coastal flooding at least is that along the coast—and presumably this applies all the way up the Queensland coast, though certainly not inland—where there is a flood that is almost always accompanied by a storm surge. What happens, I am told, is that a low pressure system 2622 Matters of Public Interest 6 Aug 2002 establishes itself off the coast. That creates a heightening of tidal levels and, at the same time, there is very heavy rain in the headwaters of the streams. The higher level of tide and the waters coming down the streams converge and the result is a flood in the coastal areas. That is common. It has been happening in all of the floods that I know of in the electorate of Surfers Paradise and I believe that is the situation right up coastal Queensland. The flood insurance that people have and have been paying premiums for is excluded if there is any contributing factor by way of storm surge. In other words, the most usual, the almost invariable, situation where there is a flood is now being excluded from these insurance policies. People believe that they are covered. They are paying a premium because they want to have flood insurance. If one reads the small print, now that it has been changed by Suncorp Metway insurance, one sees that these people do not have the cover that they think they have. I draw this matter to the attention of minister responsible for insurance matters and suggest that he take it to the insurance council. In my view, it is deceitful that the wording of people's policies is changed such as to create massive exclusions for those who believe that they are covered. This is a matter of public interest and that is why I draw it to the attention of the House in the matters of public interest forum today.

Dental Health Ms STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (11.54 a.m.): I have heard it said that the divide between the haves and have-nots can be seen when people smile. The poor state of teeth that many lower income people have, however, is more a product of their inability to access and afford dental care than a result of not brushing or not eating an apple a day. It is Dental Health Week. What better time to take action to fill the gap in access to dental care? Private dentists charge around $200 per hour, which covers their overheads and fees. This fee makes dental care out of the reach of many low income people. Since the federal government axed the Commonwealth Dental Health Program, dental waiting times in the public system have become very lengthy. The Queensland government is the only government to initiate and increase funding to public dental clinics around the state—and increased it significantly—to help fill the gap left by the federal government. But even this level of funding is like putting sandbags up against a rising tide. Non-urgent treatment can result in a 12-month wait for many low income people seeking help from the public system. The Dental and Oral Therapists Association of Queensland has been putting forward a very constructive proposition. It believes that the dental gap could be filled more readily if the well trained dental and oral therapists we have in Queensland could practise on adults under the supervision of dentists. Dental and oral therapists already clean, drill, fill and extract children's teeth in the public system. It seems logical that if dental therapists were able to practise more broadly on adults in the public and private system under the supervision of dentists dental care would be more accessible and affordable. The Dentists Association does not agree. It argues that this would compromise standards of care. But why is it okay to have dental therapists practising on children—drilling, filling and extracting; lower-level sorts of procedures—but not on adults? I do not see much difference between the teeth of a 15-year-old boy at school or a 17-year-old unemployed boy. The unemployed boy at 17 is often the one having difficulty affording dental care. As part of Dental Health Week, the Dental and Oral Therapists Association is saying that it is crunch time. It believes that dental waiting lists have to be reduced urgently and it is offering a very constructive solution by seeking to practise on adults as well as children. I agree; it is crunch time. We need to do something. Change has to occur. We are unlikely to get support from the feds on this issue. As I said, the mean-spirited federal government has axed the scheme. Data from the 1999 national dental telephone survey clearly showed that low income residents of low socioeconomic areas reported less favourable patterns of tooth loss and dental visiting compared with higher income earners, including higher rates of complete tooth loss, higher rates of extractions and lower rates of fillings, longer periods since the last visit, and avoiding or delaying care due to cost. According to the study, low income people, who are about a third of the population, experience lengthy delays in dental treatment or miss out altogether under an inadequately funded system. 6 Aug 2002 Matters of Public Interest 2623

The federal government not only created a major hole in the public system; a further blow to the dental health of low income families resulted from the massive subsidisation of higher income earners at the expense of lower income families. A study by Spencer from the Adelaide University found that higher income earners received five times the government subsidy for dental care than pensioners who access the public dental clinics. The paper by Spencer calculates that the federal government spent between $316 million and $345 million in 1999-2000 on subsidising dental care through the rebate on ancillary health insurance for 3.8 million people with private insurance. The only contribution that the federal government makes to dental care is through the 30 per cent tax rebate. The national competition policy review of the Dental Health Act in Queensland affords the opportunity now to have a good look at this issue and see whether it is feasible to allow oral and dental therapists to practise on adults. I am with them at the moment; I think it is crunch time. I think they have a good case that deserves every consideration by our government and I hope that they get that. I urge dentists to embrace this opportunity to work alongside dental and oral therapists in the adult system. This is an opportunity, not a threat to their practice and standards of practice. I encourage them to get behind the case that the dental therapists are putting up and give them all the support that they deserve.

Jondaryan Woolshed Mr HOPPER (Darling Downs—NPA) (12.00 a.m.): The Jondaryan Woolshed has run into serious difficulty. The chairman of the board, Mr Roy Grundy, has put in 27 years of tireless work, not to mention the likes of John Mathews and many others who have donated time and relics of great value. The insurance bill for this year is approximately $7,000 per month, which has not helped. Approximately one month ago the board of the woolshed decided to appoint an administrator, Mr Phil Aggs, from Brisbane. Since then I have worked tirelessly to try to acquire funding for this great educational icon of Queensland. Before the administrator was appointed, the debt level of the woolshed was approximately $350,000. Now with the charges of the administrator, valuers, et cetera, it will climb to between $500,000 and $600,000. The Jondaryan Shire Council will happily take over the ownership of the woolshed once it is debt free, and I believe this is a good thing. Under the management of the shire, this great tourist attraction can only prosper and will never need government assistance again. It is up to the council, which will put all the profits back into the complex. A lot of the work involved in the running of the woolshed can then be taken up by the shire, in whom I have total faith. The Queensland government has injected $500,000 over the past six or so years, which we sincerely appreciate. Recently, the federal government injected $2 million to rebuild the shed to ensure that it will be there for the next 200 years. What a wonderful gesture from it. However, D-day is soon coming. If the funding does not come forward, the administrator, Mr Phil Aggs, will move to sell the assets of the woolshed. Last week I attended a meeting in Brisbane with all levels of government. The Premier apologised for not being there, and I can understand that. However, what I cannot understand is why one of his staff could not be sent to represent him. Last week we heard the Premier talk about the next generation. Well, Premier, what about the next generation? If we let the woolshed be sold, we can kiss all the educational value goodbye. The woolshed represents a great snapshot of our heritage, a real history of what our early pioneers endured in the early days of this great state. This educational and tourism icon represents the make-up and the character of many of our Queensland pioneers and provides us with a great opportunity to pass that history on to our present generation and those generations still to come. You cannot buy this heritage and you cannot recoup this icon once it is sold and gone because the state government could not be bothered to save it. It has no problems spending millions and millions of dollars loaning money to huge global multinationals such as Time Warner but cannot provide a minuscule amount of that $200,000 to save a home-grown tourism icon. What will we say to Queensland children who receive a huge amount of educational value from this icon? What will we say to Queenslanders who will visit this great tourist centrepiece on the Darling Downs? The fact is that if the woolshed gets sold it will not only affect the Darling Downs; it will be another tourism revenue raising opportunity lost for Queensland and Australia. Thousands of tourists head to the Darling Downs each year to visit Jondaryan Woolshed. They then go on to pour millions of dollars into the local economy by staying in motels, shopping at 2624 Matters of Public Interest 6 Aug 2002 local shops and buying products from local small businesses, all of which amounts to jobs—yes, Premier, jobs, jobs, jobs. It would seem that the Premier is all talk and no action if he lets the woolshed close down. The federal government has said that it will fund a rescue package for the woolshed if the state government comes to the party fifty-fifty. The local community and Jondaryan Shire Council aim to raise $200,000 through the up-and-coming Heritage Festival in the last week of August to help rescue the woolshed. The only one not coming to the party is the state government. I plead with the Premier: do not let this great centrepiece of Australian history and heritage close down, not in this the Year of the Outback. It is up to the Premier. He holds the key to keeping this woolshed going and keeping our heritage and history intact for generations to come.

Community Renewal Program, Rasmussen Ms PHILLIPS (Thuringowa—ALP) (12.03 p.m.): On Saturday, 27 July 2002 I had the great pleasure of opening the Rasmussen renewal project house on behalf of the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing, the Hon. Robert Schwarten. The Community Renewal Program is an initiative of the Beattie government to raise the confidence and image of targeted communities. It does this by a whole-of-government approach to address the causes of crime and disadvantage. Rasmussen is one of the 14 areas currently benefiting from the Community Renewal Program. Last year, cabinet approved a notional budget of $2.7 million for Rasmussen renewal for three years ending in June 2004. Additionally, Rasmussen is benefiting from the complementary Urban Renewal Program, which is upgrading public rental housing to contemporary standards. Urban renewal has been allocated $3 million this financial year. The Hon. Robert Schwarten publicly launched the two programs at the Rasmussen State School on 5 September last year and reinforced the vital importance of community involvement to ensure their success. From the very start, the state government has been working hand in hand with the Thuringowa City Council and the Rasmussen community, and all partners have been very committed to its progress so far. Rasmussen residents in particular have been very enthusiastic about community renewal and have put a lot of time and effort into considering the opportunity that community renewal presents and the potential outcomes for the community. The community has just completed its planning phase and is ready to move to establishing projects. This planning work has been focused through the community reference group and the theme development groups. They have met regularly in the last six months and recorded their aspirations in the draft local renewal plan. This plan lists the goals, outcomes and strategies under the seven major themes of youth, transport, health, public spaces, jobs and education, safety, and social support. On Friday, 2 August we held a community and government planning meeting at the Good Shepherd Community Hall to finalise this local renewal plan, and projects will be written into the plan to be implemented over the next three years. This project implementation phase will be a very busy time. To support this, the Queensland government will place a full-time community renewal facilitator on site to assist. The Rasmussen renewal project house was established during February 2002 to ensure a local presence from which to resource the community. It is regularly used by the renewal program's theme groups and by local community groups, such as the Upper Ross Tenants Action Group. It is also the office of project officer for the Urban Renewal Program, Mr Paul Clair. The community renewal facilitator will be appointed and on site during August. The Mayor of Thuringowa, Les Tyrell, and a member of the community reference group joined me in cutting the cake to celebrate what was a significant milestone in this fantastic program.

Port Access Road, Gladstone Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (12.07 p.m.): I rise to speak today about a petition that was tabled this morning from 3,112 citizens of the state of Queensland. In that petition this House was requested to stop the construction of the Port Access Road, otherwise called route D, in the city of Gladstone. The petition also asked that the Minister for Transport initiate plans to reduce rather than increase the number of semitrailers, B-doubles and other heavy transport vehicles crossing the centre of the city to and from port facilities and to reassess the further development of the port of Gladstone to ensure, as opportunities arise, that truck based cargoes are directed away from inner-city port precincts to developing facilities at Fisherman's Landing and Wiggins Island. 6 Aug 2002 Matters of Public Interest 2625

At various times through the gathering of this petition and when opposition to route D or the Port Access Road was expressed, the group who opposed the construction of that access road were criticised as being of little importance, a very small number, poorly informed and other similar criticisms. The reality is that there are a significant body of people who have concerns about the location of the Port Access Road and its desirability as a development in the centre of the city. There is also a belief that better planning could be implemented for the port region. I have heard none who are opposed to or do not support the development of the port of Gladstone—quite the opposite. The principal petitioner was the manager of one of the largest plants in Gladstone, Queensland Alumina Limited. He is used to large industry. Mr Bruce Hunt is a very credible man. He is articulate, and with the Harbour City Group he has endeavoured to ensure that anyone with whom he discusses the issue is well informed. When I was handed the petition, it was accompanied by this statement from John Bright, who was acting on Bruce Hunt's behalf because Bruce was away— We are here today on behalf of the Gladstone community to entrust to you a petition for presentation to the Honourable Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of Queensland. We also ask that you remind the Members of the House that Gladstone has a vital role to play in the State's and the nations future economic development. Full achievement of this potential will depend on local community support for ongoing industrial and port development. Assure the Members that there is strong community support for this future vision, but that this should not be taken for granted. Tell the House that the Gladstone Community will never accept ill-conceived and poorly planned projects such as the proposed Port Access Road and tell the Minister that if he seeks to impose this nonsensical project, then he places at severe risk the best economic interests of this port, this state and this nation. ... it is not an exaggeration to say that Gladstone is now at a defining crossroads. If the Port Access Road is allowed to be built then the future prospects of this city as a place to live and raise a family are dire. However, if common sense prevails then the opportunity exists where the interests of the port, industry and the community can proceed together to a mutually prosperous future. Concerns have been expressed not only by members of the community in general but also by parents whose children attend Central State School. The school has the access route right beside it. The road will be elevated as it passes beside the school, and there are concerns not only about safety but also about emissions, fumes, et cetera, and the impact that that will have on the school. I reiterate that those people who have been opposed to the road have not been opposed the industrialisation of the area. They have not been opposed to the development of the port, and particularly a higher density development at Wiggins Islands and Fisherman's Landing, but they are strident in their claims—and I support their claims—that the Port Access Road is not good planning for this day and age and that there is a better way. Right up until when construction starts there is an opportunity to correct what is seen by very many people in our community as a poor decision. I ask the minister and those who consider these matters to review the matter of the construction of the Port Access Road so that the future of Gladstone—not only as far as its industrialisation is concerned but also for the economy of the centre of town and the small businesses that are established there—can be ensured and enhanced. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr McNamara): Order! Before calling the honourable member for Redlands, the chair recognises the presence in the gallery of parents, students and teachers from the Pacific Paradise State School in the electorate of Maroochydore.

Fisherman Islands Container Terminal Mr ENGLISH (Redlands—ALP) (12.13 p.m.): To quote from a famous TV tune, 'Sit right back and you'll hear a tale, a tale of a fateful trip.' This trip, however, does not involve the crew of the SS Minnow but the health and wellbeing of a worker, Mr Greg Cook. I have already spoken in this House on a number of occasions in relation to Greg's struggle, so without rehashing the details I will give honourable members a summary of the facts to date. In May last year P&O Ports took management action against Greg because he took steps to protect his fellow workers, as he is required to under workplace health and safety legislation. This unfair action caused Greg a great deal of stress and he subsequently took some leave. I hope all workers here can appreciate the pressure that was on Greg at this time: you take action to protect the health and safety of your work colleagues and the company condemns you. Greg then applied to WorkCover for assistance, and in June WorkCover denied Greg's application. With the support of Trevor Surplice from the Queensland Council of Unions, Greg appealed WorkCover's 2626 Matters of Public Interest 6 Aug 2002 decision. The review board heard the appeal in September and Greg was successful and his claim accepted. Early in 2002 P&O Ports appealed this decision of the review board. Now, let me be very clear about this aspect. I do not have a problem per se with this action by P&O Ports. Just as Greg used the appeal process to obtain acceptance of his claim, P&O Ports is entitled to use the same legal mechanisms to its advantage. P&O's appeal has been listed on three separate occasions since January this year. On the two previous occasions the matter was adjourned. The matter was finally set down to be heard on 5, 6, 8, 9 and 16 August. Last Thursday, 1 August, two working days prior to the hearing commencing, Greg received a telephone call from Q-Comp to advise him that Q-Comp was not proceeding with the case and Greg's payments would be terminated from Monday, 5 August—yesterday. He was given two working days' notice that he had to find alternative income. Greg is married with three lovely children and a mortgage, yet he was given two working days' notice to try and provide for his family. What reasons did Q-Comp give Greg for this sudden reversal of attitude? Apparently during a pre-trial conference P&O Ports had provided Q-Comp with some documents that damaged Q- Comp's case. What was Q-Comp's reaction to these documents? Did it talk to Greg and ask his comments? Did it talk to the Maritime Union of Australia or the MUA's industrial experts? Did it make any effort to investigate the validity of these documents or their substance? The answer to all these questions is no. Yesterday, before the Industrial Magistrate, Q-Comp put up the white flag and surrendered to P&O Ports. I am sure every criminal defence lawyer in Australia wishes that Q-Comp would take over criminal prosecutions. In a pre-trial conference the defence would of course table some documents to show why their client was not guilty of the offence that the police allege. Having seen such documentation, Q-Comp, being the fearless defender of justice, would quickly fold and withdraw the obviously dubious charges. No criminals would ever see the inside of a courtroom if Q-Comp had its way. Why do we need industrial magistrates when Q-Comp is prepared to unilaterally take decisions about what cases to pursue and what cases to drop? Why did Greg Cook not get his day in court? Why did Q-Comp deny Greg natural justice? If this case had gone to court Greg may have won or P&O Ports may have won, but we will never know because of Q-Comp's capitulation. This surrender by Q-Comp is also a slap in the face for the review board. Q-Comp will not even go in to defend a decision made by its own review board. This is a real vote of confidence in it. As an investigator myself I understand that problems do arise when preparing a matter for court. What I also understand is that one makes every effort to overcome these problems prior to making the decision to withdraw. I cannot condone the lack of action on the part of Q-Comp. Given that P&O Ports has proven itself to be 'creative' with the facts in the past, I cannot understand why Q-Comp did not speak to Greg and the MUA prior to making this decision. I guess it is no surprise that Greg thinks Q-Comp is lazy and incompetent. I call on the bureaucrats in Q-Comp who made this gutless decision to meet with Greg and explain and justify their decision to throw Greg onto the workers' scrap heap. Just like the crew of the SS Minnow, Greg Cook has been cast away and marooned by Q-Comp.

Coalmining Dr WATSON (Moggill—Lib) (12.17 p.m.): Coalmining and the industries associated with this activity are important industries for Queensland. In hard economic terms, coal production in Queensland is approximately $5 billion. This represents about 50 per cent of the value of coal production in Australia and over 60 per cent of the value of mineral production in Queensland. Coal contributes about four per cent to the gross state product of Queensland and is of course a substantial contributor to the state budget, both directly and indirectly, through royalties, port charges and rail freights. This does not count the contribution in terms of payroll tax, land tax and stamp duties. In short, the coalmining industry is a substantial contributor to the Queensland economy and thus the standard of living we each enjoy. Unfortunately, there are some negative side effects from coal production. Emissions from coalmines currently make up about 6.7 per cent of Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions. A coalmine produces greenhouse gas emissions in a number of ways. Underground fugitive emissions contribute about 43 per cent and spontaneous combustion of coal waste a further 11 per cent. In fact, coal waste is a second significant negative side effect of coal production. A 6 Aug 2002 Matters of Public Interest 2627 typical underground coalmine produces around 800,000 tonnes of waste coal every year. Mines are thus faced with the problem of two significant sources of greenhouse gas emissions, from ventilation air and waste coal, which are both difficult to mitigate economically. However, we now have the answer. I am pleased to inform the House that this Thursday my colleague the federal Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources, Ian Macfarlane, will officially launch the hybrid coal and gas turbine system at the CSIRO advanced technologies centre located at Pinjarra Hills in my electorate of Moggill. This system has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while generating power as a by-product. This product is an example of the vision of the Australian Coal Association's funding program which supports research that will produce long-term benefits to Australia as well as the coal industry. It reflects the successful interaction between the CSIRO, the private sector through Liquatech Turbine Co. and the state government through the Sustainable Energy Development Authority of New South Wales. This project is an outstanding example of the benefits of cooperation and collaboration between business and science. More than this, the project benefits the community by getting returns from waste, improved resource recovery and better environmental management. For example, in our local area the old mine sites at Ipswich have the potential to benefit from this technological and industrial breakthrough. As many members would know, most of these old mines have tailings or waste coal around them, which means that the land is unusable and a number have problems with spontaneous combustion. The hybrid coal and gas turbine system produces a way to clean up these sites and produce power as well. Another application of this system is in open cut mining. In some mines between 30 per cent and 40 per cent of the coal mined has to be reburied as it does not meet the required specifications to be used as steaming coal. Substantial savings can be made in operating costs if this coal does not need to be disposed of. In addition, it has the potential to provide power back to the electricity grid. Given that many of these mines are in western Queensland, this provides an opportunity to input power to the grid where the coal is mined, thus saving mining costs and reducing transmission losses to the electricity grid. This system has the potential to greatly improve the efficiency of coal production and at the same time the environment in Queensland. The same can be done in other states—hence the interest of the New South Wales government—as well as overseas and thus its export potential to the United States, Japan and China. Particularly the United States and China have substantial underground mines and substantial problems in these areas. I am very pleased that Ian Macfarlane has been able to accept my invitation to him on behalf of the CSIRO and Liquatech to officially throw the switch to 'on' this Thursday.

Barcaldine Mr PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (12.21 p.m.): It was with great pleasure that I joined with the Premier, the cabinet, several parliamentary colleagues—the members for Springwood, Stafford and Aspley—and many members of the Labor movement in Barcaldine on the weekend of 20 and 21 July. We were there for the launch of a major new exhibition that is an important addition to the Queensland Heritage Trails Network, which is attracting record numbers of tourists to the outback. The state government has injected $1.7 million into a major new exhibition that is an important addition to the $110 million network. The exhibition, A lot on her hands: The experience of Australia's working women, honours the contribution women have made to Australia's development. It was an exciting weekend for Barcaldine, one on which in this Year of the Outback a rightful recognition was shown to those magnificent women for their unselfish contribution to the making of a better Australia. More than $27 million is being spent in Queensland's 10 Queensland Heritage Trails Network attractions in the outback, including Winton's Waltzing Matilda Centre, the Blackall Woolscour, the Qantas Founders Outback Museum and the hall of fame at Longreach. While we honour the male heroes of our folklore—the swaggie, the shearer, the bushman—much of the women's contribution to our society is undocumented and unheralded. So it is right that the wonderful exhibition presented by the Australian Workers Heritage Centre is now there to honour all aspects of Australian working women's lives. 2628 Matters of Public Interest 6 Aug 2002

The exhibition tells the story of 25 Australian women and honours the contribution of all women who have helped to make Australia. The exhibition tells the story of some well-known women, such as former Victorian Premier Joan Kirner and Australian writer Oodgeroo Noonuccal. It also tells of Greek-born Voula James, who came to Australia in 1955 for an arranged marriage, raised three sons, helped write a best-selling cookbook and is now a community volunteer in Brisbane. The exhibition also tells us about Nancy Bird, one of Australia's first women pilots; Louisa Lawson, writer and publisher and mother of Henry; and Grace Munro, the founder of the Country Women's Association. What a great association that is and what a great judge of tomato relish! It also tells us about Elsie Wright, who augmented her family's meagre farm income by winning embroidery competitions. The hard work of Pat Ogden, Bob Gleeson and his Workers Heritage Centre band deserves great praise. They opened the Workers Heritage Centre to the public free of charge for the weekend. They also held a free barbecue on the Sunday before the community cabinet meeting, which was a very great success as everybody knows. I know that the staff of the Workers Heritage Centre worked 16- and 18-hour days to make sure the weekend was a success. I must thank Pat Ogden's wife, Clare, and daughters, Pauline and Patrice, for their hospitality to Margaret and me over the weekend. While we were in Barcaldine the good Lord also smiled on the St Vincent de Paul. Pat Ogden and the St Vinnie's supporters approached the Premier and the Minister for Transport to correct an anomaly of freight being charged on charity freight. The issue was resolved immediately. The generous charity offerings of those of the central highlands and the central west—indeed across Queensland—will remain free of charge. The government is a keen supporter of organisations such as St Vincent de Paul. Among the government's Christmas donations to charity last year was $27,500 to St Vincent de Paul. In the year before, the government provided $25,000. The reception in Barcaldine was warm and friendly. I thank the Premier and the Minister for Transport for doing their bit with St Vinnie's and wish they could do the same with some rain. We all hope and pray that the parched lands of the west feel the comfort of a steady, gentle, dam- filling rain. I must mention Shane Hogan and his band The Working Class Heroes, who entertained people at the heritage centre on the Friday night, Saturday and Sunday. He also worked in the local hotels of Barcaldine and came back for an encore at Pat Ogden's Globe Hotel, better known as the Barky Hilton. He plays great foot-tapping working-class songs. Members will hear more about Shane and his band The Working Class Heroes. They were a great hit in Barcaldine. I also congratulate the Barcaldine Sand Goannas who got over the top of the Winton team on the Saturday. It was a very, very tight game, but the Sand Goannas pulled it out of the bag and won handsomely.

Ms E. Wilson; Public Housing Hon. K. W. HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (12.26 p.m.): I take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister for Housing for the policy decision he has taken that allows public housing units to be named after prominent and hardworking people within the local community. Recently I had the pleasure of celebrating the official naming of some units in Brewer Street, Kallangur. They were named after a lady who has worked very hard for the local Pine Rivers community over many years—a lady by the name of Esther Wilson, who has made a tremendous contribution not just to the local Pine Rivers community but also generally throughout Queensland. She started off the business of the comfort bears and the small firemen that are given to kids after tragedies or particularly bad house fires. Those articles have become very prominent throughout Queensland. Ester is also a very prominent member of the Pine Rivers CWA and has been a hard worker in our local community over a number of years. Mrs Lavarch: A beautiful person. Mr HAYWARD: As the member for Kurwongbah says, she is a beautiful and hardworking person who really has our community at heart. I congratulate the minister for introducing this policy. I am sure it has given the opportunity to recognise in a very prominent way people who have played an important role in local communities throughout Queensland. 6 Aug 2002 Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2629

It was interesting to hear Esther Wilson speak at the gathering, because she was genuinely surprised and taken aback by not just the naming of the units after herself—she apparently had no idea as to how that happened—but also the number of people who were at the gathering to celebrate with her. In attendance were the residents of those particular units, the local branch and some state officials of the CWA and the member for Kurwongbah, who has had a long relationship with Esther Wilson over many years. As I said, I congratulate the minister on a simple policy decision, but a policy decision that is really important throughout the state of Queensland. It is a policy decision that means that people who are hardworking and who have spent a lot of time— Mrs Lavarch: Those who normally do not seek recognition. Mr HAYWARD: As the member for Kurwongbah said, it means that those who do not normally seek recognition within our local communities are able to be recognised. We had a great time that day in celebrating the naming of the Esther Wilson Units in Brewer Street in Kallangur. It was a great celebration. I am sure that, because of the decision made by the minister, there will be many of these great celebrations throughout our state of Queensland over the years. I congratulate him.

COMMUNITY SERVICES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services) (12.30 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— That leave be granted to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Community Services (Aborigines) Act 1984, Community Services (Torres Strait) Act 1984 and Local Government (Aboriginal Lands) Act 1978, and for other purposes. Motion agreed to.

First Reading Bill and explanatory notes presented and bill, on motion of Ms Spence, read a first time.

Second Reading Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services and Minister for Seniors) (12.31 p.m.): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. As I stand here today, there is a tragedy unfolding in the remote indigenous communities of this state on a scale that few of us in this House can begin to comprehend. It is a tragedy that affects the lives and futures of the traditional owners of this land and that makes it a national tragedy. It is, in part, the legacy of disenfranchisement, of stolen generations and loss of culture, and it represents a shameful part of our history and a shameful indictment of present practices. Today we have an opportunity to do something about this situation. Today, I introduce into this House two bills that will enable the government, in partnership with the people of these communities, to take the long overdue action necessary to tackle alcohol abuse and violence. There are many statistics that I could list to demonstrate the gravity of the problems confronting residents of remote indigenous communities. There is any number of reports that could be cited. The Cape York Justice Study report contained 60 pages of statistics about Cape York communities—the high rates of mortality and suicide; the appalling rates of hospital admissions for assault and injury; the rates of offences against the person nine times higher than the state average; the high levels of alcohol and drug related offending; the large number of people in custody; the high levels of sexual abuse, the majority of victims being children; the poor levels of educational attainment; the poor health profiles and the high rates of unemployment. I could go on. But I want to draw attention to a fact which, more than any other, demonstrates the need for action. People in indigenous communities die 20 years younger than the rest of the population. We know that alcohol is a key factor in this. Justice Fitzgerald reported that death rates attributed to alcohol are over 21 times the general Queensland rate. Death rates from homicide and violence, much of which is alcohol related, are 18 times the Queensland average. 2630 Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

In communities in Cape York and other remote areas of Queensland, no-one escapes the ravages of alcohol abuse. Children are sexually assaulted. Babies are born with foetal alcohol syndrome. Women are 45 times more likely to be the victims of domestic violence than non- indigenous women. Families go without food when meagre funds are spent in the hotel or siphoned off by unscrupulous sly grog merchants. We have an inescapable duty to act to do something about this situation. No government can stand by and watch while these levels of alcohol abuse and violence continue. Justice Fitzgerald has said that if urgent action is not taken the very existence of these communities is threatened. In acting to address alcohol abuse, the government faces a very difficult challenge. There are many in the communities who will tell us that things were much better in the old days, that when the communities were run by the churches or by the government and there was no grog allowed, it was quieter and life was better. But we cannot return to those days when indigenous people had no rights and were subject to oppressive legislation and government policies. This government is committed to the principles of self-determination and partnership. Our challenge is to find a way to address the problems of alcohol abuse and violence by working in partnership with members of indigenous communities and in a way that respects the rights of those people to make choices about their future. That is what is at the heart of Meeting Challenges, Making Choices. It is the need to find a way forward that balances the clear need for immediate intervention with the need to respect self-management. These are the principles that have guided the development of the Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 and the Indigenous Communities Liquor Licences Bill 2002, which I will also introduce to the House today. These bills recognise that the key to successfully tackling alcohol abuse is to empower members of indigenous communities themselves to confront the problem and for government to provide support to these people in a relationship based on partnership. A central part of this strategy of empowerment is to provide legislative backing to community justice groups. This is the purpose of the Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2002. The government has funded these groups in the majority of remote Aboriginal communities for several years. They are key agents for social change in the community. They are made up of elders and respected persons who have traditional authority and a real desire to improve the situation in their communities. With adequate support from government, these groups are well placed to provide leadership to the community in tackling alcohol. The bill will enable a community justice group to be established in each community area under a regulation. This will translate existing groups onto a legislative footing and will allow for the establishment of new community justice groups in communities without one. The legislative provisions for the Aurukun Alcohol Law Council, which provided a template for this bill, will be consolidated into the new provisions for community justice groups. The Department of Local Government and Planning has recently reviewed the alcohol law council legislation and the review report was to be tabled in parliament by 31 December 2002. However, now that the law council provisions are to be consolidated into the new community justice group provisions in the bill, the review and the report will not proceed. A community justice group will have to be representative of all the main social groups in the community. The model of representation and the process for nominating members will be worked out by the community itself and will take account of local cultural practices. Once community justice groups are established under the legislation, they will have the following functions and powers: ¥ They will be able to declare dry places in the community; ¥ They will be able to recommend how the licensed premises should be run. For example, how long it should be open and on what days. What types of alcohol should be sold and whether takeaways should be sold; ¥ They will be able to recommend what controls there should be on bringing alcohol into the community; ¥ They will continue to carry on their functions in addressing justice issues. These include providing sentencing advice to courts, mediating conflicts and dealing with minor offenders; and 6 Aug 2002 Indigenous Communities Liquor Licences Bill 2631

¥ They will be able to carry out any other powers given to them under council by-laws. The bill sets out an improved process for councils to make by-laws quickly in response to urgent issues such as law and order. The powers that community justice groups will have in relation to licensed premises and controls on bringing alcohol into the community will be better understood when I introduce the other part of the government's legislative package under Meeting Challenges, Making Choices, the Indigenous Communities Liquor Licences Bill 2002. The Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 sets out in detail the processes for a community justice group to declare dry places in its community. The justice group will be able to declare any public place in the community to be dry on its own initiative. This means any place that is not a private residence, such as a person's house or land under the control of traditional owners. The community justice group will only be able to declare a private place as a dry place if the occupier of the place or the traditional owners request such a declaration. Before declaring a dry place, the community justice group will have to give notice of its intention and consider any submissions. After declaring a dry place, a notice must be erected. The effect of a dry place declaration is that a person cannot drink alcohol or have alcohol in their possession at that place. In addition, it will be an offence for a person to be drunk in a dry place. The intention of this provision is that it will assist in providing protection against alcohol abuse for individuals or families who apply to have their house declared dry. Not only will people be prevented from bringing alcohol to their house, but they will also be prevented from entering the house if they are drunk. The government will be assisting community justice groups to develop alcohol management plans to decide how to use their powers relating to dry places, licensed premises, and bringing alcohol into the community. This is a key recommendation of Justice Fitzgerald which we have endorsed in our response. It will give substance to our commitment to community decision making and self- management. The government has already been working intensively with community justice groups to plan alcohol management responses. We have held two workshops with these groups since April. It has been clear from these workshops that justice groups are eager to work with us to take decisive action on this issue. We will provide every possible support to these outstanding leaders to help them realise their vision for a better life for their communities. The backing of legislation is only part of this support. We have also allocated an extra $1 million per year in the state budget for strengthening and expanding community justice groups. The empowerment of community justice groups under the Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 is the first important element of the legislative package that I am introducing to the House today. I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Johnson, adjourned.

INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES LIQUOR LICENCES BILL Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services) (12.42 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— That leave be granted to bring in a bill for an act about preventing harm in indigenous community areas caused by alcohol abuse and misuse and associated violence, and for other purposes. Motion agreed to.

First Reading Bill and explanatory notes presented and bill, on motion of Ms Spence, read a first time.

Second Reading Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services and Minister for Seniors) (12.43 p.m.): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. Today I have already introduced the Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 into the House. The Indigenous Communities Liquor Licences Bill 2002 comprises the remaining part 2632 Indigenous Communities Liquor Licences Bill 6 Aug 2002 of the legislative package that will carry out the government's reform agenda to address alcohol abuse and violence in remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. I will not repeat the context to the development of the bills, which I related to the House earlier. The Indigenous Communities Liquor Licences Bill 2002 achieves three objectives— ¥ It implements fundamental reforms to the management of licensed premises in remote indigenous communities. ¥ It provides for the implementation of controls on the amount of alcohol brought into remote indigenous communities. ¥ It enhances the power of liquor licensing authorities to impose conditions on licensed premises to minimise alcohol abuse, alcohol-related disturbances and public disorder. There are currently licensed premises in 12 of the 19 mainland Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. All of these licences are held by the community councils. In his report, Justice Fitzgerald recommended that councils should not run licensed premises, because this conflicts with their responsibilities relating to the welfare of the community. He said that the current arrangements place an 'intolerable burden on councils and council officials.' The bill enables the government to create new community liquor licence boards under a regulation. I will appoint these boards and they will be comprised of a small number of community members and a government representative. They will be accountable as statutory bodies. The bill enables the government to transfer the general liquor licence from the council to the board if this is considered necessary to prevent harm caused by alcohol abuse in the community. The role of a board will be to manage the hotel enterprise. The bill requires a board to do this in a way that prevents harm in the community caused by alcohol abuse and misuse and associated violence. A board must implement recommendations of the community justice group about the responsible practices relating to the service, supply or promotion of liquor in the operation of the licensed premises. In practice, these will flow out of alcohol management plans, which will be developed by community justice groups with the government's assistance. They will include matters such as the hours of opening, the type of alcohol sold and limits on sale of takeaway liquor. If the board disagrees with the recommendation, the dispute can be referred to the chief executive in charge of liquor licensing to resolve it. This is appropriate, as the dispute is about responsible practices in the operation of licensed premises, in respect of which the Liquor Licensing Division is the regulating authority. The profits of the hotel will continue to be received by the council, but they will have to be accounted for separately, and they can only be spent on programs and services for the benefit of the community. The creation of a community liquor licence board breaks the unholy nexus between a council and the operation of a licensed premises. Some councils have suggested that this is paternalistic and contrary to self-management. This ignores the fact that the management of the hotel will continue to be based in the community. The placement of responsibility with a community-based board, advised by the community justice group, will ensure that the hotel is run in a socially responsible manner. This arrangement will empower the community to make decisions about the hotel which balance the right of individuals to have a drink with the need to prevent harm caused by alcohol abuse. The second key element of the bill is the ability to control the amount of alcohol brought into indigenous communities. The bill will amend the Liquor Act 1992 to allow a restricted area to be declared under a regulation. This could cover an indigenous community area or a wider area if necessary. In the restricted area, a regulation can set a limit on how much alcohol can be carried. For example, this could be a number of cartons of beer or litres of spirits. The community justice group must be consulted in setting these controls. In practice, the alcohol management plans developed by the group will provide the primary source of information to enable the alcohol limits to be set. These provisions will be particularly useful in stopping people bringing sly grog into the community. Under current law, police will tell you that sly grog is a very difficult offence to prove. An offence of carrying more than the prescribed quantity will be much easier to prove. The government has had consistent feedback in its consultations about the damaging effects of sly grog in the communities. The blatant profiteering by unscrupulous individuals locks many people into a cycle of poverty where their wages or pensions are skimmed off by sly groggers offering credit to purchase alcohol at exorbitant prices. Some people have suggested that the penalties for the breach of the alcohol limits in the bill are excessive. They provide for up to $37,500 for a first offence, $52,500 or six months prison for a second offence, and $75,000 or 18 months prison for a third or later offence. These penalties simply mirror the existing penalties 6 Aug 2002 Indigenous Communities Liquor Licences Bill 2633 for sly grog under the Liquor Act 1992. They are maximum penalties, so the decision about the actual penalty will, as usual, be a matter for the court taking into account all the circumstances. The heavy maximum penalties are necessary to enable the courts to impose an appropriate punishment in cases which suggest that the offender is seeking to take advantage of community alcohol limits for personal gain. In circumstances where offenders stand to make enormous profits by exploiting individuals and families, this punishment is commensurate with the offence. In his report, Justice Fitzgerald said that offences relating to the illegal supply of alcohol must be vigorously investigated and prosecuted and severely punished. Back in 1999, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women's Task Force on Violence said that there should be tough sanctions for dealers who prey on people and communities. In this bill, the government is responding to these calls for action. The new offences will be backed up with the powers necessary to ensure that they are effectively enforced. Where this is necessary, police will have the power to seize property used in breaching the liquor laws, including vehicles. Property seized that is worth less than $50 can be forfeited on the spot by investigators and police. This will enable the immediate destruction of small amounts of alcohol seized, such as that found in dry places or carried in excess of the alcohol limits. Property of greater value, including vehicles used to commit an offence, can be forfeited on the order of the chief executive. This currently requires an order of the court. The power will contain the appropriate safeguards such as the rights of appeal and rights to compensation. The capacity to forfeit vehicles, including boats and aircraft, repeatedly used to bring sly grog into a community in breach of the law is a necessary deterrent to those who seek to profit at the community's expense. In addition to state police and liquor licensing investigators, indigenous community police will be given these powers to enforce the liquor laws. Their use of these powers will be subject to the authorisation of state police, following, for example, the provision of adequate training. State police will have the power to stop and search vehicles to ensure compliance with the alcohol limits. This will no longer require police to have a reasonable suspicion that a person is breaching the law. This power is equivalent to that used to enforce traffic offences and to conduct random breath testing. The government makes no apologies for the strong enforcement powers that accompany the new offences. There can be no half-measures in seeking to address problems such as those confronting indigenous communities. I have explained how the creation of the new alcohol regimes will be driven by the communities themselves. Government's part of the deal is to ensure that these laws are enforced by the state justice system. If this is to be a real partnership for action, the community will expect nothing less. The final element of the bill concerns the power of the chief executive for liquor licensing to impose conditions on licensed premises. This power will be broadened to enable new conditions to be imposed for the purposes of minimising harm caused by alcohol abuse and minimising alcohol-related disturbances and public disorder in a locality. This power could be used to address issues regarding the supply of alcohol by licensed premises near indigenous communities. For example, it will allow the Liquor Licensing Division to prohibit sales of wine in large casks, the sale of takeaways to taxi drivers, and unethical practices such as licensees holding keycards. The powers can be exercised in the same way for all licensed premises in a restricted area. This will enable a uniform set of conditions to be imposed on all licensed premises within an area as part of a comprehensive strategy for managing alcohol. The power to impose conditions on licensed premises to address alcohol abuse is not specific to indigenous communities. It can be used anywhere in the state if the circumstances justify such intervention to protect the community. This bill and the Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 are the result of an extensive consultation process. In fact, the bills are the outcome of a process of discussion and debate around alcohol issues that began back in 1998 when I appointed the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women's Task Force on Violence. Since then, we have seen a consultation and submission process leading to a thorough examination of the issues by the Cape York Justice Study, which reported in November 2001. Following that report, the government consulted in remote indigenous communities for more than three months, with the direct involvement of almost 700 people. The government considered the Fitzgerald report in light of these consultations, and formulated its response announced in Meeting Challenges, Making Choices in April 2002. Meeting Challenges, Making Choices clearly set out the current legislative proposals and was distributed widely to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities across the state. Anyone who says that there has been insufficient consultation in the development of this legislation is ignoring the facts. The time for consultation is over. It is time for action. 2634 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

In my speech on the Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2002, I mentioned that the government faces a difficult task in balancing the need for action with the need to respect self-management. We know that we will attract criticism from both of these perspectives. There are those who will say that we have not gone far enough. They will say that the bills should have intervened more directly and set out uniform limits on alcohol across all the remote communities. Then there are those who will say that there is too much intervention; that this is paternalistic and a return to the bad old days when government controlled the lives of indigenous people. Our approach in both these bills is not to intervene and to seek to run peoples' lives for them. We know that the only sustainable change will be change that comes from within communities, from the grassroots. We know that this change will not be easy. We know that it will be painful and will require courage on the part of community leaders such as the members of community justice groups and community councils. But together the bills will provide the tools that are needed for the government and communities to work together to confront alcohol abuse and violence. They will form the basis of a partnership that will lead to real improvements in the quality of life in these communities. Improving the quality of life for members of remote communities is not just about dealing with alcohol abuse. In Meeting Challenges, Making Choices the government announced a range of initiatives in areas such as support for children and families, fostering economic development, improving health, and providing better opportunities for education and training. The reality, however, is that if we allow the current cycle of alcohol abuse and dysfunction to continue, these initiatives will surely fail, as so many well-intentioned programs and initiatives have failed in the past. For this reason, the two bills I introduce today are the centrepiece of Meeting Challenges, Making Choices. While the statistics and the reports paint a depressing picture, there are many positive things that give us hope for the future of the communities. There are elders who are keeping their culture alive by teaching their grandchildren traditional language and dance. There is a growing industry based on traditional arts and crafts. There are young people who have learnt to use technology and set up their own web sites. Young people are becoming empowered and setting up their own youth action groups. We must not forget that young people account for the majority of the residents of indigenous communities, in contrast to the greying of the general population. But these positive initiatives will continue to struggle in circumstances governed by hopelessness, fear and despair caused by the abuse of alcohol. We need to work quickly to create an environment where initiatives based on the hopes and desires of ordinary people are able to flourish. If we do not act now, it will be too late. This bill, together with the Community Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2002, will enable us to take the first critical step towards a better future in Queensland's indigenous communities. I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Johnson, adjourned. Sitting suspended from 12.58 p.m. to 2.30 p.m.

PARLIAMENTARY SERVICE AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Resumed from 18 June 2002 (refer p. 1853). Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (2.30 p.m.): It is an honour to speak to the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill, because this is an historic bill that will put in place the necessary amendments to the Parliamentary Service Act 1988 so that this House can meet in Townsville between 3 and 5 September. That will be the first time in 142 years that the parliament has met outside of Brisbane. This is an historic debate and it will be an even more historic occasion when the parliament meets in Townsville. As I said, the real objective of the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill is to provide the necessary machinery provisions to allow for the parliamentary precinct used for the sittings of the parliament to be in a location other than Parliament House, George Street, Brisbane. That location will be set down by gazettal notice. At present the Parliamentary Service Act 1988 provides that the 'parliamentary precinct' means all land and improvements within the land reserved for Parliament House, George Street, Brisbane. The bill that we are debating today has been prepared to amend various parts of section 4 of the Parliamentary Service Act. These amendments will alter the definition of a 'parliamentary precinct' to enable a parliamentary precinct to be established in a location other than Parliament House, George Street, Brisbane, as 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2635

I said, by way of gazettal notice. Also in this amendment bill there is the removal of some obsolete sectional references. The regional sitting in north Queensland in September is part of a promise made by the government at the last election. I give the government credit for the fact that it is adhering to that promise. On behalf of the National Party, I say that we will make sure that this parliament is successful and meets its objectives of taking the parliament to other parts of the state to enable people who cannot get to the capital city—people in the north, north west and far north—to access the parliament and see how it operates. Townsville seems a logical place to pick, as a major city of the north and as a centre for the north-western railway line. It is within reasonable distance of Cairns, Mackay and the other cities in between. It will enable the people of the north west, the north and the northern area of central Queensland to get to Townsville if they wish to observe the sitting or take part in any of the associated events. Around the state there are other areas that could be considered for future regional sittings, such as central Queensland, Wide Bay and areas off the coast. People should be able to feel that in each term of parliament they have had access to it and been able to see how it operates. Special arrangements have been put in place for children to attend the parliament—for example, the allocation of set amounts of money depending on how far away they live—in organised groups so as to observe it and benefit from the educational services that will be provided. I hope that can be continued, because there are children in other parts of the state who are located just as far away from this parliament. The principle of giving some assistance to children from far-flung areas to attend parliament in north Queensland is a sound one. It would be just as sound for those children in western, south west, the central west and other parts of the state who would have the same sorts of financial difficulties in attending the Brisbane parliament to have the opportunity to do that on occasions. As part of the process, a lot of logistical arrangements have had to be put in place. That has involved the Speaker's office and various parliamentary staff. People probably will not realise what is involved with the regional parliament until we actually make the move. It is not just a matter of organising the seating; staff from Hansard, Committees, Security and the Attendants sections will be required to be there to ensure that parliament runs as smoothly as it runs in this place. Since 1868 when parliament moved here parliament has only ever been held in this place. There will be an enormous demand on the staff, who have put a lot of time, effort and planning into this sitting. As this will be a new site, the issue of security will be important. This morning I mentioned the issue of security. Just last week security was breached in this parliament. Mr Cummins: Those Townsville koalas won't attack you. Mr HORAN: The member treats it as a bit of a joke. However, I note that a regulation was tabled today on that issue concerning who is and who is not allowed into the parliament. I would hope that, as the member for Rockhampton said, I could look after myself with Kenny Koala. This is not about bravado; it is about the fact that there was a serious breach of parliamentary security. In other circumstances that could have results about which no-one in this parliament would be happy. One of the reasons for having a parliament in a precinct such as this is that it is secure. Often people in this place are making decisions with which people of other political persuasions do not agree. Parliaments are often targeted by people with those sorts of beliefs. This is a place where everybody should feel secure. That will be an important issue for the new venue. We certainly would not want to prevent people, particularly the children, from observing the parliamentary sitting. One of the great things about our parliament is that children can attend it. They can observe from the gallery and be taken on escorted tours around the parliament, as can other people. We hope that will always be the case and will never be jeopardised by any breaches of security. I have been critical of the fact that the budget for this parliament has been taken out of the hands of the Speaker. A very important part of the independence of our parliament is having the Speaker responsible for the operation and management of the parliament, being given a budget and being totally in charge of it. We have seen that taken away. I raised this issue during the estimates and during the debate on the estimates. Once again, we see the Premier's Department and the Premier taking control of the budget for the Townsville sitting of our parliament. That introduces an element of politicisation and the possibility of political control of the parliament. It should be strictly adhered to that the budget for every session of parliament, whether it be in 2636 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Brisbane, Townsville or in another part of the state, rests solely in the hands of the Speaker, including the deliberations on the budget and how it is spent. Sadly, that is something that has been lost in this process. These things are chipped away a bit at a time until suddenly one wakes up one day to find that the strength of the parliament based on the Speaker running this precinct and having total responsibility for the control and management of the budget has been taken away. As I said, the National Party is determined to make this parliament work. No doubt it will be a different parliament because it is in a different location. In our surroundings here we are used to where we sit and how we operate. That will all be changed. The Premier and myself will have to get a little closer together a la Howard and Crean—I hope I am not taking the part of Crean—and I do not know whether we will have a swivel chair. I notice that when Mr Howard and Mr Crean get cranky with each other they swivel around in a defiant way, but I am sure that we will be able to face each other across the table. That will certainly make it different. Then there is the fact that when members rise to speak they will not be standing in the position where they sit. Instead, they will have to move to a lectern located in one corner of the centre table. Mr Cummins: I hope that doesn't give Laurence some ideas. Mr HORAN: It will mean that the member for Kawana will have to be more careful because the Speaker will be in front of him and hear some of his inane interjections. It certainly will be different for everybody but the principles of the parliament will remain the same. The regional sitting will also be interesting because it will challenge members of parliament. At Parliament House we are used to the way parliament operates normally. It has always been a very robust place. It is the pressure cooker nature of the parliament that keeps the government of the day honest. That has been the nature of the government and opposition system—that is, an adversarial role at times and a constructive role at other times. However, that has enabled the parliament to keep the government performance at the level required by the public. I have always felt that this is quite a remarkable place. From the first day I came in here—I had never had a previous visit to the parliament and had relatively little knowledge of it—what impressed me was that it was, in some ways, a pressure cooker of society but at the end of the day everything was decided by a vote. The debate could be robust. It could be tough. It would challenge people to answer and handle themselves in the midst of interjections in, at times, a very tense atmosphere, but it enabled the different views of our state to be put forward and has enabled our state to be peaceful. I think we are the only country in the world that has become a nation by a vote rather than a bullet. This tradition of the parliament and what we shoulder in here keeps our state and nation a peaceful place. It is a place for robust debate. At times the Speaker has to handle the situation and maintain control. The regional parliament in Townsville will be interesting because it is a new area. We are going into an area where people will be seeing parliament for the first time and making judgments on parliament. That may mean that there is pressure on both sides of the House in order to ensure that we maintain decorum and that we achieve as much as possible for the people of Queensland and north Queensland. That is going to be the challenge for both sides and for the Speaker—that is, to ensure that the parliament acts in a robust way and that it caters for all of Queensland while at the same time members are aware that it is a new parliament in a new venue. The achievements of parliament are very important. Over the years the electorate has become angry about some of the social policies the ALP has inflicted upon it, particularly federally from the Hawke and Keating governments, and the Goss government in this state. People felt isolated and disenfranchised. The electorate became angry that government for the people by the people was no longer a reality. Rather, people were being force-fed a diet of political correctness and empty rhetoric and had decisions imposed upon them by bureaucrats or standardised ways to increase excises and those sorts of things. More recently, the Shepherdson inquiry showed that politics was a dirty game played by a despicable few who are willing to deceive for the sake of power and threaten the standing of the parliament in the eyes of the broader community. I think we would all hope that by going to Townsville we will help to restore the Queensland parliament to its rightful honour, place, tradition and history. The National Party recognised the need to restore integrity into our parliament—it is the people's House—and recognised that that was urgent, particularly following the Shepherdson inquiry. That is why the National Party went to the last election committed to ending electoral and 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2637 other rorts and committed to removing any potential injury to our democracy. We will always be committed to accountability. That is why we announced today that we believe the rules for the budget should be changed to ensure— Mr Reynolds: Very committed to forgetfulness. Mr HORAN: So is the member opposite. He only has to think of some of the people in his party of whom he is ashamed and who have such a disgrace. Just think of that and— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Mickel): Order! The minister will cease interjecting. Mr HORAN: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. With its vast majority in parliament, the Beattie Labor government has continued to unwind key Fitzgerald recommendations relating to the independence of the Public Service—a Public Service that is still under assault as the Beattie government sets about shredding the number of staff by as many as 15,000 according to the PricewaterhouseCoopers report. A National Party-led government would restore community confidence in our democratic heritage—we do value that heritage—and in the system that is meant to support our democracy. By returning independence to our justice system and to our Public Service in particular, we will therefore be returning accountability to our parliament. Parliament must be the centrepiece of our democracy. It should be the undisputed arena in which the government of the day can be challenged and put under intense scrutiny, but that is not happening under the Beattie government. Under the Beattie government the parliament is no longer the forum for accountability that it should be. One just has to look at some of the legislation the government has introduced, such as the legislation dealing with new charges to access FOI information. One only has to look at the way questions in parliament are not answered properly or left to the last half a minute of a three-minute reply. One merely needs to remember that the increases and new taxes in the area of transport were not even included in the budget. The National Party will be developing a policy—we had a policy at the last election—about bringing in more effective responses in the parliament for the demands of the community. We are going to have ways of making the parliament more effective in dealing with those particular community demands. Our policy will be aimed squarely at making parliament not only more accountable but providing greater community empowerment between state elections. Government members interjected. Mr HORAN: Just listen to them rabble on! With this regional parliament it is time to recognise that there are a number of great cities in Queensland, and Townsville is one of them. Townsville has been a great city serving the north as a port and as an education centre. When we were in government we were pleased to have an enormous input into Townsville in relation to the establishment of the police academy, despite the opposition of the Labor Party. We took the bold move of establishing a brand-new hospital on a greenfields site that could serve the people of those expanding western and north-western areas in the city. We funded the museum and the Pandora display. In our last budget in government we dedicated funds to The Strand. We gave Townsville that four-lane highway that was so important. We gave the people of the north some real say and real representation by putting an office of the Department of Premier into Townsville. Of course, earlier this year we announced that it will be National Party policy to locate in Townsville the Department of Northern Development. It will be a department that we will establish and it will have branches in Mackay, Cairns and Mount Isa. It will give some real representation, some real teeth and input to the north not only in regard to policy but also through the cabinet budget committee which makes the final decisions on budget allocations. It will not be a toothless tiger. The Department of Northern Development will have some real say and real voting power in the allocation of funds through the cabinet so that the people of the north know that they are truly recognised by the National Party. They will be getting the real— Mr Reynolds interjected. Mr HORAN: No, this will be in addition to the Premier's Department. We were the ones who put that Premier's Department there. It is important also that one of the things we said we would do is give the minister for northern development a voting right on the Cabinet Budget Review Committee so that the people of the north would know that no longer would they have the massive cutbacks that occurred in this year's capital works budget. Mr Reynolds: How many staff would you have in the department of northern development? 2638 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Mr HORAN: The minister is a bit concerned about it. It is a good idea. It would be there to provide for the people of the north. Not only would it provide for them; it would also look after some of their unique needs, including different schooling needs, because of the physical environment; some of the needs relating to the environment of the area; and some areas of state development. There are some very special and unique needs in the north. We have some members in that area who recognise that, and they have provided much of the advice behind the development of the department of northern development. Because this will be the first time that a sitting of parliament has been held outside this Parliament House since 1868—the first time being in 1860—the National Party will not only be supporting this bill but also the concept behind the regional sitting. We will be doing everything in our power to make sure that the Townsville sitting of the parliament works well in the best traditions of the Queensland parliament; that it works well for the people of north Queensland in our endeavours to take the parliament closer to the people; that it works well for the visitors and the children in particular who will attend the parliament; that the business of the parliament in Townsville—whether it relates to north Queensland or the rest of Queensland—is about all of Queensland, not any particular area; and that we attend to the business of the parliament in a conscientious way that gives the people of the north a very clear understanding of and a very clear insight into the parliament of Queensland and what that parliament is really all about. As I have said, the National Party will be supporting this bill. As I have also said, we will be supporting the operation of the parliament in Townsville to make sure that it is a success and that it works well for the whole of Queensland and in particular for the people of north Queensland. Hon. J. FOURAS (Ashgrove—ALP) (2.52 p.m.): I am pleased to take part in this debate. It is interesting when one comes into these precincts to see signs around the place saying 'Strangers Bar', 'Strangers Dining Room' and 'Members Only'. In fact—although it has not happened for some time—occasionally somebody would say, 'Mr Speaker, there is a stranger in the House.' Of course, that is indicative of the fact that we are in the parliamentary precinct and that that precinct actually gives members some fundamental rights and is there to protect those rights. For example, I do not think that we can be issued with a writ within these premises. Secondly, the security of parliament is not a matter for the police but is a matter for the police acting under the direction of Mr Speaker. On two occasions in the early days when I was Speaker we had protests here by Aboriginal groups. On the first occasion I went out there. They sat on the lawn. In fact, some sandwiches and cordial were sent out. It was a very, very peaceful protest, and it was a fundamental right of those people to come to this parliament, to express their views and to protest. Unfortunately, on the second occasion the good manners and goodwill shown by me during the previous protest were abused, and the gate was knocked over. So I had to direct the police to take action. Therefore, we need a precinct in Townsville in which we as members and the Speaker have the same authority as we do here. Parliament is more than an edifice. It is more than a precinct. I remember when we used to have children coming here just to look at this beautiful building. They would ooh and ah and say how wonderful it was. It is indicative of the view of the role of the parliament by the first Labor government for 32 years that we set up an education office, because we realised that the public should understand how a parliament ought to function so that when it goes off the rails, as it did in the Bjelke-Petersen years, people can be critical of it and take it to task. I am a bit surprised—and I will have more to say about this later—that the Leader of the Opposition had the gall to lecture members on this side of the House about parliamentary integrity and parliamentary procedures. I sat here for nine years as an opposition member. The Premier at that time saw the parliament as nothing more than a rubber stamp which was necessary to pass his legislation—such as essential services legislation—and to ride roughshod over the rights of Queenslanders. He needed this parliament to give him that authority. But that is all his government saw it as: nothing more than an expensive rubber stamp. People on this side of the House do not need a lecture about the executive versus the parliament. We understand it very well. I think we do know that this parliament is here to scrutinise legislation and expenditure and to give rights to members. Of course, I was very pleased when Mr Horan began his speech— Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Mickel): Order! The member will refer to other members by their correct titles. Mr FOURAS: The Leader of the Opposition acknowledged that the sitting in Townsville is part of an election promise. This government is adhering to its promise to have a parliament outside Brisbane in each term. Of course, the Opposition Leader was very pleased that children from the 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2639 north would be able to see it there. There are two videos in the education office that show the parliament in action—one for primary schools and one for secondary schools—so that students can see the parliament working and can understand the role of the Governor, the Speaker, the executive and the parliament itself. We did not sit back and expect people just to come and see this beautiful building and be impressed by it. We actually tried to tell people what the parliament is about. After that, the bipartisanship from the Leader of the Opposition ended. He then started becoming critical and lectured members on this side of the House about the integrity of the parliament. He got a bit precious about the budget. I am not sure what happened during the last term of the member's government, but there is no doubt that no Speaker can write his or her own budget. They have to go to the executive to get the money they want to spend. So in that regard nobody has control over what they spend. That is important. With regard to the parliamentary sittings in Townsville, I know quite well that the Premier understands that the Parliament House staff are by far the best people to make the decisions about how the parliament should be run. I am sure he understands that, and I am sure that the parliament has been given that right. I know that Mr Speaker has been to Townsville twice, and he will be going there twice again before the parliament sits there. I know that he has used the expertise of his officers here to make sure that the parliament will function properly. The Opposition Leader also suggested that it was unusual for moneys used by parliament and under the direction of Mr Speaker to be held by government. That is not unusual at all. For example, the stonework restoration of Parliament House is budgeted for, it is in the parliamentary budget, but the moneys are held by the Department of Public Works. That has always been the case. So it is a bit dangerous for the Leader of the Opposition to pick something on the fringes and suggest that somehow or other we on this side of the House do not understand the difference between the executive and the parliament. It was Premiers on his side of the chamber who did not understand what Montesquieu's doctrine of the separation of powers was all about. It was their side of politics that never understood what the separation of the executive and the parliament was about. I was quite amazed to sit here and be lectured about those things by the Leader of the Opposition. We do need to set in concrete the precinct of parliament so that members can have the rights that they have now in the new precinct in Townsville. I know that Mr Speaker and his staff have worked very, very hard to make it a very successful sitting. Ultimately, it is good that we are going to the people. Mr Horan promised to make the parliament work. If only he could do that by words. Ultimately, it is a bit like a football game. Mr Horan and I have both played that game. Ultimately, the game is only as good as the skills of the players. I have sat in this parliament for this term and the last term, but I have not seen a lot of skills amongst members on the other side of the House to make this parliament the lively, vibrant and dynamic place it ought to be—but here's hoping. Maybe members opposite will find some sort of a magic wand that will make them understand their role in this parliament. Instead of lecturing us about how we should function as a government, I think the Leader of the Opposition should be spending a bit more time trying to work out how his party should function as an effective opposition. I welcome this legislation. I think it is necessary. If we are to have a parliamentary sitting outside of Brisbane once every term, this is necessary legislation. It is simple legislation and I am pleased to note that the Leader of the Opposition and I agree that the legislation is worth while. I commend it to the House. Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (3.00 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill. The need for this bill arises from the Beattie government's promise to take parliament out of the south-east corner. The current plan, which screams of a waste of taxpayers' funds, is the proposal by this Beattie government to hold a parliamentary sitting in Townsville in September. It is a noble idea that people in the north of the state be able to witness parliament at work, but I would have thought that current forms of technology, which see federal parliament televised and Internet access available to many, have in fact made parliament much more available and have opened it up to far greater scrutiny than could one staged performance in the north. This trip north may eliminate the feeling that north Queenslanders have of not being associated with parliament, of being apart from the decision makers. Community consultative meetings are held in various towns throughout the state to allow people to access ministers on behalf of a community delegation or on a one-on-one basis. The Premier and his ministers spend 2640 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 a few days hearing and seeing first hand the concerns of these communities. I congratulate the government on that concept, because its ministers do get to communities that may never have seen any parliamentary staff. Whether or not communities feel that ministers take on board their concerns is a question that could be debated until the cows come home. Many have expressed the view that, for all the rhetoric, nothing ever changes a particular minister's viewpoint or intention on a particular matter. People welcome the community cabinet meetings because they were and are seen as bringing with them a basket of goodies to benefit the communities. It was my belief that these meetings were to do exactly what this parliamentary sitting is supposed to do. I would have thought that if people need or want to get close to a minister and have their concerns heard, the community cabinet meetings provide access far more efficiently and cost-effectively than this road show, which primarily allows the public to sit and watch and, I would assume, as happens here in Brisbane, to be thrown out if they dare to speak out from the gallery. How many extra community consultative meetings could be held throughout Queensland in much smaller communities with the money that is to be spent on the parliamentary sitting in Townsville? The relocating of 89 members, ministerial, Hansard and various other staff members and equipment is, I guess, a logistical feat and one, if achieved successfully, to be marvelled at. Because of this, so many questions rush forward to be asked. How many staff is the Premier taking? How many staff is each minister including in their entourage? How much equipment will be transported or hired for the use of all other members? It is almost impossible to obtain a real cost of this parliamentary sitting. So much of the cost is attributed in various ways. As an example, the added cost of travel to Townsville will probably be relegated to a member's travel entitlements. Many would see this as reasonable, but it is in fact an added cost of holding this parliamentary sitting in Townsville. Therefore, it should be seen as part of the overall cost. This is money the people of Queensland are being asked to give. The budget estimates show a figure of $500,000 as the additional cost of holding the three- day sitting in Townsville. I find the cost expressed in the estimates to be a very difficult one to believe. There must have been a world-winning performance of juggling the figures. What about the cost of accommodating all 89 members when at present many members in the Brisbane area go home at night? Then there are the costs of accommodation for Hansard and the ministerial staff, hiring of equipment, freight of that equipment and insurance to cover the entire lot, let alone the cost of insurance for the transport of the Legislative Council furniture. The cost of flights alone will be substantial as almost all members of this House will have to be flown when at present the vast majority reside in the south-east corner and therefore drive. How much of the true cost associated with this Townsville sitting will be hidden under the guise of other departments' departmental expenses? Many people in Townsville will enjoy the money this sitting will bring into the town, and the government will bask in the media reports, the front pages and the feel-good atmosphere. But what of the people who suffer daily to take a breath, who live in fear that each day may be their last? How many of these people could benefit from this publicity-seeking Premier's ever continuing desire to find a new stage on which to perform? It has been stated that $500,000 would support the employment of a specialist doctor and the necessary assistance in a major hospital for a year. How many people would that benefit? How many dental procedures could be performed? How much shorter could our waiting lists become? There are so many issues requiring our attention, but we are quite happy to spend this extra money holding a parliamentary sitting outside of this House. At best, this Townsville sitting will be a staged performance if MPs cannot be in constant contact with their researchers, electorate staff or office equipment. Many issues which need to be brought up urgently arise unexpectedly. Without constant access to equipment and staff, this will be difficult. The Notice Paper outlining the order of the bills to be debated can often change on the morning of the day in question. Access to researchers, printers and so on is essential to allow all of us to perform the job we are there to do; that is, question, analyse and, if need be, fight the government's legislation. The Beattie government will ensure that it performs well and that its Labor members have adequate resources and knowledge of the tactics to be used to ensure they perform well. I ask that all members of parliament have equal opportunity to access equipment and to keep in contact with their offices. Since coming into this parliament I have become cynical about what is fair. The final example of the excess involved with this concept is the proposal that the antique furniture of the Legislative Council be freighted to Townsville for the sitting. The insurance, freight 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2641 and other costs to move this valuable furniture to and from the venue are just some of the expenses which are totally unnecessary. It will look good, no doubt. What is wrong with using the chairs, tables and other miscellaneous furniture located in the venue and setting it up in the layout required? Taking historical antique furniture from the Legislative Council is subjecting it to damage which threatens this particular example of Queensland history. Parliament House MPs' living quarters, staff and meals facilities, already established in Brisbane to ensure minimal cost to the people during a parliamentary sitting, will sit idle while 89 MPs and their entourages travel to Townsville at the people's expense. Is Townsville a trip of good value? Not in many people's books. Quite frankly, I see a lot of people needing hip replacements, heart operations or dental procedures left a little longer on their respective waiting lists. I see the need for urgent attention to solve the insurance fiasco and to help to assist industry to supply the jobs, jobs, jobs this government continues to spruik about not being given. Action to address essential shortages is needed—not words, and especially not this media opportunity and show pony stunt. In saying all of that, now that the money has been committed I truly hope that this exercise is a success and that every member puts their best efforts into ensuring that it is. I also hope that the people of north Queensland feel part of the process of this government. Ms PHILLIPS (Thuringowa—ALP) (3.07 p.m.): It is with great pleasure that I rise to speak in support of the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2002. I first arrived in Townsville on a holiday in 1968 and I was so taken with the place that I went back south, packed my bags and moved to live there in September 1969. It has taken 33 years for the government to catch up with the idea, although I must admit that for the vast proportion of that time the regressive National Party was in government and in fact it took the Beattie government a very short time to appreciate the importance of north Queensland. My first job in Townsville in 1969 was as the second social worker to the pioneering Joan Innes Reid at Townsville Hospital. I had come from working in Victoria and I could not believe the poor quality of the hospital and medical services in Townsville. It was like something out of a 19th century movie—long dark wards, unpainted metal beds, concrete floors, a complete lack of staff and hardly any specialists at all. The difference between then and today is remarkable, with our brilliant new, state-of-the-art $185 million-plus Townsville Hospital, courtesy of the Beattie Labor government. The psychiatric ward in 1969 was a brick building at the back of the central state school. This Friday we open a forensic secure mental health unit—the most modern in the state and possibly in the country. Even in the early 1970s, patients with head injuries, sick babies and cardiac problems had to be flown to Brisbane because there was not the expertise or capacity at TGH to treat them. Imagine how traumatic it was for families with their loved ones sent more than 1,500 kilometres away. Schools were badly resourced. There were no preschools in Queensland. Two high schools were in Townsville but there was no university. Students had fewer years of education in Queensland than they did in any other state in Australia. Class sizes were huge. How startling it is to compare that situation with the progressive education reform package that was introduced by the Minister for Education this year. Among other initiatives, it advocates a full-time preschool year and fantastic ICT improvements. In 1969, the population of Townsville was about 50,000. Today, it is 150,000. Then, the Townsville council was dominated by businessmen and developers. Today, it is the most longstanding and successful Labor municipal council in the country. Thuringowa was a shire, not the fastest-growing city in the state. There were no national sports teams such as our beloved Cowboys, the Townsville Crocs, or the Townsville Fire. There was no magnificent football stadium, university, Australian Institute of Marine Science, Museum of Tropical Queensland, Reef Underworld or our fabulous Strand. I know that when hearing all this honourable members just cannot wait for the sitting in Townsville, but I wanted to be sure that they were aware that none of this would have been possible except for the visionary leadership of our Premier. Mr Mickel: I'm like Big Kev; I'm excited. Ms PHILLIPS: I take that interjection from the member for Logan. I, too, am very excited. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Poole): Order! The member will return to his seat if he wants an interjection taken. Ms PHILLIPS: Parliament in north Queensland is much more than a chance to celebrate what these great twin cities have achieved over the past 33 years; more than an opportunity to 2642 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 showcase what a Labor government has brought to the north of the state; and more than our chance to show off this great region to our colleagues from down south. It is about affirmative action for the people who live in north Queensland, and it is about their opportunity to observe and have access to the workings of parliament. In the very short time of 18 months that I have sat in this place, I have probably seen upwards of 200 groups of school students pass through the chamber or sit in the gallery and observe parliament—being guided through the entire House, learning about how the parliament operates and how they can be part of it. In that time, with all of those schools and possibly thousands of children, not one student from Thuringowa has been on a school trip to see democracy in action. Students from schools in Thuringowa are disadvantaged. They do not have the same privileges and access as children south of the tropics have. This is just not fair. So the north Queensland parliament was born—an initiative of equality—so typical of this Beattie Labor government. It is very disturbing to sit here and see members on the other side of this House criticise and knock the decision. While the Leader of the Opposition has waxed lyrical today, a few weeks ago he appeared on television saying that the sitting in Townsville was a waste of money. Regrettably, the member for Nanango has supported this position. Already, over 3,500 students have booked in to be part of the tours and to see parliament in Townsville in action. Every school I visit in my electorate is very, very keen to participate. They ask me questions about the process, about the passage of legislation, about how backbenchers and ministers operate. Teachers are setting up mock parliaments, students are debating youth legislation. Adults, too, who have never seen what it is like—what happens in this chamber—will also be coming along. Seniors are planning to come by the bus load to see parliament in session. How extremely cost effective this exercise will prove to be. I am extremely privileged to be part of this exciting landmark occasion. This will live in the memories of the people of north Queensland for their lifetime. On behalf of the community of Thuringowa in particular, I want to thank the Premier for this groundbreaking event. I also want to invite all honourable members to take some time outside the parliament to observe the north Queensland lifestyle, to talk with locals, to smell the tropical flora, and appreciate a little the unique issues there are for us living in the north of this state. Hopefully, such a sharing will help to break down the barriers and will educate those members who have never been so far north. Mr Reynolds: I wouldn't mind betting that some of these parliamentarians have never been to Townsville. Ms PHILLIPS: I take the honourable minister's interjection. I am sure that that is true. I hope that the trip to Townsville will help remove the paranoia expressed by some north Queenslanders that people from the south-east corner are ignorant of the needs of northerners and that they just do not understand. This exercise is not just about giving north Queenslanders access to the parliament and to democracy; it is our chance to show the rest of Australia and the world that, when we come out of our traditional boxes, when we experience how it really is for other people, anything is possible. It is with the greatest optimism that I commend this bill to the House. Mr ROWELL (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (3.16 p.m.): In rising to speak to this Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill, I think that it is a good initiative. Being a north Queenslander, it is going to be a great opportunity for people in the north to observe what parliament is all about. I think that the previous speaker from Thuringowa raised the issue of how difficult it is for people in north Queensland to come down here to see what parliament is all about, particularly young people. I know that the members opposite are making a special effort to ensure that young people come to see what the parliamentary process is all about. They are even paying for their fares. I am sure that those who live 200 kilometres away will be delighted. However, one of the important issues is that it is going to cost quite a bit to do this. I do not think that any member is denying that. But I think that, out of this process, what all members will realise—and I am sure the member for Townsville will be supportive of this—is the amount of travel that is involved by members who represent northern electorates who have to come down here regularly. Members will gain some appreciation of what is involved for a member who represents a northern region. But let us face it, we are going only to Townsville. Members can step off the plane and catch a taxi to a motel or a hotel—I think all members have been booked into the casino, if I am not mistaken. Mr Reynolds: Not me! 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2643

Mr ROWELL: I do not think that the minister is entitled to book into the casino, but I know that a lot of other members are booked into the casino. So members will have first-class accommodation looking out over Cleveland Bay. I am sure that they are going to appreciate what Townsville is all about. But Townsville is only a little segment of north Queensland. Mr Reynolds: You should actually mention that when you get off the plane you have another couple of hours to drive home. Mr ROWELL: I thank the minister for mentioning that. The minister has been particularly helpful. I hope that all members understand some of the problems that are associated with members who live beyond Townsville and Cairns in getting back to their electorates. As the member for Toowoomba South, the Leader of the Opposition, has mentioned, the opposition is very keen to get into the spirit of this by appointing a minister for northern development. We have talked about this over the last year. This idea has excellent merit because there are many different things about almost every portfolio relating to north Queensland. Turning to health, certainly funds have been provided to that portfolio. When the Leader of the Opposition was Minister for Health he put together $180 million-odd in funding for a state-of- the-art hospital for north Queensland, which is being built. Mr Cummins: You would have a fifty-fifty chance of getting that portfolio. Mr ROWELL: Let me go on because there is more to north Queensland than health and I want to go through all the issues. Another very important issue is education. Very often school design is undertaken in the southern end of the state and does not necessarily cater for the needs in north Queensland. The buildings do not have big verandahs or other areas where students can shelter from the heat or the rain in order to ensure they have a reasonable recess period. Of course, who put in the Cool Schools program? The National and Liberal coalition government did that during that very short period when we had the opportunity to do something for north Queenslanders. Mr Reynolds interjected. Mr ROWELL: $63 million was provided in the budget to do exactly that. Mr Reynolds: No schools were airconditioned. Mr ROWELL: There were schools and libraries, and all those types of things were started when we were in government. Mr Reynolds: None were actually airconditioned. Mr ROWELL: They were airconditioned. Funds were provided in the budget to do that. The opposition recognises the needs in north Queensland. Turning to agriculture, there are quite different ranges of agriculture in north Queensland. There are a lot of tropical crops—whether they are fruits or sugar cane—and some are very similar to crops grown in the southern end of the state. However, the north has some specific needs in terms of protecting the region. For example, I refer to ticks in cattle and the incursion of pests such as the papaya fruit fly. Last week we started debating a bill, which I cannot mention in the House today, but it has been put on the back burner because it does not seem to have enough relevance. It is extremely important that that particular bill is debated in this House and that there is a recognition of the potential problems with the incursion of foot-and-mouth disease, BSE, papaya fruit fly—and the list goes on and on. Unfortunately, north Queensland seems to be the point where that situation has to be turned around. A matter very close to the member for Townsville's heart, I am sure, is the provision of emergency services. Townsville has specific needs, because of cyclones, for coordination with bodies such as the police during adverse conditions. That is a very good reason for the appointment of a minister for northern development who will be able to recognise these special needs. Mr Reynolds: We're embracing those now—very, very well. Mr ROWELL: There is always more that can be done. Really, the government does not have the voice that is necessary to bring this into practice in an effective way. For example, the roads are different. There is a different set of circumstances during wet weather. There are great distances involved in building roads and, of course, it is more costly. The design and construction of houses needs to be quite different because of temperatures and weather conditions. Natural resources are very important because of native title and mining issues. The bulk of the metalliferous mines are certainly in the northern sector of the state. 2644 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Turning to tourism, north Queensland has some unique opportunities for tourism and that ministerial responsibility for the north would extend to those because of their particular importance. I could go on with a number of other portfolios, but I have just provided members with a snapshot of the importance of this ministerial position for northern development. I turn now to a number of other issues which are quite important in the north and which I am sure will be brought to the fore during the parliamentary sittings in Townsville in north Queensland. At present, the sugar industry is in a perilous state and badly needs an injection of cash. There is no room for loans to be taken out. Farmers on adjoining farms have not had the ability to buy out farmers who want to sell. Nobody wants to buy their farms. In the first instance, people do not have the capacity and, in the second instance, they do not want to increase their debt levels. Their equity is being severely eroded, the prices of farms are going down, they have substantial debt and, unfortunately, they do not have the capacity to borrow more money. The loan of $20 million suggested by the Minister for Primary Industries does not target the particular needs of farming communities that are doing very badly. These communities are not just made up of cane farmers; they are made up of a whole range of businesses. There are mills and there are groups who service those particular industries. There are engineering works. A whole range of businesses are very important to the sugar industry. In the event that the industry reaches a point where it loses a group of the farming community and they are not replaced, or nobody is prepared to pick up their properties—and I am guessing that that will happen in the very near future—we will then see a domino effect. We will see that those farms are not productive and their capacity to produce sugar cane will cease. The mills will not be as viable and, let us face it, it is an industry which exports something like 85 per cent of its product. Maintaining the viability of the industry a very big issue. The situation is that the provision of loans will be totally inadequate. We need to look at other initiatives. I am certain that the member for Mirani will talk about ethanol. He has done an enormous amount of work in this particular area. It is of great interest and presents some great opportunities for the whole of the sugar industry. It will not be a simple matter of putting an ethanol plant into a sugar mill or making some decisions overnight. To some degree, it will be protracted. It will need a lot of business acumen and, unfortunately, it will take time. However, we have to look for other industries and the imminent industry is ethanol. Of course, there are other industries such as plastics which certainly could warrant some consideration but they are probably five to 10 years down the track. The industry needs to change its thinking. It is now in the position of having had four very bad seasons and we are looking down the barrel of some very ordinary prices, particularly because of our major competitor, Brazil, which is in the position of devaluing the real to a point where it is hard for to us compete. We must remember that the size of the Queensland industry was expanded last year, so we have a very big competitor out there. Brazil has a range of farms which own mills, and vice-versa. It has enormous capacity to compete against us with very low-cost labour and the best technology available. We have got to deal with that situation. I turn now to dams. Water will be an enormously important issue in the north, as it is right across the state. At present we have the Tinaroo Falls Dam. Certainly we need to get on with the Elliot main channel, the Urannah dam, Nullinga dam up on the Tablelands. I believe if we have a series of dry seasons the Tinaroo Dam will not have the capacity to water the crops there. That may even occur this year if we do not get some rain. We are in a very dry period and that is not likely to change. Maybe we will get to a point where we will be struggling to get through with this next year's crop. Nullinga dam could be built. We had a very close look at it. We had it on the drawing board, together with the Urannah dam. Hell's Gate will provide great opportunities for the Charters Towers area. Those initiatives need to be adopted for the benefit of north Queensland. That is exactly what this portfolio of Northern Development will be providing—an opportunity for people with dams. We do not want to see a repeat of what happened to the Burdekin irrigators who had to pay an extra $8 a megalitre for water because SunWater was being corporatised and it was decided to take more money. The issue in relation to the proposal by Powerlink to build a powerline from Tully to Innisfail is causing a lot of angst among people in the area. A 275,000 kW high voltage powerline is proposed for that area when it could have gone through the existing World Heritage route from the power station to Innisfail. It seems that Powerlink, one of the corporate bodies of government, has decided to put it through this very beautiful area of El Arish. The residents in that area are up 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2645 in arms about it. An important issue as far as Townsville is concerned is the supply of a good energy source. The member for Townsville would recognise that, if Townsville is to grow, energy is one of the major components. Mr Reynolds: That's why they are building the baseload power station. Mr ROWELL: Yes, but the baseload power station is very small and under the current proposal will not have any significant impact in terms of the energy requirements of Townsville. I am pleased that the minister has become involved in this debate. Will the minister tell me the cost of the gas that will be supplied by the coal methane bed? This is interesting, because big industry such as Queensland Nickel and the zinc refinery are in need of a major boost as far as energy is concerned. Cost will be one of the major and governing issues. Mr Reynolds: Are you opposed to the baseload power station going ahead? Mr ROWELL: No, do not let me be confused by your argument. At present, if the price of gas were suitable to the likes of QNI—the nickel refinery near Yabulu in the Hinchinbrook electorate—it would take on board this gas. The company is concerned about the cost of gas. It needs to be at a viable level; rather than use coal—which I believe they will—they could use gas instead. Is the minister telling me that they will use gas? That is the problem we face. We need a competitive supply of gas. If future gas comes onstream—and, yes, there is a capacity in the coal bed of methane—the company can increase its capacity. At the end of the day we always have to consider what will be the cost of the gas. Ultimately, that will determine the price of power or the price paid to heat a product. That is what is required at QNI. There is a need to increase funding for the Road Implementation Program. For example, in the district of Herbert the Hinchinbrook Shire Council had to lay off 14 people because it does not have the capacity to pay its work force. To a large extent, that work force was created because of what we did with the sugar roads programs. A considerable amount was injected into the north as far as the roads were concerned. I know that the Minister for Emergency Services was good enough to visit the area during that very wet period in 1998. The issue is that we need additional funding to carry out a lot of those types of projects. It is absolutely essential that funding is provided, because the problem with areas such as the Herbert district is that with the decline in the sugar industry there will be enormous pressure on ratepayers to pay their rates. There is a belief that some will not be able to pay. In some cases, where they were given the right to pay their rates twice a year, ratepayers found it difficult to pay for the second term and now are starting to lag behind. We need some funding to do the very essential road programs, because they will make the sugar industry even more viable. We need good roads to transport products such fruit and vegetables. Right across north Queensland, the horticultural crop depends on the road system. It is absolutely essential that money is injected into the north for the maintenance of roads. I refer to the Great Barrier Reef. Some members might have the opportunity to see what the reef is all about— Mr Cummins: Will you take us out there in your boat? Mr ROWELL: I do not have a boat. I am only a poor member of parliament. The problem is that the state has to work with the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to make a determination— Time expired. Ms NELSON-CARR (Mundingburra—ALP) (3.37 p.m.): I shall draw us back to the debate at hand. From the outset, can I say that I am a very proud Townsvillian. Of course, it gives me great pleasure to rise in support of this very significant and historic legislation. This legislation will enable Queensland's parliament to meet outside Brisbane in Townsville from 3 to 5 September, the very first time that such a meeting has occurred in our 142-year history. This is certainly a cause for celebration. This legislation is very significant, but it is part of this government's commitment to hold parliament once a term in a regional centre. It surprises and amazes me that the member for Nanango can be so anti such a proposal. The member comes from a rural centre where her constituents probably do not get a chance to visit Brisbane. To have that Brisbane-centric mentality, to still live in the bush and to oppose something as significant as this is quite extraordinary. I am very surprised and concerned by that. We all know that the majority of Queenslanders live outside the city of Brisbane. This will mean an opportunity for regional Queensland to access the workings of parliament. Until now, most people, like the people from the member for Nanango's area, have not had access to 2646 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 parliament—and certainly the people from Townsville—because they have not been able to travel those distances. Meeting outside Brisbane is an election promise and it is of such great proportion that we as a government recognise that our regions are essential to the economic, cultural and social development of this great state. Mr Beattie: Hear, hear! Ms NELSON-CARR: Thank you, Premier, for agreeing with me as well. We continue to hold our community cabinets and our regional community forums, where ministers of this government regularly travel to regional centres across the state. Holding a sitting of the parliament in Townsville will be an opportunity for all members to gain a greater understanding of the regional issues and for the community to assess the performance of its elected officials. What better place than Townsville? As I have tried to tell many honourable members previously, Townsville is paradise. I have handed around a wonderful brochure highlighting how beautiful Townsville is, its excellent accommodation, night-life and restaurants. A government member: You handed it around in Japan, as I recall. Ms NELSON-CARR: I am glad the minister remembered that. Yes, I handed it around in Japan and Korea. A government member: Spreading the word. Ms NELSON-CARR: I was spreading the word about how great Townsville is. Let me be a little indulgent about Townsville, even if members think that I have been already. Townsville is an ideal northern central location, only four hours from Cairns and Mackay and not far from Mount Isa and Hughenden. Townsville also has the infrastructure to support a sitting of the parliament. Mr Reynolds: I love Townsville. Ms NELSON-CARR: Of course the member for Townsville loves Townsville. The entertainment centre in Townsville is the perfect location for us to conduct this sitting. The city of Townsville-Thuringowa is a really friendly place. It has beautiful weather in September and there is plenty to do. As has been said by the member for Thuringowa— Mr Mickel: Are there any good drycleaners in Townsville? Ms NELSON-CARR: It has magnificent drycleaners. We also have the world's best hospital located in Townsville. We have very competitive schools and the best education. Ms Stone: The Army. Ms NELSON-CARR: Yes, we have the Army as well. Our sporting facilities and opportunities are second to none. We have no pollution. We have a very low crime rate. We have easy access to everything. In short, Townsville is paradise. Mr Roberts: Have you got a good race track? Ms NELSON-CARR: Yes, there is a very good racetrack there also. It is state of the art. Mr Pearce: Have you got a football team up there? Ms NELSON-CARR: We have a football team, which I believe will be playing on the Saturday after the parliamentary sitting. Mr Beattie: They should have beaten Canterbury the other night. Ms NELSON-CARR: The Bulldogs are at the top of the ladder. We did extremely well. I hope the Premier will be able to be there for the game on the Saturday. The public gallery that we have provided at the entertainment centre— Mr Mickel: Why did Frank Tanti come down here, if the place is so good? Ms NELSON-CARR: We pushed him out. As the member for Thuringowa has said, the public gallery will provide an opportunity for schoolchildren in nearby areas to see parliament in action. Local residents and businesspeople will be able to see parliament first-hand. It will provide a very significant injection into the local economy. Townsville has a huge community spirit. If a spitting competition were held in Townsville the whole region would turn out to watch it. Mr Reynolds: I'd be there. Ms NELSON-CARR: The member for Townsville would be there. All members who come up to Townsville for this parliamentary sitting will have made an excellent decision. It will be great for constituents to see us at work. I have always envied my Brisbane colleagues because it has been 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2647 so easy for them to entertain their constituents with morning teas and dinners at Parliament House. The people in the regions miss out on that. This will be a wonderful opportunity for our residents. It will be a cost-effective exercise, despite the member for Nanango's concerns about the money that will be spent. We have a very tight Premier. Yesterday he told me that he was extremely tight. The parliamentary sitting in Townsville will highlight that. I am glad that the member for Hinchinbrook was able to agree with some of the words spoken this morning because as a regional member he, too, misses out on a lot of opportunities that parliamentarians from Brisbane have and he knows how disruptive coming to parliament on a regular basis is for families. Moving along, the Teaching and Learning about Parliament and Government Conference was hosted by Parliamentary Education Services in Townsville. It was very well attended. The conference sessions were aimed at enhancing the knowledge and understanding of participants of how the processes of parliament and government work and what sorts of resources are available. It enabled teachers to participate in a number of parliamentary education activities relevant to education and their students. Another course that was well attended was Parliamentary and Government Processes, which was offered through Parliamentary Education Services and designed for public servants. Once again, it was well attended and provided detailed knowledge. The clerk would agree; he took part in it. In relation to school visits to the parliamentary sitting, as the member for Thuringowa has already indicated, the subsidy scheme has been fully subscribed but any further applications will be placed on a waiting list in order of receipt. These subsidies are for students who live over 200 kilometres away from Townsville. School students from the tablelands, Mount Isa and the Torres Strait islands will be attending through our government's commitment to the sitting of the parliament in Townsville. During the parliamentary sittings there will be school visits to Citizen Jane, which has been fully booked. Citizen Jane has been commissioned by the state government through the Queensland Arts Council and commemorates the passage of Queensland's new constitution, challenging young people, their parents and teachers to know and understand our system of government—and, of course, to participate in it. There is also a poster competition for primary students so that they will not be left out. This will be for years 4 and 5 and years 6 and 7 and the themes will be parliament and government. There will be a youth parliament for senior secondary students. That will be conducted on the Friday of the parliamentary sitting week and will be a half day of activity involving students debating a bill on youth issues. During the week of the regional sitting of the parliament in north Queensland, Discovering Democracy Queensland will hold its second annual summit. Its theme will be Linking Locally and Making a Difference. There is plenty more, but members will be pleased to know that I will not talk further about it here. As members can see, this legislation will enable residents and regional visitors to access their parliamentarians in what promises to be a major milestone. On a lighter note, the parliamentary bowls team will be competing in a charity day in Charters Towers, the Burdekin and Townsville. As a very proud Townsvillian, I look forward to all honourable members coming to Townsville and sharing in our great city. Ms LEE LONG (Tablelands—ONP) (3.47 p.m.): I rise to participate in the debate on the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2002. This bill is designed to clear the way for parliament to sit at a location other than Parliament House so that the Premier can deliver on an election promise. He uses nice phrases to justify this sitting intended for Townsville, such as to 'improve access by the community to parliament' and 'democracy works better if people have access to the workings of parliament'. If this government is all about access and community access in particular, one might question why it has imposed punitive charges on freedom of information requests. Perhaps that access is not the sort with which this government is comfortable. Government of the people, by the people and for the people—just don't tell them much and charge like a wounded bull for what they do get told. Nonetheless, it could be said that a sitting in Townsville should be recognised as an attempt to engage regional Queensland. The public will have the chance to sit in the gallery quietly, watch quietly and, when they have seen enough, leave quietly. Some engagement! This is an 2648 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 indulgence. The idea might be appealing, but at what cost? Estimates have been given that it will cost in excess of half a million dollars. We are being asked to change the law so that government money is spent on delivering an ALP election promise at a time when the public hospital system in Queensland is crying out for extra beds, services and hospital staff. The Beattie government has a state in debt. Farmers' irrigated water costs are being increased significantly. Fruit and vegetable growers have new charges imposed on them that they have never had before. New licence and registration fees are being charged and so on. This state will spend a significant sum on meeting the Premier's election promise at a time when people in my electorate are facing up to a four-year waiting period for appointments at the dental clinics. Similar health problems are being experienced right across the state, not just in my electorate. Surely until this government is delivering in vital areas such as public health, activities such as this relocation of the parliament are appallingly indulgent. Whatever the size of the Health budget, the fact is that there are pensioners leagues in my area writing to me about the difficulty of accessing public health services. These are people who have helped build this state, who have worked hard and who have raised families in this state and who now have a battle getting access to health care. The idea of centralising services in our larger hospitals may sound fine down here in Brisbane where public transport is easily available, but public transport on anything like the levels enjoyed here simply does not exist in my electorate. However, we are debating a bill to transport this entire place to another place to do exactly what it is already doing here. When that is the reality, I cannot in good conscience support this bill. Here we are giving regional Queensland a stage managed glimpse of government when what it wants—indeed needs—is stronger delivery of the services of government. Perhaps if those services were being delivered, I could then support this bill. But those services are not. Therefore, I feel that this government should get its priorities in order. Mr RODGERS (Burdekin—ALP) (3.50 p.m.): I rise today to speak to the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2002. This bill will make way for Queenslanders to have a first-hand view of parliament and its operation outside Brisbane. This government has given a commitment to hold parliament once every term in a regional centre. This election promise is very significant for our regions and is vital for the social, cultural and economic development of all of Queensland. It is about ensuring all Queenslanders feel part of the state's democratic and decision-making processes. At present, the Parliamentary Service Act 1998 provides that the parliamentary precinct means all land and improvements within the land reserved for Parliament House at George Street in Brisbane. This amendment bill is necessary to allow precincts to be established in regional centres other than Parliament House in Brisbane. The parliament is all about people and about providing the opportunity to improve the understanding of our system of government. The people of regional and rural Queensland should be able to share in the democratic process. This bill will allow the people in my electorate, the Burdekin, and others in north Queensland who do not have the chance normally to see parliament first-hand the chance to see it first-hand. It will save on the costs that people incur to come to Brisbane to see parliament. As other members have said, people and students from north Queensland find it hard to come to Brisbane to actually see the sitting of parliament. Last year the St Colman's Catholic School from Home Hill came to Brisbane to see parliament in operation. The only problem was that the date it came down was September 11, so it did not have a very pleasant trip to parliament when it came. I hope to rectify that. I understand that it will be one of the schools attending the sitting of parliament in Townsville to see how it actually runs. It missed out on that chance when it came to Brisbane. The school worked hard towards getting the students and parents to Brisbane. I am sure that that school along with other schools in the Burdekin will be in Townsville to see how parliament works. This bill is worth while in that it allows those students to be able to see parliament. As I said, in every term of government other areas will get the same chance for the people in their communities to see parliament in operation as well. This bill will allow people to see members in parliament. I am hopeful that it will give those people who do not understand the process of parliament the opportunity to learn more about it. I look forward to the first sitting of parliament outside Brisbane in Townsville in north Queensland on 3, 4 and 5 September. As I said before, it is a sitting of parliament in north Queensland. It is available for people in north Queensland to come and see. There have been concessions made for students living outside the 200 kilometre zone to help them attend this parliament. I believe it is an important part of education for students to be able to come to this 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2649 parliament to see it operate. I have been to classrooms around the Burdekin electorate from Collinsville to Queens Beach in Bowen to Stuart and Oonoonba in Townsville and others in the heart of the electorate of Burdekin around Ayr and Home Hill. Those students have always had a strong interest in parliament, and that has been driven more since the Premier indicated that we will be moving the parliament to Townsville for a sitting of parliament in north Queensland. This is the perfect opportunity for everyone throughout Queensland to realise what can be done when a government listens to what the people want—that is, to be able to see what their members of parliament are doing and how the parliament is run. This will definitely be the best thing for all forms of government, not just the state government. Other governments should take note to try to get out to the people more and make parliament available to them to see it. As I said, it is a parliament in north Queensland. Members have spoken about how it will affect their electorates. I inform members and anyone visiting Townsville in north Queensland that the Burdekin makes up a large proportion of the north Queensland region and that we have some of the best if not the best fishing spots in Queensland and Australia. If parliamentarians have time and they wish to, they should take a trip down to the Burdekin to see what is on offer for people to relax. Maybe they could spend a bit of time there before they have to get back to their electorates. As has been said, the parliamentary bowls carnival will be conducted. I will have the distinction of making history in the Burdekin with the first parliamentary bowls team to compete in north Queensland at the Brandon Bowls Club in the Burdekin on the Saturday before parliament sits in Townsville. I thought I would put that on the record so that people are aware. It is a chance for people to get to the Burdekin to see what the Burdekin can put on for the community. It is important for the community to be able to see what members of parliament do when parliament sits. The perceptions in the community vary. This is a chance for people to actually see how parliament operates and to put to rest the perception that the media sometimes portrays, because that is not what parliament is all about. I support this bill and the opportunity it will give all Queenslanders. I commend the bill to the House. Mr MALONE (Mirani—NPA) (3.58 p.m.): It is an honour to speak on the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill. This is an historic occasion in that we are moving legislation in this House to allow a sitting of parliament outside of Brisbane. Obviously there is real excitement in north Queensland. If the opportunity is grasped with both hands, there is a real chance for north Queensland to gain something very significant out of it. However, I must say that the history of the parliament and the precinct in Brisbane has to be seen to be understood. I believe that the real spirit of the parliament rests here in George Street. It is going to be very difficult to translate that history and tradition to a stadium in north Queensland. That being said, I do support the sitting of parliament in north Queensland. The history of the parliament and the great traditions we have in the House and the absolute magnificence of the building needs to be seen by all Queenslanders. Unfortunately, the children in my electorate find it very difficult to travel to Brisbane because there is no subsidy for them to come to Brisbane to see what actually happens in this parliament. There is some subsidy for them to go to north Queensland, but a lot of schools really cannot afford to raise money over and above that subsidy to get there. Most members in this House would realise that my electorate starts about 30 kilometres north of Rockhampton and goes to Mackay. From the bottom end of my electorate it is another 800 kilometres to Townsville. Then it is about another 1,000 kilometres to get to the pointy end. So when we do go to Townsville there still are significant distances to travel either by the children or the parents who will take them there. So it is not insignificant that they are having trouble getting there as well. But I support the government in allocating funding for that to happen. I am concerned that the sitting of parliament in north Queensland will be fair dinkum; that the government is trying to do something for north Queensland; that it is not a stunt; and that it is going to achieve something for north Queensland. One does not have to walk up the street too far in north Queensland and talk to the locals to get a perception that they would rather be in a separate north Queensland state. So I just hope that the sitting of parliament in Townsville does not push them even further to say that we should have a separate north Queensland state. I say that with tongue in cheek, but I believe that those members in north Queensland and certainly those who have spoken previously would understand that. Mr Reynolds interjected. Mr MALONE: The member for Townsville probably supports that. He could be Premier of north Queensland. That is a worry. 2650 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Mr Rowell: I might put up the white flag. Mr MALONE: We could have Minister Rowell. Mr Rowell: That's why we've got a northern development policy. We should have it as a separate department. Mr MALONE: Absolutely. We will not advocate that too much at this stage. It is really good that the National Party is supporting a move to make sure that north Queensland is properly represented in this parliament in Brisbane. It is important, while the parliament is sitting in Townsville, that we look at some of the real issues affecting north Queensland. The member for Hinchinbrook spoke at length about some of the issues that are important to his electorate, which is very close to the north Queensland seat of Townsville. He also mentioned issues that affect areas further down the coast. The Elliot Channel issue has been around for a long time. The Elliot Channel will feed water into the Bowen Basin and the Bowen area, thus creating very good growing conditions for small crops in the Bowen area and bringing water to a very dry region. That could be the garden bowl of Asia if some real attempts were made to bring water into that region. Supporting that, of course, would be the building of the Urannah dam. There are other issues in north Queensland, such as the dam on the Flinders River. All those things need to be addressed. A parliamentary sitting in north Queensland, and particularly in Townsville, would be an ideal opportunity to address those issues. I hope that there will be some opportunities to talk about these things. When people sit in the gallery of that parliament in north Queensland, they will be very interested to hear some of the objectives of the parliamentary sitting in north Queensland. They will be very keen to make sure that the people who represent areas in south-east Queensland are understanding and supportive of the work that needs to be done in north Queensland. I turn now to the infrastructure that we need to consider, particularly the roads north of Ingham. I am not sure whether the member for Hinchinbrook actually mentioned this, but when we have floods in north Queensland the main highway can be closed for up to three days at a time. That would not be acceptable in Brisbane or its surrounds. Mr Rowell: The Murray Flats. Mr MALONE: At Murray Flats and the Gogango Plains near Proserpine, the highway can be closed for up to three days. It is a bit of a joke really. It is things like that in north Queensland that people get really upset about. Imagine if the highway to the Gold Coast were closed even for a couple of hours. There would be a real outcry about something like that. Mr Rowell: The member for Mudgeeraba would not be able to come up to parliament. Mr MALONE: That is right. Capital works funding for roads in north Queensland needs to be looked at, including some roads in my electorate. For instance, the Bolingbroke road is a dirt road down the side of a range. School buses travel along that road. People have been trying for years to get some bitumen on that road. Every time it rains it gets washed out and is very dangerous. There is also West Plain Creek Road and the development of the coalmines. With the big mine that is being developed there currently, namely Hail Creek mine, the infrastructure required is tremendous. There are few plans for capital works to build better roads to that mine. Up to 400 or 500 people will be employed there during the development stage and probably 200 to 300 when the mine gets going properly. Newlands is opening a new underground mine shortly—a high-wall mine. There are a whole lot of issues throughout north Queensland, particularly the movement of B-doubles, which can reduce the costs of transport throughout north Queensland. Because of the huge distances to be covered, bigger transport is needed. I have not even mentioned the sugar industry yet. We all know how desperately the sugar industry is in need of some genuine short-term support over the next year or so. In the longer term the industry needs to be looking at some long-term diversification away from the world market price to ensure that the industry is viable in the longer term. There will be a role for government in that, and the state government has the closest links, I would suggest, in making sure that the Queensland sugar industry is sustainable in the longer term. Some of the issues certainly can be driven by the Queensland government. I think that farmers in north Queensland in particular will be very interested to hear the initiatives that might come out of a sitting of parliament in Townsville. It is in the middle of the crushing season, and they will find it very difficult to attend a parliamentary session, but I can assure members that they will be very interested to hear of any support that the state government 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2651 can give them in the short term and, in the longer term, some direction that can take the industry away from the corrupt world market price and put it on a firm footing into the future. At this very early stage, if the industry is going to consider ethanol, we probably need to start exploring avenues in relation to a mandate for ethanol in our fuel. Once we get a mandate of some sort for the inclusion of ethanol in fuel there will be a line-up of investors willing to put up money to invest in ethanol plants that can be built in conjunction with or alongside sugar mills. The ethanol industry returns real dollars to real communities and makes sure that we import less oil into Australia, because the ethanol industry can replace that. In that way the money that would normally be spent on importing oil can be directed back into our country towns, the businesses in those towns will prosper, the farmers—with a change of legislation—will get some real funds from ethanol, and the small communities along the coast can gain something from it. But it does need direction by government and some real understanding and real commitment from all levels of government. Just to give honourable members some examples, one tonne of cane for which farmers are getting $20 to $22 produces 80 litres of ethanol. If that were sold at 70c a litre, which is not unexpected, that could equal $56 per tonne of cane. Of course, there are production costs in that, but those are some very simplistic examples of what is achievable. There are a whole lot of win-win situations with an ethanol industry. It does some great things for the environment and, as I said, it certainly helps out the farming sector. I believe the essence of north Queensland is in its national parks. They are renowned, and indeed all over the world north Queensland is regarded as the place to go to see a natural environment. From my own observations—it certainly has not just happened—the national parks in north Queensland are not being looked after in the way they should be. In areas I know, even in my own electorate, there is no attempt to eliminate pests, such as wild pigs and cattle, or diseases from the national parks. The parks are overgrown and they become a fire hazard during dry weather. Fire management in the national parks leaves a lot to be desired. Members in the House this afternoon would understand that a hot fire through a national park absolutely destroys any biodiversity in wildlife that is living in that national park. I refer to the Homevale National Park. Last year over 100 firefighters tried for nearly two weeks to keep the fire out of it. The fire almost destroyed the homestead on the property. This year the park faces almost the same conditions. As the shadow minister for employment and training, I have raised with the relevant minister the issue of the mining industry in the central region. We continue to have problems with training young people for the mining industry. As I speak the situation has not changed. We have a need for a huge number of workers in the mining industry, all on good pay. Unfortunately, the mining companies have to look outside the district, outside the state and even in some cases outside Australia for people to work in the mining industry. It is just not good enough. There needs to be a more hands-on approach to ensure that young people in Queensland particularly have opportunities in this field. I know that the member for Fitzroy would agree with me that the mining industry is a great industry to work in. I think all our young people should have an opportunity to be part of it. I support the bill. Hon. M. F. REYNOLDS (Townsville—ALP) (Minister for Emergency Services and Minister Assisting the Premier in North Queensland) (4.12 p.m.): This legislation represents a very historic decision for the Queensland parliament and the people of Townsville. Indeed, this is about the changing of the governance of Queensland. When the Premier made the commitment before the last election that in every term of government there would be one meeting of parliament outside of Brisbane all Labor members embraced the idea. As the state member for Townsville I was very proud to hear that the first such meeting would be held in my electorate. As the Labor member for Townsville I am extraordinarily proud that a Beattie Labor government would implement this idea as part of the democratisation of our government in Queensland. This is an extension of the very important aims and objectives that have been met by community cabinet meetings and by conferencing in the different regions of Queensland. This government is about ensuring that it takes not only a top-down approach but also a bottom-up approach. This government is a listening government. It is a government about connecting with the people of Queensland, whether they are in the metropolitan area, in the provincial cities or in regional, rural and remote areas. This government is today proposing quite historic legislation that has my very strong backing. 2652 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

All members on this side of the House know that we are passing this legislation because every part of Queensland—every region—should be able to see a parliamentary sitting. We need to ensure that parliament can be held in not only the south-east corner of Queensland. The Beattie Labor government has ensured that 4,000 to 5,000 schoolchildren will be looking at the parliament over its three-day sitting. That is a rather extraordinary number of people. About 3,500 have already registered to attend. I believe this government has brought forward a piece of legislation that is not only historic but also enduring. Even National Party governments, whenever they may be elected in the future, will have to implement its provisions. I am extraordinarily disappointed by what I think are the churlish remarks that have been made by the members for Nanango and Tablelands. It is a disgrace to see a far-north Queensland member actually opposing this bill. I am a very proud member for Townsville. This first regional parliamentary sitting will be held in my electorate at the Convention Centre. All members will greatly enjoy Townsville. I look forward to being their host. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (4.15 p.m.): One of the most enjoyable parts of my work in the electorate—I am sure it is the same for most other members—is visiting schools and talking to primary and high school students about the importance of democracy and the important role this parliament plays. Those students at times show a lack of knowledge. When they are in around year 7 they come to Parliament House and are given a tour. They see the architecture and are guided by very capable and animated attendants who really enliven the history of this parliament. On behalf of schoolchildren I put on record my appreciation of our attendants and guides, who give students such an animated and informative tour through the parliament and the parliamentary precinct. I note that one of the aspects of this visit to Townsville is that some additional schools will be bussed in to the Townsville area to observe the northern parliamentary sitting in progress. I do not have a problem with that, but I do hope that, having given that opportunity to students in far-north Queensland—justifiably, they very seldom get down to Brisbane to access parliament in Brisbane as we sit—the Premier intends to make available to western Queensland students and those equally isolated from this parliament subsidised travel to come to Brisbane to observe parliament in session in south-east Queensland. In many instances the distances will be comparable and therefore the opportunity should be equitable as well. Some have spoken with concern about the cost of this sitting. Whilst no-one in my electorate has said to me that it should not happen, people have expressed concern about the total cost of transporting parliament from Brisbane to Townsville. While the budget estimates stated that the cost would be $500,000, with the greatest respect to the Premier I find that very difficult to believe. In the interests of transparency, I believe it is incumbent on the Premier to provide the absolute cost of having a parliamentary sitting in Townsville. That is not to criticise holding parliamentary sittings in regional Queensland; it is to ensure what the Premier is talking about—that is, transparency and access to and understanding of democracy. The community should know the cost of transporting such a complex and dynamic structure to the Townsville region. This is not just about travel costs for members. There will be travel costs for all of the supporting staff and all the equipment. Previous speakers have expressed concern about the furniture from the Legislative Council chamber being transported to Townsville. From day one I have not understood why that has occurred. Convention centres have tables; they have the necessary skirting for tables to make the room look very presentable; and they would have chairs. There was nothing wrong with us sharing the equipment that was available in Townsville without the cost and attendant risk of transporting such valuable furniture to north Queensland. That furniture will not create the impression of the parliament in Brisbane because it will be isolated from the architecture that it is best suited to. So that cost also needs to be made transparent as well. The Premier in his second reading speech referred to forums such as country cabinets and regional community forums. I know that people in regional Queensland look forward to opportunities to access ministers, shadow ministers—any representatives of the government or the parliament. For quite a period now I have been lobbying the Premier to hold a community cabinet in Gladstone. It is justifiably referred to as a very dynamic and active region, heavily developed and developing. There are attendant constraints and challenges that come with that growth and people in my community would like the opportunity to be able to present first-hand to the Premier, the Minister for State Development, the Minister for Housing, the Minister for Health, 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2653 the Minister for Families and the Minister for Emergency Services—indeed, all of the ministers—the concerns and the challenges that they as individuals and as families face. So I renew that invitation to the Premier to hold a community cabinet in Gladstone—not in Rocky; that is an hour and a quarter's travel and people who are working cannot take two and a half hours or three hours just for travelling as well as the time needed to access ministers. Mine is not a Labor electorate. So I invite the Premier to show his generosity by holding a community cabinet. Indeed, the invitation is there for a parliament to be held in central Queensland in the future. I have adjoining me the electorate of the member for Fitzroy, Jim Pearce; inland the electorate of the member for Callide, Jeff Seeney; and down south of my electorate the electorate of the member for Burnett, Trevor Strong. I am sure that between us we would be able to accommodate a parliament if it was chosen to be held there. The opportunity to have a public gallery for students is also welcome. I have talked already about the bussing in of students. I wonder whether there will be adequate space for the general public also to be able to access the gallery—to be able to see, as the second reading speech says, parliament in action. I am not in any way trying to limit the access by school students—because I think that is important—but I hope that sufficient space has been allowed to ensure that there is some opportunity for the adult community to be able to visit. The other issue that I would seek some clarification on from the Premier is in relation to bills. At the moment, the list of bills to be debated numbers 19. Some members have various sources for their speeches. Others have to source their own material and write their own speeches. My concern is that, unless there is going to be some indication of the bills that may be debated during that three-day sitting, those members will have to cart 19 pieces of legislation, plus any other attendant information in the files, to Townsville. I know that governments in power list the bills generally in terms of priority to their ministers and the cabinet. They can also change the position of bills on the list without notice—sometimes as a strategy, sometimes as the need arises. But that places members—particularly the Independents—who choose to source all of their own information in a very difficult position logistically to be able to get their bills and information to Townsville. It is easy to say that the information is available on the Internet and, therefore, we can print it off in Townsville. That is true, but it is my understanding that there is going to be a printer available for the various sections of parliament—the opposition might have a printer, the rest of us might have one. Quite frankly, if we are all trying to print material, that will not be achievable. Therefore, I ask the Premier to give some consideration to advising us of the bills that will be debated in Townsville so that we do not have to cart every single piece of material that is required for those 19 outstanding pieces of legislation plus the private members' bills. The people of Queensland look forward to government that is responsible, that is responsive, that is democratic, that is transparent. As I said, I have not received very many complaints about parliament being held in northern Queensland. For people who live in that area who very seldom, if ever, get down to Brisbane, I am sure that the opportunity to see parliament in action will be welcomed. However, it will not be welcomed if it is at any cost. Again, I question the $500,000 price tag. I do not believe that a week's session will be achieved for $500,000. As other speakers have said, if a person is waiting for surgery and they have been put down the list because of an inability to pay for specialists or surgeons, in that person's mind that money could be better spent. Therefore, I seek clarification from the Premier. Ms BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (4.25 p.m.): I am pleased indeed to join in the debate on the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2002. However, I must say that I am surprised that there is a debate. From my point of view, this is so obviously a good and fine thing that the Beattie government is doing that it came as some surprise to me that some members opposite oppose the bill. I offer my congratulations to the Leader of the Opposition and to the other members of the National Party who have made clear their support for the bill. Setting politics aside, their recognition of the importance of the regional areas of Queensland and of the importance of taking this difficult step is to be noted by all members of the government. However, I was absolutely dismayed to hear the member for Nanango and, worse than that, the member for Tablelands indicate that they will oppose the bill. That a member from far-north Queensland should not see the tremendous benefits that will flow not only to— Mrs PRATT: I rise to a point of order. At no time did I indicate support either way. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Phillips): There is no point of order. 2654 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Ms BOYLE: That a member from far-north Queensland would not recognise the tremendous benefits that holding this parliamentary sitting has not only for far-north Queensland but also for the government in terms of democracy and accessibility is indeed a shame upon her. Instead, we heard from her the kind of carping criticism that is typical of One Nation. That is all it has ever shown us right across Australia—from Pauline Hanson right through to the previous members of the One Nation team in this parliament and now again with Rosa Lee Long. That carping criticism—'Can't do it,' 'No good'—is pretty much the best that we get. I did hear—however grudgingly given—a schoolmarmish like mark of 'E' for effort in terms of some recognition of the fact that we may have a good intention. Nonetheless, the member was critical and had already made the determination that this will not work. It will work. It will be a magnificent affair and something of which every member of this parliament should be proud in the years ahead. I have to admit that I experienced a little disappointment initially that the decision was made to hold the parliamentary sitting in Townsville. Straight after the election—and I am sure that the member for Tablelands will be surprised and dismayed to hear this—being mindful of Peter Beattie's promise that the parliament would sit in regional Queensland at least once, I shot off a letter in the hope that it might be first on his office desk with the suggestion that Cairns would be a fine city indeed to host that first parliamentary sitting outside Brisbane. Clearly, that correspondence was lost. Nonetheless, for whatever reason, I support absolutely and endorse the decision that the cabinet has made that the sitting should be in Townsville because of its centrality to northern Queensland in the broader sense and because of the capability that Townsville clearly has, both in terms of human resources and physical resources, to play host to us. I am sure that it will do so in fine fashion and, I dare say, as well as Cairns would be able to do. When we think of northern Queensland, we need to recognise that we are talking about a massive area. The top half of Queensland is bigger than the state of Victoria. In that geographic sense, there is no doubt that Townsville is at the centre. By taking the parliamentary sitting to Townsville, we are doing a number of important things. It follows a fine history that the Beattie government has had over the past four years of moving government towards the people—out into the community—and making government as accessible as possible. The community cabinets have been well received—and still are, as evidenced by the large number of delegations at the recent community cabinet meeting in Cairns. Additionally, the regional communities program has been very successful. Three-monthly meetings are held in regions around Queensland with ministers present to talk in a dynamic way about local regional issues. Of course, the regions of Queensland have been well looked after in many other ways, for example, through the various forums and discussion papers that are the lead-up to legislation. Those forums give people right across the state the chance to make suggestions or to express concerns about the directions our ministers are intending to take. Nonetheless, moving the parliament to Townsville—albeit for one week's sitting only—is a difficult job. No doubt there will be considerable cost and some difficult logistical problems along the way. Is that a reason, as the member for Gladstone has implied, that we should not do it? Heavens no! As a regional Queenslander, I have heard that argument for many years. I heard it from the National Party government as an excuse for not taking the kinds of initiatives that this Labor government has taken. One example is the state purchasing policy. If we had believed that it was cheaper to run one central contract from Brisbane to supply the government right around the state, then there was no need to go through the mental exercise, let alone the physical logistics, of spreading government contracts right across the state. Despite Minister Schwarten's determination that this would happen whatever bureaucratic resistance there may have been, they said it would be more costly. In the end, it has proved to be more cost effective in many areas of government service. For many years there were no regional representatives on various ministerial boards and committees because of the cost of a representative from, perhaps, Rockhampton, Townsville, Mount Isa or Cairns joining those boards. This Labor government has proudly increased and ensured the representation of all Queenslanders on various ministerial boards and advisory groups. Better than that, it has allocated funds in its budgets for ministerial advisory committees and other such groups to actually meet from time to time in regional cities. No doubt—and ministers have said this to me—the intelligence gathered by those committees meeting in the regions is considerable. 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2655

I am pleased to say that even major businesses in the private sector trade in regional areas from time to time—once a year or so—and bring their boards out to the regions to meet with the regional personnel. The greatest concession of all? Even the federal cabinet of the Howard coalition government is coming to Cairns for a meeting fairly soon. That shows how important it is that governments are not comfortably based in their own capitals and set in their rituals in Brisbane or in Canberra. Nonetheless, it is still a challenge to move the parliament elsewhere. However, it is important to meet that challenge for the benefit of the people of far-north Queensland. I endorse the remarks of the members from north Queensland regions, particularly those of the member for Townsville. He said much that I would like to have been the first to say. It is not newsworthy in north Queensland that he and I work so well together and that, in fact, on the great majority of matters, Townsville and Cairns have a very great coalition running. I am sure it will stay that way. It will be a challenge to make the parliamentary sittings relevant and—may I admit—not boring to those very many adults and schoolchildren who will undoubtedly be present in the gallery each day. Whose job is that? All members should ensure that the debates are relevant and not boring; that our voices, our expressions, our communication and the issues that we present and argue are well done and go some way toward restoring the faith of those who doubt whether politicians really have any intelligence and really do work hard. This is an opportunity to showcase what I hope will be the best of us. I expect that there will be heavy competition for speaking spots during that parliamentary sittings. However, I look forward to obtaining a good share of those, particularly through my influence with the Deputy Whip. Mr Purcell: Hear, hear! Ms BOYLE: The fine member for Bulimba has long been a mentor of mine. Of course, many issues from Cairns and far-north Queensland should be raised, showcased and argued during that sittings. I hope to participate in a fulsome way in those debates and in the determination of some of those very difficult issues. I recognise the hard work already taking place on the part of parliamentary staff in terms of organising this very important occasion in Townsville. I commend them and I encourage them not to let the attitude displayed by the member for Gladstone of 'too hard' take them over at any point. In general, far-north Queensland and north Queensland are can-do regions. We have had to be, because there has not been government assistance in the fulsome way that capital cities have had it. I hope that those who are engaged in the difficult logistical work of setting up the parliament will take that attitude and I thank them in advance for their efforts. Finally, I am considering changing my catchphrase as the member for Cairns. In the four years that I have been the member for Cairns, I have proudly displayed on the bottom of my letterhead the catchphrase, 'Speaking up for Cairns'. I thought that appropriate at the time I came into the job because we had again had a period of National Party government during which the regions and the views of the people therein and their resourcing needs had often been badly ignored. I figured that it was right and appropriate for me to make clear to my constituents in Cairns that I would be their strong voice in Brisbane. I hope that I have indeed made good representations—and loud ones, on occasion—in Brisbane. However, in so many ways the Beattie government has taken the government to Cairns and other regions and I have not had cause to be as concerned as I have been in past years that my region was not getting a fair go or that our voices were not being heard. This is another way that the Beattie government is demonstrating its sincere and absolute commitment to the people of Queensland. As previous speakers have said, it will be historic, and I, too, will be very, very proud to be part of the occasion. Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (4.37 p.m.): I rise in support of the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2002. I echo the Premier's comments in his second reading speech that it presents a wonderful opportunity for the residents of north Queensland and for all members of parliament. How often do the people of Queensland, particularly those living in regional centres, have the opportunity to witness first-hand the proceedings of the Queensland parliament? Apart from what our education system tells us about the parliamentary system and the process of government, ordinary citizens are not reminded about the important role of their elected representative in the parliament. However, every three years they are expected to make a decision about whether someone is capable of representing their views at a state level. In some 2656 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 cases, this is without having a good idea of the expectations of their elected member's role in the wider arena of the state parliament. The Premier's commitment to hold parliament once a term in a regional centre is aimed at improving access to our parliament by the community at large. The 89 members of parliament represent the total state of Queensland. We are elected to make laws with the heart of our electorates in mind. Country Queenslanders will now have the opportunity to see how they are being represented and how decisions that affect their lives are made. Since its election in 1998, the Beattie government has been conducting community cabinets and regional community forums right across Queensland. This means that government ministers are on hand to hear the concerns of members of the public directly. The Premier has taken this accessibility even further by taking the whole parliament out of the city and into the regions. What a great way to celebrate and participate in the Year of the Outback in 2002. I congratulate our Premier on this initiative and on his continuing efforts to improve democracy in Queensland to close the gap between government and those we represent. I also take this opportunity to thank the parliamentary staff for their hard work in organising this huge event. I commend the bill to the House. Mr LEE (Indooroopilly—ALP) (4.40 p.m.): This bill provides for the creation of a parliamentary precinct for the conduct of a sitting of the Queensland parliament at locations other than at this Parliament House in George Street, Brisbane. The Beattie Labor government is committed to taking the parliament to the people in a way that this state has never actually seen before. This government is opening up the institution of parliament to those Queenslanders who live outside of the south-east corner of this state. The government is committed to holding a sitting of parliament in a regional centre once in every parliamentary term. I believe that this will dramatically improve community access to the parliament. We all know that democracy works better the more that people understand it. The more that people understand democracy and how it works, the better it works. Townsville and the far north of this fine state is an ideal setting for this first regional sitting of the Queensland parliament. Often I have spoken in this place of the deep respect that I have for democracy and for Australia's and Queensland's democratic institutions. As many members of the House will know, I grew up on the Irish border and I understand that it is crucial that children from a very young age understand the importance of the democratic foundations upon which our society is built. Every time a group of school children from my electorate visit us here at Parliament House, I speak of the importance of democracy to our way of life. The more that citizens understand our democratic system, the stronger it will become. That is why I am always delighted when my constituents visit Parliament House. I am especially delighted when constituents visit Parliament House for the very first time, and it will be a pleasure to host the Indooroopilly Senior Citizen's Club when they visit parliament this Thursday. I know that many of them will be coming to this place for the very first time. This is a parliament that makes itself very accessible to the public, and I know that there are many local community associations that use the club's premises for meetings. The club recently benefited from a $10,000 Gambling Community Benefit Fund grant to provide better storage at its premises so community associations can make use of the premises. I commend its president, Cecily Walker, in that respect. I am delighted that the opportunities to see a sitting of the Queensland parliament first-hand that are available to my constituents will for the first time be available to residents of north Queensland in north Queensland. I am absolutely delighted to support this bill. Ms STONE (Springwood—ALP) (4.44 p.m.): I rise to support the Parliamentary Services Amendment Bill 2002, a bill that is necessary in order to conduct sittings of the parliament in locations other than Parliament House, George Street, Brisbane. I must say that one of the greatest joys in this job is seeing the smiles, listening to the curiosity and enthusiasm of students and being asked some amazing questions by school groups when they visit parliament. I know that when schools from my electorate visit this place they have lots of questions for me. They certainly keep me on my toes. Recently, Springwood Central State School came here and held a mini debate in this chamber. They did it extremely well, with the help of Rona, one of the helpful parliamentary attendants. In fact, the government's bill for the compulsory wearing of school uniforms was defeated. I hope by now they may have had a lesson on party discipline! From their visit here 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2657 they not only learnt about government but history and the rules of debate. I congratulate all the students who tour from my electorate as they are always courteous, well presented and very well informed, as I am sure will be students for the north Queensland parliament. I know the students, teachers and parents who visit parliament all agree that it is rewarding for all concerned. They always speak highly of the staff in Parliament House and of the great service they provide. It is also very rewarding to hear comments from my guests when they come to this place, whether it is for a formal tour, a dinner, award presentations or to sit in the public gallery, because it always reminds me of how pleasant it is and, indeed, what an honour it is to call Parliament House my workplace. On my monthly radio program on Radio 101 FM I regularly invite people into parliament not only to see this grand building but to see their parliament in action. I take the opportunity to ask community groups, individuals and tourists to visit any time they can. I am proud of this parliament. I am proud of the history of the building. I am so proud that I want to show it off. I know how easy it is for my constituents, my school groups and my guests to come into this place. They can hop on a Clarks' bus and use the busway. They can hop on a train, or they can drive on the South-East Freeway to our visitors' carpark. They have many opportunities to view this great institution. I am very pleased that they do. However, not all members in this place have it that easy. For their constituents, it can mean a plane trip, a long train trip or even an overnight drive to come and view their parliament. Why should the people so close, with easy access options, be the only ones to enjoy our parliament? Why should we not take this wonderful institution out to our great state and show the people their parliament? I am pleased that the Beattie government has committed to holding a parliament once every term in a regional centre. This will certainly improve access to the workings of parliament for all Queenslanders. While the member for Gympie last week claimed this was a waste of money, I ask her: does she think parliament is a waste of money? If this is the case, what is she doing here? As a matter of fact, has anyone seen the member for Gympie—have we had a sighting today? Government members interjected. Ms STONE: We have had a sighting. I notice that the member was very vocal last week about the waste of money on the north Queensland parliament, yet I do not see her on the speaking list. Once again, this would have given her the opportunity to give her negative view. I know why I am here. I am here to represent the views of my electorate and to ensure that the Springwood electorate is put first in major decisions affecting its area. If I can do this when parliament sits in north Queensland, I can do this if we sit out west and I can do this no matter where parliament sits. What we cannot do if we only sit in Brisbane is allow easy access of all Queenslanders to their parliament. Yes, there is a cost of this north Queensland sitting. However, there is a cost no matter where we sit. Whether it is Gladstone, or indeed whether it is Logan, there will be a cost. Mrs Carryn Sullivan: Bribie Island. Ms STONE: Indeed. So as long as we are here to do the work that we are here for, Queensland is ahead. I said at the beginning of my speech that I loved to see the faces of people when they hear about the history of this place. I love to see their faces light up when they see some of the most beautiful historical pieces of art and decor in rooms that have played a major part in our state's history. I know that this cannot be replicated in north Queensland; however, what will happen in north Queensland will be in our state history books for life. The people who attend our north Queensland parliament will witness history in the making and will play a part in making that history. I know the member for Broadwater's family from Mareeba is looking forward to being part of that history, and so will the other residents of the Tablelands electorate. I am sure that they, too, are looking forward to coming down. It will also allow people to further their knowledge about our parliament. I believe that, as a state member, it is important that I understand the plight of all Queenslanders. A unique country makes life in many different parts of our state so different from other parts of the country; indeed, that diversity ranges throughout the state. It is important that all members understand that. The north Queensland parliament sitting will go a long way to furthering our knowledge of that region of our state. I am very proud that I will be a part of this history, just as I am very proud to be the member for Springwood. I congratulate the Premier on taking Queenslanders' parliament to them and I commend the bill to the House. 2658 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Dr LESLEY CLARK (Barron River—ALP) (4.48 p.m.): It is with great pleasure that I rise to speak to the Parliamentary Services Amendment Bill that will facilitate the historic sitting of the parliament in Townsville, thereby honouring a commitment by the Premier at the last election that there would be one sitting of the parliament outside Brisbane in each term. A feature of this government is its commitment to bring government to the people and so increase our accessibility to the community. This is evidenced by our regional community forums and the community cabinet meetings held around the state about every three weeks, which include the opportunity for any member of the public to question the Premier and for any member of the public to meet with ministers. I believe that more than 50 community cabinet meetings—and five in the Cairns region—have taken place since the 1998 election. I have enjoyed the opportunity of deputations with ministers and with my constituents so that they could progress the issues important to them. Mr Bredhauer: If you want to go to a federal cabinet meeting in Cairns, you cannot see the ministers. When Howard goes up there with the federal cabinet, you have to go through your peak organisations. If you are just a person on the street or a canefarmer with a problem, you cannot get a meeting with a minister. Dr LESLEY CLARK: I noticed that. It is absolutely right. Ordinary people need to find $2,000 to attend a dinner. Mr Bredhauer interjected. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Jarratt): Order! I am having difficulty hearing the speaker. Dr LESLEY CLARK: In light of those interjections, I am very proud to put on the record that our government has it right when it comes to true accessibility for the community. Hopefully, Howard will learn some lessons from how it is being done properly in Queensland. This historic sitting of the parliament next month in Townsville will extend and build on the commitment that I have just been talking about and honour our promise by enabling the people of north Queensland to gain a greater appreciation of the workings of parliamentary democracy. I join with other people in saying that this is particularly important for our young people. By and large, I think they take our democratic system and political stability for granted. On the one hand, we can say that is a good thing, because it means that democracy in Queensland works well and they do not have to worry. On the other hand, I think ignorance of the proper role of parliament can be a threat to democracy. I am pleased that students from north Queensland will have the opportunity that Brisbane students have taken for granted for so long to see the parliament in action. The costs to students coming from Cairns are considerable. I appreciated the government subsidy of $50 per student. Despite that subsidy, students from only two schools in my electorate—the Holy Cross Primary School and Edge Hill State School—will be taking advantage of that offer and attending the parliamentary sitting in Townsville. I am looking forward to meeting with them personally. It is disappointing that country and northern members do not have a chance to meet with schoolchildren at Parliament House and show them around. I am looking forward to that opportunity and I hope those students will also engage in the many educational activities that have been organised for the regional sitting of the parliament in Townsville. Similar to the concern other members have expressed today, I am shocked that the member for Tablelands has complained about the cost of this sitting. Mr Cummins: Very disappointing. Dr LESLEY CLARK: It is very disappointing, given the opportunity this provides for the students of her electorate to come to Townsville to see what happens and increase their understanding. Unfortunately, One Nation members are following the tradition of being critical and seeing the negative in everything. That is unfortunate, because it is critical that people, particularly students, have an opportunity to understand how laws are made and to see in action the Speaker and the Clerk of the Parliament. It is disappointing that students from the member's electorate will not have her support in being able to have that opportunity. It is important to realise that the Townsville sitting will confirm the commitment of the Beattie government to north Queensland. Despite the fact that some 50 per cent or more of the state's capital works budget is spent outside of the south-east corner, I come across the view in my electorate that the government is focused exclusively on Brisbane. This will help to dispel that notion. 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2659

Some people think that Townsville should have a permanent parliament as part of a separate state for north Queensland. We might even expect that people advocating that view might want to demonstrate at the Townsville sitting. However, I am not of that belief. I do not think taxpayers want more politicians or another parliament. I think what they and we need is a government for all Queenslanders—a government that will recognise the special needs and strengths of all regions. In the Beattie Labor government we do have such a government. I commend the Premier for his initiative in holding a sitting of the parliament in Townsville. I congratulate the Speaker, the parliamentary staff, and in particular the staff of Education Services who have been working very hard to make the Townsville sitting the success that I am sure it will be. As I said, I am looking forward to meeting students from my electorate and to speaking about issues of concern to the people of north Queensland and my electorate. I hope all members will have a greater understanding of our issues and the challenges of life in the tropics. In conclusion, I mention that the National Party has supported us in this and I welcome its support. It has been excellent that apart from, as I said, a couple of Independent members who cannot see the value in this, we are united in seeing the value of taking parliament to the people of north Queensland. I commend the bill to the House. Mr CUMMINS (Kawana—ALP) (4.54 p.m.): I, too, am pleased to add my comments to the debate on the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2002. At the last state election, the Beattie Labor government gave what proved to be a very popular and well-received commitment to hold parliament once every term in a regional centre to improve access by our community to our parliament. Democracy works better if people have access to the workings of the parliament, but not all Queenslanders can travel to Parliament House in Brisbane. I have mentioned in this House that as a primary school student of St Joseph's North Ipswich I, along with my fellow students, came here many years ago, inspected, toured and left this place in awe. I believe Vi Jordan was the then member for Ipswich—many years ago. A government member interjected. Mr CUMMINS: They did have electric lights and buses. Honouring the election promise of the Beattie Labor government from 2001 is a very significant event in this state's history. Parliament first sat in Brisbane in May 1860 and, for the first eight years, parliament sat in convict barracks in the centre of Brisbane, near where the Myer Centre is today. Mr Rowell: In the convict barracks; it would have been very suited. Mr CUMMINS: God bless the member—Irish immigrants, not British immigrants. As I said before I was so rudely and ignorantly interrupted, they first sat in Brisbane in May 1860. For the first eight years, parliament sat in convict barracks in the centre of Brisbane, near where the Myer Centre is today. I believe in 1868 it shifted to its present position in George Street and has met here regularly ever since. Students from Mountain Creek Primary School visited parliament yesterday and I had the pleasure of taking them through parts of the House. I thank and commend the parliamentary attendants who do a marvellous job of conducting tours. I enjoyed my visit here in either year 4 or year 5. It left a very good impression on me. Mr Strong: They would have enjoyed it, too. Mr CUMMINS: They do a marvellous job of conducting tours. Although students can sometimes get a bit excited and a little carried away, they are provided with a lot of detailed knowledge about our democratic process and why we are here. Sometimes people can lose track of that. While I was a councillor for the Caloundra City Council I was approached by the Bokarina school to assist with funding for a bus to come down to Parliament House. I had no hesitation, even though in those days the government consisted of members from the conservative side of politics. I still felt it was very beneficial for schoolchildren to attend this House and learn about democracy. I hope it makes them better people as they grow older. I have a complaint about democracy: people complain, yet they do not often participate in democracy as they should. Mr Horan: You won't be participating after the next election, either. 2660 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Mr CUMMINS: I bet the Leader of the Opposition said that to Peter Wellington when he won the seat of Nicklin, and every other Independent and Labor member who has picked up the National Party's seats. No wonder Joh shakes his head. Does the member remember those good old days? The Leader of the Opposition is leading them nowhere. I pray he stays there as leader. Queensland is Australia's most decentralised state. While Brisbane is our capital city, our regions are vital to the social, cultural and economic development of the state. Through forums that are very well received, such as community cabinets and regional community forums, in which I regularly participate, the ministers of the government regularly travel to regional centres right across the state. Mr McNamara: People love that, don't they? Mr CUMMINS: They do love that. In fact, my electorate of Kawana—indeed, all of the Sunshine Coast—welcomed the first community cabinet of this term in 2001. Mrs Carryn Sullivan: We would welcome them at Bribie Island. Mr CUMMINS: I take the interjection from the member for Pumicestone, who also sits with me on the regional community forum. Ministers regularly attend those forums and there is a roster system of ministers where our community groups can input and consult with ministers and indeed backbenchers to influence the way that this state is governed. Mrs Carryn Sullivan: Another good Labor initiative. Mr CUMMINS: I will take some of those interjections. The holding of state parliament in north Queensland is ensuring that all Queenslanders feel part of the state's decision-making and democratic processes, which I feel is very well warranted. Townsville is an ideal central northern location approximately four hours drive from Cairns in the north and the same to Mackay in the south and Hughenden to the west. It also has the infrastructure to support the logistics of holding sittings of parliament. Mr Rowell interjected. Mr CUMMINS: Thank you very much. The member will not take me out on his boat. Mr Rowell: I haven't got a boat. Mr CUMMINS: That is right; he is a poor member of parliament. Townsville holds a special place in my family history. Over 42 years ago my father transferred from the North Ipswich railway workshops to Townsville in his trade as a fitter and turner. There he met my mother at an AWU dance, and the rest is history. I encourage all north Queenslanders to come and see how parliament functions and, of course, how democracy works, realising that the public gallery will provide an opportunity for schools in nearby areas to send children to see parliament in action. Local residents and businesspeople will be able to come and see this parliament first-hand something that I believe is very worth while. This unique sitting in north Queensland presents a wonderful opportunity for the residents of the region and all members of this parliament. We will take the opportunity to listen and learn of other issues that may have higher priorities or lower priorities to those people who reside in other areas of Queensland apart from the south-east corner, and I take on board the fact that members opposite rose in support of the bill and raised just this point—and I think it is a very valid point—as did members on the government side. At present, the Parliamentary Service Act 1988 provides that a parliamentary precinct means all land and improvements within the land reserved for Parliament House at George Street in Brisbane. This amendment is necessary to allow precincts to be established in regional centres other than Parliament House in Brisbane so that the existing powers of the Speaker under the Parliamentary Service Act 1988 can be used in ensuring the lawful maintenance of security and order in locations other than Parliament House at George Street in Brisbane. The Queensland parliament is all about people. Sitting outside of Brisbane is about providing the opportunity to improve the understanding of our system of government. The Beattie Labor government is committed to listening and acting on behalf of all Queenslanders wherever they live. Taking the parliament to the people is what democracy is all about. I believe that the people of regional and rural Queensland will wish to share in our democratic process. At this point I want to thank the member for Mundingburra for supplying backbenchers and others with a brochure, because it convinced my family to join with me at our cost in making the journey to the great north to the family-oriented destination of Townsville. I must say that when I showed the brochure to my father he commented on the Exchange Hotel, which he speaks highly 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2661 of. Although it is just down the road from the Mad Cow Nightclub, he had no knowledge of that some 40 years ago, and I have no doubt that it has changed over the years. Tourism is a very important part not only to north Queensland and the Sunshine Coast but indeed all of Queensland. We very much look forward to visiting The Strand. My son at three years old believes the water cannons are probably the greatest thing that God invented. I would warn the Leader of the Opposition that at the Billabong Sanctuary there are many koalas and there will be no security. So just be careful there, Mike. In closing, Magnetic Island is also a place that I think most members should try to make the effort to get to. I intend to have a couple of days off to explore the island, visit the gun emplacements and snorkel the Great Barrier Reef. This travel north should be well utilised by all members. I will be hoping to look up my mother's family and ensure that their comments are taken on board. All Townsvillians and north Queenslanders should embrace this. I believe that the commitment of the Premier and his cabinet to govern for all Queenslanders should be commended, and so should this bill. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs CHRISTINE SCOTT (Charters Towers—ALP) (5.05 p.m.): I welcome this historic and groundbreaking sitting of parliament in north Queensland. This is a great example of the Beattie Labor government once again taking government to the people. For 33 years the National Party governed Queensland, the party who says it is the party of the bush. Where did it run it from? From the south-east corner, and it made no move to change that. Who instigated community cabinets in Queensland to take government to all parts of Queensland? Premier Peter Beattie and the Beattie Labor government. In fact, we have had two community cabinets in my electorate. What other government has ever instigated an event where anyone can walk in and talk to any minister on any subject on the day? Only the Beattie Labor government—the true party of the bush, the true party of the people. How different it will be for people in my electorate from places like Charters Towers, Mingela, Ravenswood, Greenvale, Prairie, Balfes Creek, Homestead, Pentland, Hughenden, Richmond and Maxwelton. They will be able to drive, some of them for less than an hour—less time than it takes some members here to drive to the casino—to see how parliament actually operates. I find it surprising that the National Party, which calls itself the party of the bush, would criticise us taking parliament to the people of north Queensland. This sitting in north Queensland will allow men, women and children from— Mr HORAN: I rise to a point of order. I take offence at that comment and ask for it to be withdrawn. We have supported this bill and not criticised this bill in the parliament. She can be untruthful if she likes. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Fouras): Order! The member will resume his seat. There is no point of order. No member sitting in this chamber has mentioned that and therefore the member has no right to take a point of order. I call the member for Charters Towers. Mr HORAN: So she can tell lies in this parliament. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Toowoomba South, I take that as being a reflection on the chair. I know it was not meant that way, so I will leave it at that. The member will resume his seat. I call the member for Charters Towers. Mr HORAN: I took offence, because we have all supported this bill and supported the concept. To hear that member say the opposite and tell untruths in the parliament really brings this parliament down. I just make that point. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Horan has abused the standing orders. I would ask the member to resume his seat because there is no point of order. I am not going to repeat that again. I will warn him the next time he gets up. I call the member for Charters Towers. Mrs CHRISTINE SCOTT: This will allow men, women and children from the three R areas of Queensland—that is, regional, rural and remote—who have never had the opportunity to have those same opportunities people in south-east Queensland take for granted. I cannot imagine how anyone could criticise this. In fact, I welcome this move and commend this bill to the House. Mr PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (5.08 p.m.): It gives me pleasure to speak to the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2002. The object of this bill is to provide for the establishment of parliamentary precincts for the conduct of sittings of the parliament in locations other than Parliament House in George Street at Brisbane, as every other member in this House has said. Essentially, this will ensure that the Queensland government keeps its commitment to 2662 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 hold parliament once every term in a regional centre. This greatly improves the access to parliament by the community. Until such time as I was elected to this place, I had never been inside the House. In fact, when I was elected I had to go and see my mate Bobby Gleeson and buy a suit so I could come to work. I did not have a suit and they would not let me come to work in shorts, a Jacky Howe singlet and boots. I was told that that was not acceptable and not allowed. However, I have worked on this place. They had a site allowance on the roof here when the West Indian termites had eaten out a lot of the beams that hold up the roof. Plumbers were putting on a roof. The copper roof on this building is over 100 years old. The builder's labourers had to run out the roofing iron for the plumbers. We had to get onto the roof by walking up a single plank from the gutter to the top and then we had to walk the iron across for the plumbers, lay it in place, and they screwed it down. The plumbers were getting 12c an hour as a roofing allowance. How much was the builder's labourer getting working alongside him doing all the hard grunt? Nothing! The union came down and we had a site inspection. We notified the state Industrial Relations Commission and brought down the commissioner. The Master Builders Association opposed the allowance for builder's labourers because it was not in the award. The commissioner came down. We got up the scaffolding. The building was fully scaffolded. I can assure members that the commissioner was not very keen to get out onto that plank. He lay back against the scaffolding with his arms wide and had a little peer over the side. Murray Johns from the Master Builders was encouraged by me: 'Go on. If you think it is easy you walk up the plank.' He said, 'That's fine. That's no problem.' He commenced to walk up the plank. He got about halfway, and I bent down and gave it a bit of a shake to demonstrate what working conditions would be like during wind. Mr Welford: Lucky you didn't kill him. Mr PURCELL: He could have fallen off. That is what they were getting the 12c for—or he would have got the 12c if he had been a builder's labourer and we had a claim in for him. He sat on his bottom on the plank, and we negotiated from there. As the Attorney-General knows, that was a very good negotiating position. Mr Cummins: And you were a strong advocate for workplace health and safety? Mr PURCELL: I was a strong advocate for workplace health and safety and looking after builder's labourers. I knew the employers were just dying to give us 12c so that they could look after us. Mr Cummins: What year was that—'84? Mr PURCELL: About that. The commissioner said, 'I don't think, Mr Purcell, we'll need to have too much hearing when we get back.' I heard Mr Johns concede that the job would be worth 12c to the builder's labourers, so it looked like it was going to be by consent. So I had fond memories of this place before I came here, but I had not come inside to walk around in this esteemed place. One of the reasons we are taking the parliament to north Queensland is that this is an intimidating place. For a person to come in here cold, it is very intimidating. I think we ought to take the parliament to north Queensland just to show people that politicians are like everybody else; they put one leg after the other into their pants every morning and they do what everybody else does. Mr Terry Sullivan: Except on cross-dressing days. Mr PURCELL: I will not take that interjection. I enjoy bringing people in here because it demystifies the place. They can have a look at the place and see where their members of parliament operate and go to work. I also like to bring children in here so that it demystifies it for them. I encourage them to be politicians, because some of the best politicians in this country are those who are walking around in short pants going to school. They are our future. The children of today are absolutely marvellous. So I like to give them the opportunity to come in here. I take them into the press area so that they can have a look in there. Most members bring in children from schools in their electorates. I see what a benefit it is to them and their education to get hands-on experience, particularly in the press room. I usually put someone in the chair and say, 'You are the Premier.' I put a person either side as an aide to assist, and then I get five or six children to question the Premier about 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2663 things relating to Queensland. The Premier would be amazed by the questions they ask. Young students today are very, very aware of what is happening in politics. I think that augurs well for parliaments of the future. I commend the bill. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (5.15 p.m.): I rise to support the bill before the House. In doing so, I must express some surprise, if not annoyance, at the comments from some members opposite—not so much from the official opposition but from some of the crossbenchers. I cannot believe that the member for Nanango is so negative, saying that this is a waste of time and that it will not do any good. Then when she was challenged she jumped to her feet and said that she was neither supporting nor opposing it. She is a great fence-sitter, but sitting on the fence does not really let her constituents know where she stands. As a person representing people from a regional area who would find it difficult to get to the south-east corner of the state to where these major facilities are, I would have thought that she would be standing up for her people. I am absolutely amazed that the member for Tablelands, who has given some of the better speeches amongst the One Nation members of this parliament, took such a negative approach to this. For her to say that people cannot really participate in the parliament means that she has not done her homework or has not been prepared to access the web site or the information that has been made freely available to members for some time. Not only are people visiting Townsville going to be able to receive briefings before they go into the parliament, attend the actual sitting and then receive an information kit; there also will be displays and information tents. As well, the Arts Council is putting on a play called Citizen Jane, which is running three times daily and is already totally booked out. On the Friday after we leave, the Youth Parliament comprising students from schools in the Townsville area are going to meet to discuss a road safety bill. I cannot understand how anyone from the tablelands or outside the south-east corner of the state could find a criticism of this. Some of the questions asked by opposition members—Mr Horan and others—relate to the costings. I can understand that people are anxious about the costings. However, I think it is a fairly cheap shot by some members opposite to say, 'Oh, the nurses—you can't pay the nurses, you can't pay the farmers, yet you are prepared to do this.' It is interesting that in the 12 years that I have been a member of parliament I am yet to hear one person from the other side of the chamber raise the costs of a royal tour, a public parade for our sports heros, or public support for, say, a tour by the Pope or a head of state. Could we not also say that all of those things are a waste of time? Why should we have paid millions of dollars in security, facilities and upgrading for the Queen to make her fourth, fifth or eighth visit to Queensland? Mr Beattie: Money well spent. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: The Premier says it is money well spent. Why? It is not Betty Windsor whom we are honouring; it is the Queen, the head of the Commonwealth. It is not a particular Polish citizen to whom we come to pay respects but the leader of a church that is universal. So when we have a public demonstration or a public acknowledgment of a leader, we are recognising the institution that they represent. When we, as 89 people plus staff, go to north Queensland we are bringing the whole concept of our democracy and the operations of the Westminster system closer to home. If people are legitimately concerned about the cost of that, I want to hear their two-minute speeches and questions the next time there is a royal tour or the next time we put on a parade for our sportspeople or the next time we honour a citizen of renown. I want them to make the same statements about a waste of money and why we should not give it to the nurses or the farmers; if they do not, it is hypocritical. Mr Malone interjected. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: The member for Mirani says that it is a bit different. Could he in just a sentence say why? No, he cannot. That is fair enough. What we are taking to north Queensland is the whole institution of parliament. I get extremely annoyed when I hear someone say to me, 'Do I have to vote?' There are literally millions of people in the world at this very moment who are fighting for freedom and fighting for the right to vote. A simple story sticks in my mind. When South Africa was having its first free election there were first-world television reporters filming the event. They came to a gentleman who had been waiting in the line for about eight hours and asked, 'Aren't you disappointed that you have had to wait for eight or nine hours?' He looked at the television 2664 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 camera and said, 'I am 80 years old. I have never been able to vote in my life. A few more hours makes no difference.' What that gentleman said to us was that what we take for granted is actually really precious. We in the south-east corner take for granted so many of the facilities that are close by. I would have thought that if anyone was going to be neglectful of the regional areas it would be those of us who are based in the south-east corner. But we have a Premier and a government who have been more accessible to the bush and remote areas than any National Party government ever was. We have a group of people supposedly based in the south-east corner—such as me and most of the people around me from the Brisbane area—who are actually much more cognisant of the fact that people outside of Brisbane and the south-east corner do not have access to these facilities. We believe that they deserve a fair go. If that takes some money, so be it. If it takes some money to give our Olympic and Commonwealth Games athletes the chance to travel around the country and overseas to develop their skills, it is money well spent because it says something to us about who we are. If we spend a lot of money—millions of dollars, in fact—on royal visits then there is a good reason for it, because it says that we are part of that institution which has brought us our freedom and our quality of life. I am absolutely dumbfounded by the criticisms of people opposite that we should spend the money on something else. The member for Gladstone sat on the fence in talking about the costs and asked why we could not use just any furniture. We could, but we could also bring something of the ambience of this place to the north. Again, the Premier is talking about the north Queensland sitting of parliament. He is talking about that part of the state that is 1,000-plus kilometres away. He is not centred on just a small area. He has a broader view and so does this government. In closing, I pay my greatest respects to the parliamentary staff and the Speaker for the great job they have done. In the role of whip I have been on the sidelines in relation to some of the organisational matters that have had to be addressed. It is tremendously difficult to get the details and the logistics right. I congratulate the parliamentary staff for what they have done. I am really looking forward to the people of north Queensland seeing us working, face to face. I know that we will be better for it. I am sure they will be, too. I support the bill before the House. Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (5.22 p.m.), in reply: I thank all honourable members for their contributions to the debate on the Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill. I will make a number of remarks in response. As a kid growing up in Atherton in north Queensland, I used to refer to all those southerners in Townsville. Ms Boyle: I understand that, Premier. Mr BEATTIE: I can see that the member for Cairns shares that view. We still loved the people of Townsville, southerners that they were. This is about taking the parliament to the people in north Queensland. This is a parliament for north Queenslanders as well as for all other Queenslanders. As much as I love Brisbane, and as much as I live in Brisbane and my children were born in Brisbane, Brisbane is not Queensland. It is a vital part of Queensland, but it is not Queensland alone. We are the only state on mainland Australia in which a majority of people live outside of the capital. Our regions are the keys to this state. They are a key to our growth, a key to our past and a key to our future. I make no apology for making this election commitment. I make no apology for taking the parliament to the people. Yes, there is a cost. As I have indicated, $500,000 has been budgeted. The current estimated expenditure is $445,000, which is within that budget. Who knows whether there may be some unforeseen things, but that is the current estimated expenditure. I thank the Speaker's office and the parliament for the organisation of this parliamentary sitting in Townsville. This is the first time it has been done. Assuming we are re-elected—that is a matter for the people, of course; whether we are re-elected or not I would hope that future governments will continue to do this—at least once a term parliament will be taken to the regions. We are not talking about doing this every week or every month; we are talking about it happening once a term. That is to connect the parliament with the people. I want to take up where the member for Stafford left off. There is nothing more important in a democracy than the people's House—this House. Indeed, people need to see their parliament in action. They pay the bills. Yes, there are costs in running a democracy. Every time the member for Tablelands comes to this parliament there is a cost. Every time the member for Nanango sits 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2665 in this parliament there is a cost. Every time we sit here and debate issues there is a cost. That is the cost of democracy. None of us, when we look at this ugly world in which we live, should short- change democracy because that is what makes us Australians. We live in the best country on this planet. None of us should ever forget that. While we in this House have our differences about policy and there is a bit of argy-bargy and so on, at the end of the day there are very few nations other than Australia in which there can be differences between the Leader of the Opposition and the Premier, but at the end of the day they do not mind one another. We can argue with one another, we can get feisty about it and we can have strong verbal exchanges, but when I meet the Leader of the Opposition socially he is civilised and friendly and I am exactly the same to him. There are not a lot of countries of the world about which we can say that. That does not mean that the opposition leader is right about policies—of course he is wrong about policies—but he is not a bad bloke. That is the great thing about Australian mateship. We can have robust debate and we can get into it in a very strong way, but we can put politics aside and remember that we are all Australians. That is something I will not forget. That is what this is all about. I thank the opposition leader for his support. I appreciate it and I thank him for it. The member for Tablelands does not support the bill. As someone who actually grew up in Atherton, which is in the heart of the Tablelands, I am disappointed. As a kid, as I said, we talked about people from Townsville being southerners. People on the Tablelands felt neglected. They remembered the Brisbane Line from the war. They remembered how Atherton and the Tablelands were neglected. We are actually taking the parliament to north Queensland. We are respecting the regions. This is just as important to the Tablelands as it is to Mundingburra, Townsville, Thuringowa, Hinchinbrook and all the other nearby electorates. I say to the member for Tablelands: this is about ensuring people get a fair go. The member for Gladstone did not have support for or against the bill. She has asked that the list of bills to be debated be made available early. This is so that opposition members do not have to take copies of all of the legislation listed on the Notice Paper. I think that is a fair point. I have had my staff talk to the Leader of the House this afternoon, and I as Premier and she as Leader of the House will ensure that the list of bills for debate is released. We can probably do that in the sitting week of 20 to 22 August. I indicate to the Leader of the Opposition that one of the motions I will want to move in Townsville—I will seek his support for it—is one supporting the Year of the Outback, which I think is important. This is one of the other benefits of going to Townsville. I know that Townsville is not the outback, but it will be an important motion and I will be seeking the support of the opposition for that when I move it. I indicate to the Leader of the Opposition that that is one motion I will move. I have asked Bruce Campbell to come to Townsville when parliament is there. There will be a reception on the Monday night, to which all members will be invited, put on by the government and the Townsville City Council. It will be a parliamentary gathering in that sense. I have asked Bruce Campbell to come along and address that function on behalf of the outback. Members know Bruce. He is a decent guy. We want to make sure there is clear support for the Year of the Outback. I indicate that now and I seek the support of the Leader of the Opposition for that. I would like to clarify comments made previously in relation to the subsidy scheme for schoolchildren to attend the regional parliament. As indicated on the web site, the subsidy scheme is available and there is no waiting list that I am aware of—in fact, there is no waiting list. The Minister for Education has taken steps to ensure that all schools are aware of this and actively encourage participation in the scheme. Mr Speaker, I can tell you that I have written to a number of community groups—and there will be more in that region, and you have been active in this—and we have been asking everybody to come along to participate in some way either to the reception on the Monday night, or as delegates, or as observers. On Thursday, there will be the formal declaration by the Governor and executive council and that will formalise the process. Mr Speaker, I understand that you will be going to Townsville at some point to do a formal declaration. I want to thank you for that. Mr SPEAKER: This weekend. Mr BEATTIE: Mr Speaker, I want to thank you for that. We will have the formal executive council decision on Thursday and Mr Speaker will follow that up on the weekend. I think that we have handled this with a degree of maturity. That is why I thanked the Leader of the Opposition, because that has been important in terms of where we are going. 2666 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

I want to deal a little bit with the issue of the regions. Frankly, as I said, the regions are the strength of this state. The member for Mirani made some comments about regions. I want to talk about some of the things that are happening in the regions because that is what Queensland is all about. As many members would know, a couple of weeks ago I was fortunate enough to meet about 2,000 Queenslanders when I drove from Rockhampton to Brisbane on a four-day road trip. It came after the 52nd community cabinet meeting in Barcaldine and Longreach, which proved to be an ideal way to keep in touch. We have had 52 community cabinet meetings. They have been about getting out and talking to people. Yesterday in the local media, the member for Gympie made some comments critical of the Townsville parliament. For the life of me, I cannot understand why the member for Gympie would be critical. Today I ask her: is she going to be critical of the fact that the community cabinet is going to meet in Gympie in August? I hope not. But there is a cost involved in that. We are going to talk to people. Is the member going to be critical when the Leader of the Opposition, quite appropriately, takes his shadow cabinet around, which I notice he has been doing? I applaud him for doing that. There is a cost involved in that, but he should do it—and good luck to him. In the same way, there is a cost for cabinet—yes, ours is more expensive; I am not trying to say that it costs the same. To hold a community cabinet in Gympie costs money, and so it should. But it is about listening to people—the same with those other 52 community cabinet meetings. That is why, from the government's point of view, that visit is very important. There are all sorts of exciting things happening in the regions that the government is supporting. I want to place some of them on the record. Five state government departments have joined forces to develop some innovative telecommunications infrastructure for 32 rural and remote communities in Queensland—Education Queensland, the Department of Employment and Training, the Department of Innovation and Information Economy, and the Department of Emergency Services. The project will improve telecommunications infrastructure for delivering health and education services to 32 communities in south-west and central-west Queensland. Let us discuss that in Townsville. Let us talk about how important that is. While we are in Townsville, let us talk about the fact that earlier this month more than 16,400 head of bos indicus Queensland cattle were exported to Egypt from Townsville as part of the state's largest live cattle shipment. It follows talks that we had in Egypt during a trade delegation that I led last year. Let us talk about that. Let us talk about those regional issues in Townsville. Let us talk about a drug court trial in north Queensland, which is to begin in November as part of state government action to break the cycle of drug related crime in regional communities. State cabinet has agreed to investigate this trial of the drug court in Cairns and Townsville from November. Let us talk about that in Townsville. That is important. Let us talk about having a cruise ship strategy for the state. Queensland's cruise ship industry has passed another significant landmark with the announcement of Multiplex Constructions as the preferred developer of the proposed Brisbane cruise terminal. We want to see the cruise terminal completed by 2004 on the north side of the Brisbane River at Hamilton. We are talking about a cruise shipping strategy going to Cairns and Townsville. Let us talk about that in Townsville. Let us talk about foster carers. Foster carers are an integral part of Queensland's child protection system. We respect and appreciate the invaluable work that they do in nurturing some of the state's most vulnerable children. They provide loving, stable and safe family environments for children whose needs are often quite complex. On 23 July, the Minister for Families and I presented certificates of appreciation to far-north Queensland foster carers during the Cairns community cabinet meeting. Nearly 40 foster and relative carers received certificates. They included some of the region's longest serving and most dedicated volunteers. Let us talk about that when we are in Townsville. Indeed, let us talk about things like rural fire brigades. On 23 June, I presented the Far North Queensland Rural Fire Brigade of Daintree with a new state-of-the-art fire truck, the 500th new vehicle to be delivered to rural brigades in Queensland as part of a rural fire vehicle replacement program that started in the early 1990s. The vehicle presented at Daintree is one of four new rural fire vehicles that was commissioned by Emergency Services Minister, Mike Reynolds, and I during a ceremony held as part of the community cabinet meeting in Cairns. Let us talk about that in Cairns. 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2667

Whilst I was in Cairns for the community cabinet on 24 July, I inspected the final work on the new state government office building in Cairns, the far north's most energy-efficient building and the location of the region's biggest public art project. I was accompanied by my colleagues the Minister for Arts and the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing. The building cost $17.5 million. It is a massive investment in the Cairns region with construction generating another 250 jobs. Let us talk about that when we are in Townsville and north Queensland. But let us talk also about the environment. Cranes are not only important to the state's booming building industry; one is also being used to help lift scientific understanding of the secrets of the rainforest. Recently, I opened the third International Canopy Conference in Cairns and, at that opening, took the opportunity to announce a $50,000 grant for the Australian Canopy Crane Program. Let us talk about that in Townsville. Let us also talk about Queensland's grazing highways—our stock routes. Over the past four years, they have been upgraded and captured in a new map that I unveiled during the government's community cabinet visit to Barcaldine on 21 July. Over the past four years, the state government has committed over $4.1 million to upgrade the state's vital stock route network and water points. This is the first time in 40 years that an up-to-date map of the stock route network has been produced. The map traces the 74,000 kilometres of stock routes in Queensland. Let us talk about that in north Queensland. Let us also talk about the wine industry. Members will already know of the success of the Ballandean Estate wines from the Granite Belt in entering the United States market. Now, we congratulate another Queensland winery, Clovelly Estate, on securing a contract with a large United States importer of wines. I am delighted that Clovelly Estate, which was formed only in 1998, set its sights on the export market at such an early stage. That is another great regional opportunity. Let us talk about that in north Queensland. Let us also talk about regional Queensland being able to receive, or is receiving, a significant boost to its burgeoning events tourism industry through a new partnership between Telstra Countrywide and the state's highly successful Queensland Events Regional Development Program. I announced this in Mackay. Financial support of $100,000 to the program by Telstra Countrywide will directly benefit Queensland's regional economies through an increased events program. The office of regional events is based in Townsville. All of those programs—the Ingham- Australia Italian Festival in May had a record crowd, the Tarong Coal Wine and Food in the Park at Kingaroy, the Townsville Greek Festival—are the sorts of things that we need to talk about in Townsville. In addition, let us talk about indigenous Queenslanders. Recently, members would be aware that the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy, Judy Spence, and I signed an historic agreement with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission to improve the coordination of services to indigenous Queenslanders. The commitment of that partnership will empower state government departments and agencies to enter into agreements with regional and local ATSIC representatives to bring about change. I seek leave to include in Hansard more details of every one of those issues that I raised to highlight the importance of the regions of this state. Leave granted. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER I am delighted to announce that during last week and the weekend preceding I was fortunate to meet more than 2,000 Queenslanders and listen to some of their concerns. I promised we would not be desk-bound in Brisbane. The four-day road trip from Rockhampton south to Brisbane when added to the 52nd Community cabinet meeting in Barcaldine and Longreach proved an ideal way to keep in touch. The reception all the way was warm and friendly—even the handful of protesters in Gladstone were keen to meet with us. We promised as far back as Opposition that in Government we would keep in touch and respond to the concerns of the people of Queensland. And yet again we are delivering on our promise. On the Sunday and Monday we undertook our 52nd Community Cabinet. It was another success and I especially want to thank Member for Gregory Vaughan Johnson for his public heartfelt thanks for us paying due respect to the Central West and the Year of the Outback by taking Cabinet to the Outback. My trip through regional Queensland started on the Saturday night in Barcaldine when I opened A Lot on Her Hands—The Experience of Australia's Working Women, an exhibition honouring the contribution women have made to Australia's development at the Australian Workers Heritage Centre. And it finished on Thursday at Bribie Island on the Thursday. 2668 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

In between, I talked with people at business and community functions in Barcaldine, Longreach, Rockhampton, Gladstone, Bundaberg, Gympie, the Sunshine Coast and Bribie Island. I listened and talked to at least 2,000 people and all but a handful were pleased to say g'day and offer objective assessments and advice. The issue of water was the dominant one with everyone keen for rain. There is a real optimism along the Coast—from the potential on offer with the massive major projects in Central Queensland to Bundy's Food Precinct, and our further progressing the Sunshine Coast's tourism potential. And Gympie is being given its first Cabinet meeting since 1959 when we meet there on August 24 and 25. The other clear issue is that people are sick of party politics and they just want the government to get on with it and to keep delivering for Queensland. As well as the business and community gatherings, there were planned and impromptu visits to primary and secondary schools—and inspections of Smart State houses, Buderim's Ginger Factory and the $97 million Maryborough Correctional Centre. The Year of the Outback provided an ideal opportunity to take Cabinet into the Central West. Neither the Central West nor Gympie are our seats, but we have a commitment to ensure that all Queenslanders, regardless of where they live or how that vote, get the chance to meet the Cabinet and the Directors-General.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER Five State Government departments have joined forces to develop some innovative telecommunications infrastructure for 32 rural and remote communities in Queensland. The Commonwealth Government is providing $8 million over three years to support the outbacknet@qld project which is being led by Queensland Health. The other State Government departments involved in the project are Education Queensland, Department of Employment and Training, Department of Innovation and Information Economy, and the Department of Emergency Services. The project will improve telecommunications infrastructure for delivering health and education services for 32 communities in south-west and central-west Queensland. It will provide state-of-the-art telehealth equipment including videoconferencing and teleradiology, and improved internet access to schools and communities. This means the 32 rural and remote communities will receive enhanced specialist health services including diagnosis, second opinion and referral support. We will see improved education services delivered electronically to 81 schools supporting 11,400 students and more than 1100 teachers. This includes support for the Virtual Schooling Services. There will also be improved distance vocational education for 13 TAFE sites supporting about 6000 students through videoconferencing and videostreaming services. An added bonus is that all professionals in these communities, including 910 health clinicians, will have access to on-line professional development applications and services. The communities to benefit are: Alpha, Aramac, Barcaldine, Blackall, Birdsville, Longreach, Winton, Charleville, Cunnamulla, Quilpie, Augathella, Dirranbandi, Roma, St George, Mitchell, Surat, Injune, Wallumbilla, Mungindi, Chinchilla, Miles, Tara, Taroom, Stanthorpe, Emerald, Blackwater, Clermont, Moranbah, Dysart, Biloela, Woorabinda, and Cherbourg. This project ensures that people living in these rural and remote communities can share in the benefits of the Smart State.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER Earlier this month more 16,400 head of Queensland bos indicus cattle were exported to Egypt from Townsville as part of the State's largest live cattle shipment. It follows talks held during the trade delegation of Queensland beef industry representatives which I led to Egypt last year. The shipment was sourced from across central, north and north-west Queensland and supplied by Primac Elders to Fares Australia. This one shipment almost equals the total number of Australian live cattle (16,518 head) traded with Egypt in May. It reflects my Government's commitment to strengthen the marketing and sales of Queensland beef. Bos indicus includes tropically adapted breeds such as brahmans and droughtmasters which travel well overseas and handle the conditions well. The Department of Primary Industries oversaw the loading of the cattle in Townsville and issued animal health certifications before departure of the shipment.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER I would like to inform Members of a decision to extend a State Government initiative which is tough on a major cause of crime. A Drug Court trial in north Queensland is to begin in November as part of State Government action to break the cycle of drug-related crime in regional communities. State Cabinet has agreed to instigate this trial of the Drug Court in Cairns and Townsville from November. 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2669

We are serious about tackling the causes of crime in north Queensland communities and committed $13.5 million in the State Budget to this three-year trial. About three out of every four crimes is drug-related and this initiative aims to help drug users overcome the addiction that drives them to commit crimes. Drugs destroy people's lives and the lives of those around them. The Drug Court is an opportunity for people addicted to serious drugs such as heroin, cocaine and amphetamines to get help. It offers a very stark choice—break the habit or go to jail. Offenders who meet strict criteria are diverted from a prison term to a rehabilitation program and given an opportunity to reclaim their lives. If they can't stick to the program, they'll go to jail. Every successful rehabilitation means less house-breakings, car theft and other crimes committed by drug- addicted offenders to pay for their habit. Knowledge gained from the south-east Queensland pilot of the Drug Court has contributed to a new model for the north Queensland trial. Only those drug-addicted offenders who have never been imprisoned previously will be eligible for this program. We will also limit the number of offenders placed on Intensive Drug Rehabilitation Orders to 40 in each city at any one time. This is in line with the services available to support drug treatment and recognises the greater distances involved for both participants and agency staff.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER Queensland's cruise ship industry has passed another significant landmark with an announcement that Multiplex Constructions are the Preferred Developer for the proposed Brisbane Cruise Terminal. We want to see the cruise terminal completed by 2004 on the north side of the Brisbane River at Hamilton. It will be the cornerstone development for promoting cruise shipping in Queensland. The Multiplex proposal most fully met the Government's requirements for a cruise terminal and was superior in terms of its corporate and management arrangements for the development and operation of a cruise terminal. While the deal is yet to be finalised, the Multiplex proposal offers the most attractive financial return to the Government and minimises the costs and risks to the State. Multiplex's 'Portside Wharf' development is valued at $140 million and consists of: a cruise terminal which will accommodate cruise ships up to the size of the Aurora (76,000 tonne, carrying 1,850 passengers), navy vessels and various smaller vessels. The cruise terminal will also cater for functions, conferences and public gatherings; a residential development of 6 buildings, consisting of 4 high rise towers of 10 levels and 2 low rise towers of 5 levels, totalling 350 units; and retail space to service the cruise ship passengers, tourists and the residential development. The development offers several advantages, including: the establishment of a cruise terminal that would attract cruise ships for base porting and transit calls, and accommodate naval vessels; the establishment of a landmark building on the north side of the Brisbane River at Hamilton that promotes the character of Brisbane and Queensland to visiting cruise ships; and retail and residential development to service Queenslanders and tourists, providing public access to the river and extension of the existing boardwalk from the Brett's wharf development. Negotiating contractual arrangements with Multiplex are expected to occur within the next few months. Construction of the terminal should commence in 2003 and should be completed by mid-2004. The 'Portside Wharf' development should provide a dedicated cruise terminal for Brisbane to promote cruise shipping in Queensland. Multiplex has estimated that the development will generate 784 jobs during the construction phase and an additional 468 full time equivalent jobs in the operation of the terminal. There will also be employment generation in the broader Queensland tourism industry. Cruise shipping is a high-growth, high-yield tourism industry, worth approximately $200 million per year in Australia, with Queensland receiving about $14 million per year. It is estimated that with good cruise shipping infrastructure and facilities, capitalising on the natural attractions of Queensland, this industry could generate up to $80 million a year for the State. The selection of Multiplex as the Preferred Developer to construct and operate the proposed Brisbane Cruise Terminal is a key step forward in promoting the cruise industry in Queensland.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER Foster carers are an integral part of Queensland's child protection system and we respect and appreciate the invaluable work they do, nurturing some of the state's most vulnerable children. They provide loving, stable and safe family environments for children whose needs are often quite complex. On July 23 the Minister for Families and I presented certificates of appreciation to far north Queensland foster carers, during the Cairns Community Cabinet meeting. Nearly 40 foster and relative carers received certificates. 2670 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

They included some of the region's longest serving and most dedicated volunteers. We appreciate the great work foster parents undertake on behalf of the community and are increasing funding for foster parents by $33.5 million over the next four years. This will provide a range of additional supports including increased allowances, new respite services, more support staff and a new foster carers card to facilitate payments and concessions. We have also been running a recruitment campaign for foster carers in the Cairns region and during our visit for Community Cabinet I encouraged more local people to consider becoming carers. There are more than 130 children on child protection orders in the Cairns City region, 20 in the Innisfail area and more than 60 on the Atherton Tablelands so the need is there. People interested in becoming a foster carer should contact the Department of Families Foster Care Information Line on 1300 550 877.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER On June 23 I presented the Far North Queensland rural fire brigade of Daintree with a new state-of-the-art fire truck—the 500th new vehicle to be delivered to rural brigades in Queensland as part of a rural fire vehicle replacement program that started in the early 1990s. The Daintree presentation was one of four new rural fire vehicles that were commissioned by myself and Emergency Services Minister Mike Reynolds during a ceremony held as part of the Community Cabinet meeting in Cairns. I also presented the keys for new vehicles to representatives of the Marton, Walsh River and Normanton brigades. The replacement program is rapidly reducing the age of Queensland's rural fire fleet, with more than half of the State's more than 900-strong rural fire fleet now less than six years old. The new trucks have been designed and developed with close consultation of volunteers to meet the various needs of brigades in different parts of the State. The State Government, through the Rural Fire Service, contributes 80% of the cost of each of the new trucks, with brigades raising the remaining 20%. Some of the brigades' funds have come from the State Government's Gambling Community Benefit Fund, Rural Fire Levies collected by local councils and from local fundraising activities. The new vehicles were built in Queensland by Toowoomba-based company AAA Engineering. Each of the trucks is delivered ready for action—it's almost a case of 'just add water' and they are ready to go. Rural fire brigades and the State's 44,000-plus volunteer firefighters do a fantastic job and people all over Queensland should recognise their efforts. This year the State's Rural Fire Service budget has risen to more than $15.8 million, and includes plans to deliver more than 70 trucks and fire trailers to brigades across the State. This record budget allocation for the Rural Fire Service includes the employment of five new district training officers and a training assessment officer.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER When I was in Cairns for Community Cabinet on June 24 I inspected final work on the new State Government office building in Cairns—the Far North's most energy-efficient building and location of the region's biggest public art project. I was accompanied by my colleagues the Minister for Public Works and Housing and the Minister for the Arts. The four-level, 4,500 square-metre office block in Sheridan Street has been designed by Cairns-based CA Architects in association with Cox Rayner and built by Barclay-Mowlem. This $17.5 million building is a massive investment in the Cairns region, with construction generating around 250 jobs. It also includes many energy-efficient design features and incorporates the biggest single investment in public art ever made in the Far North. First tenants in the new building will be staff of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions followed by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines and the Environmental Protection Agency. $323,000 was spent on artworks for the new building. The public art was funded through the government's Art Built-in program which allocates 2% of public capital works building budgets to integrated artworks. Since the policy's inception in July 1999, more than $14 million has been allocated to public art projects throughout Queensland, creating 478 jobs. A total of $993,000 of this funding has been allocated to projects in far north Queensland.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER Cranes are not only important in the State's booming building industry—one is also being used to help lift scientific understanding of the secrets of the rainforest. I recently opened the third international Canopy Conference in Cairns and took the opportunity to announce a $50,000 grant for the Australian Canopy Crane program. The canopy crane based at Cape Tribulation in far north Queensland is the only one of its kind in the Southern hemisphere. 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2671

It has linked Australia into an international network of scientists now working in one of the last frontiers for discovery. Bioprospecting expeditions in north Queensland rainforest canopies could unlock whole new industries. The recent use of industrial cranes in tropical forests is opening up the canopy for exploration by scientists in the same way that deep-sea submersibles gave access to the sea floor. The Queensland Government believes there is a huge potential for bioprospecting for useful chemicals from canopy organisms. Rainforest research is just in its infancy but the Queensland Government will be there for the long haul. While at BIO 2002 in Toronto earlier this year I announced that the State Government would create a new research centre in Cairns to enable scientists to explore the best ways to use and conserve our tropical forests. The $33 million Australian Tropical Forest Institute is scheduled to be operational by June 2004, and has been designed to unlock the hidden potential that exists in Tropical North Queensland's unique biodiversity. The State Government is providing $7.8 million in funding to help establish this innovative research facility which will not only be of benefit to Australia, but provide world-wide benefits in tropical forest research. We have more tree species in one hectare of the Daintree than in all of North America. This mega-biodiversity may hold the key to the creation of new drugs to treat disease and cancer, or new pesticides and repellents. This announcement is further proof that the Smart State strategy covers the whole of Queensland and that the entire State will benefit from Smart State initiatives. Almost half the life on earth may exist in the world's forest canopies, so that's of great significance to a Smart State like Queensland that is identifying industries that spring from the results of research in the biosciences. About half of Australia's rainforests lie in a narrow tropical belt in north Queensland. They support about 800 animal species, many of them endemic—or unique—to the area. They also contain 4000-5000 species of plants, at least 1700 species of which are endemic. The canopy conference brought together biologists, environmental managers and policy makers, biotech representatives, eco-tourism operators and others in a knowledge-sharing exercise. It was the direct result of a ground-breaking agreement between the Queensland Government and the Smithsonian Institution which I signed in Washington just over two years ago.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER Queensland's grazing highways—our stock routes—have been upgraded over the past four years and captured in a new map that I unveiled during our Community Cabinet visit to Barcaldine on July 21. The State Government committed over $4.1 million in the past four years to upgrading the State's vital Stock Route Network and Water Points. This is the first time in 40 years an up-to-date map of the Stock Route Network has been produced. The maps trace the 74,000 kilometres of stock routes in Queensland. The stock route upgrade included construction of 41 new stock route watering facilities and the upgrade of another 170 existing facilities. The government was making a difference to the lives of rural Queenslanders by working with local governments to improve infrastructure and facilities for those whose survival can depend on the network, especially during times of drought. In addition to the maps, seven new holding yards have been constructed, the decking replaced on the Salisbury Bridge on the Queensland—New South Wales border, 1700 stock routes signs have been supplied to 31 local governments, and the stock route around Goondiwindi has been relocated to avoid conflict with urban expansion and to reduce traffic safety problems. The map was created in response to enquires received from users and potential users of the network looking for a map showing the location of stock routes and water points throughout Queensland. The Year of the Outback provided the perfect opportunity to launch this new map, which highlights the intricacy of the numerous roads and routes spreading throughout Queensland. The new stock route map is a double-sided sheet showing all roads and routes recognised by the Department as stock routes and water facilities located along these routes. The map also shows major towns, important roads, watercourse, the Queensland rail network, local government boundaries, and some property names. The map is available for distribution through authorised wholesalers and resellers for a retail price of $10.00.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER Members will already know of the success of Ballandean Estate wines from the Granite Belt in entering the United States market. Now we can congratulate Queensland winery Clovely Estate for securing an export contract with a large United States importer of wines. I am delighted that Clovely Estate, which was only formed in 1998, set its sights on the export market at such an early stage. Many companies take years to realise the potential for increased sales through exports so I congratulate Clovely Estate for having the courage to take this step after only four years. 2672 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Clovely Estate, near Murgon in the middle of the South Burnett, now joins Ballandean Estate from the Granite Belt, as an exporter of Queensland wines into the huge United States market. More than 1,000 cartons of Clovely Estate's Queensland Series of wines are on their way to America. Clovely Estate is a 100% Queensland owned company with 85 shareholders. The company was formed in 1998, following extensive research into the South Burnett's potential for grape production and a recognised opportunity for Queensland wine industry growth. A report commissioned in conjunction with the Queensland Government (The Macarthur Report 1994), to assess the agricultural and winery viability of the South Burnett region, revealed the very similar viticultural and climatic conditions the South Burnett region shares with the Hunter Valley. I am pleased that once again the State Government has been able to help create results in this industry. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER Regional Queensland is to receive a significant boost to its burgeoning events-tourism industry through a new partnership between Telstra Country Wide and the State Government's highly successful Queensland Events Regional Development Program. Financial support of $100,000 to the program by Telstra Country Wide will directly benefit Queensland's regional economies through an increased events program. I congratulate Don Pinel and the team at Telstra Country Wide for their investment in the program which will provide support over 12 months for rounds three and four of the program. Regional communities are no longer quarantined from the benefits that flow from events simply because of their location, remoteness or infrastructure. Early results are showing significant lifts in economic activity, with the program paying dividends by the way of increased visitor numbers—in some instances record-breaking, and profile for the host regions. The Global Info-Links Australian Nationals at Willowbank Raceway in January attracted a record summer crowd of more than 20,000—doubling the 2001 results. The event's success has secured a new three-year national deal and the nation's pinnacle drag-racing event now has "major event" status with Queensland Events. An increase in the number of visitors to The Ginger Flower Festival at Yandina in January resulted in a record 10,000 plants sold over four days. A third of the visitors were from outside the Sunshine Coast. The Australian Gospel Music Festival at Toowoomba in March attracted a record 30,000—20% up on 2001. Survey results showed that more than half of those attending the festival's biggest event in "Music in the Park" originated from outside the Toowoomba region. Toowoomba Visitors Information recorded a 57% lift in tourist enquiries on Easter Monday. Three-day ticket sales rose by 210% over 2001. Tarong Coal Wine & Food in the Park at Kingaroy in March attracted a record crowd of 5,500 with one in five adults travelling from outside the South Burnett region. Ingham's Australian Italian Festival in May had a record crowd of more than 22,000 with organisers estimating a $1 million boost to the Ingham economy There was an estimated 20% increase in visitors and sales to Townsville Greek Festival in May. More than 30,000 attended. And Easter in the Outback attracted the biggest crowds in the event's five-year history. The Queensland Events Regional Development Program is providing an investment of $3 million over three years (2002—2004). Already 38 events have benefited from the Program. There were 156 applicants for the last round of 16. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER I am proud to announce that Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy Judy Spence and I have signed a historic agreement with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission to improve coordination of services to Indigenous Queenslanders. The Commitment to Partnership will empower State Government departments and agencies to enter into agreements with regional and local ATSIC representatives to bring about change. The document we have signed today will help bring about practical and timely responses to the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It will mean less waste, less duplication and an overall improvement in living conditions for Indigenous people. The Commitment to Partnership augments the government's Ten Year Partnership Plan with Indigenous communities. Justice Tony Fitzgerald, in his Cape York Justice Study, identified the historical problem in Indigenous communities of 'rigid bureaucratic structures and processes which excluded local participation'. Justice Fitzgerald clearly identified the need to empower local officials and communities to develop local responses to local problems. 6 Aug 2002 Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2673

While the State Government must provide essential services to Indigenous communities, we must also build the capacity of communities to function effectively. The Commitment to Partnership reinforces the government's pledge to address the recommendations of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, the Bringing Them Home Report into the Stolen Generation, the 1999 Women's Taskforce Report on Violence and the Cape York Justice Study. We need to improve the health, education, living standards and wealth of Indigenous people. We will work cooperatively within government and with Indigenous organisations and communities to achieve these outcomes. The Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy will be the government's lead agency on implementation of the Commitment to Partnership. The Minister will meet twice yearly with ATSIC commissioners to review progress on the agreement which will be in place for five years. In conclusion, I went through those issues to highlight only some of the things that are going on in the regions in recent times and why the regions are so important and why we need to ensure that we have regional considerations in what we do. This parliament is not just a parliament for Brisbane; it is a parliament for the whole of Queensland. I make no apology for making this commitment and I make no apology for debating this bill today. I have with me some other material in relation to commitments to regional Queensland and budget management issues. I know that the Leader of the Opposition has made some point in relation to the Townsville sitting of parliament. Obviously, the government allocated this funding as part of an election commitment. It was appropriate that the government allocate the money, which we have done. I was quite happy to answer any of his questions at the estimates hearing. Mr Speaker, there was no infringement on your authority as Speaker. As you know, in the time that you have been Speaker—which is over four years now—I have never, ever on any occasion either privately or in this parliament sought to influence you in any way; nor would you tolerate it if I tried. I have never tried to do it. Mr Speaker, I never come and talk to you privately about matters in this House. I have never done it and nor would I ever, because I respect you and I respect the chair. Turning to the matter of the money, it is an election commitment that I made and the government should find the money. Why should the parliament find the money if it is an election commitment that I made? I should find the money and give it to the parliament and we should work it through. This is the first time we have ever done this and I was the appropriate minister to answer questions about it. I have spelt out the amount of money to the House and I have told members today that the current estimate is $445,000, although inevitably there will be unforeseen things, which is why the budget is $500,000. I do not believe that we have acted inappropriately or wrongly in any way. We have acted in good faith. There was no attempt to be anything other than accountable. Had the Leader of the Opposition asked me the question during the estimates committee, I would have been happy to answer it. I was sitting in the chamber when the Speaker was asked and I had prepared the brief, but I was never asked the question. That is not my fault. Anyway, I have shared the information with the House and now all members know the figures. I think every dollar of that is money well spent. I refer to the Speaker's powers here and I have material in relation to that. I refer to the objectives of the bill and to its preparation. I will table those notes for the information of members. Because of time constraints, I do not intend to go through them. I did seek to include a number of matters in Hansard, which I have done. I apologise to the Hansard staff because there is a lot of detail there. However, I think that members should be aware of what is happening in the regions. I commend the bill to the House. Motion agreed to.

Committee Clauses 1 to 5, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, without amendment.

Third Reading Bill, on motion of Mr Beattie, by leave, read a third time. 2674 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Resumed from 7 March (see p. 478). Mr MALONE (Mirani—NPA) (5.43 p.m.): The Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 2002 amends the Agricultural Colleges Act 1994. The bill seeks to address the accountability of agricultural college boards in regard to government funding, the functioning of college boards, consistency with national training schemes and vocational education and training for rural industry and rural communities. The act provides the legal framework for the operation of the four agricultural colleges and boards of trustees, which are statutory bodies that govern the colleges. Consultation was undertaken for these amendments. I understand that members of the agricultural college boards, directors of the agricultural boards, TAFE institute directors, Education Queensland, Queensland Treasury, the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, unions and industrial associations were all consulted. On record, there has been quite a depth of consultation throughout the industry. Agricultural colleges are the backbone for training a new generation of rural leaders. The colleges supply cutting edge technology and high graduate employment rates, and serve as a vehicle for industry development. I will give members a brief background on each of the four colleges. The Emerald College is located in the heart of the central highlands, a region that is rich in mineral and agricultural resources. The college was established in 1971. It boasts some impressive statistics. For example, for the past three years over 97 per cent of the graduates have found full-time employment within three months of graduating. The Emerald campus is situated a few kilometres outside the town. The administrative, residential and classroom facilities reside within the campus. Facilities on that campus include an irrigated and dry land farm, a feedlot, a horse riding arena and, of course, an engineering workshop. The college also has a cattle property at Berrigurra near Blackwater. Currently, that property has over 2,000 head of cattle. The Dalby College is situated some 73 kilometres from Toowoomba. It is located in the heart of one of the most diverse and rich agricultural areas in the state—the Darling Downs. The Dalby area is a major centre for grain handling, cotton ginning, rural merchandising and agricultural manufacturing and engineering. The Dalby College has an excellent record when it comes to securing employment for its students. The majority of students are offered full-time positions prior to the completion of their courses. That is excellent! One of the real strengths of the Dalby College is its ability to provide off-campus teaching. It also provides excellent accommodation, which is integral to the performance of its students. The Longreach College was one of the first rural training schools built in Queensland under the authority of the Rural Schools Act 1965. That act has now been superseded by the Agricultural Colleges Act 1994, which the government now proposes to amend. The college enrolled its first students in 1967. It provides extensive practical training in cattle, horse, sheep and goat grazing in semiarid conditions. The Australian College of Tropical Agricultural has two campuses, one located at the Burdekin and the other at Mareeba. The Burdekin campus is located 80 kilometres south of Townsville and covers 8,000 hectares. The Mareeba campus is located 70 kilometres south-west of Cairns. Agricultural colleges have been a vital part of rural life in Queensland. They provide the next generation of farmers with the skills and training necessary to uphold the high quality of Queensland's agricultural products, which are amongst the finest in the world. I will discuss in very general terms the changes that the government is proposing to the operation and structure of our agricultural colleges. As most members would be aware, agricultural colleges are responsible for the accommodation and care of students. The new insertion of a definition of 'pastoral care' seeks to clarify this responsibility for the benefit of the students. The amendments address the scope of training provided by the agricultural colleges. The provision of training by the agricultural colleges, as I have already stated, is the backbone for the training of rural workers. The current bill addresses the issue of training. The scope of training provided by agricultural colleges will be broadened. The declaration of an agricultural college will now be broadened to include courses about agriculture and also courses that have particular benefit to persons engaged in rural or related industries or persons in the 6 Aug 2002 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 2675 nearby communities. This is much broader than the original declaration that encompassed an exhaustive list of courses about agriculture, pasturage or animal husbandry. I refer to the college boards. Part of the intention of the current bill is to alter the functioning of the agricultural college boards. The stated aims are 'to provide a strategic focus for an agricultural college board'. The new amendments involve a far greater amount of responsibility for the board. In particular, there is a greater focus on financial accountability for the boards. Importantly, the changes require the colleges to provide access to training for Aboriginal people and Torres Strait islanders. I support this move as it is a very positive initiative. The amendments also address the powers of the college boards. Significant changes to the powers of the board are that they take away the organisational function of the board. Lists of the functions that will be omitted from the board are wide-ranging. They vary from appointing the college staff to deciding the strategic direction. This is a widening of board powers in some instances. The college boards will have greater flexibility in altering, extending, building or buying a building. The board will also have the power to alter, extend, build or buy a building up to a certain amount. Although the powers of the board are extended in this respect, there is still a mechanism by which the boards must operate transparently. The college boards will now be required to report in their annual reports to all ministerial directions given to the boards and the boards' responses to those directions. The boards will also be required by ministerial direction to provide information and reports in a way and within the time frame required by that direction. The board will also be required to provide to the minister a report on any matter that the board becomes aware of that may materially affect the operation of the college. The government also proposes to change the composition and protocols of the board. The government proposes to change the number of official members of the board from three to six. The original amendments increased the number of official members from three to five. The sixth member will now be a nominee of the chief executive of the department that deals with the matters under the Education (General Provisions) Act 1989. Effectively, the board is increased by one. There has been a slight change in the focus of appointed members. Appointed members now can be drawn from a wider spectrum of the area served by the college. The appointed members will basically need some sort of business acumen, and this reflects a general shift by the government to make the boards more business focused. This attitude is also reflected in the appointment of the Ag. College's board chairperson, who will need to have the skills considered necessary by the minister of the day. An important matter that needs to be addressed is that if people from wider backgrounds are to be involved in the administration of agricultural colleges there could be a conflict of interest within the provisions. This issue has been dealt with by the legislation and, hopefully, this will ensure the integrity of the operation of the board. The amendments also address the issue of appointment of an administrator. The government has included in the amendments a whole new part 2A dealing with an administrator. The new sections are triggered by the minister being dissatisfied with the functioning of the college boards. The appointment and function of the administrator will be generally at the discretion of the administrator. The amendments also propose to establish a student advisory council. The student advisory council is designed to enhance youth representation. The council will be made up of no more than five students and will comprise one former student and two staff members. Perhaps a strength of the process is that students will select the student representatives on the council. I hope that the students will have a real and thorough input into and about matters concerning the colleges. The amendments also include a new division 2 which deals with operational rules of the college. The changes to the operational rules give the power to the college director to make operational rules for any purpose authorised by a college rule or that are necessary or convenient for the day-to-day management of the college. However, operational rules that are inconsistent with a college rule are inconsistent to the extent of inconsistency. Hopefully, this will ensure that the integrity of the college will be maintained. Under the amendment, the minister will be able to delegate the powers under the act to the chief executive of the department. This is a significant shift from the original act that gave no such power. The minister has significant responsibilities under the new amendments, and this will be an issue that I intend to raise in the committee stage. In conclusion, there is much merit in this bill. Certainly, the National Party supports the Agricultural Amendment Bill 2002 and what it tries to achieve. There are probably some areas that I will raise with the minister in committee, but we feel comfortable with the bill and commend it to the House. 2676 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

Mr NEIL ROBERTS (Nudgee—ALP) (5.57 p.m.): This bill introduces a range of amendments to the Agricultural Colleges Act 1994. The act provides the legal framework for the operation of Queensland's four agricultural colleges. Since 1994 there have been significant changes to the national training system which have impacted on the operation of agricultural colleges as registered training organisations. For example, some current functions of the college board have become outdated with the introduction of training packages. Improved guidelines covering the governance of a college board are required to assist boards to function effectively through periods of significant change or challenge and to clarify board responsibilities and accountabilities. In early 2001 the Queensland Audit Office undertook an examination of certain aspects of the financial management of the Australian College of Tropical Agriculture, in particular, the application of capital funds. In a report dated May 2001, the Queensland Auditor-General recommended improved financial management practices in agricultural colleges, more rigorous accountability and reporting by agricultural colleges and enhanced skills level of each board. The amendments to the Agricultural Colleges Act 1994 will, first, enhance the colleges' delivery of vocational training and education for the rural industry, ruralrelated industries and rural and regional communities; secondly, ensure consistency with other relevant legislation and the national training framework; thirdly, enhance the ability of the four boards to provide appropriate leadership and direction to the agricultural colleges in the delivery of quality training to young Queenslanders; and fourthly, improve the accountability of agricultural college boards, especially in regard to government funding. There is one section of the bill that I believe deserves special attention. The bill introduces a student advisory council to each college, with a nominee from this council to be appointed to the college board. This is an example of the government's youth participation strategy in action. The Get on Board initiative is a component of the youth participation strategy. It aims to increase the number of young people aged 18 to 25 on government decision-making bodies like boards and committees. The government is committed to ensuring young people are represented and given a stronger voice in government decision making. Being a member of a board, such as an agricultural college board, is an opportunity for young people to engage with the government and their communities. It gives them the opportunity to influence decisions that affect their lives. As I have said, the bill introduces a student advisory council to each agricultural college. The council is established to enhance youth representation in the colleges and support effective youth representation on the boards. The student advisory council at each college will have a nominee on the college board. The nominee may be either a current student or student who has graduated from the college within the past five years. The council will consist of not more than eight members—five students, a former student and two staff members. Students of the college will elect the student members of the council. The student advisory council will advise the college board or the director on matters the board or director refers to the advisory council and will also advise on matters the council believes should be referred to the board or director. The chairperson of the council must be a student member. Ensuring that young people are represented on boards and committees is one way the government can ensure that young people's voices are heard. As a representative on a government board or committee, a young person can raise the profile of issues affecting young people, can provide a young person's perspective on issues being considered and also develop a greater understanding of government decision-making processes. Being a member of the student advisory council or the college board of an agricultural college will be a fantastic experience and opportunity for the young people involved and, I am sure, will be of enormous benefit to the four colleges. I congratulate the minister on the bill and on ensuring that young people will have a meaningful say in the operation of their colleges. Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (6.01 p.m.): I appreciate the opportunity to make a contribution to the debate on the Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill. Agricultural colleges are of enormous importance to a fairly large number of the constituents of the electorate that I represent and, similarly, those of my colleagues. The four agricultural colleges across Queensland have an enviable record in turning out graduates who are well respected in the work force and who constitute the backbone of the great rural industries that make up such a significant part of the economic base of Queensland. It is a matter of some regret to me that I never had an opportunity to go to one of the agricultural colleges. It is something that I have regretted over the 6 Aug 2002 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 2677 years. Perhaps I would have been a lot better for it. Perhaps the mortgage on my small farm might have been considerably less had I gone there and acquired some skills. A government member interjected. Mr SEENEY: However, as the minister indicates, it is never too late. I have had the opportunity to visit and stay at each of the four colleges for short periods. On each occasion I have had the opportunity to inspect the facilities and to get an idea of the types of opportunities that they offer to young people who are seeking a career in rural industries. Each of those colleges has its own individual character and focus. In common, they are certainly institutions of which all Queenslanders can be proud and which play a very important role in ensuring that the skill level generally of rural industries is adequate to meet the challenges that face those industries today. In most districts it is not hard to find stories about people who left school at 13 or 15 and went bush with an axe and a mosquito net and ended up as wealthy land-holders. That was the case 100, 70 or even 80 years ago. That was still possible. We have to respect the achievement of the people who were able to do that. However, it is indisputable that anybody who seeks to be a success today cannot take that course. I do not think anybody who takes that sort of approach to rural industry today can hope to emulate that success. It is now very much a business. A whole range of business skills have to be acquired by those who seek success. It is also an industry that is very skills based, whereas previously it employed mainly unskilled labour. The ability to work hard, to be strong in the back and thick in the head, as my grandfather used to say, were essential attributes for employment in this industry. Now it is very much skills based. Even in the years that I have been involved in agriculture the technology changes have been mind-boggling. Members should compare the technology available 25 years ago when I left school and started in the business with the types of technologies available now and the types of skills necessary for all employees, from management employees right through to casual employees. They need a skills base that was undreamt of 20 to 25 years ago. The agricultural colleges are a very important part of providing that skills base. That is why there is such an enviable success rate in terms of the employment of college graduates. The shadow minister and also the minister in his second reading speech mentioned the degree to which graduates from these colleges find employment. They are very employable. Those colleges not only equip them with technical skills but also life skills. Mr Malone: They are sought after. Mr SEENEY: They are sought-after graduates for a number of reasons, and not just for their technical skills but also their life skills. All of these colleges are residential colleges. In the main, students live in residence at campuses. That is a great learning experience for young people in terms of preparing them for employment. For many, that is an extension of the boarding school environment. A lot of those kids initially go to boarding school and go on from there to agricultural colleges. That group living- type environment is a great leveller and teacher of life skills. It produces people who can get on in any environment and in most workplace situations. These skills are combined with the technical skills that the colleges teach, and the graduates are sought after in the work force. I have had the pleasure of knowing a lot of young people who have gone to agricultural colleges. My niece is currently at the Emerald Agricultural College. I have witnessed the personal growth that that college has been able to offer those young people. These colleges are worthy of our support and are worthy of esteem. At times in the educational community of Queensland the contribution that those agricultural colleges make in a rather unique area of education is probably understated. The way they are able to combine practical skills with technical and academic skills is unique and should be recognised in this parliament as we debate this legislation which, as the shadow minister said, will have our support. The legislation seeks to make some adjustments to the board structure. One of the most admirable changes that the legislation seeks to make is to give representation to the students. That is very important because we are dealing with young adults who certainly deserve to have input into the management of the educational facility which they attend. I congratulate the minister and take pleasure in supporting that particular change within the legislation. It is a change that is probably long overdue and warranted. It is something that has been part of tertiary educational facilities in other places for quite some time. 2678 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002

If one looks at the role that the student union plays at the University of Queensland and similar universities, the student body has had representation at that management level for quite some time, and so it should be. These people are not children. They are young adults and they should have that representation and that input into the management of their educational facility. When they have that management and that input, that educational facility can only benefit and can only improve the services it offers to the young adults who attend and graduate from those colleges. There are only four of these colleges in Queensland—the one at Emerald is probably closest to my electorate—and they each have their own specialities. The one at Emerald specialises in cattle and agricultural industries, particularly irrigated agriculture. That is the college that most of my constituents attend. The one further west at Longreach is much more a pastoral college, and that is indicative of the area in which it is located. The college at Ayr in north Queensland is probably the only educational facility that deals in tropical agriculture. It is unique in terms of some of the opportunities that it offers to young people in that area of north Queensland and in that emerging area of tropical agriculture. Tropical agriculture certainly has its own set of challenges and its own set of skills. Mr Hopper interjected. Mr SEENEY: Yes, the outreach campus at Mareeba is certainly an integral part of the Ayr college, as the member for Darling Downs reminds me. The college at Dalby is certainly one that reflects the area in which it is located. It has a focus on the type of agriculture that is foremost on the Darling Downs. In recent years the college at Dalby has developed admirable facilities in terms of irrigated agriculture as well, but it started off and has been for quite some time a college that has focused on the type of agricultural pursuits that are common in that area on the Darling Downs. Each of the colleges is unique and each of them reflects the particular industries in the area of Queensland in which they are located. That diversity within the colleges is the way it should be, because there is a broad diversity within agricultural industries in Queensland. While there is a common thread of skills that are required, there are those areas of speciality for which each of those colleges provides. I have much pleasure in supporting this bill. I think it will enhance the job that those agricultural colleges do. I note that it will probably allow the broadening of those curriculums that each of those colleges offer. That, too, is a good thing, because the change that I spoke about at the beginning of my contribution to this debate in terms of the way the technology has changed and the way that the skills base has changed in the last 20 years will continue. There is no doubt that that change will continue. In fact, there is no doubt that that change will not only continue but accelerate. A broader range of skills will be required. There will be a broader range of technical skills that graduates from each of those colleges will have to be competent in if the place that they command in the work force is to be maintained. If the desirability of those graduates is to be maintained in the way it is, there is going to be a need to broaden the base of the curriculum and to ensure that they are able to respond to those changes. Those changes have certainly caused some concern and difficulties for people who do not have that skills base. In common with most other educational facilities in Queensland and across the country, and indeed the world, these colleges need to be able to provide those young people with an ability to learn and adapt as much as providing them with the skills base that is going to last for the rest of their lives, because agriculture is no different in that respect from so many other professions or pursuits. The most valuable skill that an educational facility can provide to any graduate is the skill to learn and adapt, because everybody—all of us—will need to do that. We have needed to do that for most of our working lives. The need to do that will become greater as that rate of change accelerates and becomes ever more pressing. I certainly endorse the remarks made by the shadow minister. I congratulate the minister for the legislation he has brought before the House. It does not contain anything that is contentious. In terms of providing the students with an input and broadening the curriculum base of those colleges, it enhances those colleges. I hope that they will go on for many years to come to provide the educational opportunities and the service that they have to the rural industries in Queensland. Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (6.16 p.m.): I am very pleased and happy to speak in relation to the Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill, particularly having regard to the proximity of one of the colleges—the Dalby Agricultural College—in the electorate of my neighbour, the honourable member for Darling Downs. Many of the staff at that college are residents of 6 Aug 2002 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 2679

Toowoomba North and speak to me about its progress from time to time. In fact, they have recently invited me out there and I hope to make that visit. This is an important bill dealing with the legal framework for the operation of the four agricultural colleges and their boards, which are the bodies that govern the colleges, in Queensland. It is a bill dealing with the training of young Queenslanders to enable them to take up worthwhile vocations in industry, in particular primary industry. The bill is a further example of the Beattie government's concern to be a government for all of Queensland and not just for the people living in major population centres. The bill before the House will clarify a number of existing provisions in the Agricultural Colleges Act 1994 with respect to improving accountability of agricultural college boards, especially in relation to government funding, improving functioning of agricultural college boards themselves, enhancing the ability of the four boards to provide appropriate leadership and direction to the agricultural colleges in their delivery of quality training to young Queenslanders, updating the current legislation to ensure consistency with other relevant legislation and the national training framework and to enhance vocational education and training for the rural industry sector. Since 1994 there have been major changes to the training system nationally which impact on the accountability and operation of agricultural colleges as registered training organisations. Of particular importance in this legislation is clause 6, which replaces the current section 7(3) which provides a list of functions of an agricultural college board. The new list of functions provides strategic focus for an agricultural college board. The functions enhance board accountability, provide consistency with the national training agenda and clarify the responsibilities of a board in the key priority areas of pastoral care for students, access to training for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and school to work transitioning. Another interesting aspect of the legislation is the new section 4 to enable a college to expand the breadth of training it delivers to rural industry, rural related industries and communities. The colleges will be enabled to deliver a broader range of skills training—for example, training in natural resources and conservation practices—while retaining a primary focus on agriculture. The further point of interest relates to the members of the board of each college. While retaining a focus on rural experience, appointed members can be drawn from a wider spectrum of the area served by a college. Appointed members will also be required to have the range of skills and experience that the minister considers necessary to enable them to contribute to the board's ability to perform its functions. This also applies to the chairman of the board. Further, and of interest to me particularly, is the provision to enable the board to conduct meetings by using any technology that reasonably allows members to hear and take part in discussions as they happen. This is bringing the holding of a board meeting into the 21st century and is particularly relevant to meetings of a board whose members may come from remote areas of Queensland—which one would expect in this instance. The use of teleconferencing, et cetera, is to be encouraged. Without meaning to go any further into the detail of particular sections of the legislation, I do however point out that there is a provision in clause 19 of the bill, which amends section 26, which provides for the appointment and functions of a college director. The amending clause provides that the college director, rather than the college board, appoints the college's staff. I ask the minister, when he replies to this debate, to give us some background as to the reasons for this change of approach. A further commendable change relates to the establishment of a student advisory council at each agricultural college. I think the honourable member for Callide referred to the contribution that student bodies make to the running of tertiary institutions these days. The student advisory council establishes youth representation in the agricultural colleges and supports effective youth representation on the agricultural colleges boards. The minister is to be commended for this innovation. As I said at the outset, since 1994 there have been major changes to the training system nationally, and it is in that respect that I wish to make some remarks. In his second reading speech the minister indicated that the amendments to the bill will ensure that the training delivered by agricultural colleges is consistent with the national training framework, giving graduates nationally recognised qualifications. He also indicated that in order to maintain high graduate uptake—in terms of graduates obtaining employment after finishing their courses—the colleges must continue to effectively respond to an increasingly competitive training market. To do 2680 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 this the individual boards controlling the colleges need to provide consistency with the national training agenda. This national training agenda is in reality standards adopted by the 8 June 2001 ministerial meeting of ministers which renamed the Australian Recognition Framework as the Australian Quality Training Framework, or AQTF. The minister has also adopted standards under this framework which replaced the Australian Recognition Framework arrangements of 1999. The standards are in two parts: firstly, standards for registered training organisations; and secondly, standards for state and territory registering course accrediting bodies. From 1 July 2002 all registered training organisations must comply with the new Australian Quality Training Framework standards for registered training organisations. This has no doubt been the impetus behind the introduction of the bill before the House today. The key objective of the AQTF, that is, the Australian Quality Training Framework, which I shall refer to as the framework, is to provide the basis for a nationally consistent, high-quality vocational education and training system. As I said, the framework is in two parts, that is, standards for the registered training organisations or RTOs and standards for state and territory registering course accrediting bodies. What we are principally concerned about here today, dealing with the four agricultural colleges, are the provisions relating to RTOs—registered training organisations. One of the fundamental key objectives is to obtain a nationally consistent benchmark for those coming out of tertiary training institutions, or RTOs in this case. Mutual recognition is critical throughout the Commonwealth to the operation of this nationally consistent vocational education and training system, and the framework set up under the ministerial council ensures that decisions in relation to vocational education and training have national effect. It is important that under mutual recognition each state and territory has agreed to recognise the decisions of all other states and territories in registering training organisations and in accrediting courses. This means in effect that an RTO can operate in all states and territories without a further recognition process or the payment of additional registration fees. Similarly, nationally endorsed training packages and accredited courses are also subject to mutual recognition. This ensures the mutual acceptance throughout Australia of the framework qualifications and statements of attainment. It follows therefore that if a training organisation wishes to issue AQTF or framework qualifications in the vocational education and training sector and to deliver the associated training and/or undertake the associated assessment, it must be registered. To obtain and maintain registration the RTO must meet the standards of registered training organisations. Provision is made for registration of training organisations in each state. As I said, the purpose of this bill is to assist in that process so far as the four agricultural colleges are concerned. In order to be registered under the framework, the state or territory registering body will conduct an evaluation to ensure compliance with the standards for RTOs across all of the RTOs' intended operations. Initial registering of a training organisation will include an audit. Newly registered RTOs will also be audited within 12 months of registration to ensure continuing compliance. During the five-year period of registration an RTO may be required to participate in audits, including strategic industry audits as determined by the state or territory and strategic evaluations initiated by the national quality training council. In summary then, the operation of the standards for registered training organisations under the framework is, firstly, to provide a system that ensures compliance with standards; then the new training organisations are audited within 12 months of the initial audit and their registered training status is conferred, enabling them to be issued with nationally recognised qualifications and statements of attainment. Then mutual recognition of registered training organisations and qualifications issued by other RTOs comes into operation. Finally, there is ongoing compliance with standards and continuous improvement. Time will not permit me to go into great detail in relation to what comprises the standards. However, first and foremost the RTO must have in place systems for quality training and assessment. This must apply across all of its operations. For example, written policies and procedures for ensuring quality training and assessment are required. The chief executive must ensure that the policies and procedures are circulated, understood and implemented consistently. The RTO itself must designate a person to ensure that the RTO is complying with the standards. It must report to the chief executive for review and comply with the requirements of the state registering body. The RTO must have an organisational chart and duty statements or terms of reference that show the lines of authority, responsibilities and allocation of functions. The chart 6 Aug 2002 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 2681 and statements must set out the role that each staff member of the RTO has in implementing and maintaining the RTO training and/or assessment system. There is a requirement for annual auditing. The RTO must have a written plan for its business that is consistent with its scope of registration and scale of operations. The RTO must document and implement procedures to identify and manage risks concerned with compliance with the standards and correct and prevent any failure to comply with the standards. The RTO must obtain feedback data on the provision of its services. It must use this feedback to review its policies and procedures. It must develop and implement written procedures relating to acting on opportunities for improvement identified by any means and continuous improvement of its systems. I have attempted to list only some of the requirements on the RTO in terms of the adoption of systems for quality training and assessment. Of course the RTO has to comply with Commonwealth and state legislation and regulatory requirements generally. Hence the RTO has to ensure that such regulatory requirements relevant to its operation are integrated into its policies and procedures and that compliance is maintained. Such matters would include occupational health and safety issues, workplace harassment, victimisation and bullying, antidiscrimination, racial vilification, disability discrimination, vocational education and training, and apprenticeships and traineeships. A host of regulator provisions are operable with respect to each of those. In this regard, not only must the RTO comply with legislation as I have mentioned; it also has to ensure that its staff and its clients are provided with appropriate information. In this regard, in terms of compliance the RTO must ensure that it has all the insurance cover necessary to carry out its operations, including insurance for workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity, and building and contents. I have indicated the standards that are required for the RTO to have systems for quality training and assessment, and of course the RTO must comply with Commonwealth and state legislation. One of the other requirements on the RTO in order to comply with the standards we are referring to is that it must show effective financial management procedures. In this regard it must, for example, monitor and report on compliance with its financial management policies. Its accounts must be certified at least annually by a qualified accountant. It must make and submit to the state registering body a full audit report. It must document and implement systems to protect fees paid in advance and must have fair and reasonable refund policies. In order to comply with the standards, an RTO must have effective administrative and records management procedures which would include secure storage, including back-up of electronic records, retention, archiving and retrieval of student results for a period of 30 years, retrieval and transferral of all other records consistent with contractual and legal requirements, and provision for access by clients to their personal records. An RTO must, in terms of its obligation to keep proper records, maintain up-to-date records of its enrolments, participating fees paid, refunds given, et cetera. Furthermore, in order to comply with the standards the RTO has to recognise the framework qualifications and statements of attainment issued by other RTOs and must ensure that its clients and staff are aware of what is required in terms of mutual recognition. An RTO, in order to maintain the standards, applies access and equity principles and provides timely and appropriate information, advice and support services which assist clients to identify and achieve their desired outcomes. To this end, codes of practice must be set out and made available. These codes may cover such matters as client selection and involvement; course information; fees and charges; provision for language, literacy and numeracy assessment; welfare and guidance services; appeals, complaints and grievance procedures; disciplinary procedures; staff responsibilities, and so on. Each member of the RTO's staff involved in training, assessment or client service is competent for the functions they perform. It is a requirement on the RTO to ensure that this is so. Accordingly, the RTO must develop and implement written procedures for the recruitment, induction and ongoing development of each member of it staff. The RTO must ensure that these assessments are conducted by suitably qualified persons. In order also to comply with the standards provisions, there are set out for the RTO assessments, learning and assessment strategies, issuing framework qualifications and statements of attainment, use of national and state or territory logos, and the ethical marketing and advertising of training and assessment products and services. As I understand it, one of the objects of this legislation is to ensure that our agricultural colleges will fit into the Australian policy training framework and will receive the appropriate 2682 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 registration as a registered training organisation, as I have outlined in some detail. Honourable members will gather from that detail that, in complying with all of the requirements set out in the act and in the national training framework, this compliance will ensure that Queensland's four agricultural colleges meet the highest possible standards and that graduates from those colleges will be recognised throughout Australia without any problem whatsoever. I commend the bill to the House. Ms MOLLOY (Noosa—ALP) (6.34 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill, which has been read a second time. There is not much point in celebrating the Year of the Outback, in claiming to care for our communities or in spruiking about the Smart State unless we mean it. The Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill does all of those things. This provisions contained in this bill will not be a financial impost on anyone. This bill clearly sets out the intention that it means to support people who undertake vocational education and training in Queensland's rural communities. We Queenslanders demand accountability, and this Labor government is delivering. In amending the Agricultural Colleges Act 1994 the government is setting out to improve the accountability of agricultural boards, particularly in regard to government funding. I believe it would be fair and reasonable to say that everyone in receipt of taxpayers' moneys has a responsibility to deliver the highest level of service and accountability. How often have we seen money squandered by organisations' and institutions' employees who do not respect the public purse? This is an issue of ethics—something governments and administrators need to clearly understand. Perhaps today, when we see major corporations collapsing because of the various industries' bankrupt regard for other people's money, we realise that there is an urgent need for governments to take a lead role in establishing stringent and ethical guidelines. The bill also addresses the matter of improving the functioning of agricultural boards. This is an interesting area, for all institutions need to be ever vigilant. University boards also need to be wary of members whose motivation is personal financial gain at the cost of growth and development. I have had a string of complaints to my office on this matter from concerned constituents in relation to the way in which a certain organisation on the Sunshine Coast has operated. This endeavour by the Beattie Labor government to legislate protocols is welcome and reassuring. Further to this, part of the bill covers an update of the current legislation to ensure consistency with other relevant legislation and the national training framework to this end. A reference group comprising representatives from agricultural colleges and the Department of Employment and Training was formed to guide the development of the amendment bill. Another aim of the bill is to enhance vocational education and training for the rural industry sector and rural communities—bring on the Year of the Outback and its healthy future. I refer to clause 6, which seeks to replace section 7(3), which provides a list of functions of an agricultural college board. The new list of functions provides a strategic focus for an agricultural college board. The functions enhance board accountability, provide consistency with the national training agenda and clarify the responsibilities of a board in the key priority areas of pastoral care for students, access to training for Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders and school-to-work transitioning. The Queensland government acknowledges the need for these training facilities to keep abreast of the training market and at the same time provide educational outcomes to match the market need. The Queensland Labor government also recognises the social need of students who may reside on campus to access support and pastoral care. This is just another way of ensuring students receive a holistic education. The correct mechanisms are in place to help them achieve their goals. Pastoral care provides a safety net for students who may be missing out on the social network they may have had in other circumstances. A refreshing aspect of the proposed legislation is the establishment of student advisory councils at each college. The councils will be chaired by a student and students will have a majority membership. This will enhance student representation on the college boards. The bill seeks to insert a new part 2A that will allow for the appointment of an administrator if a board has stopped functioning effectively. We all hear in this House how those circumstances arise, human beings being what they are. I will flesh out a few of those situations: an ineligibility to achieve a quorum, the resignation of a majority of board members or a continuing impasse in board decision making on major areas critical to the operations of a college. We see something being created to cover these emergencies in order to protect the interests of students and the 6 Aug 2002 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 2683 public if a board loses its ability to get on with the job properly. When these emergencies arise people tend to flounder, unable to see clearly. These guidelines give people the tools to move on and get on with the job. I guess this is all just commonsense, but we do need commonsense solutions to everyday life. Here we see practical, commonsense solutions to address the needs of rural industries and communities and to look after our student communities, who often feel disenfranchised from the decision making process, all too often by people who are either empire building or who have been away from the harsh realities of real life and the poverty engendered by student life. I trust the students at Queensland's four agricultural colleges, the Australian College of Tropical Agriculture, Dalby Agricultural College, Emerald Agricultural College and Longreach Pastoral College, enjoy and appreciate this targeted training to rural industry and communities. I also wish the colleges well, given this new focus and invigorating piece of legislation to better equip them to deliver quality educational outcomes to young Queenslanders. I commend the bill to the House. Mr HOPPER (Darling Downs—NPA) (6.40 p.m.): The member for Noosa spoke about accountability. From what I have seen in the past, our agricultural colleges have been run very, very well. There are some very, very good people at those colleges. I hope that the comments that the member made in her speech in no way reflected on the past management of any of our colleges in Queensland. I know the managers of Dalby Agricultural College, the board and the chairman of the board. They are very, very fine people. They are very, very proud of their college. They turn out some very, very fine students. In rising to speak to the Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill, it pleases me to say that the Dalby Agricultural College is located in my electorate. One can only be impressed by how that college functions and has functioned over the years. Before I was elected, I was a dairy farmer. Quite often, we would have field days at that college. Through the winter, that college would grow many trials of oats. For the benefit of the members opposite, I point out that oats is fed to dairy cattle in the wintertime. It helps to produce a lot of milk. Oats can get a disease called rust. Over the past 10 years or 15 years, many rust diseases have come into oats crops and we have had to rely on agricultural colleges to grow trials and come up with varieties of oats that fight that disease. I must say that, after attending a few field days, for three or four years I planted some varieties of oats that absolutely beat that disease and saved me probably $20,000 or $30,000 at least per annum. That is just for the winter crop. I must also mention the college's summer crop trials and what that college has done for the people of the Dalby area. The quality of students that these agricultural colleges produce is outstanding. Personally, over the years I have known a lot of these students. At this very moment, my neighbour's boy is attending the college and is doing very, very well. From the figures that I have seen, a lot of companies seek out for employment students who have attended the Dalby Agricultural College. The percentages of those students who get immediate employment are extremely high. I have heard that in some years well over 90 per cent or 95 per cent of students of that college go into employment straightaway. That is a credit to the college. Recently, the Queensland Labor government injected $3.5 million into this college. I thank the government for that. I think that is a wonderful gesture and I thank the government very, very much. It is a great thing that that happens. Students from all walks of life go through agricultural colleges, many of them leaving home for the first time. We have to make sure that the best care is taken at all times and that our colleges are accountable. Clause 4 of the bill addresses the expansion of the breadth of the training of rural industries and in the training in natural resources and conservation practices. I might add that over the past four years or five years the Dalby Agricultural College has been absolutely into training in natural resources and conservation practices. They have one of the greatest irrigation schemes out on the Jimbour plain that we have seen for years. It is managed very, very, very well. The bill also provides a framework and helps to ensure the sound management of the colleges. It also gives a wider range of powers to the college boards in allowing them greater flexibility in altering, extending, building or buying a building. The people on those boards are the people who are at the colleges and know exactly what the colleges need. The board must seek ministerial approval to sell, buy or lease land. That is good, because it helps the minister of the day to be accountable. A lot of the provisions of this bill make the minister very accountable. While I am talking about the accountability of our colleges, let me talk about the accountability of 2684 Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 6 Aug 2002 our minister. Our minister has to be accountable for how the colleges run. I support totally this bill for bringing that in. Now we can reflect on how the minister has approved things, or has not approved things. In that regard, I think that the bill is very good. Also, the board is accountable to the minister by having to report to the minister on any matter that significantly affects the operation of the board's duty. The bill refers to the structure of the board and the number of members that it should have. Although I have not spoken to our college directors as to what exactly the bill says about the numbers of board members, I think that this provision has merit. I worry about the call for a wider range of people to sit on the board so that not all of them have a rural background. My concern is that, being an agricultural college, what knowledge will other people on that board have if they do not have a rural background? We need to watch closely what happens in that regard. We are teaching students in agricultural colleges about rural practices. We need to be very, very careful about who is put on the boards. It is quite easy to get a number of people on a board who have an idea or a suggestion that may reflect on the students' wellbeing. We must at all times protect the wellbeing, knowledge and education of the students who attend these colleges. Under this bill, a college board has the level of accountability that is required to function in a more corporate and transparent way. In the past, we have seen the deadlock in the Longreach Agricultural College board. The provisions in this bill that deal with administrators are necessary to ensure the sustainability of the agriculture colleges in tough decision-making times. Although I believe that there is merit in students at the colleges having a greater say in the decision-making process—and I am not in any way knocking any student by saying this—some concern has been expressed to me about the integrity of board meetings and the meetings with directors who have made a compromise due to the students' inability to show the level of maturity that is necessary to deal with the matters and issues that are raised at board level. The colleges turn over a heck of a lot of money and massive decisions are made. I think that we need the maturity of a sensible and wise board. I am not in any way reflecting on any of the students in any way. However, I seek the minister's opinion on that matter in his reply. I would appreciate that very, very much. In discussion with stakeholders in the agricultural college industry, one issue that has arisen is that the bill gives an unreasonable amount of decision-making power to the chief executive. We have to watch that very, very closely. We have seen significant investment from agricultural companies into the Dalby Agricultural College, such as Oswald Brothers, who provide a scholarship and many other benefits such as employment for students after they complete their studies. This is a true indication of the value of these colleges. I would like the minister to outline to me the areas that he regards would be most likely delegated to the chief executive. There may be an increase in accountability in the operation of the colleges. The concern is that the chief executive may not understand fully the dynamics of the commercial activity of the agricultural colleges. Mr Foley: Mostly things like meeting training targets, regular financial reports—those sorts of things. Mr HOPPER: Perhaps the minister in his reply could touch on those few matters. That would be good. I would like to say that the younger generation in my area of Dalby have an excitement about the future. They know that the agricultural college is in Dalby. They go through high school and they live on their family farms. My daughter, Jodie, says she will go to either the Longreach Agricultural College or the Emerald Agricultural College when she has finished school. That is her vision. The only reason Jodie has that vision is that she has grown up with the Dalby Agricultural College. When we drive into town, we drive past the agricultural college. She has seen the older students of her school go to that agricultural college. She has seen them go out into the work force and become somebody and make something out their lives. That is an absolute credit to the college. My little boy plays with his best mate, little Mitchell Newton. He is only 10 years old. They say that they are both going to go to the Dalby Agricultural College when they leave school. That is a wonderful thing: 10-year-old kids who play farms and do everything and their vision is as best mates to go to the agricultural college. Mitch Newton is the fifth generation of the Newton family, agricultural farmers in that electorate. Over the years in the Kaimkillenbun district, they have grown many, many hundreds of thousands of tonnes of grain. The point I am making is that these colleges are regarded proudly by the communities. A lot of rural people are very happy to have these colleges in their areas. We must at all times look after these colleges, as they provide a strength in our rural communities. I have pleasure in supporting this bill tonight. I commend the bill to the House. 6 Aug 2002 Adjournment 2685

Mr RODGERS (Burdekin—ALP) (6.50 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 2002. This bill will enhance the delivery of education and training in rural communities. It is a commitment of the Queensland government to providing regional and rural communities the chance to help deliver the skills necessary to ensure the prosperity of our rural industries. The Australian College of Tropical Agriculture is situated in my electorate of Burdekin. It is one of Queensland's four agricultural colleges. It has a proud record of delivering quality vocational education and training to the communities and rural industries of north Queensland. It delivers training in north Queensland to meet identified training priorities and it ensures that the region's youth have the opportunity to reach their full potential and to develop the skills needed to effectively make the transition from school to work. I am pleased to note the college's strong interest in providing equitable access to training. At present, the college is working with local schools and other agencies to provide year 10 Aboriginal students an alternative pathway to employment. The initial intake of 12 students will graduate with the nationally recognised certificate 1 in agriculture, while working towards their year 10 certificate. The year 12 Aboriginal students are part of the Pathways to Success program. That is jointly funded by the federal Department of Education, Science and Training, and Education Queensland. The residential costs are largely funded by Abstudy. The Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill 2002 will further enhance the ability of the Australian College of Tropical Agriculture, together with other agricultural colleges, to provide quality training to Queensland's rural industries and communities. The Australian College of Tropical Agriculture, which was formerly known as the Burdekin Agricultural College, provides training for rural industry, rural communities and those industries associated with rural communities. The college operates four business units, including campuses located at Burdekin and Mareeba. The college is providing partnerships and alliances with other public providers to ensure local and state training priorities are met through quality training delivery in northern and western Queensland. The college is intent on building on past expansion decisions and moving from a residential training college with a focus on agriculture, to a full service registered training organisation providing training to rural industries, rural communities and industries associated with rural communities. As a registered training organisation, ACTA defines its market area as the Queensland coastal belt, particularly in relation to sugar, as northern and western Queensland, the Torres Strait islands, the Pacific Rim and Asian countries. In accordance with the Beattie government's strong focus on young people, the bill also introduces a framework for the establishment of student advisory councils at each college, thus enhancing the youth representation in agricultural colleges and supporting effective youth representation on the college boards. The Agricultural Colleges Amendment Bill implements reform in priority areas, providing pastoral care to agricultural college students, establishing closer links with industry, providing equal access to training for all persons and assisting students in their transition from school to work. The Burdekin College of Tropical Agriculture also has a strong success rate for its students, with well over 90 per cent of students gaining employment when they leave the college. I believe this bill goes a long way toward helping maintain that high standard of education in that agricultural college. I support the bill and I commend it to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Choi, adjourned.

ADJOURNMENT Hon. M. J. FOLEY (Yeerongpilly—ALP) (Minister for Employment, Training and Youth and Minister for the Arts) (6.54 p.m.): I move— That the house do now adjourn.

Marlborough Memorial Helipad and Garden Mr MALONE (Mirani—NPA) (6.54 p.m.): I was fortunate enough to attend the Marlborough memorial helipad and garden when it was officially opened on 20 July in the presence of more than 500 people. Indeed, included in the guests were Vince Lester, the member for Keppel; the mayor of Livingstone Shire, Bill Ludwig; Livingstone councillors, including John Smith from Marlborough; and there was an apology from Jim Pearce, who was unable to attend. 2686 Adjournment 6 Aug 2002

The opening coincided with the second anniversary of the tragic helicopter crash at Marlborough that claimed the lives of five people on board. They were the pilot, Paddy O'Brien, the paramedics Bill Birch and Craig Staines, and Susie Sherry and her five year old son Anthony. The helipad and garden have been dedicated to the crew of the Capricorn Helicopter Rescue Service, who braved awful weather on the night of 24 July 2000 to save the life of a young child. Their dedication to the cause of helping others and the service they provided was recognised in the opening of the facility and presentation of seven hand-made books of honour recording the event around which this memorial was established. For those left behind, the opening of the helipad was a bittersweet occasion. The celebration of the community's hard work was tinged with the fresh tears and sadness that still surrounds that tragic event. Within a few weeks of the accident, members of the tiny rural community of Marlborough joined together to ensure that a safe landing site for helicopters was built, determined that such a tragedy would never happen again. After more than 18 months of fundraising and hands-on work, the helipad and garden were finally completed. Located in Fossy Drive, the $90,000 development of the 2,000 square metre site has been funded from a concert in the park in August 2000, corporate donations from all over Australia and overseas, including land from Queensland Rail, earthworks by the Livingstone Shire Council, community donations from central Queensland, personal donations from across Australia, lots of help from the Marlborough Lions Club, sponsorship and discounted supplies from many firms and businesses, and many hours of voluntary work by the people of Marlborough and district, including great leadership by digger Kevin Cowan and Viv Jenkinson. This community, brought together by adversity, can feel very proud of their achievements and deserve every recognition for such an outstanding and beneficial asset. The helipad has been designed and established for the use of the RACQ Capricorn Helicopter Service well into the future as a safe landing site for any helicopter operating on emergency calls. It provides pilots a safe place to land, complete with lighting which can be turned on remotely, wind direction equipment and reflective markings. Around its perimeter the helipad features a garden and a granite tablet in memory of the five people who died. They have not been forgotten.

University of Queensland Ms NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (6.58 p.m.): Next Monday night the governing body of this state's best university, the University of Queensland, will consider the introduction of full fee paying undergraduate students. This is a big step. Since the reforms of the Whitlam government, access to university has been determined purely by merit, not by wealth. The principle is that you can do a university course if you are smart enough, not if you are rich enough. The concept of merit based access to higher education has led to enormous changes in Australian society. A generation of decent working class kids were educated because of it. People such as Peter Beattie and my parents became the first in their families to go to university because, for the first time, people from working class backgrounds could. Since it was elected in 1996, the Howard government has consistently sought to undermine that system. It has taken $3 billion out of higher education and has legislated so that universities can take up to a quarter of their Australian undergraduate students on a full fee paying basis. John Howard's always shallow claim to represent the battlers is belied by the system his government has established whereby smart battling young people cannot access university, while people whose results are not as good but whose parents can afford to pay, can access university. The proposal for UQ to admit full fee paying Australian undergraduate students will seriously undermine both the claims to excellence and the equity of higher education at UQ. It will allow students who have not reached the cut-off point for HECS places to enter courses through the backdoor. While the university claims there will be no demarcation between HECS and fee-paying students once they are in courses, academics will know where the money is coming from and they will be under pressure to keep them in courses. UQ prides itself on excellence. The admission of a second tier of less qualified students is not conducive to the absolute pursuit of excellence. Full fee paying undergraduate students fundamentally offend the concept of equity. In universities, as in life, we should progress because of how good we are, not how rich we are. Even if, as the university promises, entry cut-offs are relaxed only slightly to allow for full-fee paying students, rich people will have access over smarter people. In dentistry, for instance, which currently has an OP cut-off of one, this will play itself out with students with an OP of two who 6 Aug 2002 Adjournment 2687 cannot afford to pay being kept out while those on a three with cash are welcomed. The financial case put forward by the university is weak. Of the three schools that want fee paying undergraduates—vet, dentistry and law—none has presented a particularly convincing argument on how many fee paying students they expect to attract and, importantly, how much money they think they will make. For the UQ senate to jeopardise the future of excellence and a foundation of equity for the sake of a financial case riddled with holes would be a travesty. The senate— Mr Terry Sullivan: It'll be the second best degree money can buy. Ms NOLAN: That's right. The senate of UQ must stick to its principles.

Railco Ms LEE LONG (Tablelands—ONP) (7.03 p.m.): I would like to inform the House about a volunteer organisation in my electorate. This organisation has served, and hopefully will continue to serve, as a major tourism drawcard for the area. It is called the Ravenshoe Atherton Insteam Locomotion Company, or Railco as it is locally known. This organisation was formed in 1988. One of the founding members and first Railco president, Roger Perry-Keene, was interested in preserving the historic rail line connecting Ravenshoe and other Tableland locations to the coast. This followed a Queensland Rail decision to close its own scheduled service to Ravenshoe. This line was begun in 1886, with the goal of connecting Herberton to Cairns. By June 1891 it had reached Kuranda. Mareeba was connected in August 1893, but that was it for the next 10 years. It seems government being slow to deliver on promises is nothing new. The step to Atherton was complete in 1903. Its original target, Herberton, was finally linked up in October 1910. By then, of course, the demand for rail services existed even further and the line was extended to Tumoulin in 1911 and Ravenshoe in 1916. As I have said, scheduled QR services on this line ended in 1988. However, the community included a number of visionaries, including Graham West of Ravenshoe, and a decision was made to find a steam locomotive and begin a tourist service, initially from Ravenshoe to Tumoulin, but eventually reaching Atherton. This, it was thought, would provide a tourist attraction which would benefit Atherton, Herberton and Ravenshoe. A 1925 D17 class locomotive was found and brought to Ravenshoe in 1989, and restoration work began. It first steamed up in May 1990. This engine, named Capella after the town in which it was found, had its first official run in October of that year from Ravenshoe to Tumoulin. Tumoulin is, in fact, the highest railway station in Queensland. Railco did not rest on its laurels. It moved forward and a second engine, called Roger, was put back into service on the Atherton- Herberton line. I was delighted to take part in a special trip on the Capella service on the last weekend in July. It was a great experience. The engines and carriages are a credit to Railco, and the day was very well attended by well-wishers. However, the day had with it a sombre note as Railco is one of the community organisations facing tremendous challenges from the present public liability insurance crisis. In fact, its cover expired on 31 July and no other insurer has yet come forward with a policy for Railco. The organisation has registered for the Not-For-Profit group insurance scheme, but that is not due until September, so they are hopeful of returning to the track then. Railco has a strong record of delivering a quality experience. It brings a higher tourist profile to several centres on the Tablelands and it is capable of doing much more. Organisations such as Railco are offering tremendous value to Queensland's tourist infrastructure now, and at a bargain price, because of the willing efforts of their volunteers. I hope Railco is able to negotiate its way through this insurance minefield we are all facing now.

Aurora Mr LEE (Indooroopilly—ALP) (7.06 p.m.): I rise to raise my very serious concerns and the concerns of many of my constituents about the philosophy which underpins a housing development on the Gold Coast. The Aurora development hails itself as an adults only housing project, but what it really means is that it is a housing project where no children are allowed. I do not think that I have ever seen a clearer expression of what is wrong with western society than that epitomised by this development. Aurora promotes a culture of self-interested consumerism with no regard for the wider Queensland community. Aurora calls itself a '24 hour security controlled community'. They say, 'We have designed Aurora so you can live, love and work without ever leaving your 24-hour gated community.' They are saying that we can turn our back on the wider Queensland community. We 2688 Adjournment 6 Aug 2002 can opt out of our society and we can live in Aurora's plastic and false world. Australia's birth rate currently is in free fall and we all know that a society that does not genuinely value the natural place of children in our community is a society that in the long-term is quite doomed. I would urge the developers to re-think their proposals and I would also urge the Queensland community to reject the philosophy behind the Aurora development as the absolute disgrace that it is. They say, for instance, that children are not specifically banned but that the project has been designed specifically for adults as the target audience. They say that, if children just happen to be visiting, they will insist on constant parental supervision. In my book, a situation where a society, a community or even a suburb says, 'Look, we will not ban children because that might be illegal, but we do not expect them to be here very often,' is a very sad state of affairs. I urge the developers in this case to have a very long and hard re-think about their proposals.

Tilt Train Mr ROWELL (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (7.07 p.m.): I rise to speak on Queensland Rail's new diesel tilt train to operate between Cairns and Brisbane. I read with interest recently that the proposed fare for the 26.5 hour one-way journey on the tilt train will be around $250. Upon investigating what the current fare would be for a one-way air fare over the same distance, I found that this price would be in the vicinity of $170, a saving of $80. No doubt, there will be a number of people willing to pay the extra cost because of the experience of travelling on the tilt train. I am just as sure that there will be many more who cannot find it within themselves to justify paying an additional $80 for a train journey taking approximately 23 hours longer than that of a plane. The cost of food on the train journey also needs to be taken into account. This is not included in the $250. Prior to the 1998 election, this government made claims that travel on the tilt train would cost one-third of an airline ticket, but based on current flight prices a tilt train ticket would be in the vicinity of one and a half times more than the cost of an airfare. The reality of this excessive cost must surely be of concern, considering that it will take bottoms on seats to assure the viability of such a project. I acknowledge that the tilt train offers luxury seating and individual audio-visual entertainment screens not found on existing Sunlander services. Having said this, those travelling on the older and, in the scheme of things, only marginally slower Sunlander pay a considerably lower fare in addition to having the option to book into sleeper carriages. Minister Bredhauer has been quoted as saying, 'We have people travelling to Queensland from overseas just for the experience of the tilt trains, which are the fastest trains operating on a narrow gauge anywhere in the world.' I hastily point out that this statement refers only to the Rockhampton to Brisbane section and is not of any real benefit to north Queenslanders at all. If the Beattie government wants to benefit the northern section of the state, the funds used to finance the $138 million tilt train, which Queenslanders can be certain will run over budget, could have been better utilised. Had these moneys been distributed to shire councils throughout north Queensland over a two-year period, we would have seen marked improvements, such as better roads and employment opportunities in regional areas, rather than the tilt train extravaganza that we are now witnessing.

Boundary Changes, Stephens Mrs SMITH (Burleigh—ALP) (7.09 p.m.): I wish to speak about an issue that has caused considerable disturbance in my electorate over recent weeks. As honourable members may know, the Department of Natural Resources has been planning to redraw suburb boundaries on the Gold Coast. This decision was made partly because a large number of new estates have sprung up over recent years and many of the residents quote their addresses as the development name rather than the correct suburb. This makes things difficult for emergency services and Australia Post. A storm has developed over a number of housing developments being forced to give up their names, but one in particular is worthy of comment. Stephens, a suburb that I have the honour to represent in this parliament, has been the subject of a vicious campaign of slander. Stephens residents have been vilified in the media and now on the Internet. On a web site residents of Varsity Lakes used their opposition to the proposed changes to slander their near neighbours. I was shocked and appalled by the way in which Stephens was depicted on the web site. I cannot believe that people are willing to treat their fellow man that way. Call me naive, but I always believed that the Gold Coast was a warm and friendly place to live. This affair has shaken my confidence. The web site had a picture of a beautiful sparkling lake and, on the next page, a picture of the same lake shown as polluted and dirty next to a caption 'No to Stephens'. 6 Aug 2002 Adjournment 2689

Mr Terry Sullivan: Disgraceful. Mrs SMITH: The inference was unmistakable and disgraceful. Stephens does have some Department of Housing accommodation and this appears to be sufficient to have them considered as second-class citizens. The fact that the department and the residents maintain their homes well and that Stephens has some of the best water views on the Gold Coast appears to be irrelevant. I spent the first 22 years of my life living in public housing and I cannot tolerate the type of prejudice that assumes one person is better than another because of their address. The people of Stephens are sick of having their beautiful suburb maligned. They are overwhelmingly in favour of the name change and hope to finally discard the stigma, which is so undeserved. I believe I have done everything within my power to offer my support and encouragement, both publicly and privately, to the people of Stephens. I understand the importance of this name change and I will continue to fight for it. On behalf of the residents of Stephens, I call on my colleague the Minister for Natural Resources not to give in to this sort of prejudice and snobbery and to reject the submissions of those residents whose only agenda appears to be to slander their neighbours.

Gheerulla Cup, Sunshine Coast Hinterland; Great Walks Project, Blackall Range Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (7.12 p.m.): Recently, I was fortunate to be invited to welcome international visitors to a riding event in my electorate which was one leg of an international endurance race. The small Sunshine Coast hinterland community of Kenilworth recently hosted the Gheerulla Cup, the Australian leg of the prestigious Ambassador international endurance riding series. International competitors aggregate points from the Ambassador series rides hosted in selected countries to share in prizes valued at over $US1.5 million. Other legs of this event are being staged in the Middle East and Europe. The series' final ride will take place in the United Arab Emirates. The ride provided an opportunity for Australian riders to compete against international equestrians. It also provided a great opportunity for this community to showcase itself to an international audience. Kenilworth and surrounds is already well known for its impressive and picturesque riding trails, enjoyed by riders who have taken part in two Tom Quilty Gold Cup events and some 16 Easter 320 kilometre marathon rides. The success of the Gheerulla Cup has highlighted the importance of promoting hinterland riding, walking and driving tracks in our region. In this regard, the Sunshine Coast Forest Users Group has been meeting regularly and we are now at the stage of attempting to identify the tracks and areas for use and the specific areas that are to be marked as no-go areas because of the environmental sensitivity of the specific locations. I hope that our Forest Users Group is able to come up with a balanced and fair recommendation to the minister which has the support of our community. I know the committee members are working very hard in this regard. While talking about access to our forests—only last night I attended a public meeting at the Montville Community Hall. Almost 100 people attended. People travelled from Maleny, Mapleton and in between. By and large, there was overwhelming support for the Great Walks project planned for the Blackall Range. While there was support for the preliminary location of these walking paths, I believe there may be a need to make some minor changes to accommodate some of the local residents' concerns. I believe these walking paths will let us showcase to the world some of nature's real treasures in our own backyard that we too often take for granted. The opening up of these walking paths will also provide an opportunity for many locals to venture out and experience the real beauty of our natural environment. In this regard, I thank the former Minister for Environment and now Attorney-General and the current Minister for Environment for their current ongoing support of the Blackall Range Great Walks project.

Mrs J. Mitchell Ms BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (7.15 p.m.): Tonight I rise to report the passing of a Cairns lady, Mrs Jess Mitchell. Jess was 87 years of age at the time of her death last week. She was not a lady known to honourable members and was not well known by me, yet she was a lady who 2690 Adjournment 6 Aug 2002 made a very significant contribution in Cairns. It is for that reason that I think it important for the House to mark her passing. Jess Mitchell was born in Cairns in 1914. She attended Cairns Central School and did well. Shortly after leaving school, she married Les Wilson in 1933. Unfortunately, Les passed away some years ago. Mrs Mitchell set about raising a fine family of six daughters and two sons, which was probably not unusual in those days. I am told that she was devoted not only to them but also to the many activities in which her children participated in the community. She was particularly involved with the Cairns Australian Football Club, the Cairns Sea Scouts and many other organisations. Through her children and a devotion to her family and through her community activities she became involved with the Australian Labor Party and became a firm and devoted member. The time came in the 1960s when Jess was asked to join a team of Labor people standing for election for the Cairns City Council. She was not successful in her first attempt. It was remarked upon that this may have in fact been because she was a woman. Up to that time there had been only male representatives on the Cairns City Council. There were those in the community who expressed their dismay that a woman should consider taking on an activity that was clearly unsuited to the fairer sex—at least in their opinion. However, during the following term for the Cairns City Council a vacancy arose and the team decided that because Jess had received such a good vote at the election, even though she had not been elected to a position as alderman, it was appropriate that she should fill that vacancy, and she did. She served for several years on the council and, I am told, with some style and dignity, not with loudness and pushyness. I am told also that she was counselled by the men to remain feminine and to be quiet and not express too many opinions. How dare they, based on our understanding in 2002! Her community work was hard and long and it continued well past her term as the first woman alderman on the Cairns City Council. It continued into the later years of her life until she passed away. May we take this moment tonight to recognise the significant contribution she made as the first woman elected to the Cairns City Council.

Medical Indemnity Insurance Hon. V. P. LESTER (Keppel—NPA) (7.18 p.m.): I have here two letters, one from Dr Phillip Esdale, who has a medical practice in north Rockhampton, and one from a number of doctors representing the Yeppoon Family Practice. These letters are accompanied by a number of signatures. They deal with the continuing crisis relative to medical insurance. I seek leave to table these documents at the end of this speech. Leave granted. Mr LESTER: In the short amount of time that I have, I want to quote a press release of the AMAQ. It states— Reforms that the AMA believes must be introduced are: 1. Caps on general damages 2. Introduce thresholds on incapacitation so that injuries below 15% incapacity would not be dealt with by the legislation 3. A reduction in the statute of limitations so that litigation must be commenced within three years for adults and seven years for children 4. Mandatory structured settlements so that injured parties receive annual allocations 5. Non discretionary indemnity cover for public sector doctors 6. Medical panels answerable to courts to advise judges 7. Punitive damages not to be awarded under the legislation Doctors should not be satisfied with the legislation in its current form and they should continue to express their concerns about it to their patients—explaining that it offers inadequate reform ... and that strong reform is vital for the future of medicine in this State Doctors should continue to assess whether their practice is viable in the current climate of medical indemnity. If they are considering taking leave— obviously I have been unable to table this in the parliament before— ... when their indemnity premiums are due to assess their situation, then they are well within their rights to take such a decision If doctors are members of UMP they have little option but to remain so at this stage and accept the cover that is being offered ... 6 Aug 2002 Adjournment 2691

This is an awful concern to doctors. They are considerably taxed as to whether they will be sued in the future. I know efforts are being made to overcome these difficulties, but these doctors giving me this information are not people who are unreasonable. I just ask that the parliament accept these concerns in very good faith.

Wide Bay-South Burnett Regional Tourism Board Awards Mr McNAMARA (Hervey Bay—ALP) (7.22 p.m.): Last week I had the opportunity to attend the Wide Bay-South Burnett Regional Tourism Board Awards night at the Brolga Theatre in Maryborough. It was a great opportunity to celebrate the achievements of our tourism industry. I wish to congratulate the board chairman, Shane Boyd, general manager, Larry Monk, and their team for an excellent evening which was very professionally organised and run. Some 220 people attended the awards night. I would like to offer my personal congratulations to all the winners and to particularly note the outstanding quality of those operators from my electorate of Hervey Bay. The Kingfisher Bay Resort and Village won the Environmental Tourism Award as well as taking out the Restaurant Award for its Seabelle Restaurant. Kingfisher is an outstanding tourism operation as well as a major employer in my electorate. I think it is fair to say that Kingfisher has set a standard for quality, service and environmental sensitivity and marketing which is world class over the last 10 years. To general manager Ivor Davies and his team, I say well done and keep up the great work. With that record in mind, I was delighted that Mr Gary Smith, a director of the group which operates Kingfisher and a number of other tourism operations up and down the length and breadth of Queensland, was chosen to receive the John Craig Gardner Memorial Award. Gary, who also serves as chairman of Tourism Queensland, was a most worthy winner of this prestigious award and I am sure that he will continue to play a major role in promoting our region. I was also delighted that Geoff Mahoney and his team at Kondari Resort won the award for Conference and Meeting Services and also for General Accommodation—Three to Four Star. Kondari is a very important facility in a tourism town like Hervey Bay. I wish to acknowledge the outstanding and continuous improvement which has been evident at Kondari in recent years in its look, its service and its standards. Mr Terry Sullivan: Sounds like things are pretty good in Hervey Bay. Mr McNAMARA: Things are going really well in Hervey Bay at the moment. I am delighted to take that interjection. The member for Stafford should come and visit very soon. Mr Terry Sullivan: I have, and I would like to go again. Mr McNAMARA: Indeed. There is not sufficient time tonight to permit me to speak in detail about all of the winners of the awards, but I say well done particularly to the Colonial Log Cabin Resort, which won the Budget Accommodation Award, as well as the Alexander Luxury Apartments, which won the award for four- to five-star accommodation. It is vital that we have a diverse tourism industry offering all standards of accommodation, and we have that in Hervey Bay. Brian, Jill and Sarah Perry, who founded our whale watching industry in Hervey Bay, were also popular and deserving winners of the Whale Watch Operators Award. I congratulate Queensland Tourism Wholesalers, which won the General Tourism Services Award; Aussie Trax 4WD, which won the Transport Operators Award; and the Hervey Bay Boat Club, which won the Registered Club Award. Finally, I also recognise Shane Boyd and the Fraser Island Company for their very deserving win in the tour operators section. Shane and his family-owned business are a credit to our tourism industry. The time that Shane devotes to promoting the whole industry while running his own very busy company is a credit to him. He is an excellent driver of the regional board. I congratulate all winners.

Mr B. Puckering Mr NEIL ROBERTS (Nudgee—ALP) (7.25 p.m.): On 23 July I was pleased to officially name a new Department of Housing unit block in York Street in Nundah after a great Australian, Bill Puckering. This naming arises out of a belief of the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing, Robert Schwarten, that public buildings should be named after local identities who have helped shape their local communities. Bill Puckering is a fine Australian and worthy of this honour. He served during World War II in the Army's 7th Australian Field Ambulance of the 29th Brigade and served in France, Belgium, Milne Bay and New Guinea. Bill witnessed the horrors of war at its worst and watched many of his mates die as a result of war wounds. 2692 Adjournment 6 Aug 2002

In New Guinea, Bill befriended and worked with a local native stretcher bearer named Gwybolm in assisting wounded soldiers back to camp to receive medical treatment. During one such episode, Gwybolm was fatally wounded and died in Bill's arms. These are terrible memories for Bill and he does not like to talk about them, but it is important for us to know and understand the hardship and sacrifice of great men like Bill Puckering and it is fitting and gratifying to honour his sacrifices in this way. On behalf of Bill and his family, who were present at the naming ceremony, I sincerely thank Minister Robert Schwarten for agreeing to name the York Street units after him. Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 7.26 p.m.