19 May 2004 Legislative Assembly 1175 WEDNESDAY, 19 MAY 2004
Legislative Assembly Mr SPEAKER (Hon. R.K. Hollis, Redcliffe) read prayers and took the chair at 9.30 a.m.
PRIVILEGE
District Health Councils; Comments by Member for Burnett Hon. G.R. NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) (Minister for Health) (9.31 a.m.): I rise on a matter of privilege. I have disturbing information this morning about the conduct of a member of this House who has threatened a community volunteer who helps to run one of Queensland's independent district health councils. As most members would be aware, I have asked district health councils to take on a broader role this term in encouraging more Queenslanders to take an active role in the hospitals and health centres in their communities. This is about encouraging communities to have more ownership of their local health care services. Of their own accord, the chair of the Bundaberg District Health Council wrote to the editor of the Bundaberg News Mail last week on behalf of all district council members to refute constant and unsubstantiated claims by the member for Burnett, Mr Rob Messenger, that the Bundaberg Hospital was in crisis. The chairman, Mr Viv Chase, with the permission of members made public the phone numbers of every member of the council stating the council wished to take a proactive role in health care and would be happy to assist patients and local residents with any issue they maybe experiencing. On the same day, last Thursday, the member for Burnett, in what I can only describe as a cowardly and despicable act, phoned the council chairman and in a veiled threat against Mr Chase and his family called him an apologist for Queensland Health.The member for Burnett then went on to tell Mr Chase, and I quote from a letter from Mr Chase— I will now turn up the blowtorch and you will be included and I will contact all your members of Council to tell them the same. Government members: Shame! Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr NUTTALL: Queensland district health council members are volunteers. They are appointed under section 10 of the Health Services Act of 1991 and— Mr Seeney interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Deputy Leader of the Opposition, order! Mr NUTTALL: They take on a demanding and sometimes difficult role to help to improve health care in Queensland. They are ordinary people representing their local communities who it seems have become easy targets for threats and harassment from this member of parliament. They have neither the resources nor the money to defend themselves against this disgraceful behaviour, behaviour that has the potential to reflect badly on all members of this parliament. Mr Speaker, because of the seriousness of these allegations I would ask you to consider referring this matter to the Members' Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee. Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr Seeney interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Deputy Leader of the Opposition, this is my final warning to you. Mr NUTTALL: Because of the seriousness of these allegations I would ask you to consider referring this matter to the Members' Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee for its recommendation about possible disciplinary action, or referral to any other agency for investigation.
PRIVILEGE
ATSIC Construction, Rockhampton Hon. R.E. SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing) (9.35 a.m.): I rise on a matter of privilege. The Leader of the Opposition has stated in today's Courier- Mail that I should reveal matters related to the problems I was informed about regarding ATSIC construction in Rockhampton. 1176 Ministerial Statement 19 May 2004
I am happy to advise this House that the matters were referred to the CMC, contrary to the assertion, and involved absenteeism, bullying, use of departmental equipment for private work, payment of staff when they were absent, lack of adequate supervision of apprentices and a general lack of accountability. These resulted in disciplinary actions which caused the departure of one employee and the demotion of another. As I stated, the CMC was involved in both these cases, and they were resolved by May 2003. An independent consultant carried out the investigation and the department took the necessary action. I offered yesterday to provide the opposition with a full briefing on this matter. I am pleased that they are going to take it up. It is a pity that the Leader of the Opposition could not wait for that courtesy to be extended. I also want to state that contrary to the assertion in the Courier-Mail today, there will be no scrapping of the $18 million program. This money will still be available for the construction of Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander housing and the training of apprentices will simply be done in a different way.
PETITION The following honourable member has lodged a paper petition for presentation—
No Standing Zone, Currumbin Creek Road Mrs Stuckey from 611 petitioners requesting the House to urgently implement a no standing zone along the north side of Currumbin Creek Road to make entering and exiting the service station a less dangerous proposition.
PAPER Hon. P.D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.37 a.m.): I table for the House and for all members the government's response to the Leader of the Opposition's whinges about the 100 days of achievement of my government.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Budget Accommodation Buildings Hon. P.D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.37 a.m.): In August 2003 I tabled lists of budget accommodation buildings that did not comply with the 1 July 2003 fire safety requirements. I was concerned that many boarding houses did not meet new fire safety standards introduced as part of the government's response to the tragic Childers backpackers hostel fire. I take this opportunity to congratulate the Childers community on the recent opening of the new backpackers' accommodation. Fire safety requires vigilance and I urge owners and operators of budget accommodation to continue making every effort to comply with fire safety requirements. Today I seek leave to table and have incorporated in Hansard a list of 149 of those buildings that were non-compliant and which were named in August 2003 and those, as at 11 May 2004, which are now complying with fire safety standards. The Department of Emergency Services has provided the information to the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. I gave an undertaking last September to table such a list to recognise that many owners have improved their standards. The Department of Emergency Services has reinspected all buildings on the original lists and provided this data to the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. I am advised that 94 per cent of buildings that were on the August 2003 list and which remain bound by all three Building and Other Legislation Amendment Acts, the BOLA standards, now comply. This is a big improvement but I remind building owners and operators that these laws are in place for a very good reason: to ensure the safety and well-being of hostel guests and staff. Also identified separately are 23 establishments built or upgraded since 1992 and which are compliant with fire safety requirements. These establishments must also comply with the building code of Australia and are not bound to meet all the standards that came into effect on 1 July 2003. Unless the owner produces a certificate of clarification, the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service classifies buildings as pre-1992 and are therefore required to meet fire safety regulations under the BOLA. The next date for increased fire safety measures is 1 July 2005. Budget accommodation owners and operators will need to meet these standards by the due date. Improved safety for residents will only be achieved if owners, local governments and government agencies each play their part. Owners need to inform themselves of the requirements and governments need to provide owners with assistance. I now seek to incorporate the list supplied by the Department of Emergency Services in Hansard for the interest of all members and the community. I also seek to incorporate an explanation of how the BOLA works and the difference between pre-1992 and post 1992. Leave granted. 19 May 2004 Ministerial Statement 1177
Buildings Tabled as Non-Compliant in August 2003; BOLA Buildings—Now Compliant as at 11 May 2004 = 14. Premises No. Street St Suburb P/C 1 139 GLADSTONE HIGHGATE HILL 139 GLADSTONE RD HIGHGATE HILL 4101 2 14 MORRIS HIGHGATE HILL 14 MORRIS ST HIGHGATE HILL 4101 3 15 BRUNSWICK FORTITUDE VALLEY 15 BRUNSWICK ST FORTITUDE VALLEY 4006 4 207 SIR FRED SCHONELL ST LUCIA 207 SIR FRED DVE ST LUCIA 4067 SCHONELL 5 21 DEMPSEY MOUNT ISA 21 DEMPSEY ST MOUNT ISA 4825 6 214 ARTHUR NEWSTEAD 214 ARTHUR ST NEWSTEAD 4006 7 23 OLD COLLEGE GATTON 23 OLD COLLEGE RD GATTON 4343 8 244 BOWEN NEW FARM 244 BOWEN TCE NEW FARM 4005 9 25 ABBOTSFORD BOWEN HILLS 25 ABBOTSFORD RD BOWEN HILLS 4006 10 256 BOWEN NEW FARM 256 BOWEN TCE NEW FARM 4005 11 290 KENT NEWSTEAD 290 KENT ST NEWSTEAD 4006 12 32 KENNIGO SPRING HILL 32 KENNIGO ST SPRING HILL 4000 13 36 ALFRED FORTITUDE VALLEY 36 ALFRED ST FORTITUDE VALLEY 4006 14 365 BOWEN NEW FARM 365 BOWEN TCE NEW FARM 4005 15 4 THOMSON EARLVILLE 4 THOMSON ST EARLVILLE 4870 16 42 ALFRED FORTITUDE VALLEY 42 ALFRED ST FORTITUDE VALLEY 4006 17 577 IPSWICH ANNERLEY 577 IPSWICH RD ANNERLEY 4103 18 59 AMELIA FORTITUDE VALLEY 59 AMELIA ST FORTITUDE VALLEY 4006 19 61 SYDNEY NEW FARM 61 SYDNEY ST NEW FARM 4005 20 611 BRUNSWICK NEW FARM 611 BRUNSWICK ST NEW FARM 4005 21 634 WICKHAM FORTITUDE VALLEY 634 WICKHAM ST FORTITUDE VALLEY 4006 22 64 GROVE ALBION 64 GROVE ST ALBION 4010 23 67 RICHMOND MORNINGSIDE 67 RICHMOND RD MORNINGSIDE 4170 24 69 KINGSHOLME NEWSTEAD 69 KINGSHOLME ST NEWSTEAD 4006 25 80 LADE COORPAROO 80 LADE ST COORPAROO 4151 26 88 TERRACE NEW FARM 88 TERRACE ST NEW FARM 4005 27 9 LAMINGTON DUTTON PARK 9 LAMINGTON ST DUTTON PARK 4102 28 9 TAYLOR WOOLLOONGABBA 9 TAYLOR ST WOOLLOONGABBA 4102 29 9 WREN BOWEN HILLS 9 WREN ST BOWEN HILLS 4006 30 APOLLONIAN HOTEL & ROOMS 19 LAGUNA ST BOREEN POINT 4565 31 ARAMAC HOTEL 79 GORDON ST ARAMAC 4726 32 ARTISIANS BLOCK & SLEEPER 62 MARIAN ST MOUNT ISA 4825 33 ASCOT HOTEL 177 MUSGRAVE ST ROCKHAMPTON 4700 34 ASHGROVE FLATS 191 WATERWORKS RD ASHGROVE 4060 35 ASYLUM BACKPACKERS 149 GRAFTON ST CAIRNS 4870 36 BACKPACKERS IN PARADISE 40 PENINSULAR DVE SURFERS PARADISE 4217 37 BARCOO HOTEL 95 SHAMROCK ST BLACKALL 4472 38 BLACKALL ARTS CENTRE HAWTHORN & ST BLACKALL 4472 ROSE 39 BRADLEY HOUSE 218 HUME ST TOOWOOMBA 4350 40 BUCHANAN HOUSE 181 BUCHAN ST CAIRNS 4870 41 CAIRNS BEACH HOUSE 239 SHERIDAN ST CAIRNS 4870 42 CARINYAH HOSTEL 90 DENISON ST ROCKHAMPTON 4700 43 CARLTON HOTEL 66 ELLENA ST MARYBOROUGH 4650 44 CARROLLEE HOTEL 4 KING ST KINGAROY 4610 45 CENTRAL HOTEL 140 HIGH ST STANTHORPE 4380 46 CHERRABAH HOMESTEAD RESORT 0 KEOGHS RD ELBOW VALLEY 4370 47 CIVIC GUEST HOUSE 262 WALKER ST TOWNSVILLE 4810 48 CLUB WHITSUNDAY 346 SHUTE RD AIRLIE BEACH 4802 HARBOUR 49 COALSON LODGE 180 ERIC ST GOODNA 4300 1178 Ministerial Statement 19 May 2004
50 COMMERCIAL HOTEL 11 MARYLAND ST STANTHORPE 4380 51 COMMERCIAL HOTEL 59 HERBERT ST ALLORA 4362 52 COMMERCIAL HOTEL 119 OAK ST BARCALDINE 4725 53 COMMERCIAL HOTEL 0 CAPELLA ST CLERMONT 4721 54 COMMONWEALTH HOTEL 46 ALLEN ST TOWNSVILLE 4810 55 COOLANGATTA SANDS HOTEL 1 MCLEAN ST COOLANGATTA 4225 56 CORAL LODGE B & B 32 HALE ST TOWNSVILLE 4810 57 COUNTRY CLUB HOTEL 26 MARYLAND ST STANTHORPE 4380 58 COURT HOUSE HOTEL 120 GILL ST CHARTERS TOWERS 4820 59 CRITERION HOTEL 1 RAILWAY ST HELIDON 4344 60 CRITERION HOTEL 0 SHAKESPEARE ST ALPHA 4724 61 ENGINEERS ARMS B & B 115 MARCH ST MARYBOROUGH 4650 62 EVANDA 16 BRIDE ST WYNNUM 4178 63 EXCHANGE HOTEL 18 BRUFORD ST MUTTABURRA 4732 64 FLORIANA GUEST HOUSE 183 ESPLANADE CAIRNS 4870 65 GIN GIN HOTEL 66 MULGRAVE ST GIN GIN 4671 66 GLOBE HOTEL 149 OAK ST BARCALDINE 4725 67 GOLDEN SPUR HOTEL 2 BLAKE ST PROSTON 4613 68 GOLDEN WEST HOTEL 17 ST MARY ST ISISFORD 4731 69 GORDONVALE HOTEL 82 NORMAN ST GORDONVALE 4865 70 GRAND HOTEL 80 CAMPBELL ST OAKEY 4401 71 GRAND HOTEL 10 BOONARA ST GOOMERI 4601 72 GREAT NORTHERN HOTEL 500 FLINDERS ST TOWNSVILLE 4810 73 HIVESVILLE HOTEL 1 MAIN ST HIVESVILLE 4612 74 ISABELLA COTTAGE 5 BRIDGE ST STANTHORPE 4380 75 JOE MCGINNESS 234 SPENCE ST CAIRNS 4870 76 JORDAN VALLEY HOTEL 0 DARWIN ST JERICHO 4702 77 JUNDAH HOTEL 10 DICKSON ST JUNDAH 4736 78 KEATING'S GUEST HOUSE 7 ELECTRA ST BUNDABERG 4670 79 KENDAL 86 WAVERLEY ST FORTITUDE VALLEY 4006 80 KILKIVAN HOTEL MOTEL 19 BLIGH ST KILKIVAN 4600 81 KINGSLEY HOUSE 248 DENISON ST ROCKHAMPTON 4700 82 LARRIKIN LODGE 32 PEEL ST MACKAY 4740 83 LEICHHARDT HOTEL 52 MORGAN ST MOUNT MORGAN 4714 84 LINDEN LEA COTTAGE 54 HALLORAN DRV THULIMBAH 4376 85 LONSDALE HOUSE NB: In August 2003, building 52 LONSDALE ST GULLIVER 4812 name was unknown 86 LYCEUM HOTEL 131 EAGLE ST LONGREACH 4730 87 MICA LODGE 135B RUSSELL ST TOOWOOMBA 4350 88 MT TYSON HOTEL 21 BUTLER ST TULLY 4854 89 MUSCATEL COTTAGE 7 BRIDGE ST STANTHORPE 4380 90 NORTH GREGORY HOTEL 67 ELDERSLIE ST WINTON 4735 91 OCEAN/WILDERNESS LODGE NB: In August 354 SHUTE RD AIRLIE BEACH 4802 2003, this was tabled as ‘Ocean Lodge’ HARBOUR 92 OMARA'S HOTEL 45 MARYLAND ST STANTHORPE 4380 93 PALM COVE RETREAT LOT COOK HWY PALM COVE 4879 2 94 PALM LODGE 185 HIGH ST SOUTHPORT 4215 95 PEACOCK BOARDING HOUSE 27 ACKERS ST HERMIT PARK 4812 96 POST OFFICE HOTEL BARKLY HWY CAMOOWEAL 4828 97 POST OFFICE HOTEL MOTEL 25 CARE ST CLONCURRY 4824
19 May 2004 Ministerial Statement 1179
98 PRINCE OF WALES HOTEL 34 MAIN ST PROSERPINE 4800 99 PRINCE OF WALES HOTEL 63 SHAMROCK ST BLACKALL 4472 100 QCWA HOSTEL 12 ARCHER ST ROCKHAMPTON 4700 101 QUEENSLANDER HOTEL 61 TARGO ST BUNDABERG 4670 102 RAILWAY HOTEL 77 OAK ST BARCALDINE 4725 103 RED ROO HOTEL 100 ADELAIDE ST MARYBOROUGH 4650 104 REEF LODGE 4 WICKHAM ST TOWNSVILLE 4810 105 REEF OCEANA 147 SHUTE RD AIRLIE BEACH 4802 HARBOUR 106 RIPCORD SKYDIVERS 2 CURTIN RD GLENORE GROVE 4342 107 ROSANDA LODGE NB: In August 2003, building 263 ENOGGERA RD NEWMARKET 4051 name was unknown 108 ROYAL CARRANGARRA 25 ARTHUR ST TAMBO 4478 109 ROYAL HOTEL 2 RAILWAY ST GATTON 4343 110 ROYAL HOTEL 4 LYONS ST MUNDUBBERA 4626 111 ROYAL HOTEL 111 EAGLE ST LONGREACH 4730 112 SAILVIEW HOSTEL 379 ESPLANADE MANLY 4179 113 SANDRA WARD LODGE 143 GEDDES ST TOOWOOMBA 4350 114 SEAVIEW HOTEL 65 PIER AVE SHORNCLIFFE 4017 115 SERENITY HOUSE 4 HELEN ST MOUNT ISA 4825 116 SHAKESPEARE HOTEL 95 OAK ST BARCALDINE 4725 117 SALTURA 92 WEST ST MOUNT ISA 4825 118 SOVEREIGN HOTEL 53A PRATTEN ST WARWICK 4370 119 SPRINGBROOKE FARM NB: In August 2003, this 0 BURNETT HWY GOOMERI 4601 was tabled as ‘Springsure Farm’ 120 STANLEY LODGE 11 WOTTON ST AITKENVALE 4814 121 STAR INN 10 MARIAN ST MOUNT ISA 4825 122 STONEHENGE HOTEL 0 STRATFORD ST STONEHENGE 4730 123 SUNCOAST BACKPACKERS LODGE 50 PARKER ST MAROOCHYDORE 4558 124 SUNSEEKER 10 BLACKWOOD ST TOWNSVILLE 4810 125 SUNSET STRIP BUDGET RESORT 199 BOUNDARY ST COOLANGATTA 4225 126 SURF 'N' SUN BACKPACKERS 3323 SURFERS BVD SURFERS PARADISE 4217 PARADISE 127 SURFERS PARADISE BACKPACKERS 2837 GOLD COAST HWY SURFERS PARADISE 4217 128 TATTERSALLS HOTEL 78 ELDERSLIE ST WINTON 4735 129 THE AVENUE GUEST HOUSE 8 THE AVE HERMIT PARK 4812 130 THE BLUE COW HOTEL 57 HERBERT ST ALLORA 4362 131 THE CHALET 0 CHELMER ST DALRYMPLE HTS 4757 132 THE SAVOY 4 PLUMB ST TULLY 4854 133 TOWN LODGE 161 CRANE ST LONGREACH 4730 134 TOWNSVILLE TRANSIT CENTRE PLUME & ST TOWNSVILLE 4810 PALMER 135 TREKKERS BACKPACKERS 22 WHITE ST SOUTHPORT 4215 136 UNION HOTEL 35 CORONATION DVE BLACKALL 4472 137 UNIVERSAL HOTEL 60A GRAFTON ST WARWICK 4370 138 VACY HALL LODGE 135 RUSSELL ST TOOWOOMBA 4350 139 VILLA MATTEO 12 WHITE ST SOUTHPORT 4215 140 WALLANGARRA HOTEL 58 TENTERFIELD ST WALLANGARRA 4383 141 WANDERERS INN 8 BLACKWOOD ST TOWNSVILLE 4810 142 WAVERLEY 25 SUSSEX ST HIGHGATE HILL 4101 143 WESTERN STAR HOTEL 15 ALBERT ST WINDORAH 4481 144 WESTERNLINE HOTEL 113 CAMPBELL ST OAKEY 4401
1180 Ministerial Statement 19 May 2004
145 WHITE LION HOTEL 37 WALKER ST MARYBOROUGH 4650 146 WHITSUNDAY WANDERERS NB: In August 2003, 336 SHUTE RD AIRLIE BEACH 4802 this was tabled as ‘Koala Beach Backpacker’ HARBOUR 147 WOODSTOCK MANOR 4 BRIMBLECOMB ST FOREST HILL 4342 148 WYREME (B) REAR BUILDING 55 KENNIGO ST SPRING HILL 4000 149 YARAKA HOTEL 0 JARLEY ST YARAKA 4702
Buildings Tabled as Non-Compliant with BOLA in August 2003—
Now Assessed as Post-1992 and compliant as at 11 May 2004 = 23
Premises No. Street St Suburb P/C 48 THOMAS WEST END BRISBANE 48 THOMAS ST WEST END (BRIS) 4101 BRITISH ARMS 70 SEAWORLD DRV MAIN BEACH 4217 CUMQUAT HOUSE 10 SALISBURY RD IPSWICH 4305 GIRRAWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL LODGE 49 PYRAMIDS RD BALLANDEAN 4382 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK A) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK B) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK C) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK D) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK E) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK F) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK G) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK H) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK I) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK J) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK K) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK L) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 MT ISA IRISH ASSOC. ACCOM (BLOCK N) 2 23RD AVE MOUNT ISA 4825 RAINBOW HOSTEL 28 BARKLY ST CAMOOWEAL 4828 SHELL MOUNT ISA TRUCK PORT 203 BARKLY HWY MOUNT ISA 4825 STILLWATERS 173 WARDOO ST SOUTHPORT 4215 THE LOFT AT GIRRAWEEN 2157 PYRAMIDS RD WYBERBA 4382 TOP OF THE TOWN ACCOMMODATION 10 HIGH ST STANTHORPE 4380 TRAVELLERS HAVEN 75 SPENCE ST MOUNT ISA 4825
BOLA amended three Acts including the Building Act 1975, the Fire and Rescue Service Act 1990 and Local Government Act 1993. BOLA created a new fire safety standard for the buildings built before 1992.
Installations for Pre-1992 Buildings (including Early Warning and Emergency Lighting)
Section 12H of the Building Act 1975 requires that "all budget accommodation buildings built, approved or applied for before 1 January 1992" must conform with the Fire Safety Standard which was introduced through the Building and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2002 (BOLA), which includes the installation of emergency lighting and early warning systems, by 1 July 2003.
Installations for Post-1992 Buildings
Budget Accommodation Buildings built after 1 January 1992 are required to comply with the Building Code of Australia as adopted by the Building Act 1975. The standard introduced comprehensive fire safety measures including Early Warning and Emergency Lighting requirements. Post 1992 buildings also come under the BOLA Act 2002 to the extent that they have to have a fire safety management plan. 19 May 2004 Ministerial Statement 1181
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Economy Hon. P.D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.40 a.m.): Queenslanders can give themselves a pat on the back. We have passed a milestone in job creation. Since June 1998 Queensland has gained more than 250,000 new jobs—256,700 to April 2004, to be precise. More than 250,000! This fact from the Australian Bureau of Statistics is yet another sign that our vibrant business community and skilled work force are responding to the government's economic policies. In the past 12 months our employment growth has continued to set the pace for the rest of Australia. More than four out of 10 full-time jobs created in Australia over the year were in Queensland. That is more than double our population share. In April our trend unemployment rate was 6.2 per cent, still the lowest in over 21 years. Compare that to the unemployment rate of 9.5 per cent delivered by the former coalition government. We have already come a long way since those dark days when so many Queenslanders were denied the opportunity to work. Other recent indications point to Queensland's economic activity leading the nation. Surveys of the business conditions and trade performance indicate ongoing economic strength. The latest National Australia Bank business survey reported business conditions were strongest in Queensland and Tasmania. The quarterly report on trade strategy performance for the March quarter shows that our ambitious trade strategy is on target and, by some measures, even ahead of schedule. During the period we exceeded our exporter creation target. There were 45 new exporters, taking the total since the start of the strategy in October 2001 to 243—the target was 240. We are also on track to achieve a 50 per cent increase in the value of knowledge intensive exports over the five-year life of the strategy. Our running target is a 12 per cent increase, but we are tracking at 17.4 per cent. I table for the information of the House the Premier of Queensland's Export Awards for 2004 applications and background information. We are seeking to reward exporters. I also table a briefing that my various departments gave in relation to Bio 2004, which is coming up shortly and which is also a key to our export strategy. I seek to incorporate the rest of the details of my ministerial statement in Hansard Leave granted. The slight relaxation of the ratio of exports to Gross State Product was similar to the trend in the rest of Australia, although Queensland's share of 21.5% was better than the national figure of 19.6%. The trend was due to a depreciating Australian dollar, drought and uncertainty over the economic impact of the Iraq conflict. However Australian Bureau of Statistics retail trade data show that annual Queensland retail trade growth continued to exceed that of all other States in the year to March. In annual terms, Queensland retail turnover grew 12.7%—well ahead of 7.1% for the rest of Australia. The Pulse Survey showed a slight easing in business conditions in the March quarter—but it was still consistent with solid growth. And while Queensland building approvals have declined in recent months, our annual growth of 6 % remains well above the rate for Australia—where approvals fell. However, we will not take our eye of the ball. The international economy is a hard task master and we need to keep improving labour force skills and enhancing economic infrastructure if we are to continue delivering jobs and prosperity. The Federal Government expects the national economic growth rate to slow slightly in 2004-05, with a relatively static national unemployment rate. The Federal Budget paints an economy where domestic activity slows and the impact is cushioned somewhat by strong export growth. The risks for the outlook identified by the Federal Government include high oil prices and unseasonal farm conditions. For some reason the risk to the economy of further interest rate rises doesn't get a run in the Federal Budget. But clearly this is a risk that cannot be ignored—nothing destroys spending power and investment as quickly as interest rate hikes. The Deputy Premier and Treasurer will release the Queensland Budget on15 June. This will provide a comprehensive update of the economic outlook for this State. I remain confident that we will continue to be the engine room of Australian growth.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Hear and Say Centre Hon. P.D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.42 a.m.): I am delighted today to detail that the state's deaf children will be better off. The state government will fund the Hear and Say Centre for Deaf Children with annual recurrent funding of $270,000. This is a massive 1182 Ministerial Statement 19 May 2004 and deserved lift from the present $30,000 a year. I rang those at the centre this morning and they were delighted. This money will be used to support its education program. The funding will be administered through the Department of Education and the Arts. This is great news for the centre and also for the deaf community. Hear and Say provides intervention for deaf children known as auditory verbal therapy—AVT. AVT extends from traditional methods of assisting deaf children to learn to speak through listening—often by embracing new technologies which have not always been accepted in the deaf community, like cochlear implants. This has a special link in integrating listening into the home and preschool environment. Today's funding is also recognition of the hard work of Hear and Say Centre founders and, in particular, clinical director, Dimity Dornan. Dimity was named the 2003 Queensland Australian of the Year for her work with children who are deaf. For most of us, deafness is an issue we hope does not come our way—for us personally or for our children—but it is obvious when it does it is a time of needing support and care and also caring people. To Dimity and those caring people involved we hope this funding will assist in keeping up the good work. I know that the Minister for Public Works has something further to say about this later.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Janette Turner Hospital Hon. P.D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.44 a.m.): I am also delighted to announce to the House that at an official function at lunch time in Parliament House I will have the honour of appointing Janette Turner Hospital as an honorary ambassador for Queensland. This will be a great pleasure, especially since the expatriate author has now received due recognition in Australia. She is wonderful human being. I seek to incorporate details of her career and the rest of my ministerial statement in Hansard. Leave granted. In fact, when Janette won the Queensland Premier's Literary Award for Best Fiction Book in October 2003—for Due Preparations for the Plague—it was her first major Australian literary prize. I am delighted that since winning that award she has gone on to win the Patrick White Award for lifetime literary achievement. The honorary ambassadorship will represent recognition from the people of Queensland for Janette's contribution to literature as an acclaimed and prolific writer. The presence of her parents, Adrian and Elsie Turner, her brother David and sister-in-law Nancy will make the occasion all the more special. Writers and other creative people are essential in our Smart State—they have the power to challenge the status quo and help keep democracy ticking. And Members familiar with Janette's novels will know Queensland has played a big part in her work and her life. She was born in Melbourne but her family moved to Brisbane when she was seven, and she spent her formative years living in Newmarket Road. She attended Wilston State School and Mitchelton State High School—where she was dux. (And I am delighted that the current principals of both these schools have accepted invitations to this afternoon's function.) After studying at the University of Queensland and Kelvin Grove Teachers College, she was posted to teach at Mossman High. There she taught English for a year before being transferred back to home turf, to the newly-opened Newmarket State High School. On a Methodist Youth Camp she met her future husband, Clifford Hospital. Cliff's studies took them overseas—first to the United States, where Janette began writing. She has also lived in India and Canada and now resides in Queensland's sister state in the United States: South Carolina (which also has a Smart State strategy). Janette is Professor of English and Distinguished Writer in Residence at the University of South Carolina. Her work—including the internationally acclaimed The Ivory Swing, Borderline, Charades, The Last Magician, Oyster and Due Preparations for the Plague—has been translated into twelve languages. As an Honorary Ambassador for Queensland, she will be in the distinguished company of Mariko Bando, Arthur Beetson, Steven Bradbury, Richard Branson, Peter Carey, Michael Doohan, John Durst, Allan Langer, Dick Johnson, Patrick Rafter and Vicki Wilson. I am confident the House will join me in wishing Janette Turner Hospital good fortune as she represents Queensland as an honorary ambassador. 19 May 2004 Ministerial Statement 1183
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Middle East Tourism Hon. P.D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.44 a.m.): Tourism contributes $6.3 billion to Queensland's economy and supports more than 150,000 jobs—more than nine per cent of the work force. The Middle East is an important market and trading partner and holds huge potential as a source of tourists and students. We have a very positive year in tourism. I know that all members will be interested in this. I seek to incorporate the details of that in Hansard. Leave granted. Tourism contributes $6.3 billion to Queensland's economy and supports more than 150,000 jobs—more than 9% of our work force. Destinations across Queensland have reported record holiday results in 2004, and we continue to be Australia's number one tourist state. Tourism is a terrific industry—and the government is determined to see it grow even bigger and more buoyant. On my recent trade and investment mission to Israel, Europe and the United Kingdom I declared 2004 Queensland's Year of the International Tourist. A central aim is to boost the 1.8 million international tourists who visit the Smart State. The Middle East is an important market and trading partner, and it holds huge potential as a source of tourists and students. In the year to June 2003 more than 50,000 tourists arrived from the Middle East and North Africa. Tourists from the Middle East are typically high yield and long stay visitors—and their numbers are set to increase dramatically. Last year Emirates, one of the fastest growing airlines in the world, launched flights to Brisbane from Dubai. The carrier has an extensive network and these services provide valuable connections into Queensland, particularly from the Middle East. Daily flights into Brisbane are a vote of confidence from Emirates. Tourism Queensland has just participated in the Arabian Travel Market—universally recognised as the leading travel industry event for the Middle East and pan Arab region. Buyers, travel writers, and industry representatives from 95 countries attended, giving Queensland a fantastic promotional opportunity. Our "product" included: Dreamworld, Harbourtown Shopping Centre, Holiday Pacific, Palazzo Versace, Royal Pines Resort, Alawaha Tourism and Lawand Tourism. Tourism Queensland reported excellent feedback. In partnership with Cairns Port Authority and Tourism Tropical North Queensland, Tourism Queensland recently presented a detailed business case to senior Emirates executives, outlining what we believe to be a commercially sustainable route development opportunity for Dubai—Cairns flights. This would be yet another coup for Queensland. Mr Speaker, a vibrant and viable tourism industry must dedicate itself to developing new markets. We are working with industry partners to maintain the industry's vitality and ensure we are renowned as the best holiday and leisure destination in the world.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Ministerial Motor Vehicles Hon. P.D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.45 a.m.): Yesterday in a ministerial statement on freedom of information, I showed how my government is the most open and accountable in Queensland's history. Today, I continue to demonstrate our accountability by tabling documents relating to accidents involving ministerial vehicles. On 12 May, I tabled 28 documents relating to accidents and repairs to ministerial vehicles, electorate or private vehicles and ministerial staff vehicles between 10 November 2003 and 24 December 2003. At the time I also tabled a summary relating to those documents. In my summary document I advised the House that I included information regarding four repairs undertaken during the period even though the documents did not arrive until after 24 December. That is how accountable we are. For the information of the House and to assist in cross-referencing, I now table 22 documents relating to this summary, including 11 new documents that were not caught by the FOI application and which relate to the four additional repairs where documents arrived later. That is marked as A. In addition, I will now table for the information of members, documents supporting the answer I gave to question on notice No. 44 in relation to ministerial vehicles. This level of accountability and openness has never happened in Queensland's history before. In other words, I am tabling all the relevant documents relating to all the accidents involving ministerial cars. They comprise 254 documents relating to accidents in ministerial vehicles from 2001 onwards. I table 50 documents relating to the Education Minister's office, which are marked B. I table eight 1184 Ministerial Statement 19 May 2004 documents relating to the Employment Minister's office, which are marked C. I table 20 documents relating to the Health Minister's office, which are marked D. I table 21 documents relating to the State Development Minister's office, which are marked E. I table six documents relating to the Police Minister's office, which are marked F. These six documents relate to the office of Minister Tom Barton not when he was State Development Minister but when he was Police Minister. I table nine documents relating to the Transport Minister's office, which are marked G. I table 33 documents relating to the Attorney-General's office, which are marked H. I table 26 documents relating to the Environment Minister's office, which are marked I. I table 11 documents relating to the Primary Industries Minister's office, which are marked J. I table 17 documents relating to the Tourism and Racing Minister's office, which are marked K. I table eight documents relating to the Local Government Minister's office, which are marked L. I table five documents relating to the Emergency Services Minister's office, which are marked M. I table nine documents relating to the Industrial Relations Minister's office, which are marked N. I table eight documents relating to the Innovation Minister's office, which are marked O. I also table additional documents relating to the opposition office, which are marked P. No government has ever tabled such information in the history of Queensland. We are the most open and accountable government in the history of the state. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the Minister for Education, I ask that, in accordance with the procedures of the House, the Minister for Health write to me on the matter of privilege that he raised earlier.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Major Brisbane Festivals Pty Ltd
Hon. A.M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education and the Arts) (9.48 a.m.): I welcome the appointment of Michael Snelling, a Brisbane based leader in the arts nationally and internationally, who was appointed chief executive officer of Major Brisbane Festivals Pty Ltd yesterday. Major Brisbane Festivals is a joint initiative of the Queensland government and the Brisbane City Council that was set up in June 2003 to more effectively plan and take a leadership role in festivals in Brisbane and south-east Queensland. Michael Snelling is the Director of the Institute of Modern Art at the Judith Wright Centre of Contemporary Arts and was selected by the board of Major Brisbane Festivals from a competitive group of national and international contenders. He has held significant national positions, including president of the Contemporary Arts Organisations of Australia, chair of the Asialink Visual Arts Committee and is currently a member of the ABC Arts Advisory Committee. Michael Snelling is also chair of the New Media Arts Board of the Australia Council and is a member of the Queensland Indigenous Arts Marketing Export Agency. I look forward to the Riverfestival from 27 August to 5 September and the Energex Brisbane Festival from 3 September to 2 October under Michael Snelling's astute leadership, along with that of the artistic directors. I am also delighted to announce that this year the Brisbane Festival ventures into new territory— not only artistically but geographically. The festival, held every two years, has delivered on the Queensland government's challenge to give more Queenslanders the chance to experience this world- class event. In 2004 it extends into south-east Queensland with events in Toowoomba, the Gold Coast, Ipswich, Nambour, Logan and Kallangur. In 2004 the festival will present 17 new productions, nine of which are home grown or involving Queensland companies and artists. Brisbane Festival 2004 also sees the end of an era with legendary artistic director Tony Gould delivering his fifth and last Brisbane Festival. Tony has been the artistic director since the first Brisbane Festival in 1996, and I think that everybody would agree that he has done an outstanding job in that role. This year's Riverfestival by new artistic director Jonathan Parsons will further consolidate its position as one of the most innovative international festivals with its focus on local environment. This year's festival will be a mix of those popular traditions of Riverfestival such as Riverfire and Riverfeast— that is, dining on the bridges—along with innovative new programming. As the major financial contributor to the Brisbane Festival and a major contributor to Riverfestival along with the Brisbane City Council, the Queensland government recognises the importance of the arts to a Smart State both for the pleasure and challenges that it brings to audiences and as a catalyst for economic growth. These festivals will create thousands of jobs for artists and arts workers and generate millions in economic activity. They will also provide exciting professional development opportunities for local artists, stir the passions of festival-goers and build on Brisbane's reputation as a dynamic arts and cultural centre. I encourage all members to patronise both festivals. 19 May 2004 Ministerial Statement 1185
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Unemployment Initiatives Hon. T.A. BARTON (Waterford—ALP) (Minister for Employment, Training and Industrial Relations) (9.51 a.m.): This morning I have further good news on the jobs front—namely, how the state government's Breaking the Unemployment Cycle initiative is delivering for job seekers, particularly the long-term unemployed. The Department of Employment and Training has conducted a survey of people who passed through jobs projects funded by this initiative around Queensland, and the results are very good. We contacted people who participated in projects that were funded by the Community Jobs Plan and the Community Employment Assistance Program. As many members will know, these two programs exist to revitalise people who have been jobless for longer than 12 months or are at risk of being so. The Community Jobs Plan funds community organisations and councils who employ these disadvantaged job seekers for up to six months on projects that benefit their communities. The Community Employment Assistance Program funds community organisations that work with disadvantaged job seekers, offering them training, personal development, job search and other assistance in their hunt for work. Between them, these two programs have assisted more than 34,000 people right across Queensland since Breaking the Unemployment Cycle began in October 1998. In producing these figures, we look at how participants are getting on three months after their project ends. However, my department also surveys these participants 12 months after the project finishes, and I am happy to report that the 12-month figure reveals an even more successful outcome. For instance, the proportion of survey participants who had been in a Community Jobs Plan project and were employed after three months is 45 per cent. After 12 months, that figure rises to 59 per cent. Overall, 52 per cent were in either employment or training at three months, rising to 61 per cent at 12 months. There is a similar story with the Community Employment Assistance Program. Some 51 per cent of respondents had jobs after three months, which rose to 60 per cent after 12 months. Overall, 61 per cent were either in employment or training after three months, rising to 67 per cent after 12 months. I am pleased to say that our results compare more than favourably with Commonwealth programs. For example, the federal government's Work for the Dole program, which resembles the Community Jobs Plan, has reported employment outcomes of 21.1 per cent. One does not have to be a statistician to understand what is happening. Breaking the Unemployment Cycle is working for people long after it officially finishes. Remember, these are severely disadvantaged job seekers. They were people going nowhere with the assistance and programs and attitudes that had come their way. But now their lives have been turned around. This is a positive result for all of Queensland.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
ICT Industry Hon. R.E. SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing) (9.54 a.m.): I am pleased to announce that the second round of the Beattie government's Technology Survival Skills program will be launched this month. This $1 million commitment over four years provides grants of up to $10,000 each to not-for-profit organisations right across the state. This program funds projects to help Queenslanders who are disadvantaged in their access to information technology to undertake training and become more computer competent. Despite the significant achievements made in the IT industry in recent years, some people in our community—because of their age, income, location or disability—have not had the same opportunities to develop these new skills. This program is part of the Beattie government's commitment to ensure all Queenslanders benefit from our Smart State agenda. Projects that can be funded through the grants could include developing new resources such as a newsletter or a web site, or a training and skills transfer program such as a mentoring group or train-the-trainer scheme. I know in the first round announced by the former IT minister, Paul Lucas, a $9,500 grant was awarded to the Worklink Employment Support Group in Cairns to fund a computer training program for around 25 of its clients. The member for Cairns advises me that that has been very successful, and I thank the minister for that feedback. This community organisation assists people with a psychiatric disability or mental illness to find jobs. Its project concentrated on helping its clients gain job-search computer skills and to develop a more professional resume. Clients also gained benefits to their personal lives through new skills such as using emails and banking online. I encourage all not-for-profit organisations to apply for the grants, which will open at the end of the May and close on 26 July. In total, $250,000 will be provided this round. Application forms will be available from the department's web site. 1186 Ministerial Statement 19 May 2004
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Cross-Border Crime; National DNA Database Hon. J.C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Police and Corrective Services) (9.56 a.m.): The Beattie government is determined to give police the power to track down criminals who work across state borders or think they can hide in another jurisdiction. This year the government will introduce laws targeting cross-border crime, removing the need for police to gain interstate authorities to continue their investigations without the risk of delay or the loss of potential evidence. I am pleased to report that we are taking further steps to increase cooperation with other states and enhance the ability of police to track down criminals and solve more cases. I have just signed agreements with South Australia and Tasmania, opening up the exchange of DNA samples. This comes on top of agreements with Western Australia and, more recently, the Northern Territory. Discussions are also continuing with other states. Queensland has been a leader in negotiating these exchanges for the use of DNA in the fight against crime after an agreement reached in 2002 at the Australasian Police Ministers Council. We are giving police another tool to tighten the net around criminals, clear cases and even link crimes and the offenders. Now that Queensland Police have the power to match DNA samples with those taken at crime scenes in South Australia, Tasmania, Western Australia and the Northern Territory, the long arm of the law has just got a little longer. Criminals will no longer be able to run and hide across the border or even across the country. The final details of how the exchanges will take place are currently being finalised. However, the Beattie government's commitment to smart policing does not begin or end there. As members are no doubt aware, $2.6 million has been allocated over the next three years to link the Queensland Police Service to the national DNA database and allow for more testing, with $11 million committed to clear the backlog at the John Tonge Centre. The Queensland Police Service is already consulting with representatives from all Australian jurisdictions regarding the national DNA database. This marks another significant step in improving the clear-up rate of unsolved crimes. As I have said before, cross-border crime is a growing problem with drugs, guns and the proceeds of crime moved in and out of states. Presenting a united front with other jurisdictions in the fight against crime will benefit not only Queenslanders but all Australians.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Legal Services Commissioner Hon. R.J. WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (9.59 a.m.): This week throughout Australia we are celebrating Law Week—an annual event that aims to promote greater understanding within the community of the law, the legal system and the legal profession. It is appropriate in national Law Week that I can advise members that we will soon begin a new phase in the history of our legal profession in Queensland. Next Monday, 24 May, Queensland's first Legal Services Commissioner will begin his role. This position was established by the Legal Profession Act 2003 as part of a range of reforms bringing greater independence, accountability and transparency to the regulation of the profession in Queensland. Last night this parliament passed the Legal Profession Bill 2004, which will confirm the establishment of the Legal Services Commission. These reforms ensure that there are controls on the conduct and competence of lawyers that respond to the concerns of Queenslanders. I am pleased to advise members that Queensland's first Legal Services Commissioner will be John Briton. Mr Briton is uniquely qualified to take on this role. He is not a lawyer and legal qualifications were not essential for the role. However, Mr Briton is a former Queensland Anti-Discrimination Commissioner who has experience in many facets of dispute management and public advocacy. He has a long and impressive record of management, dispute resolution, investigation and advocacy. Over the past seven years, he has been a director of Briton Brady Consulting, a dispute management company which specialised in investigation and mediation. Prior to establishing that company, Mr Briton was Queensland's Anti-Discrimination Commissioner and Queensland Director of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. He came to those roles from Victoria where he was Deputy Public Advocate. The Legal Services Commissioner will be an independent umpire who will ensure that there is proper investigation of consumer complaints about lawyers. Anyone who has a concern about the actions or behaviour of a lawyer, or an employee of a law firm, can take their complaint to the commissioner and be confident that it will be dealt with effectively and independently. John Briton has the right qualities to guide the Legal Services Commission as it works to ensure high standards of conduct and accountability within the legal profession. He has a proven track record in dispute management, a strong sense of ethics, good judgment and sound decision-making skills. 19 May 2004 Ministerial Statement 1187
Mr Briton will help to bring new levels of accountability and transparency to the legal profession and restore public confidence in the profession and in the legal system. He will begin establishing the Legal Services Commission from next week, with a view to having it fully operational from 1 July, and will accept written complaints from legal consumers from next Monday.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Ipswich Motorway Hon. P.T. LUCAS (Lytton—ALP) (Minister for Transport and Main Roads) (10.02 a.m.): Yesterday, residents of Ipswich and outer south-west Brisbane twice had to put up with gridlock on the National Highway, the Ipswich Motorway. An accident in the morning caused several-hour delays for drivers in peak traffic heading to Brisbane while another accident in the afternoon caused traffic delays on their way home. I have had a number of our members of parliament recount stories to me of workers losing a day's pay, students late for university exams, people missing flights and other personal inconvenience as a result of this. One thing is for sure, people expect our politicians to work together to fix our roads. I am personally sick of the political bickering. Anyone tuning into a Brisbane metropolitan radio station yesterday would have heard at least five different politicians pointing the finger, all with their theories on how to fix this mess. As state Transport Minister, I am paid to fix problems, not create them. That is why in April I had lengthy meetings with the federal Roads Minister, Senator Campbell, to talk about important issues such as the Tugun bypass and the Ipswich Motorway. That is why I have also spoken to the New South Wales Roads Minister, Carl Scully, on a number of occasions about Tugun. Like Tugun, I want to sort out the Ipswich Motorway once and for all. But just like sorting out Tugun means standing up for Queenslanders' rights, so does the solution to the Ipswich Motorway. It will cost between $600 million and $700 million to six-lane the Ipswich Motorway, together with proper service roads, to take off the 25 per cent local traffic. That would cater for traffic demand on the motorway past 2021. Just 20 per cent of the Ipswich Motorway traffic turns off to the Logan Motorway. The remaining 80 per cent continues on the Ipswich Motorway heading to Brisbane and southern districts, or turning off to the Centenary Motorway or the Brisbane urban corridor. Anyone who thinks that six-laning the Ipswich Motorway is a politically divisive issue in Queensland is dead wrong. Federal Liberal member for Blair, Cameron Thompson, seems to be the only Queensland politician who is saying no to upgrading the Ipswich Motorway when everyone else is saying yes. Let us face it: the Ipswich Motorway is a federally funded road. It is part of the National Highway system. The federal government, therefore, needs to provide the funds to fix it straightaway. But we will play our part to be ready to fast-track design and construction with Queensland's Main Roads to get action as soon as possible. Main Roads did a great job on upgrading the Pacific Motorway to the Gold Coast while it was still operating and everyone acknowledges its success. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr LUCAS: As the former Minister for Transport acknowledges. The same can be done for the Ipswich Motorway. People often focus on where politicians disagree, but apart from Cameron Thompson there is bipartisan support for upgrading the motorway. Former state Transport Minister, Vaughan Johnson, is reported in today's Courier-Mail as having said on 12 June 1997— We have had to wait for two or three fatalities in recent times to be able to extract dollars from the federal government for the interchange at the Ipswich-Warrego Highway. State Liberal transport spokesman, Bruce Flegg, is reported in the same paper as saying 'a northern option to the Ipswich Motorway is not acceptable to the community'. Surely if just about all of us, regardless of political party, agree then we can present a united front to Canberra to get them to upgrade the Ipswich Motorway now. I have said before that I want to work with the federal government to get substantial funding for our federal road needs in Queensland, particularly with our extraordinary population growth. The Queensland government says that the federal government needs to meet its obligation to a National Highway and upgrade the Ipswich Motorway. Today I will be calling the federal Roads Minister, Senator Ian Campbell, to again personally convey to him the urgency of the Ipswich Motorway upgrade. I will also be reinforcing that we are happy to work with him on other federal priorities, but that does not mean dumping the people of Ipswich. I will be writing to all mayors in the Ipswich-Moreton area urging them to quickly take up the opportunity to lobby all federal representatives that we need a commitment to the motorway in AusLink on 7 June. In the meantime, the Queensland government will continue to work hard to deliver on our road responsibilities in the south-west Brisbane area. We are doing this through projects such as the $120 million road that will link Springfield and Ripley with Brisbane. This is one of the fastest-growing 1188 Ministerial Statement 19 May 2004 areas in south-east Queensland. This new direct link will cut commuting time as the residents of that area will no longer need to travel the Ipswich Motorway to access the Centenary Highway. Other projects include $1.8 million to upgrade sections of the Swanbank Road and $717,000 to construct noise barriers along the Warrego Highway between Dinmore and the Brisbane Valley Highway. Sometimes ministers and bureaucrats in Canberra, or even some of our federal local politicians who spend too much time in Canberra, fail to see the importance of local and regional transport issues. AusLink will be brought down in two weeks, but we all need to work harder, whether that be us on this side of the House or the members opposite, to convince the federal government that we need to have the Ipswich Motorway fixed. If Bruce Flegg, Fiona Simpson, Vaughan Johnson or Lawrence Springborg play a role in that, then all the better. After the last federal budget, it seems that the Howard government is happy to splash around billions of dollars on baby bonuses and election gimmicks. What about some capital for their responsibility on the Ipswich Motorway? It might actually mean that that baby's parents can get to work, the baby turned student can get to school, and then to their first job.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
State of the Environment Report Queensland 2003 Hon. R.J. MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (Minister for the Environment) (10.07 a.m.): Queensland's environment underpins key industries such as tourism. It generates jobs and economic growth, particularly in regional areas. Its protection is paramount. That is why the Queensland government is committed to ensuring that its environmental policies are based on the most up-to-date science available. The Environmental Protection Agency has completed an extensive audit of Queensland's environment, which will provide the government with the scientific data that it needs to strike the right balance between environmental protection and development. The State of the Environment Report Queensland 2003 is the second comprehensive report card on the health of Queensland's environment. I seek leave to table the report. Leave granted. Mr MICKEL: The report builds on the findings of the inaugural report, which was delivered in 1999, and highlights the growing pains being experienced by a growing state. It provides a snapshot of several key resource management areas: the atmosphere, land, waterways, coasts, biodiversity, human settlements and natural and cultural heritage. The State of the Environment Report is a valuable resource for future planning and aims to contribute to better environmental management practices across the state. It confirms the challenges that we are facing are increasing urban, industrial and land use pressures on the coast and the Great Barrier Reef, population growth and its impact on energy, water use and transport infrastructure and climate change. We will use its findings to ensure that we get the balance right between creating jobs, encouraging economic growth and sustainable development and protecting the environment. The report provides a regional analysis of issues where possible to assist natural resource management groups and local governments by providing contextual information for planning and management purposes. It also highlights some of the successful partnerships involving the community, industry and government where significant progress is being made in addressing many of the issues raised within the report. Some of this good work is presented in the case studies featured within the report. The Queensland government is also addressing some of the issues raised in the 2003 report through initiatives such as vegetation management laws to end broadscale remnant tree clearing by 2006; the Queensland Greenhouse Strategy; the reef water quality protection plan; the state coastal management plan; the establishment of the Office of Urban Management; the establishment of the Trust for Nature; the cleaner energy policy; TransLink; the South-East Queensland Forestry Agreement; participation in the national action plan for salinity; and the Water Act 2000. We are being transparent about the state of the environment and our response to environmental issues. We will not put these issues in the too-hard basket, as our political opponents have done. This report provides a valuable information base for community, industry and government to make informed decisions about environmental and natural resource management. I look forward to working with the community and industry to address its findings and take the next steps towards the protection of our natural assets. The report is available on the internet at www.epa.qld.gov.au. I seek leave to table a letter in response to a question asked by the member for Lockyer last week. Leave granted. 19 May 2004 Ministerial Statement 1189
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Children of Parents with a Mental Illness Hon. M.F. REYNOLDS (Townsville—ALP) (Minister for Child Safety) (10.11 a.m.): I want to assure the House that my new Department of Child Safety will work to ensure that the protective needs of children whose parents have a mental illness are recognised and met at the earliest possible time. It is imperative that evaluations of the health of children are incorporated in case management plans for parents with mental health problems. Parental mental illness has been shown to be a common contributing factor not only for children being taken into care but also for those children remaining in care for protracted periods. Late intervention to protect children with mentally ill parents is rightly seen as a system failure, and we will be working hard to improve outcomes in such cases. We must be mindful at all times of the wider impacts of mental illness. In terms of the department working with parents with a mental illness, we will continue to work towards increased collaborative, coordinated and responsive service delivery in relation to the very important linkages between parental mental health and child protection. Where existing practice and policy does not appear to effectively address the interrelationship between parental mental illness and child protection issues, we will review this. The department will continue to pursue improved responses through cross-department information sharing and, where necessary, legislative change. The Department of Child Safety will be the lead agency for child protection and will be supported in this role by the Queensland Police Service, Queensland Health and Education Queensland, particularly through a rejuvenated SCAN system. The enhanced suspected child abuse and neglect teams will provide an integrated across-government response to child protection. The Queensland government is committed to ensuring that all children and young people who have been harmed or who are at risk of harm have access to holistic, integrated, transparent and accountable service responses across government agencies. On Monday I assured attendees at a social work conference at the Gold Coast Hospital that social workers who join the new Department of Child Safety can and will make a difference—a difference to the lives of the families they work with. I say to all members of the Gold Coast in the House today that the 100 or so social workers and allied health professionals I spoke with on Monday afternoon at the hospital can be assured that they have a team of dedicated and committed professionals working with my department on this very important issue. I look forward to the positive working relationship with Queensland Health and other agencies in establishing an integrated child protection delivery system. Case planning and case management across agencies will ensure that the best outcomes are delivered for parents with mental health problems and particularly for children in that family.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
ConsultQld Web Site Hon. F.W. PITT (Mulgrave—ALP) (Minister for Communities, Disability Services and Seniors) (10.14 a.m.): E-democracy initiatives are key components of the Beattie government's community engagement agenda. Today I am pleased to inform members that our trial of online community consultation, called ConsultQld, has now been running for a year. The 12-month trial of ConsultQld, which is accessed through the government's Get Involved community engagement web site, was launched last May. It began by seeking Queenslanders' feedback on a discussion paper about the middle phase of schooling. I am pleased to inform the House that from 1 June this year the laws governing smoking will be the latest issue for discussion on ConsultQld. ConsultQld is an innovative way to give Queenslanders, wherever they live, the chance to have their say on issues being considered by the government. Queenslanders can contribute their opinions online, read what other people have had to say and be kept informed about the government's response. Over the past year Queenslanders have been asked for their input through ConsultQld on five issues covering a range of topics, from the ageing of the state's population to a review of the provisions in the Retail Shop Leases Act. About 300 people have made nearly 600 online submissions to date. Those who enjoy the opportunity to have a say on government policies also have access through ConsultQld to information about consultation currently being conducted, both online and off-line, by government agencies around the state. 1190 Notice of Motion 19 May 2004
Today I am pleased to announce that I have approved the continuation of the ConsultQld trial while the Department of Communities conducts an evaluation of the initiative. The evaluation will consider the lessons we have learned about online consultation and how we can improve the system. I would like to emphasise that ConsultQld does not replace other opportunities for engagement between government agencies and communities. It complements traditional consultation processes and enhances Queenslanders' access to government decision-making processes. Queensland is recognised around the world for our work on developing new and innovative ways for the government to engage with the community through the Internet. I encourage all members of parliament to support ConsultQld as a simple and effective way for Queenslanders to have a say on issues that matter to them.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Smart Women, Smart State Awards Hon. D. BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (Minister for Local Government, Planning and Women) (10.16 a.m.): This government is committed to seeing Queensland live up to its name as the Smart State—a leader in the fields of engineering, the sciences and information and communication technologies. While these are among the best-paid industries, women are very much underrepresented in these fields. In 2002, women represented 19.7 per cent of IT professionals, 5.8 per cent of engineers and 39.8 per cent of workers in science and the environment. Last November, the Women in the Smart State Directions Statement 2003-2008 was launched, setting out priority areas to address inequity, disadvantage and underrepresentation experienced by women in Queensland. Under this plan the government wants to see more girls and women pursue careers in ICT, sciences and engineering—the jobs of the 21st century. As an encouragement, I am pleased to announce that the Office for Women has opened nominations for the second Smart Women, Smart State Awards. This program was an initiative of Lesley Clark, then parliamentary secretary to the Premier and still the member for Barron River. I thank her for her vision and hard work in establishing these awards. The Smart Women, Smart State Awards reinforce the significant role that this government places on women's participation in building Queensland the Smart State. These awards honour high school and university students, researchers and women in business, the public sector and the community who are achieving in the fields of engineering, ICT and the sciences. They are significant not only because they pay tribute to Queensland women and girls who are making positive advances in what have been traditionally male-dominated occupations but also because they provide a role modelling focus, encouraging further participation by more women and girls. Last year, the inaugural year for these awards, saw some 175 high-calibre nominations received. This year there are seven categories sharing in a prize pool of $17,500. Advertisements with nomination details will be appearing in major newspapers across the state on Saturday, 22 May. Nominations will be open until 2 July and winners will be announced in August. I commend this initiative to the House and urge Queenslanders to support and encourage the efforts of women and girls striving to make a difference in the sciences, engineering and ICT by supporting the Smart Women, Smart State Awards.
ORDER OF BUSINESS; STANDING AND SESSIONAL ORDERS Hon. A.M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (10.19 a.m.), by leave: I move— That so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended to enable general business to be considered from 7.30 p.m. this evening. Motion agreed to.
NOTICE OF MOTION
Standing Order 70(ii) Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.19 a.m.): I give notice that, given the extraordinary abuse in this House by ministers who are continually refusing to answer questions, I will move— That standing order No. 70(ii) be amended to clearly state that answers to questions by ministers and members must directly relate to and be directly relevant to the question asked. 19 May 2004 Private Members' Statements 1191
PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
Premier, Inappropriate Language Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.20 a.m.): We have heard a lot in this place and outside of this place notably by the Premier in the last few weeks about standards of members of parliament. The Premier is the first to come into this place and quote media articles. Well, let me quote a media story of my own. This appeared in the Good Weekend magazine of the Sydney Morning Herald on Saturday, 8 May. The article is written by Frank Robson and it is entitled 'Out for a spin with Premier Pete'. Dotted throughout that article are terms used by the Premier colloquially referred to as the 'f' word. It is totally inappropriate for the Premier to be casting that sort of reflection on the people of Queensland. He carried on like a hick in that article and he made Queensland look like hicksville. Let us look at some of the quotes in the article. He says of Mr Beattie that he— ... cusses exuberantly. [expletive] he cries, while counselling his troops on how to deal with some election-delayed matters. 'If they don't cooperate, we'll sack them!' He is further quoted as saying— 'Now I have to go back and have a really cranky news conference,' he grumbles when the plane nears Brisbane. 'They'll be [expletive] over not being invited to Cherbourg,' he predicts, curling a lip. 'They'll [expletive] go right off, you watch. They're so intellectually sound and are people of such great depth, you'll hear their stinging, scintillating questions and you'll be in awe, Frank. You'll walk out thinking, 'What's happened to my profession?' This is in the Sydney Morning Herald. He further goes on to say— 'I've never given a [expletive] about criticism,' he told me poolside. 'I'm the only one who can tell the factions, Right or Left or whatever, to get [expletive]. They mean nothing. That is inappropriate language and inappropriate conduct— Time expired. Cabcharge Vouchers, Townsville and Thuringowa Mr WALLACE (Thuringowa—ALP) (10.22 a.m.): Last Wednesday I advised the House of problems facing customers of Townsville Taxis who wish to use Cabcharge vouchers or cards. Little did I realise the can of worms I would open when trying to stand up for taxi users in Thuringowa and Townsville. Since making that speech I have been flooded with phone calls of support from both consumers and cabbies alike. However, one phone call was not quite so savoury. Last Wednesday evening Mr John Lobwein, the managing director of Townsville Taxis, left an extremely agitated and rude message on the answering machine in my electorate office. I will not sully the pages of Hansard with what he said, suffice to say that I and my staff were left under no doubt of his intentions. I have news for Mr Lobwein and it is all bad. I will not be intimidated by his phone call and I will continue to stand up for the residents of Thuringowa who elected me. I will be an advocate for my electorate and for the people of north Queensland and uphold the oath that I took in this place a couple of months ago. Where I see problems that affect my community, I will continue to draw these concerns to the attention of the House whether Mr Lobwein or his ilk likes it or not. On Sunday I met with some gentlemen who have a stake in Townsville Taxis and its operations. They are Mr Rod Hicks, Mr Bob Smith and Mr Ted Zalewski. For a number of hours they outlined several matters which were most concerning regarding the operation of Townsville Taxis as well as the management's attitude to Cabcharge customers. I am in the process of preparing this material for the information of the Minister for Transport. Complaints have also been lodged with the ACCC over a number of matters which I understand are to be investigated. I hope Townsville Taxis will get its house in order as soon as possible. Thuringowa and Townsville are increasingly becoming important travel destinations and often taxi drivers are the first people visitors meet. The situation cannot be allowed to continue where Cabcharge customers are treated like second-class citizens. I will not be silenced in speaking on this matter and will continue to work hard for the good of my community. My staff and I are committed to helping the north because that is where we live. No amount of abusive phone calls from Mr Lobwein or anyone else will stop us from doing our duties. Payroll Tax Mr LANGBROEK (Surfers Paradise—Lib) (10.24 a.m.): I rise before the House today in the sitting before the state budget and I place a challenge to the state government: if the government's economic prowess is as good as it says it is and if the government is going to deliver the surplus it promised us before the election, then the government should give Queensland businesses a break by cutting payroll tax. Over the last four years payroll tax has been cut by 0.25 per cent, alleviating some of 1192 Private Members' Statements 19 May 2004 the strain on local businesses. These cuts, though, do little to give businesses paying payroll tax the reprieve they need. Let us take, for example, a man who owns a medium sized business in my electorate. Due to the make-up of his business with regard to commissions and bonuses, he ends up paying over $10,000 a month in payroll tax. He has expressed to me that this money could easily go to hiring two more staff or investing in other ways to expand the business. What hurts these businesses, though, is that they are trying to compete with fractionally smaller businesses that fall below the $850,000 payroll tax threshold—businesses that are not paying payroll tax. As a result, when it comes to quoting prices, the smaller business can quote a couple of per cent under the payroll tax company and that can be the difference in getting the job. Moreover, only three per cent of Queensland businesses pay the tax. These businesses see the Queensland government providing concessions to multinationals and larger companies to lure them to this state and they wonder why they are the only ones lugging this $1.3 billion burden. I am not advocating for more businesses to share this burden. I am asking for the burden itself to be reduced. In the next financial year Queensland will receive over $400 million more than any other state as a result of the federal government's tax reform. We are living in a good economic climate and the federal government has been able to deliver tax cuts. I ask this state government to follow the federal government's lead. If those members opposite are serious about expanding Queensland's economy and providing jobs, they should help Queensland businesses by cutting payroll tax. On a different issue, this morning the Premier tabled the government response to Mr Springborg's— Time expired. Youth and Community Learning Centre, Toowoomba Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (10.26 a.m.): Last Friday I had the pleasure of representing the Minister for Education at the Youth and Community Learning Centre in Toowoomba for the official blessing and opening of stages 2 and 3 of its new facilities. This school was established in September 2001. It is a coeducational Catholic school and offers primary and secondary education for years 1 to 12 non-boarding. The school is located in my electorate. The school has an enrolment of 26 secondary students, including 22 indigenous students and three students categorised as disabled. The school has three full-time staff as well as a community liaison officer and an administrative assistant. Mr Ian Hunter is the principal of the school. The major aims of the service are to provide an alternative gateway of access to young people to engage in education and training, maximise participation of young people, foster holistic development of young people and promote indigenous cross-cultural awareness. A great deal of the refurbishment work was needed and much of this was done by the young people themselves as well as the community volunteers, particularly people from St Therese's parish. Stages 2 and 3 refurbishments are part of an ongoing staged refurbishment plan designed to bring the current facilities up to a more presentable, safe and functional level for the benefit of these young people. The centre provides 23 hours of education and training to students each week. Sensitivity to and awareness of indigenous culture and respect for diversity underlies all of the operations of the centre and its environment. The section that I opened on behalf of the minister was the total upgrade of male and female staff toilet facilities as well as a more functional covered area for auto mechanics. This has brought the amenities block up to standard and provided a much needed sheltered area for auto mechanics. Recent achievements of this centre have been up to 100 young people choosing to re-engage in education and training, being awarded a three-year wadu or indigenous youth partnership initiative grant through the Enterprise and Career Education Foundation— Time expired. Aboriginal Councils, Audit Report Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) (10.28 a.m.): I want to speak this morning about the totally unacceptable management practices of some Aboriginal councils that have been further exposed by the Auditor-General in his Audit Report No. 7 of 2003-04. I have to say that the reconciliation process in this state and this country will never work while we see the significant abuse of financial management practices in many of these communities and these people who are in charge snubbing their nose at the due process. If I can just quote from the Auditor-General's report in relation to Doomadgee Aboriginal Council— I am concerned that Doomadgee Aboriginal Council has been unable to achieve timely completion of its annual financial statements for several years. That is totally unacceptable. The Auditor-General continues— 19 May 2004 Questions Without Notice 1193
My contract auditor has advised that a number of issues have contributed to the late finalisation of the Council's financial statements, including inaccurate general ledger records which required follow up and subsequent adjustment entries to be processed; and delays in finalising the Fixed Assets Register. If this was big business or any other business, it would be a totally unacceptable practice to the board of that operation. The money owing to councils includes $5.2 million for outstanding housing rents, and there is $2.8 million for 'other'. What 'other' is nobody would know. There is $595,000 written off. I have got to say that this is totally unacceptable. I say to the minister here today: if you have got to put administrators in place in these communities to make sure that we do have accountability, so be it; it must be done. We cannot have the Auditor-General making comment year after year after year in relation to these outstanding reports saying that the financial statements are inaccurate, that they are not up to date. I call on the minister here today to take full control of her responsibilities in this regard.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Attorney-General Mr SPRINGBORG (10.31 a.m.): My question without notice is to the Premier. I refer to the opposition's freedom of information application concerning the conduct of the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General at a function hosted by the Director of Public Prosecutions, and I table those documents. Can the Premier explain why his staff first claimed that there were no such documents in his office; why they then admitted to just three documents on appeal; and why they did not admit to a further 24 documents until pressed by the Information Commissioner in external review? Will the Premier also confirm in this House whether he and his staff are simply contemptuous of FOI requirements or whether he has more than one liar on his staff? Mr SPEAKER: That is unparliamentary. Mr SPRINGBORG: I will withdraw that term. Mr BEATTIE: Let me start by thanking the Leader of the Opposition for his question, and let me just very briefly make reference to the comments that he made in his two-minuter. I, like a lot of Australians, plead guilty to swearing from time to time. I have given a commitment to my dear loving wife that I will improve, and all I can do is work on it. Like a lot of Australians, it is one of those things that I do, and I have to say that swearing is not a party political sin; it is a matter of bipartisanship. But I will do better. On 1 October last year the opposition made one of its many applications for documents under freedom of information, this one regarding highly personal allegations involving the Attorney-General. My office has made available 27 folios which are relevant to this request—three to the opposition and 24 to the Information Commissioner, who plays a major role in the freedom of information process. It is important to point out that as soon as I was made aware of this matter on 22 July last year by the then Director-General of the Department of Justice and Attorney-General, Dr Ken Levy, I met with the Crime and Misconduct Commissioner, Brendan Butler SC, and wrote to him the same day. I asked him to review the matter in detail and advise me as to any action that should be taken by the government or by me. I table a copy of that letter. On 25 July Mr Butler wrote to me to tell me— There is no basis to consider that the conduct of the Attorney-General amounts to official misconduct nor any basis to refer the matter to the Queensland Police Service. On 26 August I informed Dr Levy of the outcome, and I table that for the information of the House. This matter has already been made public. On September 16 and 17 last year the Courier-Mail carried two large articles and I table these articles, both of which make it clear that the Crime and Misconduct Commission cleared the Attorney-General of any wrongdoing. On 10 February my chief of staff wrote to the Information Commissioner, enclosing 24 folios relating to the matter and thanking the commissioner for having granted an extension of time in which to make additional searches. That was due to the election and other matters. I will table a copy of that letter. The Information Commissioner has now had the information for three months but I understand has not yet determined whether it should be passed on to the opposition. In the letter from my chief of staff to the Information Commissioner he says— You are undoubtedly aware that the matter the FOI application relates to was the subject of a CMC inquiry. Accordingly, the file was not retained in our normal filing system, and staff did not have access to it. I should also mention that the CMC found no evidence during their inquiry of official misconduct nor any basis on which to refer the matter to the Queensland Police Service. I now table that letter for the information of the House. Let us be really clear about all this: this matter has been fully and properly investigated. The members opposite are not pursuing an issue about FOI; they are simply seeking to get into the gutter to try to denigrate the Attorney-General. It is 1194 Questions Without Notice 19 May 2004 disgusting behaviour; it is an absolute misuse and abuse of the FOI process and the laws. FOI was never meant for muckraking, and that is exactly what they are trying to do.
Attorney-General Mr SPRINGBORG: My next question is to the Premier. I refer the Premier to a memorandum from his chief of staff in July of last year concerning a phone call from the then Director-General of Justice requesting an urgent meeting, and I will table that memorandum. The memorandum refers to a sensitive—a sensitive—and possibly explosive—possibly explosive—issue which had to be raised with him on Crown Law advice. Can the Premier explain why his chief of staff did not reveal this memorandum when we requested access to these documents, even though he is personally responsible for the FOI review process? Will he now inform the House what this sensitive and possibly explosive issue was? Mr BEATTIE: I refer to exactly what I said: the opposition is clearly in the gutter here and they are abusing FOI. Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr BEATTIE: I have already explained that this matter was the subject of a CMC inquiry. Yes, I did receive that communication; yes, I met with Dr Levy in the presence of the Deputy Premier; and yes, I met with the Attorney-General. The Deputy Premier, the Attorney-General and I all agreed that— Mr Springborg interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition has asked the question. We are going to hear the answer. Mr BEATTIE: Every issue raised with me by Dr Levy was to be sent to the CMC for full investigation. I have already explained in the letter that was sent to the Information Commissioner why that information was not initially released to the opposition; it was because it was part of a CMC investigation. Every document my office holds— Mr Springborg interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I now warn the Leader of the Opposition. Mr BEATTIE: Every one of these documents has been sent to the Information Commissioner. Whether they release it as part of the opposition's attempt to smear is a matter for them. Every one of the documents in my office has been sent to the Information Commissioner. There was a CMC inquiry going on, and when there is a CMC inquiry, my government provides everything to the CMC. Let me be absolutely clear here: this is an absolute abuse of the FOI process for nothing more than muckraking—nothing more than muckraking. That is what it is. It is disgraceful. The Information Commissioner has every single document that my office has right now. Whether the Information Commissioner releases that in terms of the requests from the opposition is entirely a matter for them. Every single document my office had has now gone to the Information Commissioner. Every piece of information we had prior to that had gone to the CMC. The alternative to what the Leader of the Opposition is saying is that somewhere along the line I should not have provided the material to the CMC. If material is sent to the CMC, as it should be, that should be investigated. If the opposition FOIs in the middle of that process, so be it. The facts of life are that we did the right thing by sending it to the CMC. The opposition lost the last election and instead of pursuing policies they are pursuing gutter tactics in this House. I just say to the Leader of the Opposition: you talked about positive politics, not filth. What we are getting today is an attempt at character assassination. This matter has been fully investigated by the CMC. Let me make it clear that I stand by the Attorney-General. He has my full confidence and support. He is one of the best Attorneys this state has ever had, and I am not going to allow the Leader of the Opposition to smear his reputation by the abuse of FOI. I have to say to the Leader of the Opposition: this is one of the most despicable performances I have seen by you or anyone else in this House. You should be ashamed of yourself. It is absolutely disgraceful. Mr LINGARD: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. You have allowed the Premier to use the words 'you' and 'your' back to the Leader of the Opposition. As soon as the Leader of the Opposition says anything back, you give him a final warning. The Premier must speak through the chair. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member has interpreted that in a very different way. When I warned the Leader of the Opposition it was under standing order 114. Yesterday morning I made a statement that I was going to address that standing order by saying that when somebody is not taking interjections then the interjector will be warned. It is obvious the Premier was not taking interjections. They are entirely different things. I am in the chair, and I ask the member to respect that. 19 May 2004 Questions Without Notice 1195
Mr LINGARD: There were many examples yesterday, including the member for Logan, where the word 'you' was referred back to the opposition. If you allow that in an answer then you must allow an answer back from the opposition. Every minister must speak through the chair. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Murrumba. Asylum Seekers Mr WELLS: My question is directed to the Premier. I refer the Premier to the fact that his government has demonstrated its unequivocal commitment to the safety and wellbeing of Queensland children. Is the Premier aware of evidence that another Australian government lacks compassion when it comes to the treatment of children who are the victims of circumstances? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the member for Murrumba for his question. I know that, like me, he shares a concern about children and their protection. The children of asylum seekers are no different to any other children in that they deserve to be healthy, happy and safe. Babies and children simply do not belong in immigration detention centres. The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission's report into children in detention has found that Australia's detention system is fundamentally inconsistent with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Australia ratified in 1990. I want to make this clear: border protection is vital, but so is the welfare of children. It is unacceptable that on average children are spending increasing time in these detention centres, with one child detained for nearly five and a half years. If that does not have some impact on the mental and physical wellbeing of a child, I do not know what does. Most children in detention are younger than 12 years of age. I know the member for Murrumba shares my deep concern about this as does Karen Struthers, my parliamentary secretary on multicultural affairs. When they are finally released into the community it is generally on a temporary protection visa which precludes children and their families from eligibility for permanent residence. Temporary visas also effectively prevent children from reuniting with family members from their country of origin. They are broken up not only from their family but also their country of origin, which makes it very difficult for the children to develop and achieve any degree of happiness. Ultimately, temporary protection visas impede children from fully participating in education opportunities and community life. Nearly 2000 temporary protection visa holders were released to Queensland between 2000 and 2003. The Queensland government gives them the same standard of services as permanent protection visa holders—that is, access to public housing, rental bond loans, support to access the private rental market, state schooling, English tuition for schoolchildren and TAFE tuition for adults. Immigration, as we all know, is a federal concern. But caring for children is everybody's responsibility. The federal coalition's treatment of babies and children in detention only strengthens my government's resolve to continue opposing a proposal to defy the local community and build an immigration detention centre in the Pinkenba area. I know the member for Clayfield is deeply concerned about this, and so am I. Let me be really blunt: I do not want to see children, under the age of 12, in a detention centre in Brisbane. That is not what we want. That is damaging to our international reputation and that is not acceptable to Queensland. I say to the federal government that I understand the issue about borders, I understand the need to protect Australian security and I support that, but we should not abuse children along the way. I think, frankly, it is about time we had a more humane approach, not just a political one. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, I welcome to the public gallery students and teachers of Mater Dei Primary School in the electorate of Toowoomba North.
Attorney-General Mr SEENEY: My question without notice is directed to the Premier. I refer the Premier to his answer to the previous question asked by the Leader of the Opposition where he referred at length to receiving a clearance from the CMC. I table a copy of Crown Law advice provided to the Director- General, Department of Justice on 18 July 2003 in relation to the conduct of the Attorney-General for which he claims he received a clearance. In this document the Crown Solicitor advised that the matter concerning the Attorney-General's behaviour did not involve official misconduct, it was not one for the CMC, but it was a matter for the Premier's consideration under section 27 of the Public Service Act. When the Premier ignored this Crown Law advice and referred this matter to the CMC on 22 July, was he seeking to again use the CMC as a clearing house for ministerial misbehaviour rather than take action himself against yet another minister acting inappropriately? Mr BEATTIE: The filth continues. Let me be very clear about this. The legal opinion, which I have read, that the member made reference to was an opinion sought by Ken Levy to determine whether he should raise this issue with me. That is what it was about. The member nodded, so he accepts that that is true. As a result of that, he came to see me. The Attorney is the first law officer of this state. He is the 1196 Questions Without Notice 19 May 2004 most important law officer in this state. It was absolutely imperative that there be no cloud at any time over the Attorney-General. What did I do? First of all, I met with Dr Levy and the Deputy Premier. I discussed the legal opinion. He brought it with him. I then met with the Attorney. All of the issues that were raised with me were referred to the CMC because it was absolutely imperative that they be fully and properly investigated. I put these matters to the Attorney. The issues that were raised with me by the Director- General, Dr Levy, were denied by the Attorney. My requirement to satisfy whether I was personally satisfied with his explanation of events was very clear—and I was. So the member is saying to me that the decision was mine. Yes, it was mine. I exercised my discretion in discussions with the Attorney. I was satisfied with his explanation and I determined that that was the end of the matter other than the fact that— Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: The member's behaviour confirms that he is not interested in the real answer. He is just interested in muck. Mr SEENEY: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. The Premier can squirm as much as he likes. The information is in the Crown Law advice. He cannot misrepresent the Crown Law advice. Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Resume your seat. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Let us deal with this interjection. For one second have the patience to listen. What the member is saying to me is that this was not a matter for the CMC, it was a matter for me. Is that what he is saying? Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Exactly. So what did I do? I exercised my judgment. I raised the issue with the Attorney-General. I was satisfied with his explanation. Therefore, from the opposition's point of view, that should have been the end of it. That is the logic. I was not prepared to accept that. Because it was the Attorney all these matters had to be referred appropriately to the CMC and they needed to be fully and properly investigated, which they were. The CMC found that there was no further matter that ought to be pursued. Mr SEENEY: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. This is exactly what the Crown Law advice informed the director-general. Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Resume your seat. Mr BEATTIE: I conclude by simply saying that I stand by the Attorney-General. This is nothing more than a despicable personal attempt at assassination.
Labor Members Mr REEVES: My question is directed to the Premier and Minister for Trade. Could the Premier please inform the House what Dame Nellie Melba, Jackie Kennedy-Onassis, Anne Boleyn, Lawrence of Arabia, Henry Palaszczuk, Terry Sullivan and John Howard have in common? Mr BEATTIE: I have to tell the member that it is a long list, but I will answer that question. This will absolutely shock the honourable member, but I do actually know the answers to those things. Firstly, Dame Nellie Melba was born today. Jackie Kennedy-Onassis tragically died on this day. Anne Boleyn was beheaded on this day. Lawrence of Arabia died in a motorcycle accident in England on this day, and Henry Palaszczuk was elected to the Queensland parliament 20 years ago today. Mr Mackenroth: And it's Judy Spence's birthday. Mr BEATTIE: And in addition to that, it is Judy Spence's birthday. Terry Sullivan was elected to the Queensland parliament 13 years ago yesterday and John Howard entered politics 30 years and one day ago today. I want to congratulate Henry on his 20 years of service, and I want to congratulate Terry Sullivan. In fact, if one looks at Henry's record, the 7 February election was Henry's eighth. His two-party preferred vote was 81.02 per cent higher than any other member of the 51st Parliament. Indeed, the local paper, the South West News, did headline it 'Henry VIIIth'. I will leave that to others. When one looks at the history of this, it says a lot of interesting things about politics. When one looks back over those years and sees those personalities, one thinks of the old maxim of people in glass houses. I was interested to read crikey.com. This is the interesting thing about politics. Crikey.com of 4 May states— Crikey hears that a huge Liberal Party fundraiser is being held in Sydney on Thursday, 20 May. For a mere $8,000 you can sit at the same table as the Prime Minister. Government members interjected. 19 May 2004 Questions Without Notice 1197
Mr BEATTIE: I will tell you what: you are a cheapskate—$8,000. Or for $245 one can sit at the table furthermost away from the Prime Minister with various amounts in between. Mr Schwarten: That's where I'd want to sit. Mr BEATTIE: You would pay more for that one? Who is the MC? Alan Jones, of course. Government members interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Let me say that I have no criticism. I am just observing these things. I also notice that Peter Costello is throwing a knees-up in Brisbane according to the Courier-Mail this morning at the Carlton Crest. The cost is a mere $1,500 for a table of 10. So he is obviously a lot cheaper than the Prime Minister. Mr Springborg interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I do not know whether the twins are going. On a broader note, just musing about politics as a result of these legendary people, I was interested to see—and I welcome this—that the federal government has backed down on its decision to stop funding critical research to protect the Barrier Reef and tropical rainforests. Instead, it is inviting the coordinated research centres located in two key marginal seats to restructure their proposals. In celebrating John Howard's 30th anniversary, it would be very useful if these CRCs were properly funded. Yesterday Peter McGauran mentioned to me at the launch of the health centre that that was something the federal government was looking at again. Queensland needs this, and I urge the Prime Minister to celebrate his 30th anniversary by funding it properly. Attorney-General Mr HOBBS: My question is to the Attorney-General. As the chief law officer of this state, does the minister think it is appropriate for a person under investigation by the CMC to personally contact the chairman of the CMC? Minister, is it appropriate for such a person to seek an early opportunity to influence the investigation by 'clearing up any misconceptions'? I table a copy of the CMC details of such a conversation. Mr WELFORD: I thank the honourable member for the question. Let me say, firstly, that as Attorney-General of the state of Queensland I take my job very seriously. I see my job as very important to this state and I certainly am committed to due and fair process not only in respect of myself but in respect of every citizen of our state. Due process was followed in this matter. Due process was followed in every respect with which this matter has been dealt. The Premier dealt with it properly when he consulted with the director-general. The Premier dealt with it properly by referring it for independent assessment—not leaving it to the Premier himself but referring it for independent assessment by the CMC. The CMC dealt with it properly. It is true, as the file note from Mr Butler from the CMC notes, that he and I had a conversation. The essence of that conversation, which he correctly records, is that I was anxious in my role to ensure that the matter was dealt with promptly, not least of all because it was important for the institution of Attorney-General that any person holding that position not remain for an indefinite period under a cloud when subject to a CMC investigation. I indicated my preparedness to cooperate at an early opportunity to ensure that investigation was dealt with expeditiously in the public interest. The CMC conducted investigations. The CMC advised the outcome of its investigations to the appropriate people. As far as I am concerned, that is the proper end of the matter. Federal Government Payment, National Reading Benchmarks Mrs DESLEY SCOTT: My question is to the Minister for Education. Minister, I note that the federal Minister for Education announced a $700 payment for families with children who do not meet national reading benchmarks. I heard on national radio this morning that Queensland children will miss out on this payment. Minister, is this true? Ms BLIGH: I thank the member for the question. Like her, I welcome any new investment in children and learning. I am very pleased to see that the federal minister has finally taken a leaf out of Mark Latham's book and put a focus back on basics such as reading and writing for young children. But I regret to inform her that she is right. By all reports to date, Queensland is not going to get one cent of this new money allegedly because Queensland is deficient in the reporting of national benchmark results. I am pleased to have a chance to clarify what happens in Queensland. All children in years 3, 5 and 7 sit the national benchmark tests in literacy and numeracy every year in state and non-state schools. The results of those tests are provided to the child's school. They are provided to the Commonwealth government for national reporting purposes and they are provided to parents, who get an indication of the questions that the children answered and the child's results compared to state averages. It has not been the practice in Queensland to report a child's performance against the national benchmark because, frankly, that benchmark is so far below the state average and reporting it has never, ever, ever been a federal requirement. 1198 Questions Without Notice 19 May 2004
For completeness, however, I announced in June last year that all reports from 2004 would also contain the national benchmark. In what can only be described as one of the cheapest political stunts that I have seen from the Howard government, the federal Education Minister has said that he will withhold the new funds from Queensland's most needy children. Those children who are struggling with reading who are most in need of extra literacy assistance will be denied it allegedly because Queensland national benchmark results are not available. It is an unbelievable policy position. Dr Nelson knows full well that all results are available. Queensland can provide the name, the school and the result of every child who has sat the years 3, 5 and 7 tests. I could provide it for him this week. I can give him the names of every child who is struggling to meet the national benchmark. But Dr Nelson is not interested in that information. He is not interested in the needs of those children. He prefers to play cheap, nasty and, frankly, ugly politics with the children of our state. I think it is important that the mums and dads of the more than 3,000 children who are struggling with reading in Queensland know that their child is a political football to the Howard government. One asks themselves at times like this what kind of people are running the country. What kind of people are they who would deny children who cannot read the assistance that they need because of some political stunt? It is un- Australian. It is unfair, and the parents of Queensland will see through it for what it is.
Consumer Protection Mr QUINN: My question is directed to the Minister for Fair Trading. I refer to the minister's statement made in the House last week when she said— Queensland has the greatest consumer protection regime not only in Australia but also internationally. I ask: if this is the case, then why do New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia and even the ACT have specific laws covering mortgage brokers yet Queensland does not? Ms KEECH: I thank the honourable member for his question. The question is simply a duplication of the question that was asked last week in parliament, and I refer the honourable member to my previous response in Hansard.
Public Transport, Cairns Dr LESLEY CLARK: My question is to the Minister for Transport and Main Roads. As the minister is aware, there have been a number of mechanical problems and customer complaints in Cairns involving buses. Can the minister please advise the House of what Queensland Transport investigations have revealed and whether any action has been taken? Mr LUCAS: I thank the honourable member for her question. She, together with the member for Cook and the Minister for Communities and the Minister for Local Government, has shown a keen interest in the safety of bus and other passenger transport in the greater Cairns region. All bus passengers and passengers on other forms of public transport in Queensland have a right to feel safe. In Cairns, a number of incidents have occurred this year that have led to passenger complaints or mechanical problems. For example, on 17 February, the dual back wheels fell off a Love's bus. In March, there was a brake failure on a Sunbus vehicle. The Queensland government views passenger transport safety very seriously. I should say, though, to reassure parents that statistically the safest way to get their children to school is on a school bus. It is very important to reinforce that. Last week my department put two Cairns bus companies on notice about maintenance, training and service procedures. They were Cairns Sunbus and school bus operator Love's buses. In late 2003 early 2004 Queensland Transport began investigations and last week served both of those companies with a direction under section 100 of the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act. They must address by law the problems identified as a result of those directions. Failure to do so could result in a maximum fine of $12,000 for each breach found and/or cancellation of their accreditation. The Beattie government is serious about the safety and reliability of the services that bus fleets provide to the public. Our audit found a range of problems, for example, Sunbus running late due to mechanical breakdowns and incidents with Love's buses causing concerns. Both companies have been subject to a full audit of their vehicles. Queensland Transport has been working with them to improve systems and procedures to minimise the likelihood of breakdowns and accidents. This is not about hitting people with sledgehammers; it is about ensuring that safety is enforced according to the law. We want to work with these companies, because we want to get a good outcome for everybody. But we will not compromise on the safety of our bus-travelling public. Bus operators have contracts that require daily pretrip inspections of vehicles, six-monthly inspections by Queensland Transport inspectors, maintenance and servicing programs that incorporate the procedures for the rectification of any faults found, and the training of drivers in the use of daily check sheets and defect reporting. 19 May 2004 Questions Without Notice 1199
This is a legal enforcement matter. It is not appropriate for me to say anything more except to say that we take passenger safety very seriously. We expect companies will maintain a high standard of service to ensure that passengers are confident in public transport in Cairns and elsewhere throughout this great state. Interruption.
PRIVILEGE
Attorney-General Hon. R.J. WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (11.02 a.m.): I rise on a matter of privilege suddenly arising. A moment ago the opposition tabled a document, which is the record of a telephone conversation between the chair of the CMC, Mr Brendan Butler SC, and me. The opposition sought to ask a question based on that telephone memo and made selective reference to part of it. As I indicated, I believe in fair and due process. The opposition failed to disclose the prior paragraph— Mr Hobbs interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Warrego! Mr WELFORD: I want to inform the House of the prior paragraph that the opposition member in his question did not disclose to the House. That paragraph reads— Mr HOBBS: I rise on a point of privilege— Mr SPEAKER: Order! We have a point of privilege that I am listening to. The member will wait. Mr WELFORD: The point of privilege is that the opposition member asked a question in which he implied that there was impropriety in the way in which I approached the chairperson of the CMC. The chairperson of the CMC records in this telephone record as follows— Mr Welford emphasised that he did not wish to interfere in any way in the process but wanted to ask if he could be informed when we had completed our assessment of the matter. The record speaks for itself. The opposition is pursuing these unsubstantiated allegations—we now know unsubstantiated allegations—for petty political and grubby political purposes.
PRIVILEGE
Attorney-General Mr HOBBS (Warrego—NPA) (11.04 a.m.): The Attorney-General has maligned me. I asked that question and tabled the document for everybody to see. It was not as if I was wanting to not quote the particular document. The whole document was on the table for everybody to see. It is because those people have covered it up— Mr SPEAKER: Order! We are not going to get into a debate.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Resumed. Juvenile Crime, Compensation Mr CHRIS FOLEY: My question is to the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice. I have had a number of constituents complain to me about a number of incidents of property damage done to cars, houses, et cetera, by juveniles who in many cases cause damage with relative impunity. The constituents go on to complain that when they seek compensation for the damage caused they are told that no-one can be held responsible as the people who caused the damage are minors. Whilst I am painfully aware that it is difficult to balance the rights of parents, children and the wider community in these matters, can the Attorney-General outline what plans he has as the chief law officer of Queensland to address this problem? Mr WELFORD: I thank the honourable member for his question. It is a legitimate question, because it raises difficult problems encountered by people who suffer damage to their property as a result of offences committed by juveniles. I may stand corrected, but I am not aware of any limitation on the courts being able to impose, in addition to a penalty for a property offence, the capacity to also order restitution in the normal course, as is done for offences by adults. But it is a matter ultimately for the discretion of the court to determine whether restitution is ordered in addition to any other penalty that is 1200 Questions Without Notice 19 May 2004 imposed on the juvenile or any other order made in respect of the offence. I suppose it is understandable that there are circumstances where a court would exercise a discretion not to order restitution against the juvenile based on the fact that the juvenile is impecunious, that is, does not have any capacity to meet a restitution order if it were made. This is a difficult conundrum. So far the government has not formed the view that there is justification for imposing upon a juvenile's parents in every case an order for restitution where property damage is done. I am sure that the honourable member is himself aware of many good families where unfortunate circumstances arise and the young members of those families occasionally go off the rails and perform an indiscretion, as it were—make a mistake, commit an offence. It is appropriate that those matters are dealt with by the court, that appropriate admonishment is given and that an appropriate penalty is applied to those juveniles. There is no easy answer to this issue, but it is one that all members of the House from time to time encounter. I certainly have an open mind about looking at ways in which we can continually improve our sentencing laws to provide greater flexibility for courts to address the wrong that is perpetrated, whether the offender is a minor or an adult. These are things that all parliaments of Australia have wrestled with from time to time. It is so far something that all of us have to continually apply our mind to in trying to find solutions. But there is no easy one answer for every situation of that kind. Safety of Seniors Ms STONE: My question without notice is to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services. Firstly, I would like to say happy birthday to the minister. The National Seniors of Springwood and Rochedale and often Neighbourhood Watch groups speak to me about seniors' safety. Could the minister advise the House what the Queensland Police Service is doing to protect the interests of our seniors? Ms SPENCE: I thank the member for Springwood for the question. I know that the member is aware of the task force that I established to look at seniors and crime, because I have had representation from seniors in her electorate about this very issue. Indeed, I have had a great deal of interest from seniors throughout Queensland about the work of this task force. Many people have written to me asking me if they could be members. It is not possible to have people from all over the state on this task force, but we have asked people to make submissions to the task force. I understand that quite a number have been received. The participants in the task force include representatives from various government agencies; the chair of the Seniors Advisory Council, Mrs Val French; representatives from the Pensioners and Superannuants League; representatives from the Ethnic Council of Queensland; Reconciliation Queensland; and the retail shops association. A number of different groups are participating enthusiastically in this task force. The task force presented me with its three-month report last week. I was pleased to read about their work. I addressed the first meeting of the task force but will miss the third meeting, which will be held tomorrow. It is very busy in its initial work. It is researching information not only about crime prevention but also about personal safety initiatives. It has found that, while we have a lot of personal safety initiatives across government, they are not necessarily targeted at seniors, and that is what it will look at. It has also identified the need for government to start collecting more data about crimes against seniors. The Police Service is obviously very interested in the types of crimes and the age groups that we should be collecting data about. As I said, the task force has looked at various issues. I am pleased to see that one of the subcommittees is looking at reducing fear of crime against seniors. While seniors are not the group in society most likely to be victims of crime, they are certainly affected by crime more than any other group in our society. Not only do we have to look at crime prevention; we have to look at the psychological effects of crime against seniors in our society. So one of the subgroups is particularly looking at that. The task force asked me when I would like it to finish its work. I am reluctant to set a time frame on the work. I think it is more important that we do give it some time to do the work that it feels needs to be completed. It will be reporting to me on a regular basis on the work it is doing. Ipswich Motorway Mr ROWELL: My question is addressed to the Minister for Emergency Services. I refer to the traffic disruption following a motor vehicle accident on the Ipswich Motorway yesterday. Will the minister please inform the House why it took the emergency services more than four hours to clear the accident site and what action he proposes to take to ensure that similar delays do not occur in the future? Mr CUMMINS: I thank the member for the question. Mr Rowell: No trouble at all. Mr CUMMINS: Thank you very much. What a polite man he is. 19 May 2004 Questions Without Notice 1201
Mr Rowell interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Hinchinbrook. The question has been asked. Mr CUMMINS: The incident on the Ipswich Motorway yesterday should be taken very seriously. I acknowledge the severe traffic delays and disruptions. As all media reports clearly outlined, it was a very serious accident. Not only did it take— Mr Rowell: Four hours. Mr CUMMINS: I beg your pardon? Mr Rowell: Four hours. Mr CUMMINS: It did not take that long for it to happen. It took that long to clear. Mr SPEAKER: Order! We will have the answer to the question. Mr Rowell interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Hinchinbrook. You have asked the question. Mr Rowell: He took my interjection. Mr SPEAKER: Order! We will have the answer to the question. Mr Rowell: It took four hours. Mr CUMMINS: It did not take emergency service vehicles four hours to get there. They got there as quickly as they could. A substantial number of cars and vehicles were involved, including trucks. Emergency services have to come along and make sure the scene is secured. The first thing they want to do is make sure that any people who are harmed are removed from the situation— Opposition members: Four hours. Mr Rowell interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! You have asked the question. Member for Hinchinbrook, you will cease interjecting. Mr CUMMINS: It did not take four hours for them to get the people away. It is absolutely ludicrous to suggest that. It took them a long time to clear the vehicles. Mr Seeney: Why? Mr CUMMINS: Why did it take a long time to clear the vehicles? Firstly, you have to get the injured people out. Then you have to make sure all the oil and other substances are cleared from the scene. Obviously, the tow truck operators and others have to be in a very safe situation to make sure. Police were involved. Police take control of the scene and ensure that proper procedure is followed. While I do not know exactly the issues surrounding the incident, I do not think that was the main reason for all of the traffic congestion. The traffic congestion is notoriously bad on the Ipswich Motorway. It is about time those on the other side of this House stood up with the minister and demanded better funding for our roads in Queensland. People in Ipswich and suburbs to the west— Mr Hobbs interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Member for Warrego, this is my final warning. Mr CUMMINS: People of Ipswich and suburbs to the west are being treated with absolute disdain by the federal government. We heard the former minister and the former shadow minister years ago demanding that something be done on the Ipswich Motorway. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Member for Gregory, this is my final warning. Mr Johnson: That's the first warning I've had. Mr SPEAKER: And it's the final one. Mr CUMMINS: It is about time those opposite stopped trying to blame the good emergency services workers and put the blame squarely back on the federal government, which massively underfunds Queensland roads. Hear and Say Centre Mrs REILLY: My question is addressed to the Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing. In 2000 the state government, through Q-Build, sponsored major upgrades to the Hear and Say facility at Milton. Mr Johnson interjected. Mr SPEAKER: It is the final. 1202 Questions Without Notice 19 May 2004
Mr Johnson: You gave me a final warning. Mr SPEAKER: I have just warned the member for Gregory. I now warn you under standing order 123A. I now call the member for Mudgeeraba to re-ask that question. Mrs REILLY: I would be happy to start again, Mr Speaker. My question is addressed to the Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing. In 2000 the state government, through Q-Build, sponsored major upgrades to the Hear and Say facility at Milton. Would the minister inform members about Q-Build's latest contribution to help this valuable community organisation? Mr SCHWARTEN: I thank the honourable member for yet another sensible question on a very sensitive issue. It is just a shame that the rude people opposite would not pay a bit more attention to this. As the Premier outlined to this parliament this morning, Hear and Say does a wonderful job in this state in restoring the capacity that the people opposite abuse all the time—the capacity to listen and to speak. Since 2000 Q-Build has been involved in a very strong partnership with this organisation. I am delighted to add to what we did at the Milton centre, which was $50,000 worth of work in joinery and assistance in that regard. We will do a similar thing at Robina, where our apprentices will be involved to the tune of $50,000 worth of fitting, joinery, framing up the building and so on. I also want to talk about another corporate citizen who has done a wonderful job with Hear and Say; that is, the building company Thiess. Thiess has adopted this organisation as its charitable partner, as it were. It has spent $1 million in that partnership. It contributed to the Milton centre as well. I also congratulate Thiess on receiving a Year of the Built Environment award this year. Thiess is a very good corporate citizen in this state, and it is good to see the Queensland building institute rewarding Thiess in this regard. For all those on the other side of the House who continually undermine Q-Build, these are the sorts of opportunities our government has to put the arm of friendship, goodwill and support around wonderful organisations such as Hear and Say, which has made a difference to so many people who do not have the capacity to hear and speak as we in this place do. I invite all honourable members to become more familiar with the great work that this organisation does. I commend our business unit Q- Build for the great work that it does and, furthermore, commend Thiess on its wonderful efforts in this regard also. Real Estate Agents Mrs STUCKEY: My question is addressed to the Minister for Fair Trading. Just over two weeks ago the minister issued a media release putting real estate agents on notice for making unsolicited approaches to grieving relatives. Given that it has been revealed that this practice was promoted by the government through the TAFE training course notes, I ask: as the licensing authority, has the minister written to agents, especially those who have gone through the TAFE course that brazenly promoted the use of death notices as a practice to snare potential clients, to demand that they cease such practices? Ms KEECH: I thank the honourable member for the question. I am delighted that the Liberal Party is suddenly so keen to talk about fair trading issues in this House. I commend it for that. We certainly missed representation from the Liberal Party yesterday at the opening of the Centre for Credit and Consumer Law at Griffith University. I thank the honourable member for Beaudesert for his attendance and acknowledge all of the other representatives from the legal and other fraternities who were there. Mr Schwarten: What, the Libs weren't there? Ms KEECH: They were not. It is a bit disappointing. With respect to real estate agent courses, particularly looking at chasing grieving relatives, this is certainly something that as minister I do not support whatsoever. I am pleased that the Minister for Employment and Training has acted so quickly in informing course providers, particularly TAFE, that this sort of response is not acceptable, and I commend him for that. In fact, I have warned agents and put them on notice that such conduct will not be tolerated. Real estate agents who engage in this practice may in fact be in breach of the property agents and motor dealers code of conduct, and under the code they are required to act professionally and refrain from high pressure, harassment or unconscionable conduct. I encourage real estate agents to let the Office of Fair Trading know if they know of any agents who are behaving in such a dishonourable way because it certainly will not be supported by me. Federal Budget, Advertising Mr FINN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Emergency Services. I note in last Sunday's Sunday Mail there was an advertisement from the federal government singing the praises of the budget, and this advertisement had a photo of a fire truck in it. Could the minister please tell the 19 May 2004 Questions Without Notice 1203
House how much money the federal government provides directly for running the Queensland Fire Service? Mr CUMMINS: I would like to thank the member for the question. The answer is no, sadly. The federal government does not directly fund our fire services. The federal government is really clutching at straws on this one. Not only is it drawing a long bow by insinuating that it is funding our Fire Service; a closer inspection shows that it has really missed the mark. The photo the federal government is using is not even a Queensland fire appliance. The advertisement in the Sunday Mail, which is obviously a well- read Queensland newspaper, shows it could not even get the right fire truck. The photo the federal government has used is from New South Wales. It is so out of touch that it is disappointing. The federal budget of last week had very little in it for the majority of Queenslanders, as everyone in this House should acknowledge, although we would not expect that from the other side. This is just another desperate attempt by the federal government to try to convince voters that they provide these types of services. Queenslanders will not be fooled. Those of us on this side of the House acknowledge what a great job our firefighters, auxiliaries and rural brigades do right across Queensland. Sadly, all we hear is derogatory remarks from the other side. The number of outstanding firefighters in Queensland, along with the professional firefighters, is 7,800 full-time and part-time employees and about 88,000 volunteers who go out proudly and save Queenslanders' lives every day. They really do a great job. They deserve our praise and appreciation. While firies are best known for turning out to fires in homes, buildings or in the bush, Queensland Fire and Rescue Service also provides a vast range of other fire and rescue services including road accident rescue and other types of rescue, chemical and hazardous material management, community awareness and education programs. That is a very big part of the job nowadays. Mr ROWELL: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. It is quite clear that what the minister is saying is not absolutely correct because the GST money as far as fire services is concerned then goes into state coffers. Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order. You are debating the issue. Mr CUMMINS: As I was saying, firefighters across Queensland do a great job. Some of the other services they provide are education, community awareness, fire scene investigation, alarm monitoring and response. Our government, the Beattie government, proudly allocated $282.8 million to provide fire and rescue services across our great state. That is an increase of more than $24 million on the operating budget for 2003-04. Pork Industry, Postweaning Multisystemic Wasting Syndrome Mrs PRATT: My question was for the Minister for Primary Industries but I will direct it to the Premier. With regards to the federal decision to allow the importation of pork from 11 countries where the death of eight million pigs has occurred due to the debilitating disease postweaning multisystemic wasting syndrome, and taking into account how little is known of the disease or how it is transmitted, I ask: what measures will this government take to protect Queensland pork producers by ensuring any Australian state importing pork from any of these 11 countries does not cross-trade with Queensland? What representation has this government made to the federal government opposing this importation of pork, and will evidence of that representation be tabled? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for the question because it is a matter that concerns us as well. I should mention that the Minister for Primary Industries is at a ministerial council meeting in Adelaide. That is why he is not here. The federal government announced yesterday that it approved the importation of pig meat from a number of other countries, and the member made reference to that. The Queensland government did make representations to the federal government regarding the import risk and import risk analysis. The Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries stressed the need to dispose of waste material because that is one of the central issues in all of this, as the member knows. The department also pointed out that cooking of the product onshore would inevitably lead to some increased level of waste to be disposed of in Australia—hence, we made the representation to the federal government and made our concern known. As the member knows, the Queensland pork industry itself has expressed concern about the approval of the importation, particularly in relation to the postweaning multisystemic wasting syndrome or PMWS. I think I got that right. Mrs Pratt: Almost. Mr BEATTIE: Only the member and I in the whole chamber know—and of course the Minister for Natural Resources, who is across all these pig issues. The Minister for Primary Industries has noted the issue of biosecurity. It is going to be discussed by Australian agricultural ministers at their meeting, and I would hope out of the meeting that is taking place—that is where he is at the moment—they would issue a very clear position that would clarify these issues of risk and disease. 1204 Ministerial Statement 19 May 2004
There have been a number of issues in recent times involving primary industries that have been a matter of some debate. Bananas are another example. Australia is a part of global importation and exportation—we need that to get jobs for people on the land and farmers. We cannot at any time give up protection of our major industries like the banana industry and the pork industry. The pork industry is very important to us. I can remember a couple of years ago, when on a trade mission to Singapore and other countries in Asia, the enormous opportunities I saw for us to develop our industry and export into those markets. I am keen for us to take advantage of those export opportunities, but whatever we do in terms of trade to get access to those markets we should not at any time put at risk our own primary industries at home. That is one of the issues that Henry Palaszczuk will be pursuing today. With a bit of luck, he will be able to communicate directly with the member. I will ask Minister Palaszczuk's office to make sure that the member is aware of any communication that comes out of the federal ministers meeting.
Local Councillors, Remuneration Package Mr BRISKEY: My question is directed to the Minister for Local Government, Planning and Women. I refer the minister to recent media reports calling on the state government to regulate the setting of remuneration packages for local government councillors. Can the minister advise the House whether this is a practical solution? Ms BOYLE: I thank the hardworking member for Cleveland for his question. The state is not presently intending to change the remuneration accountability requirements for councillors. Presently the system is such that state legislation requires councils publicly to advertise the details of their proposed remuneration packages, including any details of mobile phones, cars, reimbursements, fees or allowances, and they must do so within six months of each council election. Included in this advertisement must be details of dates and times of council meetings where the package will be debated. This will allow interested members of the public to attend. One of the good reasons the state does not set the conditions or remuneration packages for councils is that the job is so diverse around the state of Queensland. For some of the geographically large but small in rate base councils, there is tremendous travelling time to attend only occasional meetings. The job is very different to the job of a councillor in Brisbane city or in other regional cities where maybe a telephone is more important and of more immediate use than a four-wheel drive. The differences in circumstances and the difference in the hours involved in the job are part of the reason why we believe it is best for councils to set their own remuneration packages and to be responsible for this in the eyes of their own constituents. I draw honourable members to an excellent production by the Local Government Association of Queensland entitled 'A Councillor Remuneration and Entitlement Guide 2004'. This excellent publication sets out in detail requirements and advice to all councillors. This is a matter that has been raised in the past at local government conferences and I am sure will be again. Let us keep in proportion the very fine work done by most councillors in this state of Queensland who are indeed earning the remuneration packages they are given.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Ministerial and Opposition Handbooks Hon. P.D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (11.31 a.m.): Today I want to correct an oversight which exists in both the Ministerial Handbook section 4.12.9 and the Opposition Handbook section 4.12.6. When members of the House undertook overseas travel in the early nineties, if my information is correct, the Goss government established a practice that within a month members had to report to this House. We are not changing that, but within that report there was a requirement to provide an estimate of the cost. The difficulty is that with Amex cards and so on the bills are not in within a month and, as the Leader of the Opposition discovered recently when he had to extend the time for the reporting on this, it becomes very difficult to get an accurate figure. I have had the same experience. Mr Mackenroth interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I take that interjection. Most members of the House have not been including an estimate and indeed, as the Deputy Premier indicated, that applied also to the Leader of the Opposition back in June 2002. What happened was that—and this is actually helpful—subsequent to us coming to office I brought in a process that every six months all the accounts had to be tabled in this parliament. The full-year reports are ticked off by the Auditor-General. In other words, they are real costs, not estimated costs. What I have done is change the handbook for both the opposition and the government to provide this— 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1205
Note that the total estimated cost of the travel is to be included in the report and/or the actual costs are to be reported in the Public Report of Office Expenses which is currently required to be presented to parliament on a six monthly basis in accordance with section 3.8 of this handbook. In other words, it is the actual cost. If people want to put in an estimated one they can, but it is the actual costs. I do not want anyone to think that I am seeking to hide the estimated costs of my recent visit. I notice that the Leader of the Opposition has quite rightly reported that his estimated cost was $62,500. On the basis of advice from the Ministerial Services Branch within the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, I am advised that for the equivalent three people that the Opposition Leader has chosen my cost was $61,564.92. I have advised the House. I have been consistent with the old rule. It is now changed forthwith and therefore I would expect people, both ministers and opposition travellers, to in fact include it in the six-monthly report.
ADDRESS-IN-REPLY Resumed from 18 May 2004 (see p. 1167). Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (11.33 a.m.) In February of this year the people of Queensland participated in a most remarkable election that had a most remarkable result. It was not the policy statements of the political parties that made the campaign remarkable, nor was it the daily media menu of bloopers, bare-chested men and public disendorsements, though I must say that the disendorsement of the National Party candidate in Whitsunday did generate more than just a little interest. The 2004 election campaign was remarkable because, unlike campaigns in many countries and nations around the world, in Queensland nobody was imprisoned for their views, no-one was injured or maimed in bloody street violence and nobody died in the name of politics. The outcome of the election was also remarkable, and I say this not because of the outstanding public endorsement of the Beattie government, or because I think that we have all the answers and that everything will run smoothly for the next three years; no, the election outcome was remarkable for the fact that as an elected parliament we sit in this House today with mutual respect for the role that each of us plays in the delivery of good governance and for the fact that passionate debate occurs on a range of issues, without the intervention of violence or political assassination. We are the lucky country and today I pay tribute to the role that each and every person who cast their vote on 7 February played in the maintenance of our democracy. Most of all, I want to thank the good people of the Whitsunday electorate for placing their faith in me to represent their interests in our state parliament. I am humbled by that responsibility and pledge to continue to work hard and diligently for the next three years to repay their trust. Working in my electorate as the member for Whitsunday is actually a labour of love. As I go about my work I am constantly reminded not just of the physical beauty of the area but also of the energy, courage and fortitude of its people. One of the greatest privileges of being a member of parliament is the opportunity to meet so many people, to hear their stories, to be exposed to their history and to learn of their dreams and aspirations. It is at this very personal level that my work has the most meaning and I gain the most satisfaction. I pay special tribute to the many hundreds of wonderful people in my electorate who devote their time and energy to providing volunteer services for the community. If our volunteers ever went on strike our communities would quickly grind to a halt. Whether they work in our schools or hospitals, as referees and umpires in local sporting clubs, as a member of a service club or charitable organisation or in any other guise, our volunteers are the backbone of our communities. Most volunteer clubs, groups and organisations run on a shoe-string budget and indeed a great deal of volunteer time and energy is devoted to fundraising activities. Thankfully the Beattie government has a program in place that returns money raised from gambling and wagering to the community. I speak, of course, of the Gambling Community Benefit Fund. There are few joys in life quite as satisfying as being able to tell a hardworking community group that they have been successful in their grant submission. Since 2001 over $3.75 million has been distributed to community groups in the Mackay- Whitsunday region and I know that even a small amount of money to buy equipment or to enhance facilities can make a big difference to the lot of our volunteers and community groups. It is my intention in this term of the government to continue to work closely with volunteers from all walks of life and to provide them with as much support as is possible. I know that when some people think of the electorate of Whitsunday they automatically imagine a tropical paradise where life floats along in perpetual holiday mode; the motto of the people is 'Don't worry, be happy'. I have to acknowledge that my electorate is home to 74 tropical islands, large tracts of pristine national park and many of nature's icon beaches. There is, however, another side to my electorate that does not make it into the pages of glossy tourism brochures. Despite some views to the contrary, Whitsunday is predominantly a rural electorate where the landscape is dominated by fields of sugarcane. The sugar industry has enjoyed a long and prosperous history in my electorate. However, recent years have seen the winds of change begin to blow through 1206 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 the industry in a way that leaves no-one in doubt that the sugar industry of the 21st century will be a very different beast from its 19th and 20th century predecessors. This process of change will be a difficult and challenging one that, quite frankly, not every canefarmer will survive. There is no silver bullet or panacea for survival and with a volatile exchange rate, depressed world price for sugar and unpredictable weather conditions, even the most efficient and well-managed producer has no guarantee of a future in this industry. I do not say these things just to act as a prophet of doom; I say these things so that my colleagues in this House will understand the precipice upon which the industry is balanced. More than that, I would like everyone to consider that this is not just an industry under threat; we are talking about people and people's lives. Already I know of farming families whose credit will not extend to another season and they have been forced to put their farms on the market. We might as well rip the heart out of these people because for them their farm is not just some asset to be traded; it is part of them. In many cases, it represents their heritage in this country. No-one knows what the future holds for the sugar industry and its people, but I simply say let us not play cynical, political games about who or what is to blame. Let us work together towards a more secure future and, where necessary, let us help to make the transition from the industry as painless as possible. Unfortunately, sugar growers are not the only group in my electorate finding it tough. I am sure that most people in the south-east corner think that the worst drought in 100 years is well and truly over. Nothing could be further from the truth. The failure of yet another wet season in my part of the world has set alarm bells ringing. While the Mackay-Whitsunday region as a whole is in desperate need of soaking rain before winter truly sets in, I am most concerned about the situation in Bowen. Located in an area known as the dry tropics, Bowen has long used its cloudless skies as a lure for tourists. But in the absence of good cyclonic rain over the past few years, which normally replenishes underground water supplies, mango and small crop farmers are having to operate with a reduced allocation of water for irrigation. The Bowen Collinsville Enterprise Group has long championed major water infrastructure projects to drought proof the area, but in this day and age no government would commit to or give approvals for such major projects until all the i's have been dotted and the t's crossed. Most importantly, we need to be sure that the projects would not interfere with the continued health of the catchment and that the projects can deliver water that is affordable. Whatever the final outcome of current deliberations, I will continue to work with local farmers and their representatives to plot the best path forward through what is becoming an increasingly challenging farming environment. If there is one bright spot on the radar in the Whitsundays, it is the steady growth of the tourism industry across the electorate. The credit for the sustained success in this most competitive arena I believe can be shared between the individual business owners who surely deserve honorary degrees in positivity, the regional tourism organisations—Tourism Whitsunday and Mackay Tourism and Development and their dedicated board members—and the state government which, through funding for Tourism Queensland, continues to support a vigorous destination marketing program. One wonders how many other industries could have faced up to disasters like the Ansett collapse, September 11, the Bali bombings and SARS and come out even stronger than ever. It has been a tough time for those in the industry and I want to acknowledge the resilience and doggard persistence of individual operators who could have been excused for thinking that it was just all too hard. But, then again, I think that being an operator in the tourism industry is a bit like being cast adrift in a life raft on stormy seas; there are never any guarantees of success so one just has to keep paddling for all one is worth. The good news is that we seem to be back on track with occupancy rates at the end of last season exceeding expectations. I just hope that this trend continues because, as was recently reported in the print media, Airlie Beach is attracting billions of dollars in development applications that have the potential to make or break the beautiful yet fragile environs of the Whitsundays. I feel fairly confident that we have the appropriate checks and balances in place to protect the environmental integrity of the area during this period of rapid growth. However, I am not nearly so comfortable about the level of social support available to existing and future residents. Of particular concern is the rapidly diminishing availability of affordable housing stocks. I know that this situation is not unique to the Whitsundays, but as a tourist area we do have a lot of our workers in casual employment—a major impediment to home ownership. With ever-increasing rental costs and the predominance of casual employment, many people who come to the Whitsundays in search of a home find themselves priced out of the accommodation market and move on. This is simply not conducive to the creation of a stable, healthy community. I am committed to working with the Whitsunday Housing Association, the Whitsunday Shire Council and the community at large to find answers and, hopefully, solutions to the issues of affordable housing in my electorate. There is still a lot to attract people to the Whitsundays and the attractions just keep expanding. In July of this year the Great Walk of Whitsunday will be officially opened allowing locals and visitors the option of casual day walks through the cool and peaceful lowland forests or a more challenging three- 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1207 day walk along ridge tops that offer spectacular views across the Coral Sea, taking in most of the 74 beautiful islands that make up the Whitsunday group. I know that the whole community is looking forward to the opening of the great walk because above all else it will provide an opportunity for locals to explore the beauty of their own backyard. During my first term as member for Whitsunday, I was on hand to welcome two different but very important new transport services into the Whitsundays. The first of these was Virgin Blue which began flights into the Whitsunday coast airport in April of last year. The arrival of Virgin Blue provided a major boost for our local economy as it not only provided visitors with a choice in airlines; the additional flights also boosted the total number of people coming into the Whitsundays and this was welcomed by everyone. We now also have a weekly flight to and from Sydney, and Melbourne is soon to be added to the list, which will give our southern cousins a direct flight away from the winter blues straight to paradise. A second revolution in transport was unveiled when the tilt train made its maiden voyage through my electorate in June last year. What a great train this is. I can assure members that it has been well received by people in my electorate. While on the topic of planes, trains and automobiles, I want to express my sincere thanks to the former Minister for Transport and Main Roads, Steve Bredhauer, who responded in the best way possible to my pleas for funding to address road issues in the Northern Beaches of Mackay. While life in the Northern Beaches is close to ideal, its very popularity created a very real problem. The ever-increasing numbers of residents who commuted to the city along Mackay-Bucasia Road eventually led to that most hideous of situations, traffic jams. Now my colleagues from Brisbane might say 'so what', but bumper to bumper traffic is the very reason many of the northern beach residents left the big city and moved to the very laid-back beachside locales of Shoal Point, Bucasia, Dolphin Heads, Blacks Beach and Eimeo. The commitment to road improvements which were made during the 2001 election campaign as a five-year plan have been brought forward and since completion have not only eased the traffic problems; they have also made the Northern Beaches an even more popular place to live. So we are now busily planning the next stage of roadworks for which $6 million was committed prior to the last election. Easier road access, a soon to be constructed 24-hour police station and a combined emergency service centre are just some of the services delivered to the Northern Beaches by the Beattie government. I have been proud to have played a role in ensuring that the needs of my constituents in this part of the electorate have been met and I am certainly looking forward to working with this and other communities in my electorate over the next three years. The opportunity to represent the good people of Whitsunday is one that I cherish. The past three years have certainly been a very steep learning curve for me, but I do not have a single regret. The hardest part of this job is the frustration that comes of wanting desperately to help someone but being unable to. I am sure we all curse 'the system' from time to time for its inflexibility, but, at the end of the day, it is only because we have a system that we are able to live in relative peace and stability. The best part of this job is the opportunity to meet and get to know many people from all walks of life and just occasionally actually making a positive difference in their lives. As many members have previously noted, one does not win an election without the considerable assistance of many people. I take this opportunity to record my deep and sincere gratitude to the many, many party members, friends, supporters and family members who gave so generously of their time and energy to ensure that the seat of Whitsunday remained in the Labor fold. I especially thank my campaign manager, Mick Colwell, and his gorgeous wife Maria who have been there to support me every inch of the way. I also owe a huge debt of gratitude to the branch members in my electorate who did the hard yards during the campaign. There is absolutely no glamour in sitting in the sun for hours on end at pre-poll booths or stuffing letters into envelopes, but, time and again, branch members stepped up to the plate and made sure that all the bases were covered. My electorate officers Brendan and Frances were just terrific. I do not tell them enough how much I appreciate their hard work and commitment, but I will put it on the record today. The campaign in Whitsunday was anything but predictable, but they helped to keep our campaign on track and most of all they maintained a good sense of humour which I think is the secret to getting through the inevitable tension of an election campaign. A special thankyou also goes to Damian who worked long hours to coordinate the campaign and to Melissa Thomas who deserves a medal for her patience and understanding. Finally, I pay tribute to my partner Ray who knows how difficult it can be to share one's life with a politician, but has nevertheless been there to support me at every turn. It has been said before, but it is true, that this job puts unfair stress and hardships onto our families, not the least of which is the fact that we just cannot always be around when they need us. Despite this obvious downside, I say again that being the parliamentary representative for the people of Whitsunday is both an honour and a privilege. I look forward to working with my constituents 1208 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 over the next three years as together we face the challenges, celebrate the achievements and continue to build a partnership based on shared values and mutual respect. Hon. R.J. MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (Minister for the Environment) (11.49 a.m.): Mr Deputy Speaker, would you please pass on my congratulations to Mr Speaker on his re-election to this high office and also to the Deputy Speaker on his election. I also want to thank the people of Logan for their continuing confidence in me and also to the dedicated campaign team who were supported by community, sporting and Neighbourhood Watch groups within the Logan electorate. On their behalf, there are a number of issues that I wish to place on the agenda for this, the 51st Parliament. I firstly want to thank my colleague the Minister for Emergency Services for coming to my electorate earlier this year to turn the sod on the Logan West Ambulance Station. This is a much-needed facility to service an expanding community. Extra officers have been assigned to the station, and the station will also service three major roads—the Logan Motorway, the Gateway Arterial and the Mount Lindesay Highway. The officers and the community have been patient over a long period of time, and we are relieved that work has started on this facility. This facility will mean that any person suffering a code 1 will be seven minutes away from an ambulance station. The other major infrastructure project is the Mount Lindesay Highway upgrade. It is a major project, and I want to thank the Main Roads personnel who have been available for my representations to them. In particular, I want to thank Mr John Mullard and Peter Bell and the head of the project for Walter Construction, Mr Syd Phillips. They have been available for people who have worries and for the many different groups who want to see them about their particular concerns. Often with such major projects it is not always possible to have every issue resolved, but they are ready listeners and carefully explain what they are doing, and that is much appreciated. One issue causing some concern was the decision by Education Queensland to excise some land from the Regents Park State School for the placement of extra soil from the road activity. It is a shame that this decision was taken over the school holidays when the school community was not on hand. The staff and students at the school have an environmental project in the nearby adjacent bushland and would have liked to have been consulted about the likely impacts of this decision. Main Roads officers have agreed to keep the P&C advised, and I want to work with them, Main Roads and Education Queensland to ensure that we can get a suitable outcome from what has been an unhappy experience for that P&C. I welcome also a commitment by the Main Roads Minister for a further extension to the service road along the Mount Lindesay Highway near Carter Road. The completion of this project will make entry from the Mount Lindesay Highway safer for people in the Munruben Forest and Chambers Flat areas. Members will recall the Beattie government funding the new TAFE campus at Browns Plains. This has been well received by the local community. I am also pleased to announce to the House that through the efforts of the Logan West Community Centre at Estramina House and with the cooperation of the Logan TAFE director, Mr Greg Harper, a new course will be offered and is currently under way for women to assist them to gain their confidence to help re-enter the work force. The subjects will be offered at the Crestmead Community Centre, which is now being administered by Logan West. This is a meaningful breakthrough for educational opportunities for unemployed and single mothers in my electorate. I want to also commend the work done by the Logan West Community Centre for taking over the Crestmead Community Centre. I want to ensure that the high schools in Logan West—Browns Plains and Park Ridge state high schools—benefit from the learning or earning initiatives announced by the Minister for Education, Anna Bligh. These are two Logan schools that are in the Coopers Plains district under the Education Department administration, but those two schools are often mistaken for being in the Logan-Beaudesert district. It is essential that they are part of any initiatives, because the need in those areas—the need in my electorate—is so great. I want to also bring to the House's attention the need for a new special education unit facility at Browns Plains State High School. I know it is high on the priority list for funding. The P&C has asked me to raise this issue for it in this parliament, and I would ask the minister to consider the funding of this project in the budget context. Two new units have gone in at the Yugumbir State School and another one at the Browns Plains State School, and we very much appreciate that. I want to thank and acknowledge the significant contribution that the Education Minister and the government have made to fund facilities in the Logan area. The minister has been very responsive and proactive to the special need of parents at the Park Ridge school. Its new computer initiative will help all schools in my area and will benefit Park Ridge in particular. I may have new responsibilities, but I have retained my old interests. I know that that will be reassuring for the member for Robina and his team. Members who were in the last parliament and perhaps some who were not will know of my interest in the welfare of my old friend the member for Robina and the Liberal Party that he leads. I proudly stood side by side with the member for Robina in the last parliament to fight against the rampant branch stacking and rorting that had blossomed. When they were threatening the endorsement of the member for Robina, I exposed them. I even helped save 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1209 the new member for Moggill from political oblivion even before his career got off the ground. The demands of my new office may limit my ability to continue this important and, can I say to the House, sometimes dangerous work. Apart from all my work to help the member for Robina and the member for Moggill, it is the parlous financial state of the Liberal Party that continues to cause me great distress. With regard to the recent Liberal Party preselection in the federal seat of Bowman, I understand that an incident occurred and the members erupted—erupted to the point where, I am afraid to say for Liberals, there was pushing and there was shoving. A punch or two was thrown. Numerous threats were made, and all in the one meeting room. These events have given me the answer to the Liberal Party's financial woes. In my electorate there is a very well run boxing club always looking for support bouts for its tournaments. Like the Liberal Party, the club is always on the lookout for fundraising ideas. So today I want to announce that I am keen to help out both the Liberals and my own boxing club. I am suggesting to the boxing club that it invite all the participants from the Liberal Party preselection in Bowman to hold one of their preselection support bouts in my boxing club. It would attract a bigger paying crowd, and the club and the Liberal Party will share the profits. Given what happened at the Bowman preselection, we might even be able to involve other events like wrestling and even kick-boxing. I am unsure about fencing, but the way factionalism is being played in the modern Queensland Liberal Party we should get ready for anything. As the member for Kallangur, a well-known fight promoter, can attest, there are some fighters who get carried out on a stretcher. But I am told that with some of the Liberals in Bowman they get carried in on a stretcher and out on a stretcher. Boxing tournaments must have a doctor in attendance. The member for Moggill would no doubt bulk-bill or offer his services free of charge, though I hope none of the contestants find the treatment worse than the punch that made it necessary. The member for Currumbin could use her medical knowledge to off-side for the member for Moggill. The member for Surfers Paradise could moonlight as a dentist at these events. He could repair the broken teeth and dentures free of charge so the combatants could walk away with that Colgate ring of confidence. If things really get out of hand, the member for Caloundra as a former lawyer with the Public Trustee could read out the wills to all of those anxious relatives. Because I am ever vigilant in looking after the member for Robina's welfare—and I do hope he is listening to me—I am sure that we can turn this escalating violence in Liberal Party preselections into a financial salvation both for my boxing club and for his party. Until recently, of course, the enemies of the members for Robina and Moggill were easy to identify. But they have been joined—perhaps even overtaken—by the member for Callide, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The National Party has a curious approach to its former coalition partner. The Leader of the Opposition wants amalgamation; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition wants extermination. At the last election the Caltabiano forces ensured that the member for Robina was the last one standing for the Liberals at the election. To fashion a compromise for the sake of coalition unity, the Caltabiano Liberals ceded most seats on the Gold Coast to the Nationals. In fact, every state seat in the federal Liberal held seat of Fadden was contested by a National Party member. The Liberals rolled over to the Nationals on tree clearing and daylight saving and then my good friend from the electorate of Callide blamed the Liberals for their election loss! He locked the Liberal Party staffers out of the opposition offices. No wonder Di McCauley said all of those uncharitable things about him in her highly acclaimed literary work. I implore members on both sides of the House to turn the other cheek for the member for Callide and shout him a meal whilst he is here in parliament. I understand that he is short of cash. I understand that he has been driving around Callide and going into every newsagency and buying Di McCauley's book before his constituency has had a chance to read it. That is why a few weeks ago up there in Rocky the member for Callide was worried about used car salesmen. I understand that his car has done so many kilometres that it is ready for a trade-in. So members should not be too harsh on him in his criticism of used car salesmen. He had a used car on his mind as a direct result of this book. The net effect is that the sales for the McCauley book are rising and the member for Callide's wealth is plummeting. I hope that the library will not allow the member for Callide to borrow the copies that it has purchased for members to read, because it will have trouble getting them back. They will be out on a long-term loan. I am delighted to inform the House today of another very significant appointment that I have made. After his superb speech in this House last Thursday night—and it is compulsory reading for anybody who missed it—I have asked the distinguished member and my friend the member for Southport to assist with the task of continuing the fight not yet won to make the Queensland division of the Liberal Party honest, genuinely democratic and representative. Members have no idea of the enormity of the burden that my colleague has undertaken. His fax machine will burn out. Crossing the road will become dangerous as material falls from the backs of trucks. Much of that material will be interesting; most of it will be deadly accurate from Liberal Party branch members and office-bearers right across the length and breadth of Queensland. I say to the new members of the Liberal Party in this House: if you want to know what is happening in your party, ask me. I can be relied upon to supply them with accurate branch member details, unlike their own organisation. In the term of the 50th Parliament it 1210 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 was I who came to the rescue of the member for Robina on that desperate day when he was trying to get the numbers in the conference. I wanted to supply him with all of those branch member lists so that he could contact each and every one of them. The member for Southport will perhaps even do a better job than I did looking after the interests of the Liberal Party. He has a forensic ability to expose the rorts and that will be very helpful. But I will be there to help him as time permits. It is that heavy burden that I have to carry now that takes me away from what has been one of life's great horrors—meeting all of those people in the dead of night, people with false beards, and that was just some of the women in the Liberal Party. So I say to my friend from Southport that this is not an easy challenge that I have given him. There will be times when I will look back at this with great regret. But I hope that he can bring some salvation to the Liberals, because they need it. My friend from Kallangur will be there to help the member for Southport with any fights that he has to sponsor over at the Greek Club if there are any other preselections like the one for Bowman. So I wish the member for Southport all the very best for that. May I thank my electorate for the indulgence that they have allowed me, but I know I do this on their best behalf. If we can get anything from this today, at least we might be able to help out my boxing club in Browns Plains which is only too happy to sponsor any further preselection bouts for the Liberal Party. Miss ELISA ROBERTS (Gympie—Ind) (12.03 p.m.): I am pleased to have this opportunity to bring to the attention of the House, particularly to the ministers, the needs of the electorate of Gympie. The Gympie electorate is lucky to have the best of everything. It has the beautiful, pristine beaches of Rainbow Beach and Tin Can Bay, the magnificent vistas of the Mary Valley, the wonderfully eclectic and artistic environment of Cooroy and Pomona and, of course, the thriving community of Gympie proper. The past three years has seen many changes in my electorate. Following representations that I made to the previous Health Minister, I am pleased to see the refurbishment of the Gympie Hospital, including a new surgical theatre and an updated dental clinic. My electorate is also looking forward to the redevelopment of the accident and emergency department and any new policies that the current Health Minister devises in order to reduce the current statistics that show that people in many rural areas are dying from preventable diseases up to eight times more frequently than are their wealthier city counterparts. The fantastic dedicated staff of the Gympie Hospital deserve the very best in medical technology and the best possible conditions in which to work. I thank the staff for their commitment and patience in regard to the changes occurring within their hospital and I vow to continue to fight on their behalf and for future patients so that they can be confident that their hospital will not lose any more services offered, as was the situation when I took over this seat in 2001. I will also work during this term to address the issue of waiting lists for dental treatment. I am advised by the hospital district manager that the backlog is beginning to be reduced. I sincerely hope that those who have been waiting for over four years for an appointment will be treated in the very near future. Unfortunately there have been some concerns in regard to the current trial for emergency dental treatment, but I am hopeful that at the conclusion of the trial the minister and his staff will take on board the public's views when deciding whether to make the new system permanent. Still on the topic of health, I have some concerns about the dissemination of information regarding the access to mental health services within my electorate. I have been contacted by some people who have either been suicidal themselves or a relative of someone who is displaying suicidal tendencies. These people advise me that they have to wait up to three weeks for an appointment. Apparently, Gympie has a crisis acute mental health team that is available between 8 a.m. and 4.30 p.m. Monday to Friday. Support is supposed to be available after-hours from the Sunshine Coast, but people are still told that they have to wait weeks for an appointment. It seems as though the availability and extent of services is just not getting out to the community. Last night a staff member of mine attended a public forum regarding mental health. The lack of knowledge within the community regarding mental health support is also being felt by volunteer organisations such as Lifeline and op-shops. People are often going into the shop severely depressed and seeking help, but staff are unaware of where they can actually refer these people. There seems to be a general lack of information out in the public as to what a person can do if they are feeling depressed or suicidal. In light of this, I totally support the planned 1300 number for people to call if someone is worried about a friend or relative's mental state. The planned implementation of such a number was told to me by a Gympie mental health worker, and I hope that it becomes a reality. It saddens me to think of some of the young people in my community who have taken their own lives over the past 12 months who, had they have been aware of the fact that the help was out there, may still be with us today. I acknowledge that there is a problem in recruiting medical practitioners and specialists, such as psychiatrists, to regional areas due to the inadequate remuneration offered by this government to encourage and maintain doctors. If Gympie is not to have full time or at least permanent back-up staff, then people should be referred to the nearest location where treatment can be sought. No-one in a precarious mental state should have to wait for treatment simply because of a lack of communication 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1211 between departments and clients as to alternative treatment options when one service provider is unable to provide assistance at that time. Another area that I will be focusing on throughout this term is the upgrade and maintenance of the state schools throughout my electorate. There are a number of schools that require substantial upgrades. A few schools have reached the stage where their student numbers are growing so rapidly that they no longer fit comfortably in the buildings, particularly the demountable buildings that were supposed to be temporary, yet are still in place 20 years down the track. The education of our youth is vitally important and is an area on which I will continue to focus. Finally on the topic of education, I just want to say to the minister: please give my schools airconditioning. The site plan for the replacement police headquarters has been signed off by the new Police Minister and the Gympie headquarters is on the three-year forward plan for capital works. I hope that the forthcoming budget will see the necessary funding to begin actual construction and is not one of the projects to suffer now that the government has had to reprogram its capital works schedule. Some of the issues that people are still bringing forward concern the increasing inability of people to access legal aid services and the high public liability costs for nonprofit organisations. I am sure that everyone in this House is aware of the magnificent job volunteer organisations do, whether that be transporting patients to specialist appointments from Rainbow Beach to Brisbane, providing a hall for a local dance group, or providing recreational activities for those who have a disability. If there is a way that the government can provide some sort of financial assistance to these types of organisations, any assistance to lessen the financial burden, that would be instrumental in ensuring that they continue to exist within our communities. I am aware of the hugely litigious society in which we live and that people must start to take more responsibility for their actions instead of taking the option to sue. However, it will probably take generations to reverse this trend to the extent that it may actually equate to lower premiums. In the interim, we still have many vital volunteer and community groups struggling to survive due to these costs. Governments at all levels rely on volunteer and community organisations to serve communities in a number of ways. Each one of these organisations manages to lessen the burden of responsibility for governments in numerous areas. Without the valuable contribution made by each and every one of these organisations, our communities would be bereft of essential services and care. It is due to the great necessity for our nonprofit groups that governments at all levels should contribute a percentage of the insurance costs so that they continue to function for the benefit of the public. One area I believe needs to be addressed by this government is the unmet needs of people with a disability. Whilst the increase in emergency funding which was offered during the last term was appreciated by the disability sector, it in no way managed to deal with the long-term future of the sector. The current funding formula for service providers falls way short of ensuring equity to clients. The specific individualised funding manages to service only a small percentage of people with a disability and leaves many without assistance at all. In 2002, only 10 per cent of applicants for funding were successful. The urgent requirement for respite for carers cannot be underestimated. There are people in our communities who are desperate for respite accommodation and day care. We are all becoming aware of the fact that the number of ageing members of the population is growing rapidly, but nowhere is it more of a concern than in the disability community. I know of numerous parents who are in their middle to late 70s and are the primary carers for an adult son or daughter with a severe disability. The concerns these people have surround the fact that they cannot get any sort of guarantee that their child will be looked after when all family members have passed away. Many of these members of the community whose parents are no longer able to look after them end up on huge doses of medication in nursing homes that are not capable of looking after residents with disabilities. The quality of life of these people is radically reduced and devastating to witness. The problems arising out of the housing boom and subsequent rise in house rentals, as well as a lack of emergency accommodation, particularly for men, are of major concern and need to be addressed once again by all levels of government. I commend the Noosa council for initiating its affordable housing pilot. This initiative would entail a partnership between the council, landlords and the state government. The partnership will lease private housing for a guaranteed one- to two-year period at 75 per cent of the market rate. These properties would then be let at the same discounted rate as for those who are on low incomes. At the end of each lease the three parties would jointly fund any necessary repairs so that the properties would be returned to the owners in the same condition as they were initially leased. I believe that the proactive approach taken by Noosa council is marvellous and well worth this state government's support. Ideally, my electorate would benefit from more ambulances, which I imagine would be automatic now that everyone is paying a levy. Mr Cummins: Did you support it? Miss ELISA ROBERTS: Yes, I did. We would also benefit from more schoolteachers and smaller classes and an expansion of the patient transit subsidy scheme for people who live outside Gympie. 1212 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
There are numerous other subjects and issues which I will gladly pursue on behalf of my electorate over the next three years. I would like to thank all of those people who assisted me in my re-election campaign, particularly my polling booth workers, who worked so hard, stayed positive and managed to keep me feeling so much more confident than I actually was. There are so many of you, and I am hesitant to mention you all by name because I may inadvertently leave one out. You know who you are, and you are wonderful. No words can even convey how grateful I am to you. I would also like to thank those people who came up to me in the street or while I was shopping, and continue to do so, to congratulate me. You will never know how much a few kind words mean to me. As for all those lovely cards and letters, I have kept every single one. I promise to work even harder during this term, and I want every single person who put their faith in me once again on election day to know that I never take one moment of my time as their representative for granted and treasure the role they have given me more as each day goes by. Hon. N.I. CUNNINGHAM (Bundaberg—ALP) (12.13 p.m.): On 7 February this year the people of Bundaberg elected me for the seventh time in a row—the first four elections at local government level and the last three for this state parliament. I feel humbled by their support and I thank them sincerely for their continued confidence in my commitment to listening to their concerns and in my ability to deliver better facilities and services for our residents, increased opportunities for our city and a better quality of life for us all. As other members have said, it takes enormous support from a wide range of people to win a state seat. I take this opportunity to thank my husband, Elvin, son, Glenn, daughter, Anne, and their young families for their total and unconditional support and encouragement throughout my 16 years in public life. As I have said many times, family support and a sense of humour are essential if you are going to cope with the pace, the challenges and the demands of public life. I am also fortunate to have the support of my mum, my sisters and my brother, and my late dad, who was my mentor in politics and taught me how to stand up for my beliefs, would have given me the greatest encouragement. Today I would like to place on record my thanks for the unwavering support of my electorate officer, Marcia Courtice, undoubtedly one of the best in Queensland; Mr Dennis Carswell, who has been my campaign director for all three state campaigns; Mrs Evelyn Quinn, who is always there when we need help and spoils us with her home cooking; a former member for Bundaberg, Mr Jim Blake, whose political astuteness and wisdom is invaluable; branch president Jim Emery and all of our branch members; and John Faircloth and Michael Edgar, who were on the city council with me and have remained good friends and supporters. I thank Milton Dick, who was again an enormous help with my campaign; Ken King, who came from Gladstone to help; Bill Ludwig and the AWU; and the many Labor Party members in Bundaberg and Brisbane who together ensured that I would again have the honour of representing Bundaberg here in this 51st Queensland Parliament. I congratulate all members on their election and re-election and place on record my disappointment at the loss of Trevor Strong, who was a very capable and well-liked member for Burnett and a valued member of the second Beattie Labor government. Trevor has since been elected to the Burnett council, so the people of Burnett have not lost him entirely. Once again, the people of Queensland have chosen a Labor government to provide the basic right of all Queenslanders—open and honest government. I congratulate the Premier and fellow cabinet ministers for providing the leadership and the policies that led Labor to another outstanding win. Following my first election to this House in 1998, my maiden speech highlighted the many attributes of the beautiful city of Bundaberg. I spoke of the importance of our sugar industry and the growth occurring in our horticultural industries, at our port, in our clubs, in special events that boost our economy and at our new university campus, where 72 per cent of the earlier enrollees were the first members of their families to ever have a university education. During that speech I also emphasised our main problems—the desperate need for a major water storage in place of the Kallawa dam that was promised in the 1970s and never delivered, and our massive unemployment problem. I said in that speech in 1998— If we are ever going to provide jobs we need new industries, we need expansion of existing industries and we need water to service those industries. I went on to say— But we must have that dam to provide ... for the economic stability of our entire region—its industries, its people and our future. I am very proud to say that we are now getting that dam. I also spelt out some federal government issues that were impacting badly on communities across Australia—unemployment and job security, the continued sale of our assets, the rising costs of health treatment, the concerns for the welfare of our elderly and the concerns for our young, for their education and for their future. Sadly, six years later those problems are still there, and they gained very little mention in last week's federal budget. While the money flowed freely in that budget, the major issues of education, health, housing and roads missed out badly. I am sure that these issues, together with the future of Medicare and Telstra, will figure prominently in the coming federal election campaign. 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1213
However, in my past two terms in this parliament much has been achieved for Bundaberg. The dam we have so desperately needed is being delivered by the Beattie government. It is the biggest Queensland government project under way anywhere in the state. It has already lifted confidence in our city, will give our economy the boost it has needed for so long and has put Bundaberg on the positive pathway to a stronger future. It is the first dam to be built in Australia under the current rigorous environmental standards, with $17 million to be spent on environmental management and protection, monitoring programs and fishways. The new approach roads and bridges are a huge benefit to those shires, as is the workers accommodation village, now completed in Childers. A $500,000 allocation will start recreational programs for the completed dam. Under our government unemployment in Queensland is now at its lowest level for 20 years, and we are securing stronger economic and employment opportunities for Bundaberg. As I have just said, the $200 million dam is well under way, with 150 workers now on site and economic benefits flowing on to local companies and suppliers; four companies are preparing to move onto the new food precinct; the new Salmat call centre is employing 130 men and women; scallop, hemp and mining proposals are progressing well; further expansion is occurring at our port; and our state development centre has identified possible investors for the Austoft site. The building industry is booming. Our state government is providing financial incentives to local manufacturers, and more than $7 million has been spent on training programs and providing jobs for some 1,200 apprentices, trainees and our unemployed. While I am encouraged by the drop in unemployment in Bundaberg in these past two terms, there is still a long way to go, and this new term in parliament will be one of challenges, opportunities and hard work as we move to secure industrial growth in Bundaberg and provide the jobs that are still so badly needed in our city. Other major gains for Bundaberg during my first two terms include extensions and capital works to 14 schools. Some $27 million has been spent on public housing. We have gained 39 extra police, including our first two Aboriginal liaison officers. A daily tilt train service between Bundaberg and Brisbane was initiated very successfully. Our clubs and groups gained more than $2 million in gaming funds. Our rowing, athletics, golf, BMX and sailing clubs received major project funds. Our Emergency Services gained record new vehicles and equipment. A new TAFE marine college was built. Extensions were made to DNR. Buildings were funded for our university. The sum of $1 million was provided to build the PCYC building. We provided more than $2 million in subsidies to the city council, $4.5 million to develop the food precinct and $1.3 million for a new aerial ambulance. We increased funds to community services and state subsidies allowed our private bus service to expand. I worked tirelessly in those two terms to gain better funding for our hospital, better services and better conditions, better equipment and better buildings and shorter waiting times for patients. To name just some achievements, the hospital budget was increased by 35 per cent. The $27 million redevelopment was completed. We gained a rheumatology clinic. The four-chair renal dialysis clinic was increased to 11 chairs. Mental health buildings were improved. The outpatient clinic was expanded from just six rooms to 14. Modern birthing suites have been added. New staff accommodation is complete, and modern equipment including a CT scanner has been installed. All medical positions are now filled. Our nurses are highly qualified, compassionate and caring. Up-to-date modern equipment and technology is available, and during the minister's recent visit to the hospital we were met with positive comments from staff and patients. I have a steady stream of residents contacting my office singing the praises of our hospital, the staff and the treatment they have received. This is a very different scene to what was happening during my first term when the then National Party member for Burnett used that hospital mercilessly as a political football. The media reports at that time not only reflected badly on everyone working at the hospital but also made it very difficult to recruit doctors and specialists. That member's constant and irresponsible statements caused enormous problems for our hospital and an unprecedented drop in staff morale. It was a terrible time for staff, patients and their families, and nobody in Bundaberg wants a repeat of those three years. I urge the member for Burnett to settle down and have some regard for the ongoing reputation of our hospital and its 860 employees. He would build a better profile for himself if he forgot about crises— I believe he identified 12 in his maiden speech—and started making a positive contribution to his electorate and his constituents. Follow up complaints by all means—that is our job—but follow the appropriate channels available to all members of this House to represent constituents. I urge staff members who are complaining to Mr Messenger to follow the appropriate procedures available to them through their unions to negotiate on their behalf. I am very proud of my first two terms in this parliament, including twice being appointed to cabinet as Minister for Local Government and Planning. I have just outlined some of the achievements I gained for Bundaberg in that time, and as minister I consider the two most important pieces of legislation I put forward were the tough new laws for the keeping of restricted dogs and the new swimming pool fencing legislation that will save young lives. My most satisfying achievement as minister was to stop federal minister Wilson Tuckey's proposals for the distribution of financial assistance grants to Queensland's local governments that would have seen some 30 councils facing enormous financial difficulties. 1214 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
I appreciate the thanks and good wishes I have received from the many friends I have in local government, and I will always appreciate the honour and distinction of being part of cabinet and the friendship I enjoyed with fellow ministers. However, this term is going to be a turning point for Bundaberg, and in asking not to be considered for cabinet in this term I gained the opportunity to concentrate solely on my electorate of Bundaberg, its people, its problems and its future. In this term our dam will be completed and growth in our industries will not only be possible but also need to be promoted, encouraged and supported to ensure we gain every opportunity for industrial growth and jobs. The food precinct will move ahead as growers take advantage of the security of water to expand their horticultural industries and move further into processing and exporting. Our sugar industry that is so important to Bundaberg will face enormous changes in this term. The state government's Sugar Industry Reform Bill that was passed through this parliament just weeks ago will allow that industry to make the necessary changes to move forward, and I look forward to helping this industry not just survive but also prosper as one of our major industries. At this crucial time for the sugar industry I was dismayed to see the federal government's strong focus on exiting the industry in its package, and I can say I was disgusted that every National Party member in this House—some representing major sugar growing areas—not only voted against our necessary legislation but also fought against it for two days. The Beattie government's third term has started off at top pace, with the three bills introduced on the very first sitting day—the Vegetation Management Bill, the Sugar Industry Reform Bill and the Duties Amendment Bill that will reduce transfer and mortgage duties by up to $3,000 for first home buyers in Queensland—clearly showing this government is governing for all Queenslanders. In Bundaberg 10 days ago I had the pleasure of announcing $840,000 in state subsidies for major sporting projects for Rugby League, cricket and hockey. If added to the recent $261,000 in gaming funds to 15 local clubs, this government has provided more than $1 million to sport and recreation in Bundaberg in just two months, and we are already benefiting from the government's election promise to reduce elective surgery waiting times with 50 extra Bundaberg patients to have their surgery by June. The Beattie government's support for Bundaberg—for our dam, for job creation, for our hospital, for our schools, for public housing, for emergency services, for sporting and community welfare—has been unprecedented and I will continue to work in a positive way for Bundaberg's industries, groups and constituents as we as a government work together to meet the challenges of this 51st Queensland Parliament and gain the maximum opportunities for our electorates. I joined this parliament in 1998 to get a dam—a dam that no-one had been able to get in almost 30 years—and we are getting it. This has given me the greatest sense of achievement in my 16 years in public life and it has given Bundaberg a future. In closing, I would like to say a big thankyou to the many community groups, service clubs and volunteers who work tirelessly to lift the quality of life we enjoy in Bundaberg. It is my privilege to be patron of 15 of those clubs, and I take this opportunity to pay tribute to them all. Hon. C.P. CUMMINS (Kawana—ALP) (Minister for Emergency Services) (12.28 p.m.): I would like to congratulate the Speaker on his commitment to the 51st Parliament. Coming into this House for the 50th Parliament, I know that he is a very good man and does an extremely good job. It is with great pleasure and pride that I stand here and give this address-in-reply speech as the member for Kawana. I am very humbled to be part of the Beattie government's cabinet and a representative from the Sunshine Coast. I promise that I will do everything I can to continue to faithfully serve the citizens of my electorate and indeed the Sunshine Coast region. The Sunshine Coast is one of the fastest growing regions of our great state. With my good friend and colleague the member for Noosa, I know that the people of the Sunshine Coast will have strong voices and get a good hearing in this, the 51st Parliament of Queensland. After my re-election in February I can still claim to be the only person to represent the fine electorate of Kawana. However, one person can only do so much during an election campaign and there are many, many people who work tirelessly behind the scenes. Of course, my wife, Donna, my soul mate, and my five-year-old son, Daniel, are obviously my most treasured supporters and I dearly love them. I cannot thank them enough for their support and understanding during what can be a very difficult and trying time as a member's wife and son. While we say we want to put family first we do know the pressures that we all face. Election campaigns and the trail that we go on when the elections are called are full of pressure and are very difficult times and I thank them both for their love and support. I would also like to sincerely thank my parents, Kevin and Priscilla, for their love, support and devotion. They have been very fine supporters of mine and long-term supporters of the Labor party. I can remember growing up listening to arguments around my grandfather's kitchen table in Liverpool Street, North Ipswich. My grandfather was a crane driver in the railway who had come off the land from the Toowoomba area. He had three sons, Maxie, Kevin and Warren. Those three sons all went into the North Ipswich railway workshops and did trades. I was very proud in the late seventies to go into the railways. Neither my grandfather, my father nor any of my uncles were still there, but I was a third 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1215 generation railway worker. North Ipswich was a very working-class area and I am very proud to say that I came from there. No-one should ever be ashamed of where they come from. I received a very good education and I suppose my political education was one of great interest, being a working-class Catholic, in the great debates of the DLP and the ALP and, as I say, my parents, my uncles and grandparents were very strong supporters of the Labor movement. They were some of the very many good Labor members who have come from the Ipswich area. Many still do. I know my Uncle Warren and Aunt Noela are very good supporters of the Ipswich Labor members. I cannot thank my family enough for their support and understanding during what can be a very difficult time. My father spent many years as a fireman in the Air Force and I am very pleased to be able to continue this family involvement as the Minister for Emergency Services. I have also had a very long association with paramedics and the ambulance system. When I was married close to a decade ago my best man and groomsman were both paramedics and now work for Care Flight on the Care Flight helicopters on the Gold Coast. I therefore have a close association with emergency service workers. I acknowledge that most members, if not all members of this House, build up a very good rapport with their local ambulance committees and also their ambulance staff and firemen by visiting the stations and meeting with them socially. They are great workers in the community; I know that we have a great affiliation. I am very pleased to be associated with those emergency services workers because I do believe that they are the salt of the earth. It is no wonder that emergency services personnel and volunteers are held in such high esteem by the general community. They regularly get satisfaction ratings above the 90 per cent mark year after year. Recently I attended a live fire training exercise at the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service academy at Lytton with some other very interested members from this side of the House. What we saw during two very impressive fire and road accident rescue exercises really opened our eyes to what these fantastic people deal with every day of their working lives. I sincerely mean that. We cannot thank our emergency services workers enough. I would also like to make mention of a very special group of people who helped me during the campaign; they were truly inspirational. To Lyn Parker, Beth Webster and Donna Hamer, who put in very long hours in my electorate office: I cannot thank the three of you enough. Even when the going got really tough close to the end of the campaign and soon after, when the result was up in the air, those three people were always on hand to make sure the ship was on course. There are many people who helped in my campaign office by doing simple but important work like stuffing envelopes and delivering flyers in the searing summer heat from early in the morning to late in the evening. There were even some people working away at these chores in the campaign office when one of the worst storms that I can remember to hit the Sunshine Coast passed through Kawana. Sadly, many received damage to their vehicles, and I again thank those who showed up the very next day to continue to fight for what they believe in: a party that has a strong social justice agenda. I know that this will not put them off continuing the fight to make sure that their political beliefs and friendships are well supported. It is always difficult to name all the people who have helped me and I do apologise if I miss any, but I do have to put a lot of names on the record. There is Don and Audrey Harris, who are great supporters who live nearby. Don and Audrey retired from the electorate of Kallangur; they are well known to Ken and speak highly of him. They are very active in their community and are what I would describe as salt of the earth type people. I must mention Jean Robinson, Rose Benson and Kath Sweeting, who in the last term suffered the tragic loss of her loving husband. Kath is a very good supporter and I thank her for all the hard work she has done. Mark Lawrence is a union representative on the Sunshine Coast who has a passion second to none to make sure that workers receive their correct entitlements. He is a very good man and he is known by many on this side of the House. Richard and Amanda Bexon are great people whom I have met over the years. They have their own business and they never cease to chip in and lend a hand. I cannot speak highly enough of James and Mary Gardner. James and Mary were my campaign managers in 2001 and they came back for more in 2004. James and Mary are tireless workers with hearts as big as Phar Lap. Ray Marx and Robyn Deane are a great couple who also gave me great advice and were never caught short when it came to assisting. Mick Graham from Caloundra has been very active within the ALP and the entire Caloundra community. He is a great assistant and he and his good wife, Jenny, have always been good friends of mine. I have got to make mention of two people who are probably enjoying themselves in gay Paris at the moment: John Gray and his lovely wife, Claire-Marie. John was my campaign manager and is a bundle of knowledge, a bundle of fun and sincerely a great man. John has since been endorsed as the ALP candidate for Fisher. I know that John will fight the good fight and I would be very proud to see him as the first Labor member for our area. John has an extensive military and academic career and his thoughts at a federal level are, in my opinion, second to none. I offer John and Claire-Marie the support they have offered me and I will leave no stone unturned in making sure that he has a successful transition to Canberra this year when the Latham Labor government is elected. 1216 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
Leon Boulton is another great member of the party. He is a long-term worker and life member of the party. In my first term we applied for life membership for Leon and he received it. He was one of the cornerstones of the formation of the Kawana branch of the Labor party. I was elected to this House as a state member for Kawana and, in fact, we did not have a Kawana branch. We formed a Kawana branch from members from Caloundra and Maroochydore and, of course, a lot of new members. It is a very vibrant branch, as most on the Sunshine Coast are, filled with hardworking people. We do have a lot of differing views but we all have one thing in common and that is to make sure that the thoughts and beliefs of the Labor party and a strong social justice agenda for all is implemented at the various levels of government. Todd and Sonya Comrie and their beautiful baby son have been great friends of my wife and I and great party supporters. I wish them well. They have transferred out of my area and I know they will both have a very successful family life and great careers. To Cameron Tappin, who sadly will be relocating away from the Sunshine Coast: I thank you very much. To John and Rita Williams, who have always been great friends and very good supporters: I thank you. I also say thankyou to Peter Friis, who I know was a former assistant to another railway electrician in this House; Peter used to help in the Nudgee campaign. Sadly, I had to rope him in for the Kawana campaign. Peter is very active. He is a very compassionate man. He is not a young man, but he stands and fights as hard as he can. He has a very strong belief in regard to the tragedy that this sad and sick Liberal federal government imposes on the refugees who come to our state. Mr Neil Roberts: He is a good man, Chris. I worked with him for many yeas. Mr CUMMINS: I did mention that he was an assistant to the member for Nudgee, Neil Roberts, when the member was working as an electrician. I thank Pam Taylor, Nancy Venning, Peter and Judy Flint, Carol Silabon, Laurie Sartori and Andreas and Anneke Flach, who would be known to many in this House. Their daughter formerly worked for the Minister for Health and the former member for Mount Coot-tha. They are great supporters. In retirement they have endless energy and are very strong supporters of the ethnic community. Mick and Mirella Vran are great people whom I met while working in the community and on the dunes over the years. They too helped me tirelessly. I thank Scott and Lee Falvey, Peter and Ann Slade, Michael Taylor and Rita Walker, John and Jenny Stephenson, who are very proud people. They are good friends of Mick and Mirella Vran. They worked tirelessly in making sure that I was re-elected to this place. Len Cook and his son, Matthew, are the typical Australian family. Len is a solid man and his son, Matthew, was great fun and had boundless energy. Jamie Kerr and his sons are great people who did everything they could to help me. To Clive and Pam Robertson I say thankyou. I know Clive will be campaign manager at the upcoming federal election for the ALP candidate for Fisher. They will again pour their heart and soul into making sure that we have a Labor representative at a federal level. Sam and Lois Bateman—all I can say about them is ditto. They are great friends both of mine and of the federal candidate. Brett and Penny Shipton, formerly from New South Wales, have relocated to Queensland and are great friends. They have two lovely boys and were of great assistance. Stan and Iris Williams also helped. Stan is getting on and many from Townsville will know of Stan and his great work for the party up there. Peter Blanche needs thanking. I did mention my uncle and aunt, Warren and Noela Cummins, who not only helped out with my good friend Don Livingstone but also doubled up and came to Kawana to help me out. Steve and Katrina Pullen are a great young couple who have very successful careers. I thank them dearly, along with Brad Davies and Kendall Perkins-Brakels, who is probably the best painter on the Sunshine Coast and one of the best in Australia. To Brendan Bathersby, a great mate, I say thanks. I acknowledge Horatio and the Passeggi family. The Passeggi family in the last term had a very difficult issue regarding their migration visas. I was very pleased that the Beattie government did what it could to help this good family that was adopted by the Sunshine Coast community. Their children were living and working within our community and going to a local school. They were involved in their local church. They came back and helped me because of the work we did. They are a really great family and an asset not only to Queensland but also to Australia. I acknowledge Loree Rudd, who is very well known in this House, Greg Pitman, Paul Morton, Greg Roberts, Barbara Hanson and her parents, Frank and Heather Hanson, and Ken King and Christina Nuttall. They were helping other people, but they were tireless in their support for me. I also acknowledge Meg and Enzo Dicento, Stuart Cordingly, Miriam Webb, Peter Harris, Noela Murphy, Steve Nykiel, Ray O'Donnell, Brendan Hogan and Bill and Irene McRae, life members of the Labor Party who came up from Booval. After they helped the member for Ipswich they came up and helped on my campaign. Bill and Irene are great parents of a loving family and are, in fact, my brother's parents-in-law. I could not speak more highly of Bill and Irene. 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1217
Dianne Stirling, Val Hill, Emma Bateman, George Pesce, Mike Meurer, Leigh Heaney, Rhys Bortignon, Trish Marinozzi and Michael Catchlove were all great assistants. I am very pleased that they helped me. I would not be standing here today without their great support and understanding. The Sunshine Coast is now home to almost 240,000 people. The population of the region is projected to grow and reach close to 400,000 by 2016. In recent years, the region has been charting substantially higher annual growth than any other part of south-east Queensland and Queensland as a whole. This rate of growth is expected to continue. The region is becoming increasingly popular as a home for young families. The Sunshine Coast surfing beaches, cosmopolitan dining, shopping options and beautiful hinterland make it a very popular holiday destination. We should welcome our tourists and visitors to the area because they generate funds and employment. Our region's main industry is tourism. There is still a strong agricultural sector— with sugar and tropical fruit. We are facing a crisis with the Nambour mill closing, but the people of the Sunshine Coast know that the end is near and that they have to continue to enjoy the great lifestyle that we have. We have seen a significant growth in education. Education should be referred to as a business. It is a great business. I do sincerely believe in the Smart State as do the vast majority of the people living in brick and tiles right across Queensland who want to see the next generation educated to a better standard than they are. There is nothing wrong with that. We do have a very vibrant construction, fishing and retail industry. The Beattie Labor plan for the Sunshine Coast that we took to the election and was overwhelming endorsed includes $104 million in transport investments. This is infrastructure that we badly need. Sadly, the federal government has spent little or nothing on the Sunshine Coast. We have had inept federal members for far too long. It is all right to stand there and be the propaganda machine for an inept federal Liberal government, but it is about time they started bringing home some bacon. We will see in coming weeks glittery promises of millions of dollars, but after decades of poor federal representation it is about time we had a change. We as a government will be creating over two and half thousand new jobs through an investment of close to $18 million. More than $27 million in health upgrades will be made. I acknowledge the good work that the new Health Minister is doing. He has an open door policy. He is going to ensure that we have aged care facilities, a second operating theatre and extra beds at Caloundra Hospital. This is already under way. Specialist vascular surgery at Nambour Hospital and new renal dialysis services will be provided. Nambour Hospital is a great regional hospital. If we could turn back the clock 30 or 40 years we would not have built the Nambour Hospital where it is presently; we would have built it in a more central location. But decades ago Nambour was the capital of the Sunshine Coast. These things happen. It is a great hospital and it has great workers. It is under immense stress with the high growth area. The minister has committed close to $10 million to ensure a new health facility will complement the Kawana area, which I am very supportive of. There is another $20 million in education staff and facilities, including close to 60 new teachers. Something very dear to my new position is that over $5 million for emergency services projects and staff, including 20 new paramedics, will be provided. The member for Noosa spoke about the new ambulance station at Coolum. There is more money for police—close to $9 million. A police station was promised for my electorate and it will be delivered within this term at Sippy Downs. We also have two new police beats. Mr Deputy Speaker, please pass on my good wishes to the Speaker in this 51st Parliament. Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (12.48 p.m.): At the outset I congratulate the member for Kawana on his elevation to the ministry. It was great to hear today his family connections and the great support that he received from them. I will always remember the honourable member for the support that he gave me in ensuring that caucus had its annual retreat in Toowoomba last year. It was largely because of the efforts of the honourable member for Kawana that that took place there. I was very grateful for his representations at that time. It is a very great pleasure indeed to be able to speak in this 51st Parliament—that is, having been returned as the member for Toowoomba North. I am very pleased to be able to inform the House that the electorate of Toowoomba North was very kind to me in terms of the confidence it showed in its voting patterns. The personal vote for the Australian Labor Party increased by eight per cent and the two-party preferred vote by six per cent. That was personally a great relief, as other members would appreciate, but also a great tribute to the hard work done by so many people, and I will come to that later. Mr Deputy Speaker, I would ask you to be kind enough to pass on to the Speaker my congratulations to him on his re-election as Speaker for his third term. He does a tremendous job, and it behoves us all to have an understanding of the standing orders to make his job somewhat easier than it has been at times. I want to congratulate all members who have been re-elected. I also want to congratulate the new members, particularly the new Labor members, to this House. Mr Hoolihan is a colleague in the sense of being a fellow lawyer. I also want to congratulate my neighbouring MPs, all of whom now are in the National Party and in particular the member for Lockyer, Mr Rickuss, who is in the chamber at the 1218 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 moment. I hope that he has a very productive and enjoyable stay in this parliament. The nature of politics is a strange thing as to how it changes over the years. In the area of Toowoomba, in the past we have enjoyed a great deal of Labor representation. Prior to the Labor split, the majority of members on the near and far Darling Downs were Labor members—that is, north and south Toowoomba, and the electorate of Darling Downs used to be held by the ALP Minister for Education, Mr Diplock. The far- western seats were usually held by people in the Labor Party who were elected on the strength of the shearers' vote, the railway workers' vote and so on. But things have changed, as we all know, and it is a different complexion. Therefore, it is an immense privilege of mine to be the sole representative of the government in the Darling Downs and south-west Queensland. Of course, that means that I am the sole representative of the people of that area in the Beattie government of Queensland. As I said before, I want to pay some well-deserved recognition to those who helped in my re- election. Of course that is a dangerous thing to do, because there were literally dozens upon dozens of people who helped. But I particularly want to pay tribute to the people who have worked over the last three years in my electorate office: Gwen Liesch, my electorate officer; Michael Thomson, who was there for about six months after I was elected in 2001; Davina Smith; Mary-Kate Khoo; Bianca Green; and Frank Burke. The latter five shared the second position from time to time. Campaigning for a seat the nature of mine—and I suspect for a lot of seats in this House—really starts from the day after the election, and any sensible member will adopt that attitude. In order to carry on that campaign for a period of three years, all members, particularly myself, rely most heavily on loyal and competent staff. In that regard, I am certainly blessed enormously by that association. I particularly want to single out Gwen Liesch, my principal electorate officer. Gwen worked at my old firm for about 20 years prior to my election. I have known her and her family for many years. She and her whole family have helped at the various elections that I have contested. She has an enormous capacity as a people person to solve their problems efficiently and well. I have never had any complaint whatsoever from any members of the Toowoomba community or my constituents concerning her efforts. I want to publicly in this place acknowledge what she has done, without taking away from the very worthwhile contribution made by the other members of my staff, whom I mentioned earlier. I want to acknowledge the input of my relatives and friends in both the successful 2001 and 2004 elections and the unsuccessful 1998 election. In particular, I want to thank my sister and her husband, Elin and Brian Thomson; my brother and his wife, Jim and Wendy Shine; my brother, Michael Shine; friends who came up from Brisbane; Bill Everson; Xavior Kelly; Damien Carroll; Bernadette; and members of the legal profession. I also want to particularly acknowledge the splendid support given to me by the Australian Labor Party in this campaign, and particularly the efforts of Peter Bentley, who came up with others from New South Wales; the many members of the young Labor movement; Des McGovern, who has been the co-campaign director for Toowoomba North now for a long time; president of the branch, Chris Mierbush; and secretary Wendy Gallagher. I also want to acknowledge the efforts of those made over many months leading up to the campaign in terms of folding letters and doing many laborious tasks, including Des and Mary Mallett, Bill Blacka, Pat Sleba, Mrs Pat Chambers, Lola Egan, Des Hussey, those who worked on the prepolls—that is, 10 days prior to the election—the various members who worked on the committees and the literally hundreds who worked on the day. It was the best resourced and manned—or personed—campaign in terms of poll workers ever seen in Toowoomba North, and I am very grateful for the support of all those people both local and those who came from other centres to help. I am particularly grateful to the state campaign director, Cameron Milner, Milton Dick and others who were instrumental in seeing that that support was given. I want to acknowledge the support of the trade union movement to the campaign in Toowoomba North, particularly all members of the Toowoomba Trades and Labour Council, the Australian Workers Union, Paul King particularly from the QPSU, the Rail, Tram and Bus Union and the Queensland Teachers Union, all of whom supported in various ways my campaign. I campaigned on the basis that our area—and I reiterate that I am the only member south or west of Ipswich in the government— needed a voice in government. I also campaigned on the fact that I was successful in the sense that, as well as doing all of the tasks that many of us do in terms of being accessible, I also provided a service called a mobile electorate office every second Saturday throughout my term. Basically, they were the two planks of my personal campaign in Toowoomba North. I must say that the result demonstrated the effectiveness of those arguments and that performance. I am very grateful to the people of Toowoomba North for recognising that. Of course, no matter how effective or how much effort individual members put in, unless they can actually deliver tangible results for their electorate, then their efforts are probably of little worth. I had the benefit of the tremendously competent, visionary and supportive government in the form of the last Beattie government. I want to congratulate the Premier and all of his ministers for the support that they gave me and the people of Toowoomba North and the people of the Darling Downs and south-west Queensland generally in that regard. Some of the major achievements in that last term were, for example, in health, which of course was the major issue in the last election. The Baillie Henderson 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1219
Hospital redevelopment comprised an amount of $13.8 million being injected. In terms of mental health, there was an injection of a further $6.2 million to the Toowoomba Base Hospital's acute psychiatric unit. With respect to Home and Community Care, a total amount of $18.3 million was invested in Toowoomba. This of course enables our elderly people in particular to live at home in their preferred surroundings for much longer than they otherwise would have been able. Also with respect to the Health portfolio, there was an amount of $100,000 in start-up funding to the Toowoomba Hospice with an additional $300,000 per annum of recurrent funding. The Toowoomba Hospice has been a major project of the Toowoomba community, and I congratulate it generally. It was sought after strongly by many advocates, and it was always dependent on the government being able to come to the party with approximately half of the recurrent funding. I want to acknowledge the efforts of the former Health Minister, the Hon. Wendy Edmond, for agreeing to the submissions that I was able to make from time to time and thank her for agreeing to fund that project. Education was also a great winner under the last Beattie government. Sitting suspended from 1.00 p.m. to 2.00 p..m. Mr SHINE: As I was saying before the luncheon break, education in the last term of the Beattie government was a major winner in Toowoomba and Toowoomba North. An example of that is the Fibre Composites Centre of Excellence at the USQ—a $10 million project. Toowoomba State High School was granted an amount of $3,000 for much-needed refurbishments and that has been put to great use. The Mary MacKillop Catholic School at Highfields is the first Catholic school to be built in the Toowoomba diocese in over 30 years. It cost $2.2 million, of which $1.2 million was supplied by the state government. I want to particularly acknowledge the efforts of the Minister for Education, the Hon. Anna Bligh, who was instrumental in the grant of those moneys to enable that school to be built and, of course, the Premier for attending at Highfields on yet another occasion to open that school. I must mention the $800,000 allocated to the Highfields State School to extend the resource centre and to provide extra classrooms. Highfields in particular did well in the budget allocated for Education, but it is not to be outdone, of course, by the Police portfolio. Toowoomba did exceptionally well in that $20 million was allocated for the construction of the new police station, which is being carried out in three stages. As well, the then Minister for Police, Mr McGrady, established one of the tactical crime squads in Toowoomba, which has had outstanding and resounding success. All in all, there have been an extra 37 police officers in the Toowoomba area as a result of government action over the last term. Emergency Services is another portfolio where my electorate did very well, particularly at Highfields, where land was purchased for the construction—I hope in this term—of a fire station and possibly joint ambulance station at Highfields at Kratze Road for an amount of $53,250. As well, an amount of $256,000 was allocated for fire service tankers at Highfields. All in all, an amount of $94 million was invested in the south-west district for the Department of Emergency Services. Transport and Main Roads is a portfolio where my electorate was certainly not neglected. An amount of $17 million was spent on the upgrade to the rail corridor on the Toowoomba Range. This was necessary because of the great expansion and fantastic output associated with the Acland mine. That was a much-needed injection of funds to make sure that the Toowoomba Range could handle that extra workload. Also in the Highfields area is the duplication of the Cawdor Road intersection on the New England Highway at a cost of $1.7 million. The first sets of lights in the old shire of Crows Nest were constructed at that intersection. As well, the usual, if you like, urban bus contracts were developed for better bus services in and around Toowoomba, including Highfields. The Department of Employment and Training also featured significantly in the spending of the government in the past three years, particularly at the TAFE college in Toowoomba where a new horticultural training facility was erected at a cost of $2.9 million. As well, significant amounts have been spent since 1998 under Breaking the Unemployment Cycle, creating 4,698 jobs. With respect to sport and recreation, the equestrian centre was built with 100 per cent funding out of the showgrounds. I want to particularly thank the Treasurer and Minister for Sport for recently agreeing to a further amount of $110,000 so that the western wall can be erected. I also want to acknowledge his concern for the electorate and the people in it with respect to the advance to the Highfields Indoor Sports Centre—$1 million to enable that construction to be completed—which the Treasurer opened on the Australia Day weekend this year. Of course, who can forget the amount of $2.25 million that was expended on Stadium Toowoomba, which was previously known as the Athletic Oval, in the reconditioning of the Duncan Thompson Stand. The Department of State Development showed its continuing interest with the Charlton and Wellcamp project—a project vital for the future of Toowoomba's industry—in that in the last budget an amount of $1 million was allocated for continued planning. While I am on the subject of the Department of State Development, I must mention the construction of the Suncorp Metway call centre in Toowoomba which is providing 250 jobs. The department was instrumental in attracting that Suncorp Metway call centre first of all to Queensland and then to Toowoomba. 1220 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
I am pleased to say that the Premier, when visiting Toowoomba in December and during the election campaign, made significant policy commitments. I will briefly describe what they are. Over $109 million will be invested in the future of Toowoomba, with over $17 million to be invested in the region for health infrastructure. Over $14 million has been invested in education with 35 new teachers for the region and lower class sizes. In housing, $3.25 million has been invested for public housing. In relation to jobs, 920 new jobs have been created with an investment of $6.8 million under the Breaking the Unemployment Cycle initiative. In Transport, $700,000 per year has been allocated for the bus subsidies and other long-distance subsidies and completion of repairs of the pavement on the New England Highway between Mount Kynoch and Highfields at a cost of $1.6 million. There has been the installation of the traffic lights at Highfields Road and the New England Highway—that is a second set of lights—at a cost of $390,000. There were improvements to the traffic signals at Ruthven Street at the intersections of North, Jellico and Campbell streets at a cost of $130,000. There was the completion of the third stage of the police complex at a cost of $3 million with $300,000 for a police beat at Highfields. A house and land have already been purchased. Generally in the community we see the government's interest being continued in quite a number of other projects, including $11 million for the waste water project in conjunction with the Toowoomba City Council at the Wetalla treatment works. I am very pleased that the Minister for Education agreed to the gift of the Mort Street land previously owned by the Department of Education with respect to the North State School. That has been gifted to the Toowoomba City Council as a centenary gift for October this year. I am extremely grateful for the activities of government in the past three years and its commitment for the next three years. I look forward to implementing Peter Beattie's and Labor's promises for Toowoomba and the Darling Downs over the next three years. Time expired. Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (2.08 p.m.): In rising to give my address-in-reply, I would like to acknowledge the Governor for her presentation in opening the parliament and wish her all the very best in the job that she will be doing. I know that she and Mr Bryce will do a fantastic job in representing Queenslanders. I also thank my family for the support they have provided me, not only in the time I have been Leader of the Opposition but also when I have had various other roles in the time I have been in parliament. I thank my wife, Linda, and my children, Megan, Jens, Laura and Thomas, for their forbearance. We all know that the families of members of parliament face a significant challenge and responsibility, regardless of where they may live. Even members who are fortunate to live closer to parliament here in Brisbane still have long parliamentary sitting hours and the other duties and obligations that go with being a member of parliament on a day-to-day basis. The position I hold and the electorate I represent often mean being away from home for maybe four or five nights in a row. Sometimes you may be at home in your own bed only one night a week. The conversations I have with my children on the telephone are quite interesting from time to time. My wife has enrolled my children in soccer, so they are enjoying going off each Saturday to play soccer. So far I have been to one game, but I do not know when I will be at the next one. The disappointment in their voices when I ring up and they ask me whether I am able to come along and see something they are doing at school or attend their sporting event at the weekend is quite pronounced. However, that is one of the sacrifices we as members of parliament make. Once again, I thank my family for their very strong support. As I said, it is somewhat difficult for them, but they do provide me with very strong support. My wife of some 14 and a half years, Linda, has provided that support right from day one. All of our children have been born in the time I have been in parliament. It is true, also, that when you are away so much you see some quite dramatic changes in your children. As they develop naturally, you see the personality development in an even more pronounced way because of the time you spend away from home. I also thank my electorate staff and the staff in the opposition office. I do not want to go through and name each and every one of them, because they are all as important as each other. If it were not for them, I would be unable to do the job I do at an official level—the job as Leader of the Opposition and also, very importantly, in the electorate. When you have a job that takes you away from the electorate as much as mine does—ministers and the Premier would appreciate this—sometimes you feel as though you are not necessarily doing the job in the electorate that you should. Even though your heart, your mind and your thoughts are there, you know that you are missing things you would otherwise be able to attend if you did not have extended office commitments. That is why your electorate office staff are so essential in providing the support necessary to ensure that day-to-day electorate matters are able to be dealt with. I also thank my very excellent campaign committee. As all members on both sides of this chamber realise, recognise and have reflected on during this debate, if it were not for our campaign committees we probably would not be here. We all say that our individual campaign committees are the best in the world. That is, of course, a matter of subjective evaluation. I would like to thank my campaign 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1221 committee, headed so ably by my electorate council chairman David Littleproud, campaign committee chairman Jill Smith and all of the other members of that committee. I acknowledge my electorate council and the numerous branches I have in my electorate that have provided extraordinary support to me on an ongoing basis. Their loyalty and dedication are absolutely unquestioned, to the extent that during the last election campaign, when I was unable to get back to my electorate on any more than four occasions, people on my electorate council and my campaign committee were able to make sure that day-to-day election matters were very ably and capably dealt with. I also thank the electors of Southern Downs for returning me. This is my sixth term in parliament. In that time I have held three electorates—Carnarvon, Warwick and Southern Downs—following a number of redistributions and also a distribution in 1991. I welcome the fact that they have given overwhelming support to me, with 75.2 per cent of the two-party preferred vote. I acknowledge that. That is a significant margin in my electorate. Notwithstanding the overlay of the other previously existing electorates, it is probably one of the highest votes of confidence that has been given to a member of parliament in that region for a long time. It is my very strong intention to make sure that I do not let those people down in my advocacy on their behalf in this place and also in my representation of them in the electorate and outside of it. I am fortunate enough to represent an extremely vibrant area of Queensland. It is the southernmost electorate in this state. It has amongst its population people who specialise in very many areas. Of course there is a strong agricultural base. There is much light industry and light manufacturing. Also, there is a quite extensive service industry throughout the electorate. That is a service industry of both the private sector and the government sector. Often we tend to forget the importance of the service sector in electorates such as mine. I will take a moment to reflect on the government services. When I go to school presentation nights each year I sit there and look at the number of teachers and extended staff who work in schools and think, 'This school must be almost the biggest employer in the town.' In many cases it is. The schools and hospitals provide not only service to that community but also employment to the area and the resulting boost to the economy. I pay tribute to all of the government employees who do such an excellent job in my electorate. I acknowledge the number of staff who work in hospitals as well. I have been concerned, however, that there were a number of fundamental attacks on the people of my electorate by the government through its policies in the previous term. I think people in many areas of Queensland, particularly regional areas, reacted against the government to the extent that I said in the lead-up to the election that, quite noticeably, there were two Queenslands. There was the Queensland that existed west of the Great Dividing Range and the Queensland that existed east of the Great Dividing Range. Unfortunately, the policies of this government helped to harden and focus the view of many people in my electorate that the government did not care for them. There were a range of those issues, and I want to speak in detail about some of those in a moment. Principal amongst them were matters such as property rights. There was the attack by this government on the racing industry. There were other issues such as the lack of appropriate investment in infrastructure, whether it be roads or water, and the undue, over-the-top and disproportionate impact the ambulance levy had on many people in my electorate. There is a range of other issues, including cross-border issues, that need to be properly addressed by government. I do not believe that, notwithstanding that members of the government say that they want to address cross-border issues, there is a serious consideration at the administrative level of government of some of the difficulties people who live in near-border communities have to deal with. They have to deal with day-to-day transaction of commerce and service access across the border. People who live in another area of the state that does not deal with those things on a day-to-day basis probably think, 'So what? Who cares? What is the real issue?' I can say that it is a very real issue for people who live in those areas. The ambulance levy brought this to the attention of many people who work, have their extended family and own businesses in my electorate. They can no longer be an ambulance subscriber in Queensland, even though the only ambulance that can service them is in a Queensland based town only five or 10 kilometres from their home, which is over the border in New South Wales. There is no other ambulance service within 100 kilometres of them. It is ridiculous that those people can no longer subscribe when they have done for generations. They work, send their kids to school, have businesses and have properties in Queensland, but they are told that they cannot subscribe. If needed, they will be picked up by a Queensland ambulance and will then have to try to recover costs from their private health scheme or the equivalent scheme in New South Wales. The lack of understanding and real appreciation of those sorts of issues brings enormous frustration not only to people in my area who have friends who live across the border but also to those people who are such an important part of our community because they engage on a day-to-day basis. 1222 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
On the property rights of individuals, for example, we saw some extraordinary attacks right across regional Queensland at the last state election and also prior to that. People were saying, 'We are trying to make a sustainable living out of agriculture. We are trying to preserve the land as much as we possibly can. There is no recognition of that fact but we continue to be demonised by the policies of this government and by the perception that it wants to create, whether it is in water use, salinity, vegetation management or whatever the case may be.' Those people bought those blocks of land with certain rights. They actually had a premium built in when they bought the vegetation on that property. If the government wants to take that away, then there is a responsibility on government to ensure there is an offset against that by some sort of reasonable compensation. Even the legislation that passed through parliament recently did not appropriately address that matter. We have deficiencies with roads funding. We have heard the Minister for Transport and others stand up in this place over the last few days and allege that the Commonwealth government is not fulfilling its responsibility in road funding in Queensland. Look at the diminution in road funding on state roads in Queensland under this government. It has been quite significant and it is falling back to levels that it fell away to in the Goss government, where there was a very significant and deliberate neglect. I do not argue that there is not a very strong role and obligation on government to ensure that there is a proper focus on social policy and investment in that area, but that cannot be done at the expense of the infrastructure which is so necessary to keep the state moving. Whether that is in a regional area, a remote area or a metropolitan area of Queensland, the government must invest. It cannot keep shoving and ducking its responsibility. There is an enormous fall-away in the necessary investment in roads and other transport infrastructure throughout this state. Look at water—another area where this government does not have a comprehensive policy, particularly in regard to bringing new water to south-east Queensland. Look at the situation of the Gold Coast. It came within six months of running out of water only a few months ago. The government by way of its policy decision in 1989 knocked Wolffdene dam on the head. Fair enough; that was its policy position, notwithstanding the fact that that piece of land had been identified as a dam site for a long period of time. Basically the caveat was on the titles. As people bought those pieces of land, they were aware of it. The government then said that it would no longer be a dam site and knocked it on the head. That was its policy position. It did, however, acquire two much smaller dam sites which were nowhere near as efficient on the Gold Coast hinterland around the Beaudesert area. The real question we have to ask is: what is this government doing to expedite the development of those water storages? I would have thought as a result of what we saw happen on the Gold Coast, and also with the population growth in south-east Queensland, that there is a very strong obligation on this government to move forward those particular water infrastructure developments to ensure we do not again face the situation of the Gold Coast being within six months of running out of water. We had the ludicrous situation where people could not have a shower on the beach after going for a swim. This is where this government is very much falling behind. It may be spending a lot of time dealing with social policy issues. That is its desire; fair enough. But there is a range of infrastructure issues which are not being appropriately dealt with by this government in a focused and a strong way. At least at the last Brisbane City Council election we saw Campbell Newman take a very strong policy platform to the people of Brisbane to address the issue of gridlock and to ensure road congestion in Brisbane was going to be dealt with and addressed. The real challenge now will be for the Labor-dominated council to work constructively and cooperatively with Campbell Newman to ensure that those commitments which he made, for which he received the personal support of the people of Brisbane to implement, will be implemented to reduce that gridlock to make sure that Brisbane's liveability is maintained in the future. Unless we invest in these areas, the lifestyle which people enjoy—the reason they want to move to south-east Queensland—will be seriously compromised in the future as we see gridlock from Noosa down to Currumbin and west to Ipswich. That is what we are facing, particularly if we are moving towards 3.7 million people living in south-east Queensland by the year 2026. We have to make sure that we have the roads and the infrastructure and other government service infrastructure in place regardless of where we are across Queensland. That is one area where this government has been extremely derelict. That is one area where this government has never been able to match the capacity of the conservative side in this state to invest in that type of infrastructure. That is one area where we have always had a superior record than the Labor Party in this state. I would encourage the government not to let that fall by the wayside because it is extremely important. I would like to touch on a couple of specific issues relevant to my electorate. We have had a lot of ongoing problems with drought. I know people might be sick of the focus on drought but the last 10 years has been absolutely extraordinary. The seasonal conditions have never been quite like it before. We have had a decade of marginal rainfall. If honourable members want to look at the records, they will see what I am saying is proven. Those people, I believe, have come through that quite resiliently. The 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1223 drought is not over yet, but there are a lot of challenges ahead for people and we are hoping that things have turned a corner. With regards to biosecurity, there is much concern at the moment over proposals put up by Biosecurity Australia for the importation of, amongst other things, apples from New Zealand. I note there are other issues with regards to bananas and also pork, as was mentioned in parliament this morning. We can be political all we want in this place but one of the really strange things that I think has happened over the last 20 years in this country is that we as politicians have let those decisions get out of our clutches. We have handed over to so-called independent statutory authorities the decision as to what is going to be imported and on what basis it is going to be imported in this country. The mechanism for making these decisions on the importation of apples, bananas, pork or whatever the case may be was put in place by the Hawke government in the early 1980s. The only thing I can say in its defence is that rural industry through the National Farmers Federation and other rural advocacy groups said at that time, 'We want politics taken out of this. We want these decisions made on a biosecurity basis. We do not want these decisions made by politicians. We want to have open access to trade. We want to know the things that are being imported into Australia are being imported for the right reasons. The only reason we can stop them is if there is a disease threat. So that is the best way to ensure that as a trading nation we are able to keep trading.' That is what they said and the government responded at the time. We have a situation now where, because of the decisions which are being made, we must still wear the political odium even though we have cut ourselves out of the decision-making process. You cannot have it both ways. It is not the bureaucrats who make the decision; it is not the people who work in biosecurity who make the decision who get themselves unelected. it is the government of the day which has to face up to the political consequences of the decision. With regards to the apple industry, the apple growers in my electorate produce magnificent apples, and they come on sooner than any other apples in Australia because of the climate and the geographical area. These apple growers are sick and tired of having to fight this issue over and over again. They have at least once, if not twice, beaten the issue on sound scientific terms. It is back again and it looks like we will have the importation of apples into Australia. They are saying that the processes are working against them. There is going to be a much higher standard for them to export their apples to Tasmania and other places. Because of some other pest, they will not be able to export Queensland apples to Western Australia or Tasmania, but New Zealand will be able to bring apples into Australia and more easily access markets across Australia than they will be able to export their own apples across the country, and that is the lunacy of the current system. Mrs CARRYN SULLIVAN (Pumicestone—ALP) (2.28 p.m.): I rise today to sincerely thank the voters of Pumicestone for electing me to represent them for another term. I am very privileged and honoured to be able to continue my role as the state member for Pumicestone. Government members interjected. Mrs CARRYN SULLIVAN: I thank the members and I will take those interjections. Although the two-party preferred vote was down due to there being only four candidates this time and the fact that One Nation failed to mount any sort of a campaign, my primary vote increased by 1.4 per cent, which bucked the state trend which was down by some three per cent. The electorate office never missed a beat during the February election, although it was difficult to maintain the running of the office and campaign at the same time. Thank heavens for my two staffers, Ralda Reid and Helen Gibson, who ensured that constituents' concerns were well looked after. We were trying to work out the other day just how much experience we had in the office and we figured out that it was roughly 30 years. During that last three years we have been able to help a lot of people with their genuine concerns and it would have been, I think, a bit of a disaster for the electorate of Pumicestone to lose that 30 years of experience to a newcomer. Behind every successful candidate is a hardworking, dedicated team and mine was no exception. I cannot name everyone who helped but I would like to acknowledge and thank my supportive, long- suffering husband of 24 years, Jon, my daughters, Casy and Tai, for their patience and many members of the Bribie Island and Caboolture branches of the ALP. I note that many people here remember my husband, particularly Neil Roberts and Linda Lavarch. He was an excellent member and he has fond memories of this place. I also thank those many members of the Bribie Island and Caboolture branches of the ALP, particularly Brian and Yvonne Williams, Susan and Richard Hetherington, Col Matthews and Peter Boyd. I would like to personally thank community members Tom Vievers, Allan and Neridah Phythian, Garry Sheppard, Tony Kennedy, Dewan Schankar and Helen Glisson, who were the backbone of my campaign. I also acknowledge all of those people who placed signs in their front yards for me in the lead-up to the election and those who handed out how-to-vote cards on the day. At the final count we actually 1224 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 had over 100 volunteers. It was an absolutely magnificent effort and I only hope in the next three years that I can live up to their expectations. I am honoured to say that my campaign team, with help from Milton Dick at party office and Stephen Beckett, the federal Labor candidate for the seat of Longman, helped run an honest and clean campaign and I am very proud of them for that. That was unlike the Liberals, who ran a vicious and nasty campaign full of deception and dishonest tactics and lied about many local issues which did nothing but put fear and confusion into the community. Would you believe they even had the hide to produce a how-to-vote card which had my name—my surname—spelt incorrectly? They spelt it S-i-l-l-i- v-a-n. How would you pronounce that—'silly van'? Well, maybe so, but what a disgustingly low act. It is against the law and we did take them to task about it. I do not know whether anyone else suffered under the hand of the Liberals as I did, but at the end of the day I won. Mr Wilson: They have got very low literacy levels. Mrs CARRYN SULLIVAN: I will take that interjection from the member for Ferny Grove. To suggest that the Labor government had done nothing about increasing police and resources in the Pumicestone electorate is absolute nonsense—more Liberal lies. We in the government know that there is always more to be done, but in the past three years we have seen extra police in Morayfield in the form of the Morayfield police shop front; for the first time in Beachmere the residents have had a permanent police presence in the form of a police beat; and Caboolture and Bribie Island police stations have had extra police. Both the member for Glass House, Carolyn Male, and I have been very instrumental in working hard to achieve those extra numbers. There has also recently been two experienced plain-clothes detectives located on Bribie Island, and a 14-man tactical crime squad which is to be located now in Deception Bay and not Redcliffe. That is something else that the member for Glass House and I worked very solidly on. Because Redcliffe is a bit far away from Pumicestone and Glass House we were able to convince those people in the know that Deception Bay was indeed a far better place to put this tactical crime squad. We are very grateful that it is going to be placed there. While I am talking about police numbers, I express my sincere thanks to the previous police minister, the Hon. Tony McGrady. I remember at times we were lobbying him up to a letter a week to try to get some extra police resources for the area. He never once said to me, 'Go away.' He was always so patient and listened to my concerns that I passed on on behalf of my constituents. The proof is in the pudding; without his support we would not have the police resources that we have today. I also congratulate the Hon. Judy Spence, the current Minister for Police, and let her know that I will continue lobbying her for more resources for my electorate. I have already flagged with the minister the need for a 24-hour police station on Bribie Island and I will certainly continue to lobby that on my constituents' behalf over the next three years. During my first term as the local member, I have represented the people of Pumicestone and worked diligently to help individuals and community groups, not only with their concerns but in providing services to the community. I have been able to form close working relationships with businesses, police and many nonprofit community groups and service clubs, and I feel welcome when I attend their meetings and social functions. They provide invaluable services to the community and their volunteers are exceptional. They certainly form the backbone of any society and they should be commended at every opportunity. I am very privileged to have known them and to have worked with them and I certainly would like to continue that relationship. I recently had the pleasure of awarding certificates of appreciation to two hardworking volunteers, Margaret Guthrie and Jacqueline Hansen, who have worked tirelessly to promote and foster the arts through the Bribie Island Committee Arts Centre of which I am a foundation member. I am planning to ask the Premier to sign many more certificates over the coming years as a small token of the state government's appreciation of volunteers' efforts. In my first address-in-reply in March 2001 I spoke about the make-up of the electorate I represent and the hopes and aspirations of the local residents. The electorate has grown considerably and very rapidly and has stretched existing resources, facilities and infrastructure, but I am pleased that the state government has at least kept up with the pace of development. Other levels of government have not fared as well. All promises made to the electorate three years ago have been fulfilled and I am committed to making sure that the promises made in the lead-up to this year's election will also be delivered. I am keen to work on the new ministerial committees I have been selected for, particularly the new child protection committee. The minister, the Hon. Mike Reynolds, is committed to the Peter Forster reforms and I am looking forward to working with him to achieve those outcomes. Also I have been appointed to roads, local government and planning and the environment and I have also been asked to continue my role on the Scrutiny of Legislation Committee. I will continue to fight to ensure that the proposed legislation does not unduly affect the rights and liberties of the people I represent. I have learnt a great deal in the last three years. I have learnt that you cannot give everything that constituents want, you cannot resolve every issue, you cannot solve everyone's problems. I have 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1225 certainly learnt that there are always two sides to a story. I will continue to do my very best. Unfortunately my best will not be good enough for some, but I will do my best to represent the people of Pumicestone with their concerns. At the start of my speech I thanked all of those people who were directly involved in my campaign, particularly in that last three weeks leading up to the election, but I would like to place on record my sincere thanks to my Labor party colleagues in this House. Never a day goes by in here that somebody does not give me some advice or an idea that helps make my job not only a little easier but also a little better. I note that the member for Kurwongbah, Linda Lavarch, is in the House. I sincerely thank her for her patience and ideas. She has sat next to me for the last three years. I congratulate her for moving on to bigger and better things. Her support over the past three years was invaluable. My job would have been much harder had she not given me all that advice. I really appreciate it. There are a lot of other members like Linda whom I would like to thank. I cannot name everyone. I would particularly like to thank Margaret Keech, who sat on the other side of me and who also gave me a lot of advice. Had I taken it, who knows where I might have been today! I would also like to acknowledge Mr Kerry Shine, the member Toowoomba North, who is so level- headed. Whenever I get myself into a dither he is always there to calm me down and give me some very good advice, which I have often taken and which was very much appreciated. I would also like to thank Michael Choi. He is not the only computer whiz in this House, but he has shown me things that a computer can do that I did not know existed. That has certainly made life a lot easier. Ronan Lee sits next to me now and he has big shoes to fill. I am expecting big things from Ronan. I look forward to working closely with him over the next three years. Carolyn Male shares a boundary with me. We have worked so well together. She is an easy person to get along with. She is a wonderful member of parliament. Between us we have been able to achieve a lot of things that perhaps a single member could not achieve. I want to pass on my heartfelt thanks to her. I want to say a big thankyou to Terry Sullivan, the whip. He is also a very level-headed gentleman. The amount of time that he puts into backbenchers is insurmountable. He is always there for us, especially after hours. Many times I have had to discuss an issue with Terry and he has been extremely compassionate and understanding. I was privileged to be able to celebrate his 13th year in parliament last night. I thank him for that invitation and appreciate it. To all of the other members of parliament whom I cannot name, my sincere thanks. They do not know how much it means to somebody who is new in this place that they can ask somebody for a hint, a clue, on how to organise something or how to fix a major problem. Every member is unique. They all have fantastic ideals. I have learnt so much from them. I appreciate everything they have done. I thank the ministers and their staff because they are always there to answer my questions. I had to ring one of the ministers on Saturday with a problem and within three hours it was fixed. It is marvellous that we can ring and they are so accessible. It means a lot to me. My sincere thanks to everyone. I look forward to working with members over the next three years to make the electorate of Pumicestone a better place. Miss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (2.44 p.m.): It is with pleasure that I rise to speak in the address-in-reply debate. Like other members who are celebrating being back in the parliamentary system, it is a joy and an honour to be able to represent the electorate of Maroochydore, first and foremost. When I meet with school students it is always interesting to explain to them the role of a member of parliament. I explain to them that we have a role as a local member representing the constituency, we have a role within our political party and we have a role within the parliament—that is, most importantly, to represent all the people of Queensland as well as our individual constituency. When we deliberate and pursue issues we need to consider the broad impact upon the state of Queensland. Local constituency work is something that does not always get a lot of kudos from traditional media outlets. Local outlets follow local issues. It is the bedrock of the work we do. It is contact with our local people that informs us of the issues that are important to them. It is contact with our local people that keeps us grounded in terms of how they see us performing that role. In this rapidly changing world and with new technology the challenge of keeping in contact with the constituency only grows. When we look back in history we find that people would sometimes have been away from their electorates for months. They came from all over Queensland as we do to represent individual electorates. With modern transport things have changed. Yet we have the challenges of technology which, in many ways, has increased the amount of work that we are able to put through our offices and deal with. The life of a modern member of parliament is challenging. It is one that impacts upon our families, our personal life and our professional life in interesting ways. But we volunteered for this job; we put our hands up. All members, regardless of our political leanings, are usually motivated by the belief that being involved in our democratic processes is a vitally important part of our future. If we believe in something we should be willing to get in and work for it. We are the unusual ones because we represent the 89 seats and are at the front line. It is a democratic right which we should always uphold. 1226 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
I am blessed to live where I do. I have a constituency that stretches from Mount Coolum, Point Arkwright and Yaroomba down to Mooloolaba. This comprises some wonderful tourism spots that are well known to members of this parliament. It has been growing rapidly but also provides very interesting and diverse dining and accommodation experiences for people. It is a very exciting area. I have the challenges of growth, like many living in the south-east corner. This is the challenge we face. The popularity of the areas we represent challenges the quality of life that we also want to see protected. I believe one of the biggest challenges we face in Queensland, and particularly in the south- east, is maintaining and protecting and hopefully enhancing the quality of life in a range of areas for our constituents and for the future constituents who will live in these areas well beyond the time when we represent our electorates. It is a challenge getting the planning right. We face the challenges of delivering the infrastructure that deals not only with transport needs but also with environmental needs. In the election campaign the pertinent issues were transport and our hospital system. I gave a commitment that I would continue to fight for significant upgrades of our road system. Since 1998 we have been promised a road study to be completed and then out of that construction of a new road network north of the Maroochy River. What is a disgrace is that the planning study was stretched out in the most painful of ways and still has not been released publicly. But five days out from the election, Terry Mackenroth announced that $35 million would be spent on the Pacific Paradise network and the upgraded interchanges would be built. I welcomed that announcement because I gave a commitment on behalf of the coalition that a National-Liberal coalition would proceed with that bypass and motorway upgrade, but also that we would see the duplication of the Sunshine Motorway bridge. This is essential infrastructure not only for quality of life but also for the environment. We hear members talk about gridlock and freeways that grind to a halt. We have that already on the Sunshine Coast, and it is not with great pleasure that I report that to this House. That is also impacting on our tourists and our visitors who bring the dollars that sustain the jobs in our local economy. However, there is gridlock more than twice a day. We do not have rush hour two times a day. Rather, we have gridlock many times a day on the Sunshine Motorway over the Maroochy River bridge and to the north of the Pacific Paradise area. The Maroochy River bridge on the Sunshine Motorway carries about 32,000 vehicles a day. Those members who understand road issues know that we need to start four-laning a road when around about 22,000 vehicles a day use it. That road is already 10,000 cars a day over the design capacity. There is nothing, however, in the road implementation plan or any of the announcements of government for funding the duplication of that bridge. This issue is impacting on the Sunshine Coast from Noosa through my electorate of Maroochydore and also Kawana, because it is a key coastal highway that links those areas. It impacts on constituents in a number of electorates. I call on the Beattie government to put this road item on its agenda in the next two years, because the area is already facing five per cent to eight per cent annual growth rates of traffic and that road is 10,000 vehicles a day over and above what it is designed to carry. It is unacceptable that it is not in the road funding plan. Our commitment was that in government we would fund that. I call on this government which won the February election to match that commitment and to follow through, because it is impacting on those communities. While I welcome the upgrades to the Sunshine Motorway to the south which have been long announced and reannounced, without the upgrading of the bridge there will still be gridlock. I also welcome the $35 million to be spent to the north of the bridge. However, it is interesting to note that, when Terry Mackenroth was asked about this pledge he made five days out from the election, he was asked whether the road would go ahead regardless of whether I was elected as a National Party member or the Labor Party won with its candidate. He gave a commitment that, regardless of who the candidate was, this would happen; it was a commitment of government. We are always a bit suspicious when we get a $35 million announcement five days out from an election when all the other road funding had already been announced, but he also gave a commitment that the work would start next year. But the detail after the election is that there is more planning to be done. That will start next year, but the road construction will not be completed until 2008. Unfortunately, this is a pattern that we see across south-east Queensland and Queensland generally with the Beattie government—big on PR, big on the planning documentation but it strings it out for years. Projects go well past the desirable starting date to the point where communities get frustrated with a consultation process that is then so far removed from the starting process of the actual construction. There needs to be good planning and there needs to be good consultation, but the government does not need six years to do a planning study. That is just an example of the ridiculous situation we are faced with on the north shore and the Sunshine Motorway. There are other critical roads that need to be upgraded as well, and Maroochy Road is certainly one of those. As a key link to Nambour, where the base hospital is located, it is also groaning under gridlock many times a day. Once again, the funding to complete the links—not just take the next step with about two kilometres of road upgrades—is not programmed in the immediate future. These are the challenges that we need to see this government deliver on. If Queensland is going to deal with quality of 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1227 lifestyle issues, infrastructure and bringing the infrastructure spend up to speed, these issues have to be addressed. When one looks at the amount of funding that is being spent on infrastructure in Queensland as a percentage of gross domestic product, one realises that we are really off the boil. New South Wales is whipping Queensland with regard to the percentage of its gross domestic product on a state basis it is spending on infrastructure. Queensland is so far behind the Australian average that it is just not funny. We have seen a situation where there has been a fall-off in the amount of money spent on roads to only about 14 per cent of the capital works budget from where it was sitting at around about 25 per cent a few years ago. In real terms, road funding is going backwards under the Beattie government. Is it any wonder there is gridlock? The government cannot keep passing the buck. It needs to address this issue, because it is a lifestyle and amenity issue. It is an economic impact issue, but it is also an environmental issue. If the roads are gridlocked, public transport does not work. If the roads are gridlocked, cars are spewing out greenhouse gases into the environment and the impact is horrendous. Let me address another key issue in the election for my constituents, and that is our health system. This is something that I feel passionately about. We do need an effective public hospital system that is operating in our community. There are some excellent staff who do a wonderful job and who dedicate themselves beyond the call of duty to deliver that. But people also have a breaking point. I have talked to so many good people—nurses, doctors and specialists—who have sacrificed financial gain to work in the public system. Quite frankly, it is about time that the issues of dealing with staff and listening to their concerns and not shooting the messenger were taken on board. However, excellent staff have left the system broken hearted because they find that there is not a good cooperative culture within Queensland Health bureaucracy. There is a tendency that, when people raise issues to seek a solution, they are shot down and even bullied out of the system. We now have a situation where there are only half the number of anaesthetists to do the work that is necessary on the Sunshine Coast in the public system. The state government announced during the election campaign that there would be extra operations and that it would open up this theatre and that. We know that currently the full theatres are not operating already at Nambour Hospital. While it sounded good in theory, until this government addresses the fact that it has had specialists only recently walk out of the system because of a lack of support, we will continue to have a situation where specialists who deliver a particular service sometimes have a lot of down time because the full range of services is not in place for them to deliver that particular service. It is terribly inefficient. I have constituents who have waited five or six years for an eye operation. I raised it with the minister, and he blamed all of those industrialised doctors walking out of the system. But this is the same complaint I raised with his predecessor before the indemnity dispute hit the fan, yet the government is still not listening. When will it listen? There are specific issues where it needs to cooperate, because that is the way forward. The government has to cooperate and work with its staff in order to solve these problems. Do not bully them. Do not threaten them and certainly do not shoot the messenger when they speak out in terms of ways to solve the issues. It needs to work with them. I have been disappointed that the current minister has made the mistake of following his departmental line. I have talked to many excellent people who have left the system because of the way they have been bullied out of Queensland Health. Cancer treatment is something that I am very keen to see advanced. An issue I have been raising for the last few years is that there was a private provider coming on line. There were up to 12- to 15- week waits at one time in the public system, and certainly there are still many months of waits for critical radiation treatment for cancer patients. There was the opportunity to send some of that work to private providers so people could get timely treatment to ensure that they were in the best position to fight this insidious disease. We announced that we would go ahead and purchase services from the private provider on the Sunshine Coast so that those hundreds of patients did not have to travel to Brisbane. During the campaign the state Labor government matched our commitment, and I welcome that. I am keen to see that come into place soon. I will be watching it, because we are keen to see it happen sooner rather than later. With regard to travelling back and forth to Brisbane when one needs multiple treatments for cancer and the additional stress on families, you have to know people to understand the impact. There are other issues that I want to talk about with regard to the local environment, particularly our river system. By the year 2015 it is estimated that there will be a doubling of the number of boats on our waterways. We love our outdoors lifestyle and it is wonderful, but the resources to cope with that have not actually been flowing. I am concerned about issues to do with pump-out, water quality issues with boats in our system, the policing of the regulations to maintain good order and environmental guidelines being put in place. I certainly call on the government to make it a priority to protect our waterways and to look at the issues of good boating practices and water quality. The Mooloolah River and the Maroochy River are too important to watch them degenerate. We need to do all that we can to ensure that not only is their 1228 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 future health addressed but also that there is safety on our waterways in terms of how we look after our boats. Mooloolaba has a commercial port and a lot of people do not realise that it has one of the biggest turnovers in seafood on the east coast. About $80 million worth of seafood goes through the Mooloolaba harbour. I am sure that people have enjoyed the seafood on the Sunshine Coast. One of the reasons why I fought so hard for the dredging of the Mooloolaba harbour entrance was that it was having an impact not only upon recreational users but also on the commercial industries that operate out of the Mooloolaba harbour. Experienced pilots and experienced skippers were saying that the harbour was dangerous. It took months to get action from the government. They said that nature would fix it and to wait until there was more rain. Incidentally, when there was more rain the problem got worse. Finally, I was pleased that we moved the hands of government, and the harbour was dredged. Subsequently it has had to be dredged a few more times, but so it should be. We do not expect to have a road block and not clear it. The same thing happens with a port that is critical to the economy of the area. The government has a legislated responsibility to keep that port operational and to keep the harbour entrance safe. So I urge the government to never let the dredging of that harbour go for so long in future. Unnecessary loss and damage to vessels was caused and compounded because of that situation. It was just an outrageous situation. Anyone who had seen the harbour and knew that Mooloolaba port used to be one of the safest ports in Queensland knew that Queensland Transport and the government had acted too slow to fix it. I will certainly be continuing to follow that issue. The schools in my area are keen to see the upgrades set down under the school renewal program. Also on the agenda is the time frame for the upgrade of some of those buildings. I will certainly be following that matter as there have been commitments given by the government. As my time is limited today, I want to particularly pay respect and honour to the people in my life who have supported me. I particularly want to thank my family and my mum and dad who have been such a wonderful support to me personally and in my campaign. They were just wonderful. I have a campaign team of so many volunteers. I cannot do this job without the many unpaid volunteers who have a belief in my vision for Queensland, who have a belief in their local area and who work with me. They are not necessarily driven by personal political ambition, but they share that belief in upholding our democratic system and looking after our local area. I really appreciate the hundreds of volunteers who helped me throughout my campaign, which made it possible for me to sit in this place for my fifth term in parliament. My staff have also just been outstanding. I acknowledge Betty Ledger and the work that she has done, and Merril Rough. I also want to acknowledge Trish Longhurst who, tragically, I heard today, has just passed away. Trish worked for Neil Turner also as an electorate officer. Although she had not worked for me in recent times, she had worked for me as well. My sympathy goes out to Mike and their family, because Trish was a caring, compassionate person who did the job of electorate officer in not only my office at times but also in Neil Turner's office. Electorate officers are wonderful people who, when they have the right advice and a compassionate ear with which to listen, make such a difference as to how we do our work. I value my staff. I value those who work voluntarily with me, because the job of a member of parliament is not a job that you do alone. Not one person can do this job without the help of many other people, be they the paid staff who are dedicated beyond the call of duty or those volunteers who give their heart and their time. Hon. D. BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (Minister for Local Government, Planning and Women) (3.04 p.m.): I thank the people of Cairns for re-electing me as their member for Cairns in the state parliament. It is a privileged position and one that I enjoy tremendously. I reiterate my absolute commitment to representing the people of Cairns on state government matters, to ensuring that their needs are understood and that they receive high-quality services and proper resourcing, always with an eye to the bright prospects for Cairns in the future. Cairns is at an interesting point in its history. The town is busy again. Tourists, both domestic and international, are visiting, businesses reported a significant upturn, educational opportunities at all levels have expanded, unemployment is lower and traffic on the roads is heavier. We have done good work since the early 1990s, the last boom period for Cairns, to diversify the economy—to build our aviation and marine industries, to develop educational choices for overseas students, and to expand the range of employment and training opportunities. Small business, the lifeblood of Cairns, has learned from the hard times and become sharper. Residential house prices have increased and the available housing stock for rent has decreased. However, along with the good news there is a downside. We have a long public housing waiting list and we are facing additional problems due to insufficient affordable housing. While I recognise how hard this problem of affordable housing has been to solve elsewhere in Queensland and around Australia, it is nonetheless incumbent upon all levels of government to work on solving this problem that threatens the Australian dream—a dream that is still alive in the hearts of young families in Cairns and elsewhere to own their own home, or at least to have a safe, adequate, affordable home to rent. 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1229
The Manoora community renewal program has been a great success over these last six years. I am pleased that we have announced that, as that program comes to a close, a new community renewal program will begin in Mooroobool. Community leaders and I have already begun work to set the priorities for improvement in the Mooroobool community, mindful of the problems that have plagued the community over recent years. These include vandalism, juvenile crime and public disorder. The very design of the Mooroobool public housing estate, with its multitude of laneways and alleyways—many unlit—contributes to the lack of safety that residents feel in their own community. Unemployment is high, too, and it is reported that there are too many children too frequently not attending school. Learning or earning is the Premier's direction for all young people through to school leaving age and that applies to the young people of Mooroobool. Our aim is for the suburb of Mooroobool to be a neighbourhood that is as good, safe and happy as any in the city of Cairns. However, the main issue during the election campaign was services and waiting times at Cairns Base Hospital. I thank the new Minister for Health for taking up the problems at Cairns Base Hospital immediately after his appointment. He visited almost straightaway, met with staff, many of whom had been concerned about the hospital's services and the levels of funding. He spoke to each of them individually and also, of course, with the management of the hospital. I am pleased to report that since the election and since his appointment there have been considerable improvements in the existing problems and expansion of services. Undoubtedly, there will be further good news over the months ahead. However, in the meantime considerable progress has been made in addressing the orthopaedic surgery waiting list, and a detailed program to address the ENT waiting list will shortly be implemented. I am meeting regularly with the local branch of the Queensland Nurses Union and with the Cairns Division of General Practice. I have called on people right across Cairns to bring their complaints about health services in Cairns to me—to report them to my office. They have done so and, I have to say, volubly some months ago. But some good news on this issue is that the number of complaints being made to my office about health services in Cairns has reduced to a trickle. Another matter of concern over recent years—really, over very many years—in Cairns is safety on the streets in relation to problems associated with public drunkenness. The problems of public drunkenness occur in daylight hours and the early evening, mostly associated with indigenous people who have clearly consumed too much alcohol and then some of them behave very badly. They can be frightening to passers-by, their behaviour is certainly against the law, and unacceptable really to themselves and their own families as well as to the broader populace. I am pleased to say that there has been considerable improvement, however, in this problem over the last several years. The police have taken an active role with the new powers, including their ability to move people on and to pour alcohol out if people are found to be consuming it in a public place. Behind that, not so obvious, has been good work done by people appointed to case manage and assist these people, many of whom are homeless and are alcoholics. As frustrated and dismayed as we might be by their behaviour from time to time, the true solution to the problem is assisting them with a healthier lifestyle—a way forward. I pay tribute to our case managers and to others who work at Quigley Street Night Shelter and at the diversionary centre for their good work on a long-term resolution for these people. I have to say, there have also been problems with many people during the middle of the night with public drunkenness. These are not so much indigenous people; they are Caucasian young men who also drink too much and behave extremely badly. There is a suspicion that illicit drugs are involved and that the combination of these illicit drugs and alcohol leads to absolutely frightening attacks and aggression that is uncharacteristic of them at other times. I am pleased to say that there has been a strong policing response, as well as a presence from Liquor Licensing, and that presently this problem has been diminished. I hope it will stay that way. Nonetheless, I welcome the announcement of the Minister for Police that there will be extra policing numbers for Cairns and the far-northern district. In addition to attending to all of the promises we made during the election, there are many other everyday matters that a local member such as me must respond to, and I do so in the great majority with enjoyment. One of these most recently was at St Mary's high school in Cairns. St Mary's year 11 students have the choice of doing legal studies. Amongst those who chose to do that subject, they have taken up a particular project in recent times on which they have done considerable research as well as conducted a survey. I was pleased to be at St Mary's for the legal studies students to present to me their report on the research of a survey on a matter of some considerable interest to young people; that is, the age at which they can attain drivers licences. Their research looked into provisions in other states and looked at encouraging governments towards a uniform code around Australia. I will be pleased on their behalf to present the report to the Minister for Transport and Main Roads and ask him to consider their findings. St Mary's is only one of the fine schools in Cairns. I have heard only today that two others of our high schools—Cairns State High and Trinity Bay State High—have achieved excellence awards. In fact, I can say in Education Week that there is not a school in Cairns that I am not proud of. I can attest to this further by the numbers of complaints that are received in my office, for example over the period of a 1230 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 year, about any one school in the Cairns electorate. They would total less than 10 over the period of a year. That is extraordinary quality education, and I pay tribute to all of the teachers and the other staff who work in our schools, public and private. Many other matters are brought up to all members of parliament in their local electorates day by day. I affirm my commitment to remain as accessible as possible. I am pleased to say that one of the most successful ways in which I have achieved this is through the purchase of my mobile electorate van. It is painted up in duly bright colours and has signs everywhere so that it is easily visible. I go out in my van with a couple of chairs and a table and a bit of information on the latest and the best from the Queensland parliament, particularly on how state government actions are addressing problems in Cairns. I stop somewhere in a neighbourhood park or under a tree. I get around all of the suburbs, on Saturdays in particular. That way I am able to be accessible to and chat to people on the ground. I am looking forward to continuing my neighbourhood rounds and am pleased to say that my next rounds of Saturdays will take place in June and July of this year. I will continue to work hard for Cairns and will remain mindful that that is of course my first and primary responsibility. I do, however, thank the Labor caucus and the Premier for my appointment to the ministry and in particular to the portfolios of Local Government and Planning and Women. As some honourable members may know, I had enjoyed two terms as an elected member of the Cairns City Council in the late 1980s and 1990s. 'Enjoy' is the right word. It was my introduction to politics, and I found the world of local government extremely interesting and important for the everyday way in which people are affected. It is therefore a great pleasure and privilege for me to have come back to local government, as it were, by being given this ministerial portfolio. I am one of the many thousands in Cairns who are aware of how important is planning for the city's future. In a city like Cairns that has experienced numbers of periods of rapid growth, we know that it is important to get ahead of the action—to be planning for the housing, transport, health and education needs of the area. But we know more than that. We know that it is not good enough simply to plan in the individual council area. I look forward, therefore, both as member for Cairns and as Minister for Local Government and Planning, to working with Cairns City and all of the councils in the far-north Queensland region towards forwarding our regional plan, called FNQ 2010—to making sure it is being implemented by all of the authorities involved and to making sure that it is keeping the vision clearly in front of us as we move into this next growth period for Cairns. As the Minister for Women, may I say that it is a great pleasure for me to have some position to lobby for those women who have not yet got the privileges of a fair go in our society. I am frequently asked by women and men, 'Do we really need a Minister for Women? What's the point these days in having an Office for Women?' Mostly that question is asked by people who do see the tremendous gains that have been made by women—in careers, in their families and in general equality in society. They are questions that are mostly asked by people who come from settled families, functional families, happy and loving families in which women are well treated. Unfortunately, however, that is not the story for all women in Queensland. In Cairns, in regional cities and, even more concerningly, in rural and remote areas and indigenous communities there are still very many women who are not getting a fair go, very many women who are living in poverty, very many women who are not even safe in their own homes. These have to be the priorities of the Minister for Women and the Office for Women. More than that, however, I am sorry to say that equity is not there yet in other areas, such as pay for women. I was most amused by Prime Minister Howard's claims that women would benefit by his budget. I am sorry to report that it is under 10 per cent of women in employment who earn over $52,000 per annum. Those tax cuts of his will go not only to the rich but also to the rich blokes in our society. There will be no benefit to very many women in Cairns or far-north Queensland. I must say that I am particularly concerned about the problems for young mothers in our society. It is very much harder, in my estimation, for young mothers these days than it was for my generation. Many of them are struggling not only to do the best by their children but simply to afford the rent. Some of them are trying desperately to work to bring in some extra money, and casual work is difficult indeed and ill paid. Some are courageous enough to be trying to educate better towards an eventual career. With HECS debts mounting over their heads, they are struggling indeed. There is little in the way of economic benefit for young mothers. I think we as a society make a great mistake by not assisting them and their partners to a good start at the most crucial time in their family history. Only, however, by working hard in the electorate of Cairns, by staying in touch with people in Cairns and elsewhere as I travel around Queensland, can I truly serve the people of Queensland. I reiterate my commitment to do that in this parliament and out there on the ground, in fine places as there are everywhere, to ensure that those people in Cairns are well represented. Thank you indeed to my campaign team for their fine work. I know that it is a team job. I thank the ALP members who have been such strong supporters in good times and difficult times over recent years and during the election period. I thank all of the friends that I have in Cairns and the supporters who stood by me and campaigned for me. I am privileged to have a family who love me no matter what and who support me 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1231 also, and I thank them. I thank my electorate staff who manage the tremendous number of phone calls, faxes and emails that are part of our everyday pressures. It is indeed my privilege to be the member for Cairns. Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (3.20 p.m.): I look forward to participating in this address- in-reply debate to the speech by the Governor at the opening of the parliament. It seems a fair while ago now that we opened the parliament. I look forward to this, my sixth term. Like the member for Stafford, yesterday was my 13th anniversary in this place. He and I came to parliament in two by-elections that were held in 1991. I well remember that period of time. I joined the National Party, had one week of preselection, four weeks of campaigning and got into parliament. I had a steep learning curve. History shows that I missed the first division. It was about two minutes after I was sworn in, and I had been led outside to have a photo taken. I heard these bells and there was a riot at the front gates at the time. Some members who were here in 1991 may remember it. I thought the bells were some sort of security alarm and we were battening down the hatches to keep the rioters out. Anyway, I know a little bit more about it now. I look forward during this term to being able to represent my very loyal constituents in Toowoomba South to the very best of my ability. I feel grateful that through that period of time I have developed some experience and have been able to help them in many cases, particularly in individual cases when I can use the experience and knowledge of my city and of the important people in the city to help people with the minimum of fuss. I think all of us in our electorates enjoy that. Sometimes it can be frustrating. The big projects do not always come to fruition. But to be able to help someone on an individual basis is really worth while. At the outset, I want to thank sincerely my campaign committee and the Toowoomba South electorate council. They did a marvellous job. The campaign was well funded, well run and well organised. We were ready and prepared. We got an increased margin. This election campaign we had far more helpers than we have ever had before. We always have had plenty of helpers, but we had more people than we needed on the booths. So it was very helpful to those who were organising the rostering. I have a couple of comments I would like to make about the election campaign. In Toowoomba the campaign has always been run on a peaceful basis at all the booths. Each party—sometimes there are two parties, sometimes there are three or four parties—takes enough space for three or four corflutes at each gate. This time we noticed a real change, with the Labor Party swamping entire fences around some of the schools. It certainly did not lead to a very peaceful attitude at the start. I think all political parties are entitled to a fair crack of the whip in getting a reasonable space near the front gate for two or three of their posters, and we will certainly make sure that happens in the future. Also, some helpers who had campaign material on their clothing went into polling booths and lingered in those polling booths. It is against the rules and it should not happen. If those things start to creep in and people push the envelope, then the next thing we will have is unpleasantness at polling booths which we certainly do not want to see in Toowoomba. We have never had it before. I would like to not only thank sincerely my campaign committee but also congratulate fellow state members of parliament in my area: Stuart Copeland, the member for Cunningham, who had an increased majority; Kerry Shine, the member for Toowoomba North, who got an increased majority; and, in particular, Ray Hopper, the member for Darling Downs, who won with a very substantial result. Ray took a courageous decision some two years ago after he had spent a year in parliament as an Independent. He came to the conclusion that he could do more for the people of his electorate if he was part of a team—part of a team that had statewide policy, part of a team that was working for major issues for people not only in his electorate but also throughout the state. He also saw that, unless there was some degree of unity and pulling together on the side of conservative politics, Labor could well be in power for decades. So he took a very brave decision along with his wife, Jo Anne. I know he had some very unpleasant and disturbing experiences along the way, but he has been rewarded for his courageous decision and for the manner in which he works his electorate in such an understanding and hardworking way with a very good result. I know he will work very hard to maintain the confidence of his electorate. At the outset I would like to pledge to the members of my electorate continuing hard work not only on the individual matters that are important to people in my electorate but also on the major issues that are important to the people of Toowoomba and the Darling Downs. Very often the economy of the Darling Downs and south-west Queensland provides so much of the economic impetus for our city, for our boarding schools, for our universities, for our rural and agricultural suppliers and for all our service industries, be they legal and accountancy practices, computer services, retail and so forth. I want to mention today an issue which I have probably spoken about more than anyone else in this parliament, and that is the issue of recycled water from Brisbane to the Lockyer Valley and Toowoomba. During the election campaign and late last year the Labor government said that it would not proceed with the project; that it was not economically viable. During the election campaign we were able to force the Premier to say that he would review that project. I understand from the material tabled in the parliament today that the Premier intends to undertake a review of the project. 1232 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
I want to say again that the people behind this project are not the sort of people who would persist for the years that they have persisted with a project like this if it was pie in the sky, if it was fanciful, if it had no practical and successful future. They are people who have been successful in their own professions and businesses. They are people who have borrowed substantial amounts of money at great risk, who have developed export markets, who employ many people—in some cases over 100 people—and who have made a real success of projects and have contributed to the success of the downs and Toowoomba. These people would not continue with this project with the persistence they have if they did not believe in it and had not already committed so much of their funds to it. So I urge the Premier to review this carefully and have great confidence in the people who are behind this project and the people who believe in it. I was very disappointed to hear—and I have heard a couple of ministers say it—people say that the project would not proceed because of its economic unviability, the phrase that this would benefit about 100 farmers and it would be a subsidy of about $1 million per farmer. That is an incorrect attitude to have. If recycled water comes up, there will be primary producers who will benefit from having security of supply of water, but they turn that into increased and secure production based on secure, long-term contracts. In turn, that means 90 to 95 per cent of the funds they derive from that—maybe even more at times—gets spent on new equipment, on staff, on export and on developing value adding because the water is far more expensive than any other water they have used before. So they grow higher value crops and they value add those particular crops and develop export and new domestic markets. So it simply flows through the community and everybody benefits. It has been estimated that immediately this water arrived at the Darling Downs there would be somewhere in the order of a $150 million increase in farm gate sales. If we extrapolate that on a two-for- one or three-to-one formula, that means a $300 million to $450 million economic boost to Toowoomba and the Darling Downs. For us on the downs, where our greatest asset is the magnificent black soil and the best farming systems and farmers in the world in terms of the tonnage they produce from that black soil, add the security of supply of that water in a climate where we are short of rainfall and for us it is like opening up a massive coalmine, it is like opening up a port facility, it is like having a brand new aluminium smelter or some other major project put into the area in terms of what it would do for our district. We are not on the coast where we can have $30 million esplanades built and attract more tourists. We are not on the coast where we can have an $800 million eight-lane highway built to bring more economic growth, tourists and business to our area. But we are in the best agricultural area of the world. We are just a little bit light on when it comes to rainfall, and that secure water supply would do so much for the economic development of our beautiful city which sits at the edge of that massive growth area of south-east Queensland. That would flow on to the capital city, to the port of Brisbane, to rail, transport and the like, and I think it is a project that is visionary and it is a project that must proceed. Some of the detail of what has been happening with that project is that there was an independent study undertaken. That independent study did show that it was environmentally viable and would have wonderful environmental results for Moreton Bay, the Brisbane River and, at the other end, the Condamine-Balonne system. It is technically viable and it does provide economic benefits. But that independent report said that it is not yet financially viable and it made some recommendations on how to make it more viable. That is being undertaken through Ernst and Young at the moment. They are looking at a revised system of purchasing water from councils at a cost of around about $450 million involving the Brisbane City Council, the Ipswich City Council and possibly other councils in south-east Queensland. At the same time it saves those councils undertaking massive capital upgrades that they are required to do under the COAG agreements on the current outfalls and pumpouts that they undertake and, instead, taking that valuable water, purchasing it at the correct economic price to both sides, and forming a board that will transport that water with some federal and state government help, with major input from the farmers themselves and from private enterprise to construct that line and the pump station. Bear in mind that Toowoomba now pumps its 8,000 megalitres of water over 400 metres in a vertical lift from the Crestbrook Dam to the top of the range and then along to Toowoomba and this lift, whilst it will be slightly higher, will be lowered somewhat when the second range crossing is built and the water is able to be taken through the tunnel for the second range crossing. That brings me to the second range crossing and other major projects which, along with the recycled water, are a real window of opportunity for Toowoomba, the Darling Downs, south-east Queensland and south-west Queensland. The Warrego Highway through Toowoomba is the heaviest freight carrying road in Australia. Go to any of the intersections of James Street through Toowoomba at any time and you will see six or eight B-doubles at either side of the lights. There are 16 sets of traffic lights that these trucks have to traverse as they go through our city. It is the main highway from the booming growth area of south-east Queensland and the port of Brisbane through Toowoomba to both Darwin and Melbourne and, in some cases, Sydney. As I said, it is the heaviest freight carrying road in Australia, and I doubt that any city in 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1233
Australia the size of Toowoomba would have such a highway going right through the absolute centre of it with four lanes at times almost chock-a-block with B-doubles. For the social infrastructure of our city and the way that people traverse our city, that main east- west route is at all times full of huge semitrailers and B-doubles and it is a major traffic issue in our city. Just as the recycled water would be a nation-building, Snowy Mountains type exercise for our state, the second range crossing will help to build this nation, because these trucks—with the major input they have to the transport of goods in Australia—would be able to traverse the range at about 80 kilometres an hour on a lower gradient and they would save at least a half to three-quarters of an hour in time and fuel. It would enable the western side of Toowoomba to become the Singapore of Australia, as the Australian inland railway is developed and as the second range crossing becomes a major truck route to enable transport and logistics terminals to be established at Charlton by the Department of State Development and by private enterprise at Wellcamp Downs. It would certainly be a great boost, not only to us but also to south-east Queensland in terms of transport logistics, be it road, rail or containers coming from the end of the line of the Australian inland railway and being distributed throughout south- east Queensland. During the election campaign I spoke a lot about the Toowoomba Base Hospital and in particular the need for radiation therapy. It is one of the things that I want to continue to fight for. The federal government has promised a major contribution towards getting radiation therapy equipment for Toowoomba. Whether it is the Toowoomba Hospital as a public hospital or a private hospital that puts it in place, it is important that the staffing and the finance for staffing for the public hospital is there from the state government so that radiation therapy can take place. We are a major regional city. People see Toowoomba as the capital of south-western Queensland and, in fact, people come from northern New South Wales and from many parts of Queensland for major services. We have around about 140,000 to 150,000 people living in our immediate vicinity and probably service 250,000 or more. It is essential that we have radiation therapy at such a major hospital. There have been reports in our local media of a very sad case of a young mother who nearly lost her baby due to a misdiagnosis at the hospital. My concern is that the staff at the hospital are under pressure regarding time and under pressure regarding the use of equipment because of budget constrictions. I certainly hope that that misdiagnosis, which they apologised for, was not caused because of any pressure not to use ultrasound in this case. I think it is important that these modern tools of diagnosis are able to be used and that the hospital has an adequate budget to be able to undertake a particular diagnosis and do it accurately and correctly. Crisis accommodation for those people who are in very unfortunate circumstances is essential in a major regional city. We are a true regional capital, servicing many, many people. Many young women from western Queensland, central Queensland or the Burnett often come to Toowoomba when they have had some tragic circumstance in their family, such as domestic violence or a marriage break-up. Many people come to our city when they have got children with disabilities in order to find some form of assistance and support in the rearing of those children. Many people come to our city when they have a mental illness because of the particular mental health facilities that we have. We are a major regional city. As a result, there is a very big social need in the area of crisis accommodation. In particular, we need crisis accommodation for women. We have a need that is well above the size of our city because of the regional nature of our city and because it is a city that women flee to from other parts of the state. Secondly, we need crisis accommodation for youth because there are youth who are in need of crisis accommodation. We need crisis accommodation for those who have a mental illness and may be receiving community mental health treatment or treatment at the Toowoomba Base Hospital and need somewhere to stay whilst they recover. There are other cases of people with particular disabilities and families with disabilities who need help. Organisations in the city like Anglicare and many others do a wonderful job. Last year I went to see the Minister for Public Works and Housing about a particular place in Toowoomba that I felt was ideal to be able to provide a large number of rooms and assistance. I am grateful for the good hearing that he gave me and the investigations his department undertook, but I am disappointed that it did not come to fruition. I will continue to fight for that sort of accommodation. I think one of the principles we have to look at when it comes to accommodation is that all governments of any colour have limited amounts of funds. We can lay the blame where we like for having or not having those funds, but sometimes if you can get a facility that will provide 40 good rooms which can be well run to provide that sort of accommodation for people, maybe you are better off to have that than to wait another 10 or 15 years for some you-beaut greenfield site that fits all the modern requirements. Many of these people simply want a roof over their head rather than being forced to live with someone who might bash them, or being forced to sleep under a bridge, in a car or in a tent in the park. The point I make about crisis accommodation is that we have a wonderful service in town from the Salvation Army, but they are limited to 14 houses and they are always chock-a-block. We have a wonderful service from the likes of the Toowoomba Youth Service, St Vincent de Paul and the Catholic 1234 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
Church with some of the accommodation they provide, but we still have an urgent need for crisis accommodation. I saw the member for South Brisbane at a community cabinet meeting some years ago and I spoke to her about this issue. As I said, I have spoken to the Minister for Public Works. It is something we need and something we want to keep fighting for. I want to say a couple of words about the Royal Agricultural Society of Queensland, the Show Society in Toowoomba, where I had the honour of being the general manager for some 13 years before coming in here. In recent years they have had some tough times. There was great courage shown by John McDonald who took on the position as president, supported by a wonderful committee and also Damon Phillips, the new CEO, who have worked extremely hard. They had a very successful show this year; they have turned the show right around. They have received assistance and support from the state government, which I am grateful for, and hopefully they will get some support from the city council. It is a major centre for events in the city. The last year I was there we staged 184 events. It brings a lot of major events and attractions to the city and is well worthy of support. I congratulate John McDonald and his team on the way they have turned that showground around. I congratulate Superintendent Wayne Browning, who will be retiring in a couple of months, for the wonderfully strong leadership he has shown to Toowoomba police. He has brought about a lot of improvements in our city through his direction and experience. I wish him well in the future. I pledge that I, along with the wonderful staff that I have working in my electorate office, my wife and my electorate council will continue working hard for the people of Toowoomba South who have shown such confidence in me for the sixth time. Dr LESLEY CLARK (Barron River—ALP) (3.40 p.m.): It is with pleasure that I rise to contribute to the address-in-reply debate as it marks the appointment of a second female governor, Dr Quentin Bryce, to whom I send my best wishes, and the beginning of the 51st Parliament. It also marks the beginning of my fifth term representing the people of Barron River. I thank them for the continuing faith they put in me to represent their interests in this place. I am humbled by their support and commit myself to another three years of hard work on their behalf. The success of the 2004 campaign to retain Barron River is due to the hard work of many people. I am under no illusions about the significance of the leadership of the Premier and our winning campaign. I congratulate him on his achievements and for the health, education and environment policies in particular that were supported by the people of Queensland at the election, resulting in the return of 63 Labor members. I congratulate all new members, particularly the new member for Cook, Jason O'Brien, with whom I share a boundary. He will be another great member for Cook, following in the footsteps of Bob Scott and Steve Bredhauer. At the local level, I thank my campaign team, headed by Jim Turnour, for their commitment and hard work. The Liberals and the Greens made sure it was one of the toughest campaigns I have experienced so the final result of 53 per cent of the vote was an excellent outcome for this marginal seat. Jim Turnour is now the Labor candidate for the federal seat of Leichhardt and has all the qualities necessary to make an excellent federal member. I wish him well in his contest against sitting member Warren Entsch, whose colourful stunts, like riding a mower across Cape York Peninsula, cannot disguise the fact that he has not delivered for the industries in far-north Queensland. His opposition to increased environmental protection for the cape and the Daintree forest is well known, as is his support for the sale of Telstra despite continuing shortcomings in telecommunication services in far-north Queensland. I am also indebted to the many ALP supporters and members in Barron River who did everything, as always from letterboxing and enveloping to fundraising. I want to particularly thank my electorate staff, Cathy Lovern and Jess Paoluci, who served on the campaign committee and who also provide such excellent service to my constituents in the electorate office. For Jess, who just started working me this year, it was her first campaign. The election was called on her 24th birthday so it will be a campaign she will never forget. I also appreciate the great support we received from party office, particularly Melissa Thomas, who was always available and went into action no matter how stressed. Finally, I want to thank my family, in particular my husband, Ross, whose love continues to sustain me in the demanding and stressful role as member for Barron River, to say nothing of the range of household tasks that he uncomplainingly performs making me the envy of all my friends. My daughter, Jen, flew home to provide her support on election day, which made all the difference to me. The last time she was personally involved on election day was the horrendous 1995 election loss. So it was great to enjoy the victory party together. Sadly, my son was on Army exercises and not able to get leave but his support has always been there for mum, and I thank David for that. I am indeed fortunate to have such a wonderful supportive family—an absolute necessity for a career in politics, as we all know. After the election I reviewed the history of my marginal seat. A few members of this House will remember my National Party predecessor, Martin Tenni, who won the seat from the Labor Party's Bill Wood in 1974 by a handful of votes and who served until 1989. I have now matched Martin Tenni's record, winning Barron River for five terms. In fact, my result in 2001 when I achieved 57 per cent the vote was the largest majority achieved by any member in the history of the seat since it was created in 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1235
1971. Labor and conservative parties have each held the seat of Barron River for six terms each, demonstrating the inherent marginal nature of this seat. Since 1992, the votes of Green party supporters have played an important role in Barron River, with Labor consistently receiving about 65 per cent of their preferences. I particularly appreciate their support in the last election. There have been significant improvements in services in the Barron River since I was first elected in 1989, with major achievements including the construction of the western bypass, establishment of the Smithfield Community Health Centre, Kuranda High School and Kuranda Ambulance Station, extension to the Smithfield Police Station and police beats in Trinity Beach and Holloways Beach, and significant funding contributions to the development of the Cairns campus of JCU. The unique environment has been protected and enhanced with the gazettal of the Marlin Coast State Marine Park, Smithfield Conservation Park and additional visitor facilities in the Barron Gorge National Park. Education has always been a priority for me in light of my own professional background and last term nearly $6 million was allocated to my schools for new facilities, upgrades, computers and airconditioning. Planning has begun to determine the location and timing for new schools to cater for increased enrolments associated with the population growth occurring in the Cairns area and my electorate. But I know there is always more to be done and I am pleased to have gained election commitments for a number of significant projects in Barron River, some of which have already been delivered while others will be funded in the forthcoming budget. For example, as I told the House in the last sittings, a $200,000 house has already been purchased for the Kuranda Neighbourhood Centre. Work should start later this year on the $3 million bridge over Rice's Gully to ensure a flood-free access for local Redlynch residents. Schools at Redlynch will also benefit with extensions to the administration centre and library at the state school and funds for St Andrews Catholic College to enable them to construct facilities to offer middle schooling next year. The Redlynch Valley community is indeed fortunate to have two excellent schools offering a choice for parents. I commend principals Richard Ruddell and Loretta Graham and their staff for their dedication and achievements. Edge Hill State School and Smithfield High School have been allocated funding for major projects under the Smart Schools Renewal Program. There will be another police beat at Yorkeys Knob to ensure that the crime rates remain at the current low levels on the Marlin Coast. I would like to thank Senior Sergeant Tim Nolan and his team at the Smithfield Police Station for their excellent work. Boaties on the Marlin Coast have welcomed the announcement that the boat ramps at both Yorkeys Knob and Stratford will be widened to three lanes, making for quicker entry and exit at these busy ramps. Roads have not been forgotten and further improvements will be made to increase safety at the roundabouts on the Captain Cook Highway. I use this opportunity to beg motorist to slow down on these roundabouts because speed is still the most significant contributing factor to these accidents. I have long campaigned for improvements to bus services for the residents of Caravonica and Lake Placid in particular, so I am looking forward to new weekend services for these areas and other improvements after July with the injection of an extra $3 million into public transport in Cairns which will subsidise four new buses and provide other improvements. The problems with the Sunbus service reached crisis point last year when mechanical failures saw so many buses off the road that some services were cancelled and others run very late. There have been significant improvements since the appointment of a new manager and there is now a real commitment on the part of the company to meet their contractual obligations. Notwithstanding that, I welcome the action by the Transport Minister that Sunbus has been served with a section 100 notice which means that if any beaches are found over the next three years the company can be fined a maximum of $12,000 per breach, underscoring our determination to ensure a high-quality public transport service for Cairns. The largest road project in my electorate is proving the most controversial—namely, that of the proposed $400 million four-lane widening of the Kuranda Range road which is opposed by a Kuranda community action group. This is a complex issue and I will speak about it at length in this House at another time when environmental assessment is further progressed. Suffice it to say that views in the community are strongly divided about the costs and benefits of this project. Public housing has always been a controversial issue in Barron River—or at least its location. But the current two projects have been well received. The $4 million redevelopment of the Aboriginal community of Top Kowrowa began last year and the first three houses are nearing completion. The remaining nine will be constructed over the next two years and will be accompanied by upgrades in sewerage, road and water infrastructure. Seniors will also benefit from the construction of eight two- bedroom units in Oyster Court, Trinity Beach in 2005-06. Whilst not in the Barron River electorate, Cairns Base Hospital, as the major regional hospital, is critical to my constituents. The Liberals' campaign in both Barron River and Cairns targeted the hospital, aided and abetted by the Cairns Post. One feature article, highly critical of the government and health 1236 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 services, which appeared during the campaign actually used the journalist's sister and her family who I believe have connections to the Liberal Party. The candidate who contested Barron River in 2001, Councillor Sno Bonneau, headed up a group calling itself the Cairns Health Interest Group, which was in fact blatantly political and used very cleverly by the Liberal Party for its own advantage. I am not denying that there is a need for improvement in services at the hospital, but the community never received a balanced picture about what was happening at the hospital and the excellent work of the staff. I would like to particularly commend Phil Cammish, the regional manager for the Cairns health district, whose appointment last year has proved to be a turning point for the hospital. The government's commitments for a resident ear, nose and throat surgeon and increased intensive care capacity are being implemented and the hospital will, for the first time ever, have its own full-time cardiac specialist shortly. The hospital has also taken advantage of the funding from the first $20 million made available to reduce waiting lists for elective surgery, another of the government's election commitments. The election commitments I have described and which will be implemented over the next three years represent my success at campaigning for the facilities and services that are needed for my electorate, but I have another list of projects that will shape my efforts over the next three years. I may not succeed in delivering them all because they are not all issues over which the state government has complete control, but they are issues that the Barron River community has put on the agenda, and I am committed to working with them. The responsible ministers are all aware of these issues and of my determination to achieve positive results for my community as far as possible. The first of these is the provision of new secondary facilities to cope with the growth in Cairns which has, in the last year, moved from the southern corridor to the west and north into Barron River. The Minister for Education is giving consideration to a community consultation process to progress this issue. I have spoken about this issue in the House previously and indicated my personal support for additional secondary facilities either at Redlynch or on the Marlin Coast. One option to be canvassed is a senior campus for years 10, 11 and 12 on the JCU campus. However, I want to hear what the school communities and the university have to say about this proposal. I have had informal discussions with the Vice-Chancellor Bernard Moulden and understand that he is yet to be convinced of the benefits for the university from such an arrangement, so this is clearly something that needs to be explored in the coming months. Another education project that I am pursuing is related to road safety around the Smithfield State School and the Holy Cross Primary School. The SafeST plan for the high school has identified the need for internal staff parking, and I have begun making representations to the minister on this issue. The Kuranda community is united in its aspirations for a swimming pool, and I have pledged my support for this project. The Mareeba Shire Council has been reluctant to commit to this project for many years because of its costs. However, the last local government election resulted in a commitment to carry out a feasibility study, which is now well under way. I am hoping that the council will apply to the state government for funding under our major regional facilities program this year. The independent candidate at the last state election, Andrew Ryan, has publicly indicated that the swimming pool is on the Prime Minister's wish list. I do hope that this is true, because the forthcoming federal election is the time to take the Kuranda pool off his wish list and add it to his want list and include it in the federal government's election commitments to far-north Queensland with the appropriate encouragement of the federal member, Warren Entsch. I have already indicated that the Department of Housing is constructing 12 new houses at one of the Aboriginal communities in Kuranda, but the local Aboriginal housing co-op has just completed a report which indicates that another 30 homes are needed to address the housing needs of indigenous people in the Kuranda district. I will continue to work with Ngnoombi co-op, and the department is currently considering the purchase of three blocks of land near Kowrowa. But again the federal government needs to play its part, and with the demise of ATSIC and its housing program I am waiting to see if the federal government department now responsible for housing will meet its obligations to the Kuranda indigenous community. There is considerable cultural diversity in the Cairns region and in my electorate, and I have begun working with the Cairns City Council on two projects to support that diversity. The government has two parcels of land in the Kamerunga area near the Barron River which the government is prepared to convert to a reserve for historical, cultural and heritage purposes. I have requested that the council become the trustee for this land so that the Cairns District Chinese Association can develop its proposal for a major cultural heritage centre and the Boddicitta Buddhist Centre can lease existing buildings for its activities, including regular retreats. I am progressing that project with the council and look forward to having a meeting shortly about that. The Barron River electorate is amongst the most scenic in the state, and environmental issues will continue to be important to me and to my constituents. I have already spoken in this House about the significance of the forested backdrop to Cairns and the important role that the Cairns City Council new planning scheme will play in protecting the hillslopes from inappropriate development. I am 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1237 supporting the actions of the Save Our Slopes Community Action Group and the Cairns and Far North Environment Centre and will work with them as well as the council and the Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Local Government to achieve the best possible outcome. One of the projects I initiated back in 1995 was the establishment of the Smithfield Conservation Park, which was finally gazetted in 1999. Part of the park serves as a centre for mountain biking activity, and I commend the Cairns Mountain Bike Club for its commitment to develop the young riders from our area who have gone on to international success. However, there are community access problems that I am working to resolve with the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service and the James Cook University, whose land adjoins the park. I have also requested additional capital works funding to create parking facilities and a signed walking track system to enhance the recreational use of the park for locals. The new development boom in Cairns and the Marlin Coast in particular is putting increased pressure on the coastal environment, as well as the hillslopes. The recently released Wet Tropics Regional Coastal Management Plan and amendments to the Vegetation Management Act will provide additional protection, but again the new Cairns plan will determine the future of this area in large measure. In my submission to the plan, I sought additional protection for the coastal creeks that act as wildlife corridors. Members will recall the personal heartache I experienced last year regarding the Bluewater canal development. Due to the existence of prior approvals, I had no option but to seek the intervention of the Premier and support legislation to allow the development to proceed despite the impact of the development on the State Marine Park. This development has proved to be less than benign, at least in the construction phase, with displaced wallabies being killed on adjoining roads, soil erosion problems and delays in finalising the acid sulfate management plan. I am also very disappointed with the delays in allocating $50,000 to environmental groups as required under the deed of agreement that exists with Consolidated Properties. There are now reports in the media that the property is up for sale for $40 million. The company gained the support of the community on the basis of a commitment to bring many benefits for local residents in Trinity Park, and I will be monitoring the situation very closely to ensure that it delivers for locals, for those who invested in this development, and that all the detailed and comprehensive environmental conditions in the deed are fully complied with—sale or no sale. In the parliament I am looking forward to my new role as chair of the Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee which is currently giving consideration to the question of a preamble to the Queensland Constitution. I want to take this opportunity to thank my staff when I was parliamentary secretary to the Premier in far-north Queensland during the last term of government. Kylie Bock and Des Lee were both wonderful in their support and skills that they brought to their respective roles as policy adviser and administrative assistant. We worked very closely with government departments and business and community organisations to enhance services to far-north Queensland, but I am particularly proud of our work in the area of women in emerging industries. I was delighted to hear the new Minister for Women, Desley Boyle, today call for nominations for the Smart Women Smart State Awards which I initiated last year to recognise the achievements of women and girls in science, engineering and technology. We were a great team, and I am pleased that both Des and Kylie will be continuing to work for the government in Cairns so that their expertise will not be lost. I am also serving on the backbench committees of Ministers Bligh, Mickel, Robertson and Keech and I look forward to making a contribution to their portfolios, particularly as it relates to far-north Queensland. I also want to congratulate my colleagues the member for Cairns, Desley Boyle, and the member for Mulgrave, Warren Pitt, on their elevation to the ministry, and I look forward to working with them closely to bring further benefits to far-north Queensland. In conclusion, I want to thank again all those people who supported me and continue to support me in so many ways, enabling me to continue to represent the people of Barron River. To them I reiterate my determination to give of my utmost to represent their interests and to assist them to achieve their aspirations insofar as I am able. Mr LIVINGSTONE (Ipswich West—ALP) (3.56 p.m.): It is certainly a pleasure to stand here today in my fifth address-in-reply debate. I am proud to stand here as the member for Ipswich West. I am proud also to stand here as a member of the Australian Labor Party. Mr Deputy Speaker, would you please pass on my congratulations to Mr Speaker and congratulations from the electorate of Ipswich West for his appointment to that high office. I want to thank my campaign committee—John Staines, my campaign manager, and his wife and the 120 other people who played a very significant role in my campaign. It would be impossible to name everybody. I am sure I would leave someone out and offend someone. I also want to thank my staff Bev, Cheryl and Denise, my wife and family for their continued support, and the people of Ipswich West who supported a stable Beattie government and returned me with an increased majority. It is not possible to always speak about all of the issues that are important to the electorate but I certainly intend to touch on a few of those. Ipswich is doing extremely well in recent years. We have reduced crime. Unemployment is well below the state average, and there have been many improvements in our schools. But there are three particular issues that I want to address today. The first is health. There is a massive shortage of doctors in the Ipswich area. Subsequently, there is a large 1238 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 problem with a very small amount of doctors bulk-billing. As a result, something like 72 per cent of people who go to the Ipswich Hospital could see their GP. Many of the doctors who have been established there for a long time have closed their books, and people moving into the area to live find great difficulty in getting in to see an established doctor. When one looks at the education facilities and the number of young people who are keen to go to university to become doctors, it is absolutely disgraceful on the federal government's part that there are not more positions for our young people to become doctors. One of the other very important issues in my electorate is the Ipswich Motorway, which certainly gets more than its share of publicity. The Ipswich Motorway is a federal government funded responsibility. The Ipswich Motorway is a major traffic accident risk and congestion corridor in Queensland and requires immediate funding to ensure that Ipswich does not suffer further. It is hard to understand the federal member, Cameron Thompson, who has been pursuing a northern option. The fact is that a northern option really is not an option at all. The growth in Ipswich is going to occur in the south of Ipswich through Springfield and then later through Ripley. That is where we have to look at building future roads. Certainly this government is committed in the next three years to building a road, which will be the responsibility of the state government, from Springfield through to Ripley and certainly it will have a corridor to go towards the Yamanto area. That is the area where we should be spending the money, not to the north. However, having said that, I have been on record over a long period as supporting a northern option in the long term. In supporting a northern option, I do not in any way support Cameron Thompson's view that we have a northern option instead of doing up the Ipswich Motorway. I think that the northern option is something that we strive for in the future. It would certainly be of great benefit to Ipswich. I remember as a young person having to travel through Brisbane to get to the Gold Coast. These days we can just use the Logan Motorway. It has certainly been great for Ipswich to be able to do that. I look forward to some time in the future when we can do that to the north. But that is only after the Ipswich Motorway is upgraded. It needs to be upgraded now. The northern option is absolute nonsense, because only about 20 per cent of the people would benefit from having that northern option. The other disappointing thing is that the media regularly runs stories in relation to government members passing the buck. The fact is that almost everybody in our area is totally in agreement with upgrading the Ipswich Motorway, except Cameron Thompson. Even from the Liberal Party's point of view, the Leader of the Liberal Party, Bob Quinn, is on record in this parliament making comments in relation to the Ipswich Motorway. Certainly in an article that appeared in the Queensland Times on 16 January this year he disagreed with Cameron Thompson on that particular issue. He actually held a press conference on 15 January to state the Liberal Party's position. So Cameron Thompson really does not have a feather to fly with. I just simply cannot understand why anybody would not want the Ipswich Motorway upgraded to six lanes. The state government is keen to do that. We are keen to do that now. We are ready to start on it. It is just a matter of getting money from the federal government. One of the other great areas of concern to me in my electorate is affordable housing. On a regular basis many people come to my electorate and are unable to find housing. That problem is getting worse. Although the Beattie government has lifted spending on housing assistance from around $330 million to $528 million a year, our efforts to expand the availability of affordable housing have been severely limited by a short-sighted federal government. The major source of funding remains the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement, yet the Howard government has continued to walk away from its responsibility by cutting the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement funds. Since the end of the Second World War, federal governments have played a major role in the social housing sector. That role and the onus that it puts on the federal government to provide adequate funding through the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement was honoured for over 50 years by Labor and coalition governments until Howard came along. While demand is increasing, the ability of the state government and the housing groups to respond has been severely limited by funding cuts instigated by the Howard government. Adequate and affordable housing influences a wide range of social outcomes, such as education, health and employment. It is vital that as many Queenslanders as possible are aware of the position that we face and the callous approach that is being adopted by the federal government. In recent years, we have seen the loss of many affordable housing options for Queensland families, particularly in Brisbane, Ipswich and other regional centres. This has caused increased competition for the dwindling supply of low-cost housing. As a result, rents have soared to levels that are unaffordable for low income and very low income households. More than 167,000 Queenslanders are now living in housing stress. That means that they pay more than 30 per cent of their income in rent. In Brisbane and Ipswich alone, hundreds of beds have actually been lost due to caravan park closures, boarding house closures and flatette closures. The loss of stock at the affordable end of the housing market is increasing competition. For a lot of people it is just simply getting out of hand. The Department of Housing relies on funding from the Commonwealth government under the 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1239
Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement for a continued expansion of the public and community housing portfolios. These funds have been declining. While the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement funding has declined remarkably in recent years, funding for rent assistance has increased significantly over the same period. However, without an adequate supply of capital programs, rent assistance will have limited effect. There is no point in having rent assistance if there is no house to rent in a person's price bracket. One only has to look at the Queensland Housing budget figures—and these figures exclude administration costs—to see that under the Borbidge government in 1997-98, $330.4 million was spent on housing. Under the Beattie government in 2003-04, the Beattie government spent $528.1 million—an increase of $197.7 million. Over that same period, from 1999-2000, the Howard government's funding has gone from $182.5 million to $132 million in the 2003-04 financial year—a very, very large reduction in the amount of money being spent. It is clear that the Beattie government has lifted spending on housing programs while the Howard government has cut funds. The blame lies squarely with the federal government and its ongoing cuts to the housing market. The federal government does not even have a minister for housing. That role is included in a wide range of other welfare responsibilities. A separate housing minister would enable the federal government to better focus on a responsibility that it is not meeting under its current ministerial arrangements. Without additional funding, I have real concerns that we will see a decline in the size of the public housing portfolio. While that would not be a desirable outcome, it would certainly be unavoidable without additional funding. In the area of Ipswich, when we look at the issues of health, the Ipswich Motorway and housing, there has never been a more urgent time for a change in federal government. The Australian Labor Party federally has already committed itself to upgrade the Ipswich Motorway. That is going to be its main priority in Queensland. It has committed to that already. The state government is going to be spending money to the south. It is also going to be spending money on service roads, which will take a lot of the traffic off the motorway. So there has never been a more important time for people to vote for the Australian Labor Party. Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (4.06 p.m.): I rise to speak in this address-in-reply in this the 51st Parliament. First of all, my thanks must go to the people of the Nanango electorate who have elected me for a third term in this place. I have to say that at the time of the election I was prepared, but I was not prepared for the overwhelming number of people who came forward and offered their assistance to man the booths. In fact, 27 people wanted to man one particular booth. I thought that that was just amazing. I had no trouble in getting people to man every booth throughout the entire electorate. I thank every single person who stood out in the hot sun on that day, particularly those who would not leave. They actually stood there from the opening of the booth right through to the end of counting for the night. I thank them. Also I want to thank my campaign committee. One particular person who moved from the area quite some time ago comes back at each election time just to drive me around so that I do not get too tired. I thank Col very much and I thank Nerida, who lends me her husband at election time. I also have to thank Barry and Leanne, Bruce and Marylin and Geoff and his wife, Trish, who actually came forward and offered me premises for the entire time of the election campaign free of charge. I thank all of those people. One particular gentleman who worked very hard for me was Jim Blackwell and his wife, June, who manned the campaign office every day for the entire time. So I thank all of those people. The other person I must thank is my husband, but I thank him all the time for putting up with me. I do not believe that I am very easy to put up with at any time of the year. I would now like to raise a few issues concerning my electorate. I will start with primary industries, because that is one of the main industries that my electorate is involved in. Members of the House will realise that I have spoken about the importation of peanuts from China and their being supplied to Woolworths, the importation of pork and the disease that now threatens that industry, and in the past I have spoken many times about dairy deregulation. I wonder if people realise that all of these things are in fact due to competition policy and globalisation. There is another area in Australia in which each and every one of us will be paying. That is to do with fuel and multinationals. I heard a report just recently that since Woolworths and Coles have brought in their discount fuel outlets 50 per cent of independent fuel retailers have actually gone out of business and it is expected that, of the remaining 50 per cent, another 50 per cent will go in the very near future. Each and every one of us will pay for that in due course. It will be paid for in our fuel and in every item we actually buy off the shelves. That is a major issue that is of great concern to me. We need to recognise that, although most urban areas are not concerned with drought, the drought does still exist. It is still quite dry in my electorate. There is an anomaly in the pork industry. I have here a letter from Queensland Pork Producers Inc. to do with drought assistance and risk management programs. It states— 1240 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
The location based approach to drought assistance through Shire declarations fails to recognise that pork production is impacted by drought irrespective of location. This is due to the industry's heavy reliance upon grain and other essential feed ingredients as critical inputs into the piggery operation. The process to obtain status as an Individually Droughted Property is cumbersome, inflexible and virtually impossible for a piggery operation to fulfil. This process requires urgent review. I would ask the minister to look into this issue. Our area is a major pork producing area and the problem needs to be addressed. Most people do not realise that there has been a major reduction in DPI staff. This is affecting rural producers. Again, I ask the minister to look at this matter. Primary industries is a huge industry. We need the men on the ground. The problem needs to be attended to urgently in order to resolve a lot of issues that have been left lying around. The tick problem is still a major issue. I have spoken to the minister about that at great length, so I will not go into it here. I will be broaching these subjects with the minister throughout this term. Most speakers in this debate have already mentioned education. One of the issues in our area is airconditioning. Some of the schools have been told that the temperature is not quite high enough, but I can assure everyone here that the temperatures in the Nanango electorate can be quite extreme. They rise quite high in the summer. The temperatures are actually recorded on the airport at Kingaroy. It is a low area. It is actually quite cool in the summer. There can often be up to eight degrees difference between the temperatures recorded at the airport and those recorded at the schools. Recently the temperatures got quite low. The distance between the schools and where I live is only about 50 feet, but it was frosting down on the flats, where the schools are, and it was really pleasant where we are—about seven degrees. There is a marked difference. I ask the minister, when thinking about airconditioning for these schools, to recognise that there is a vast difference between where the schools are located and where the temperature is recorded. A lot of infrastructure is needed in all of the schools. During the year I will be asking the minister to address the issues as I bring them to her attention, if it is possible. One of the main issues—this is one matter on which I will sound like a cracked record for the next three years—is main roads and transport. I have to say thank you to the minister, the department and all of the staff I have dealt with over the last few years. They have worked very hard to allocate funding and get a lot of the necessary work done. I am very thankful for that, but other issues have arisen fairly quickly. Passing lanes are essential. If you travel from Caboolture to Kingaroy through the South Burnett up the D'Aguilar Highway or you come through Ipswich up the Brisbane Valley Highway, you will find that it is now very difficult to overtake anywhere along those roads. They are just awash with semis, B- doubles and tourist traffic. It is almost impossible to pass. The Kilcoy shire would like some passing lanes almost through to Caboolture. It is a fairly winding road. It needs many passing lanes because of the amount of traffic flowing there. Most people know that a lot of people are now going on those roads purely to stay off the coastal roads and as a quicker route inland and further up the coast, so it is needed. I would ask that the minister do a traffic count pretty soon. There is also the need for an acceleration lane along the Winya Road travelling east. A turning lane is needed at Sandy Creek Road. Quite a bit of road needs to be addressed. It has been patched so many times that it is falling apart everywhere. The section between Kilcoy and the Beerwah turn-off is pretty bad and quite dangerous. Also, the Kilcoy Creek Bridge needs raising and replacing. They are fairly urgent things for that particular area. The Nanango shire asks that the government consider for future planning and financial assistance the sealing of the Bunya Mountains road. It would like it to bitumen standard. This is a major tourist facility for the South Burnett. Governments are forever telling rural shires to embrace tourism. They are quite happy to, but they need help. They need a little assistance with the roads, and this is one of the major ones. At this time I must thank the previous minister for roads. He did in fact approve 6.1 kilometres of overtaking lanes on the Blackbutt Range, which is something we had been asking for for a long time. The Blackbutt Range road has always broken up pretty rapidly. When a car is stuck behind a truck or some other vehicle, it is stuck there and will be for a long time—until it reaches either Blackbutt or Kilcoy, depending on the direction. It is a long stretch of road. We thank him for that. I understand that works are supposed to start within the next financial year. I will be happy with that and I think the shire will be over the moon. I travel by the Kingaroy to Brisbane corridor twice or three times a week. Major sections are quite dangerous for the simple reason that people do get stuck, their frustration builds to boiling point and, like anyone in a hurry, they tend to want to overtake when it is not easy or not possible. Tempers get frayed and so on. Road rage is becoming quite a major issue along those roads. The way to eliminate that would be to supply overtaking lanes. 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1241
There are sections that could in fact be dual carriageway. Caboolture to Kilcoy is getting close to that point. I guess that would be the preference of both Caboolture and Kilcoy shires, but they will settle for those overtaking lanes as a first step. I look forward to putting those proposals to the minister and going from there. In Kilcoy, there is a health issue with the Kilcoy Country Companions. It needs assistance. The previous Minister for Health accepted this as a great idea. She backed it. She wanted us to ask the State Development Minister to back a loan, which is the only impediment at this point to it going ahead. To achieve that, I would also ask the current minister to meet with representatives of Kilcoy Country Companions to help push for that as well. That is a huge issue. We are down two dentists in Kingaroy and it is causing major dramas. I will not go into all the issues, but they are major and they will be going to the minister very soon. I have taken seriously the minister's communication that he wants to know about every issue that is failing in the medical section in our area. I believe him when he says that he wants to get it sorted out. He might regret saying that to me, but I will take him up on that offer and go from there. We are still, I believe, in the Kingaroy area down four police. As the police station is supposed to be a 24-hour station, I would ask the minister to address that shortage and give due consideration to allocating more police to the Nanango community and the Woodford community. There are major drug problems in that area and the community wants them sorted out. They are desperately seeking some way to get it resolved and one policeman is not sufficient. I have to thank the State Development Minister for the recent announcement of $1 million to assist the Nanango shire to begin its aquatic centre. It will be a major $2.5 million project and that $1 million to start is possibly more than they expected. So I thank the minister and so do they. It will be a benefit to all the communities surrounding Nanango such as Blackbutt, Yarraman, Kingaroy and even communities further afield. I also thank the minister for the $455,000 boost to the sports facility at Woodford. I have to thank the Emergency Services Minister for the Woodford Fire Station and not too long ago the upgrades to the ambulance station. It is always good to see these facilities going ahead, but they are essential parts of any community and one would expect that they would be progressed at all times. Employment is always an issue, and when legislation is passed in this House that impacts heavily on employment in the area because it stops people from continuing in the industry they are already in or eliminates it all together, I would ask the government to give due consideration to encouraging other businesses to set up in the area or assisting them. The government should provide some sort of incentive to offset that loss to the community, because if you take away people's livelihoods in small communities it is devastating for everybody. There is a major issue, too, with public housing. Although we can always use more and I will ask for more, what I am finding with many elderly people is that because a lot of the housing is not in the lower areas of the community and insulation is quite minimal they are having a great deal of trouble keeping their homes warm; they cannot afford it. I stood in their houses, flats and units only a couple of weeks ago and I could literally feel the cold coming through the walls, and it is not really that cold yet. I would ask in future that any public housing have the insulation increased and that consideration be given to boosting the insulation in the current housing. We have huge water issues in my electorate. The problem with Atkinson's Dam has been going on for a long time, as has the Coominya water supply. So I ask that both of these issues be looked at again and addressed. Kingaroy is still waiting for confirmation of its water allocation for Gordonbrook Dam in accordance with its original proposal, which was that the allocation be 1,990 megalitres. Being inland, we must realise that the growth of these communities is reliant on a known and reliable water allocation, and we need to assure all councils of their right to future growth, not keep it hanging over their heads and perhaps discouraging businesses that want to set up there. With regards to local government, we are asking that consideration be given by the Office of Urban Management to population development opportunities in towns such as Esk and Kilcoy, which are close to large urban developments like Ipswich, Caboolture and the highly urbanised and developed areas of the coast. People find little difficulty in commuting to the city for employment these days, and these areas which are not far out of Brisbane or major towns are taking the overflow when people can no longer afford to live in the cities. It is essential that realistic consideration be given to this request from councils. I mentioned in the House before on behalf of Kilcoy and Kingaroy, and I now add to that Esk, the growing number of councils which question the good-quality agricultural land policy and ask once again that the minister consider realistic lot sizes for rural land for councils' new town plans. I also ask that irrigation be provided for the equestrian centre at Lee Park in Nanango. It is a major racing facility in the Nanango electorate area as well as the Nanango township, and I would encourage support of that. Most people would know that public liability insurance is still a major issue. The Kingaroy show was reduced from three days to one day and that goes on to affect many other areas. I would also like 1242 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 some clarification from the minister with regards to the wind farm—people are quite concerned about this project—and whether it will or will not go ahead. They need some security of knowledge in that area. There are so many issues that one could go over, but I would like to thank the ministers for assisting recently with supplying signatures. They signed labels to be put on wine bottles, et cetera, to be auctioned at the Burrandowan races held this year. I think they might be interested to know that thanks to that and other donations the auction raised $9,000. Time expired. Mr PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (4.27 p.m.): It gives me pleasure to rise today to speak in this address-in-reply debate. On Saturday, 7 February 2004 the electors of Bulimba re-elected me for another term. I would like to sincerely thank those people for trusting me to represent their interests for another three years. I will work for every constituent in my electorate, as I always have. I enjoy my job and trust that my constituents will continue to come to me with their issues. Being a member of parliament means being away from family sometimes for many days— sometimes weeks. I would like to thank my family for their patience, understanding and continued support. I would also like to thank the many hundreds of people who assisted with my election campaign, working tirelessly in the lead-up to and during the election. I realise members of parliament do not get to be where they are without the support of branch members, friends and relatives. They all hold a special place for me and always will. I would especially like to thank my campaign director, John Shepley, and the SEC committee which has met on a regular basis throughout the campaign. Bulimba is a rapidly changing electorate with real estate values increasing every day and redevelopment occurring on a large scale. The cohorts of electors have changed greatly since 1992 when I was first elected. It is a real challenge to keep pace with that change—a challenge I am more willing to take on and enjoy. I would like to thank the Premier for the confidence he has in me by appointing me as a parliamentary secretary. When he advised me of this, he asked me which minister I would like to work for. Without hesitation I said Robert Schwarten, given my background in the building industry and my interest in public housing. It was two days later that the portfolio was broadened to include racing. Although my brothers still have and my father had a deep interest in the racing industry, that gene up until now had passed me by. While I used to read the front pages of the newspaper, my brothers always turned straight to the racing guide. Now I find myself heading directly to the back of the paper to see what has happened in the industry overnight, although I must say that recently racing, and especially UNiTAB, has progressed more to the front pages or at least the business section. You are more likely to read about racing in the Financial Review than the Courier-Mail as the machinations of the TABCorp, UNiTAB and TAB drama have been played out. So it has happened that I have spent a lot of time travelling the gravelly roads of outback Queensland to talk to country race clubs about rationalisation of the industry by Queensland Racing. The rationalisation has caused disquiet among 147 race clubs in Queensland. Some have benefited in terms of increased prize money, but many have lost out because of not being given race dates. Some 30 clubs have found themselves with a track, a committee, infrastructure, but no meeting. Some of these have applied for and been granted a date for self-funded meetings or community race scheme meetings, but some have no meetings at all. If racing is the sport of kings, country racing is the sport of the common people. People are not only passionate about horses and seeing them race; they are also passionate about their towns and communities—towns where the only entertainment may be the once-a-year race meeting, a meeting that brings the town and outlying district together for the one day of the year. It is a day when friends meet, people dress up, have a few drinks, catch up on the local news and maybe even watch a horse go round a track, maybe even wager on a good thing. Racing is not just about horses, jockeys, trainers and owners. Of course, that is the core of it, but it is also about a group of people in town coming together to celebrate, often in hard times, and the only celebration on the horizon is the upcoming race day. For weeks before the big event teams of volunteer workers take time off from their real jobs and put all their efforts into getting the track ready for the meeting. Grass is slashed, sometimes by the bloke who works for the shire, paint is splashed about to brighten up the bar of the canteen, the rails are checked for safety, repairs are carried out, barriers are dusted off and stalls cleaned out ready for champions to arrive. These volunteers do it for the love of the event. Towns like Noccundra, which is 1,100 kilometres from Brisbane in south-west Queensland with a population of five, swell to a magnificent 400 on race day. Jill McNamara at the Noccundra Hotel proudly showed me the new amenities at the track, a playground for the children funded by Sport and Recreation Queensland, a huge shed providing shade from the hot western sun, toilet blocks, canteen and the new rodeo complex beside the track. They do not have much else out there at Noccundra, but they have this complex and that was the centre of their events for the year, the one and only event that that town had. The race committee for that track travelled 600 kilometres to sit down and have a chat about their race meeting and their facilities. Texas, 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1243
Isisford, Muttaburra, Ilfracombe, Aramac, Wyandra, Eromanga, Flinton, Morven and Tallwood are all small towns but with big hearts and lots of willing helpers eager to contribute to the one day a year of racing. To date I have visited 71 clubs and consulted with over 350 people, mainly in the southern and central parts of the state. It has been during these visits to country race tracks, sometimes sitting under the shade of trees, that another picture has emerged—a picture not just about horses and racing but a picture of passionate people involved, in a voluntary capacity, in staging the one day of the year race meeting; the day when the town comes alive, when locals and visitors come together to enjoy dressing up, a drink and a good yarn; when the town prospers, the pub sells more than it does on any other day, the clothing shops do a roaring trade, the local car dealer entices in a few buyers, the bakery and butcher supply the refreshment canteen at the track and the hotels and motels are full. While this one day is vital to small towns, there is a bigger picture of racing in Queensland. It was on this bigger picture that Queensland Racing based its rationalisation of the industry prior to the 2003- 04 racing season. The rationalisation of the racing industry in Queensland is proving to be a success. Prize money has increased and TAB clubs have received a significant increase in distribution. But at what cost? Thirty race clubs did not receive a race date from Queensland Racing in 2003-04 and may never race again with funding for prize money from Queensland Racing. In the 2003-04 racing year there were 47 clubs with one non-TAB meeting. There were six clubs with Queensland community racing schemes, four clubs with self-funded meetings, one club with only a betting meeting, and a total of 58 clubs with one meeting. In the 2003-04 race year total, clubs that did not race numbered 18. If we put all these clubs together with one race meeting or nil, we have 76 clubs, or a total of 147 clubs in Queensland—that is, 54 per cent of clubs had one meeting or none in 2003-04. It is not argued that Queensland Racing's role is a commercial one. What is important to Queensland Racing is the bottom line. It is obvious that the wellbeing of communities has been ignored in the rationalisation process. What also has been totally ignored is the human factor. Thousands of people have for many years voluntarily organised race meetings, maintained racecourses, provided information to whatever body governed racing at the time, filled in forms, raised funds, convinced sponsors to contribute to prize money and done the myriad jobs, such as cleaning toilets and making sandwiches, that go to conducting a race meeting and keeping a club viable. Also forgotten by Queensland Racing in the rationalisation process are those people without whom there would not be a race meeting: the trainers, owners, jockeys, stable hands and everyone else involved in providing the horses in order to put on a race meeting. Why do they do it? They do it for the love of racing and their community. The bottom line is not what country racing is about. It is about a racing event, a social event and a community event. It is about a community working together to provide what may be the only event for that community in a year. Following the rationalisation 30 communities may no longer be able to do this. At this time I have only visited half the country race clubs, but it is clear there are many issues common to them all that have an impact on country racing. These issues include the lack of consultation in the rationalisation process with clubs generally, the formation of racing circuits, occupational workplace health and safety issues, maintenance of infrastructure, club representation on regional associations, the shortage of jockeys and horses, the allocation of race dates, the allocation of TAB meetings, improving the quality of horses, marketing, integrity services and mobile TAB vans. These are issues Queensland Racing and UniTAB will have to address. In closing, I would like to thank the many clubs that have willingly met with me, sometimes early in the morning, late into the evening and on the many weekends. They have travelled long distances and often brought smoko with them. I thank them for their openness, honesty and willingness to share their knowledge of country racing. I table a list of clubs that I visited over that period of time. Hon. D.M. WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (4.36 p.m.): May I congratulate you, Mr Deputy Speaker, on your elevation to this position. May I begin by thanking the people of the Murrumba electorate for the confidence they showed in me and for the good judgment they have exercised repeatedly in recent elections. I assure them of my continued dedication to their interests and my continued commitment to the causes which they sent me to parliament to represent. I am acutely conscious that when my constituents went to the ballot box most of them who voted for me did not do so on the basis of assessment of my personal merits but on the basis of their belief in the program and philosophy of the great Australian Labor Party. So I would like to thank all the branch members in the Murrumba electorate, but particularly my campaign director, Paul Baildon, and his wife, Jan. For his achievements over the last two elections Paul will undoubtedly go down in local history. The result in the electorate of Murrumba was good not only in absolute terms but also relative to similar areas in the state, and this is undoubtedly due in part to the sound judgments made by my campaign committee and the strenuous efforts of my campaign team. Another large factor in our success was the extreme effectiveness of my electorate office. I would like to thank my electorate office staff, Sue and Megan, for their diligence in managing the office, the 1244 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 willingness they always had to go the extra mile on behalf of a constituent, and the thousand little ways that they organise and assist me. I thank and pay tribute to my partner, Michelle, who in spite of a battle with breast cancer still found time to attend functions with me and support me in what I was doing. Eighteen months on from the operations and radiation treatment and three six-monthly check-ups later, Michelle is free of the cancer and in that time she has got herself a new job, bought herself a new house and embarked on training to be a lay counsellor to other women suffering from breast cancer. That kind of response to a life-threatening crisis requires an unusual degree of courage which commands the respect as well as the love of those who know her well. I am fortunate to have a supportive family. My son, Dan, and my daughters, Anna and Michelle, have never once objected to the extra burden of time and effort that the life of an MP placed upon me even when it affected them most directly. When the last election was called Dan, Anna and I were taking a private holiday at Mon Repos. We were enjoying being wildlife volunteers with the Environment Department's turtle conservation program. When that short holiday had to be cut shorter, there was not a murmur of complaint. My sister, Marguerite, has been there for me at every stage of my life and continues to be an enormous support now. I could not have done what I have done, I could not do what I now do and I would not be able to what I intend do without Marguerite. Thank you, little sister, for all that you do and are. I would like to make special mention of my Aunt Mary who died just before Christmas. She was like a grandma to my children and a mentor to me. For 52 years I have had the strength which I drew from the example of her good humour, zest for life, honesty and fortitude. She taught me much of what I now know. In the weeks and months and, indeed, years working up to the last election, I travelled extensively to a large number of electorates throughout the state to announce policies or address issues. This may or may not have improved the election result. It probably did in Keppel. Mr Hoolihan: It certainly helped. It was great. Mr WELLS: I thank the honourable member for Keppel, my friend sitting beside me, for his confirmation. Whether it improved the election result or not I do not know, but it certainly improved the environment. I thank my personal staff in my former ministerial office and the officers of the Environmental Protection Agency for the strikingly effective work they did during the 2001 to 2004 period. Finally, I would like to thank my colleagues in this House. Parliament would not be the kind of place it is if we could not have the companionship of good and loyal friends—as everyone will eventually find out one way or the other—and I thank mine. May I now speak of the electorate of Murrumba—the region that is my home and whose people are my boss. The electorate of Murrumba takes in parts of three different local government areas— Redcliffe, Pine Rivers and Caboolture. It has three different demographies. The issues emphasised in Kippa-Ring often vary from those emphasised in North Lakes or Deception Bay. But the statistics which gloss over differences of emphasis tell a story worth noting. Compared with the state average, the citizens of Murrumba are younger, more likely to be Australian born, more likely to have left school early without completing year 12, more likely to be unemployed, more likely to be part of a single parent family headed by a female and more likely to be part of a single parent family headed by a male. So in my electorate, while one can meet people from a full spectrum of Australian society, one is pretty certain to meet the traditional Aussie battler. Many of my constituents live in residential areas that were built well away from transport corridors and away from employment generating infrastructure by the rapacity of grasping capitalists of a bygone era whose motivation was to squeeze every last dollar of profit by applying every square centimetre to residences with complete disregard for open space, urban amenity or the transport needs of their clients. Therefore, there is limited capacity for many of my constituents, particularly the young or the elderly, to go to the city or to places where employment can be found. This constitutes an ongoing and significant need of my constituents. The Minister for Transport was the minister to whom I made the most representations during the last parliament. The new Transport Minister will be receiving many representations from me on this issue. Many parts of Queensland feature the kind of unplanned development that many of the suburbs in my electorate feature. The suburbs were built before the infrastructure was put in place. But it does not have to be so. I remember only last year I was at a conference in my then ministerial capacity where I met with an urban developer who purported to speak on behalf of other urban developers. He said, 'What we want the government to tell us is where they do not want us to develop.' I said to him, 'I thought that you would probably want to develop everywhere you possibly could?' He said, 'No, our organisations are so big that we can pick and choose. We do not want to be where we are not wanted. We can go elsewhere. What we want from the government is certainty.' 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1245
It should not be beyond the capacity of the government to provide that certainty. Transport infrastructure should be in place before development takes place. I have very great confidence that the government is addressing this very difficult issue. But one decade ago when I drove my children down Anzac Avenue to school and kindergarten it was possible to do that as a quick detour on the way to the city. Now, there is a traffic jam at the relevant times on Anzac Avenue. At the same time, in the planned community of North Lakes, Mango Hill there is traffic of a more salubrious kind. There are very large numbers of children riding their bikes to the excellent new school that has been established in North Lakes. Safe bikeways have been put in the relevant parts of that development as part of the initial planning for the development. In other words, when that development was designed it was designed with transport needs in mind. Likewise, so should be our developing suburbs. As I say, I am very confident that the government is now addressing this issue. It is an issue that will take time for full addressal, but full addressal of this issue will add enormously to the value and quality of suburban life. An associated problem is that of urban amenity. Scattered throughout Queensland are examples of appalling planning decisions by local councils. Development permits have been issued and suburbs have been built right up against aerodromes, chook farms, factories and the like. The citizens then complain about the problems of odour and noise nuisance that they experience. The problem is made more intractable because the complaint is at once valid and made against essential infrastructure. In Murrumba the problem exists in two places. One is the Castle Hill area of Murrumba Downs where residential development now encroaches on the Petrie paper mill and the Pine Shire council's sewage treatment plant. The other is the new planned community of North Lakes which abuts the Narangba industrial estate which is zoned for noxious and hazardous industries. What a contrast is that? We can drive the prophetically named Boundary Road along the boundary of two worlds—noxious and hazardous chemicals on one side of the road and a planned, urban, lakeside lifestyle on the other. Paradoxically, good planning decades ago was what placed that development there. It was decades ago that the Department of State Development bought that land because it was well away from urban developments. Because the local councils allowed urban developments to encroach, we no longer have the benefits of the good planning of years ago. But good planning needs to be done again. The correct place for a noxious and hazardous industries site is in an undeveloped area, surrounded by a green belt, on a railway line that the workers can use for fast access to their work. I think we need a process for dealing with this that does not damage our industrial infrastructure but which over an extended period of time leads to the noxious and hazardous industrial estate being phased down and eventually located elsewhere. I now want to turn to one of the great success stories of the second Beattie ministry. I refer to community renewal, particularly as it applies to Deception Bay. If one goes for a walk along the esplanade of Deception Bay, one can see the extent of beautification which is wonderful to behold. The beauty of the suburb was not as evident before community renewal came in. But more important than the actual changes to the physical environment is the renewal of the community itself. The way it worked was that money was provided for the community for worthwhile projects that were going to reflect the renewal of the Deception Bay. The community was consulted in respect of how to spend that money. Involving members of the community in that kind of decision gave them power over their lives that they had never previously had. A leadership group emerged in Deception Bay with a realisation that by concerted altruistic action the community can pull itself up by its bootstraps. The success of the program can be seen not just in the parks and walkways of Deception Bay but in the morale, the energy and the vitality of its citizens. What community renewal has done for the bay is to engender social capital. I pay tribute to my friend and colleague the Minister for Housing, who developed the program. That minister likes to pass himself off in this House as a rough diamond, but that is a false pretence. He is in fact a thinker and a visionary who has quite deliberately set about restoring self-esteem and dignity and redressing the injustices of some of the state's most disadvantaged areas. The concept of social capital is no longer a flaky one. It is in fact a rigorous one. I refer honourable members to the writings of people like Fukuyama, Putnam and the work of the World Bank on this subject. Taking some of the threads of thought from those resources, may I give members an indication of how the theorem goes. Social capital equals the amount of trust or willingness there is in a community to cooperate. The extent of cooperation in a community has an economic consequence, and that economic consequence is entirely benign. If one looks at the areas in which there are no community voluntary organisations—like, for example, the inner suburban slums of Russia and the United States— one will find that the only effective economic activity is in fact the black market. If, on the other hand, one looks at those areas where there are large numbers of voluntary organisations of people who are willing to cooperate and work together in order to achieve altruistic purposes for no personal reward of their own, they will find a flourishing economy. In other words, there is a direct relationship between economic vitality and the willingness of people to work cooperatively together for no personal reward. 1246 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
What the Community Renewal Program does is to deliberately build social capital. The city of Redcliffe is a very interesting area, and part of it falls within my electorate. The number of voluntary community organisations per head of population in Redcliffe exceeds that of any other urban area in Queensland. However, just down the road in other areas, those areas were impoverished in respect of the number of voluntary organisations in comparison to the city of Redcliffe, and I do not exclude areas closer to Brisbane. The development of that kind of social capital is difficult to achieve, yet community renewal does that. The development of that kind of social capital—the development of voluntary community organisations—is very dependent on the creation of a leadership group arising out of the community. That is precisely what the Community Renewal Program sets about doing, and it does it very well. The Community Renewal Program is an example of a government aiming directly at what governments ought to be aiming at. Governments have until now tried to serve their people indirectly by improving the productive resources of their jurisdiction and trying to maximise their prosperity as measured by gross domestic product per head of population. That might have been all right while the world was young. In the 21st century the world has come of age, and the time has come for governments to aim directly at those things that really matter—the happiness and wellbeing of the people they represent. I assure the people I represent that I will settle for nothing less than that for them. Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (4.54 p.m.): Congratulations to the member for Redcliffe on his election as Speaker in this the 51st Parliament of Queensland. I wish the member for Redcliffe well in his endeavours as our Speaker. I also congratulate the Premier on once again receiving an overwhelming mandate from the people of Queensland. Congratulations also to my fellow Independents on their re-election and to the One Nation member. Congratulations also to the Leader of the Opposition and to all of my other parliamentary colleagues. To the people of Nicklin on the Sunshine Coast, I give you my heartfelt thanks. It is an honour and a privilege to represent you, and I promise you that I will continue to work hard on your behalf and be your strong independent voice in state parliament. Once again, my heartfelt thanks go to the members of Wellington's army who have stood with me and worked tirelessly on my behalf. Words alone cannot describe how I feel about this dedicated group of men and women. They are my confidantes, my allies and my very dear friends. Many thanks. Notwithstanding this support, I would not be here today if it was not for the total commitment of one special person—my campaign manager, my strategist, my best friend and my wife, Jenny. I sincerely thank you. I was overwhelmed and humbled by the level of support I received at the last election, particularly as the former coalition ran a campaign attacking my credibility as an Independent and my ability to represent the concerns of all of my constituents in parliament. The fact that the National candidate received just 14 per cent of the vote shows that the people of Nicklin were not fooled by this hype. As an Independent, I have been able to cross the party political divide and work with the government of the day for the benefit of my electorate. Unfettered by party political allegiances, I have worked with the three levels of government to ensure the best possible level of service for the electorate of Nicklin. I give my constituents and all Queenslanders a commitment that I will continue to do this for as long as the people of Nicklin want me to be their member in state parliament. Once again, the Premier has received an overwhelming mandate from the people of Queensland to govern this state. While the Nationals and Liberals can take some heart from their increased numbers, they are still, I believe, way out of touch with the thinking of many Queenslanders. I believe that the Nationals and the Liberal Party need to acknowledge that the Independents in this the 51st Parliament were elected on their own merit and not through party bias or through support from the party machine. If the Nationals and Liberals want to win government in Queensland again, they need to work with the Independents and not against them. Their enemy is not on this side of the House; it is the other side of the House. In responding to the Governor's address on 17 March 2004, I note that the Governor advised how the government will improve the Queensland child protection system, and I hope in undertaking this radical overhaul of the department the state government will be able to ensure that enough competent staff can be recruited to undertake this essential child protection work. On the Sunshine Coast where our population is increasing very rapidly, there is a great need for these child-care services to not just continue but increase. I note that the second state government service referred to by the Governor in her address was health. While improving the level of Queensland's health service appears to rank very highly as a priority with the government, improving health services in my electorate on the Sunshine Coast is certainly a very high priority to me. Only yesterday I spoke with the Health Minister about a health related problem involving one of my constituents. This morning I again raised another matter with the minister. I shall continue to lobby the minister and the government for improved health services for not just the electorate of Nicklin but the whole of the Sunshine Coast region. The Nambour General Hospital is, I believe, currently operating beyond its capacity. Unfortunately, many problems that we have experienced at the hospital over recent times have been directly attributed to Queensland Health's inability to attract specialist doctors and anaesthetists to perform the essential work required of them. While I challenge Queensland Health bureaucrats to work harder at filling these important specialist positions at Nambour General Hospital, I agree with the 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1247 minister's comment made yesterday in this parliament—that is, that the federal government also has to share part of the responsibility. I believe it certainly does, because we simply do not have enough students in Australia training to be our doctors. I believe it is disappointing that in Australia—the lucky country—we have to bring in doctors from overseas to work in our public hospitals because we do not have enough of our own Australian trained doctors. I hope that the minister's new committee will be able to resolve an unfortunate dispute involving nurses and Queensland Health over the recognition of certain nursing qualifications. Recently, we lost some of our dental services at Nambour Hospital, again because of a lack of specialist staff. Many of my constituents are disappointed that they now have to travel to Brisbane for this dental work. This service certainly should be delivered in Nambour, where it has been delivered in the past, and I hope that the dental vacancies will be filled in the near future. Improving education services in Queensland was acknowledged by the Governor as another service of importance. Education certainly is another very high priority in my electorate. Schools from Kenilworth to Eudlo, North Arm to Nambour, Chevallum to Burnside, Mapleton to Montville, Yandina to Woombye and Palmwoods to Bli Bli all do a wonderful job in preparing our young Queenslanders for life after school. Eudlo State School needs a new toilet block and the toilets at the Nambour State High School are certainly in need of a major upgrade and refurbishment. I certainly hope that the minister can fund those upgrades in this year's budget. Nambour Special School is also looking forward to the new building that is due to be completed in the near future. Additional painting is also necessary at schools such as Nambour State High School, Nambour Primary School and the Yandina and Burnside schools to mention only a few. The Mapleton observatory is working very well and is certainly a great asset to the school and to the whole region of the Sunshine Coast. The Sunshine Coast Children's Therapy Centre is going from strength to strength and simply cannot cope with the demand for its services. There must be something right happening down there. Only a fortnight ago I had the privilege of opening the Sunshine Coast Hear and Say Centre in Nambour. I take this opportunity to say thankyou to the Nambour Rotary Club and to Harry and Margaret Reed and all the other people who got behind this project to bring this new service to the Sunshine Coast. For some time I had been lobbying the government to support this great service. I say thankyou again to the Premier and to the Queensland government for this morning's announcement of the provision of financial support to the Queensland Hear and Say Centre. In addition to training provided by the Nambour Hospital and our schools, Nambour TAFE is another major partner in Nambour's education precinct. The Nambour TAFE campus has a very important role to play not just today but also in the future in training our future leaders in a whole range of activities. While the Governor spoke about her government's plan to increase the number of police in Queensland, I take this opportunity to call on the government to upgrade the facilities at the Nambour Police Station. We must ensure that the conditions that our police officers work in are reasonable and appropriate. In that regard, I believe that the government can do better by relieving the cramped working conditions at the Nambour Police Station. If the government will not prioritise the rebuilding of this station, I use this opportunity to again call on the government to provide some airconditioned demountable office space—and I do not believe that that is an unreasonable ask—so that our police officers simply have better working conditions. The Nambour police beat also needs permanent staffing as a result of the expansion of the Nambour central business district. Beside the Nambour Police Station is the Nambour Courthouse. At the moment the magistrate visits the court once a month for court hearings. I take this opportunity to call on the minister to please increase the number of times that our magistrate visits Nambour. On the other side of the Nambour Police Station is the fire station. Put simply, this station is past its use-by date. A new station is required. Unfortunately, the current station cannot meet the needs of the service and the local firemen. I take this opportunity to call on the minister and the government to prioritise the planning for a new Nambour fire station. I thank the minister for recently accepting my invitation to visit the Nambour Fire Station to see first-hand the conditions that our firemen are working under. Before leaving the topic of fire services, I acknowledge the good work that our volunteer rural fire brigade members do. The Maroochy River rural fire brigade is about to receive approval from the government for a new brigade site on state government land at Yandina. I thank the former Minister for State Development, Tom Barton; the current Minister for State Development, Tony McGrady; and the new Minister for Emergency Services, my parliamentary colleague on the Sunshine Coast, Chris Cummins, for their support in enabling this to happen, because it simply would not have happened without the support of the government. I am continuing to lobby for a new brigade site for the Ilkley rural brigade and also the River View brigade is looking for some land that they can call home for their new fire truck. Community housing is another area of high need on the Sunshine Coast. I take this opportunity to thank the Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing for his support for the building of more emergency accommodation units on the Sunshine Coast and also for assisting in our calls for help for the men's boarding house. I support the government's proposal to curb the supply of alcohol and the incidence of alcohol related violence in indigenous communities. One area that I am concerned about is 1248 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004 the level of gambling in our community. I hope that in this year's budget, due to be brought down next month, there will be a realistic strategy to respond to this real issue. I listened to the Governor speak about continuing the five-year road program. I support the continuation of this program. Some of the major link roads currently on the program in my electorate are the Kenilworth-Eumundi road, the Kenilworth-Conondale road, and the Nambour Connection Road. Only last week I met with Mapleton community representatives, together with officers of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, to investigate the possibility of constructing a heavy vehicle pull-off lane on the Nambour-Mapleton road. Some other roads of importance requiring upgrading are the Palmwoods-Montville road and Obi Obi Road. I acknowledge that this government has allocated more money to upgrade the Citytrain network. Nambour is on the Citytrain network and I take this opportunity to call on the government to install toilets on this service for the benefit of the many elderly passengers who use this service travelling from Nambour to Brisbane. Each year we have a steady increase in the number of people travelling on the Sunshine Coast leg of the Citytrain network. The rail infrastructure is in need of upgrading so that more commuter services can operate. I shall continue to lobby the government for that to occur. Finally, I note that the Governor acknowledged the need for management of fire, weeds and feral animals in our state forests. On Wednesday, 9 June I will be holding a meeting at the Mapleton Bowls Club to discuss the issue of wild dogs. I am pleased to announce that representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Natural Resources will attend. I thank the ministers for their support on this matter. I note that the Governor concluded her address by calling on all 89 members of this the 51st Parliament to work together in improving the lives of our people and communities in the promotion of the current and future interests of this state. Can I say here and now that I certainly am prepared to work with the government, with the opposition—with anyone in this chamber—to improve the conditions and improve the level of state government services not just in Nicklin, not just on the Sunshine Coast, but throughout the length and breath of this great state of Queensland. Ms NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (5.07 p.m.): I rise today to respond to the Governor's speech outlining the Beattie government's priorities for this, our third term. I wish to respond to those priorities from a personal, philosophical framework and to comment on how Ipswich fits into them. I want to talk specifically about some issues relating to the health of our democracy and the community's engagement with it. I want to talk about education, I want to talk about south-east Queensland planning and how Ipswich fits into that. At the commencement of my second term, I am three years—and I feel very many years—older and I would like to think that I am a little wiser, too. I am often asked if I have yet become cynical about politics. The answer very clearly is no. While people put politicians and the political process down, my experience has heartened me as often as it has caused me disillusionment. Among my colleagues in parliament and in the Ipswich community are many wise, smart and passionate souls who it is my privilege to know and, as a result of my work, to be able to call friends. Politics is the most direct reflection of the community. Voting is a direct expression of community values. Just as our political process is flawed so, too, are we. Just as it is not good enough for politicians to ignore communities so, too, it is not good enough for individuals to opt out of democracy and then blame someone else for their problems. The corollary here, or perhaps the harsh reality, is that people get the politicians they deserve. There should not be a gaping void between the community and their representatives. We are in this together. Politics should be about hope, about appealing—as Abraham Lincoln said—to the better angels of our nature. It is a great tragedy that through the Hanson and Howard eras Australian politics has been about appealing to our fears and our petty jealousies. How else do we explain running a whole election campaign around the lie that Australia is endangered by foreigners who throw their children overboard? Mark Latham's leadership is different, because it returns the agenda to hope—to the idea that government should participate in protecting and educating children and that it should be focused on providing opportunities for all. That hope and that active notion of government should be irresistible. To provide that hope, however, we must restore a degree of humanity to the debate. We must value civil society and the political process, and the public debate must always be relevant. Too often we spend our time caught up in what American academic Benjamin DeMott calls junk politics, where the focus is so personal and so symbolic that the real issues are lost. Our media gave more attention to the Lockhart River wine matter last month than it has to years of Aboriginal poverty. They obsess about Amanda Vanstone's shirts but do not ask why she is one of only two women in the federal cabinet. And the Courier-Mail counts the number of MPs' speeches as some kind of performance measure, but rarely does it take note of the quality of what was or was not said. Hugh Mackay argues that this focus on the immediate and the personal is a response to the fact that the big social and political issues are too daunting for us to contemplate. But frankly, we cannot just cop out like that. We should indeed expect more from a media that is more than willing to take the easy road. Politics matters. Nothing will influence our society's future as much as politics, and it behoves both 19 May 2004 Address-in-Reply 1249 those of us in it and those reporting on it not to treat politics like an insider's game in which the community are not playing but to focus on its capacity to change people's lives. The community's decreasing connection to the public debate is reflected in the fact that 48 per cent of 18-year-olds and 13 per cent of people between the ages of 21 and 25 are not even enrolled to vote. What worries me is that for every smart 19-year-old with a vision for Australia's future who chooses not to vote there is a grumpy reactionary who wants to return us to the 1950s who does. In 1905 Queensland women for the first time got the right to vote, in 1966 Aborigines were granted the right and in 1973 we lowered the voting age from 21 to 18. Each extension of the franchise has been met with a rush of participation from the newly empowered group. It is now time to extend the franchise again, this time by lowering the voting age to 17. The member for Nudgee has made a similar call, and I acknowledge his work on this issue. My proposal, though, is that lowering the voting age should not be seen as an end in itself. Rather, it should be one aspect of a renewed, genuine national focus on democratic participation, and it should come in conjunction with the introduction of a genuine, comprehensive system of civic education in schools. Young people care about the future, and no single thing will impact on that future more than politics. But at the moment what we teach them about our political system is decidedly hit and miss. Most Australians could not tell you of the differing responsibilities of the three levels of government. A recent study showed that most Australians, in huge contrast to Americans, did not even know that we had a Constitution. And the separation of powers is a foreign concept to the National Party, let alone to the majority of punters. How would people know? We do not really teach them at school. Right now there is some civics in the SOSE program from primary school to year 10. While the federal government has talked a lot about its Discovering Democracy project, the truth is that the take-up has been abysmal and its funding is now being stripped. How is it that we can teach kids senior physics without teaching them the foundations of their own society? Ignorance of how our own society runs can have a huge impact on people's lives. As MPs we see it every day as we see people who feel victimised and disempowered by a system they do not understand. It is a small step from finding a system you cannot navigate to thinking it is a system that is out to get you. So we should lower the voting age and we should compulsorily teach kids the life skills of civics, just like we do English and maths. If the voting age were 17, most young people would vote for the first time while at school. It would make their civic education relevant and it would allow enrolment drives to be targeted at the captive audience of young people while they are still at school. Such a change is entirely consistent with the state government's Education and Training Reforms for the Future agenda, and it is only appropriate that it is Labor, the party which has always led Australian social change, which should empower young people now. The Governor's speech rightly focused on education, because that is at the heart of everything that we as a government do. For the sake of our economic and environmental future, Queenslanders have to live more off our minds and less off our natural resources. We cannot continue to be a quarry and a farm. The most recent figures for gross state product show that agriculture and mining still account for around 12 per cent of gross state product, compared with less than five per cent for education and six per cent for health. While the proportion for agriculture has declined markedly in recent years, we still rely heavily for export income on primary products. While that continues we will remain export price takers, never price makers. The only way to change that is to realise the aim of the Smart State. The Beattie government is already on the way. In the last three years year 12 retention rates have increased from 68 per cent to 81 per cent, and that is before Education and Training Reforms for the Future really kicks in. In addition, the statewide introduction of a prep year will improve children's educational foundations, especially for those children who are not read to at home. When these changes are bedded down, however, there will still be more that needs to be done. Australia is increasingly divided between the upwardly mobile middle class who value education and are giving their children a chance through education and a growing underclass of people who do not. These are the people you hear swearing at their kids in the street. Education should be the focus for all parents. If we as a society are not focused on giving young people opportunities in their lives then what on earth are we doing? We should start by taking a tough, symbolic stand on the value of education. I have recently written to Mark Latham arguing that parents, including those in some Aboriginal as well as white communities who do not send their kids to school, should not get family allowance. School uniforms are another sign of valuing education, and uniforms contribute to respectful school environments. I contend that school uniforms, properly worn, should be compulsory in all state schools. The second thing about education is that we should value teaching. The Howard government has finally woken up to the impending teacher shortage and, appropriately, focused on teaching and nurses through the Nelson review. As a state government we need to do better at encouraging and rewarding teachers who take curriculum leadership in the school and who genuinely engage in lifelong learning. 1250 Address-in-Reply 19 May 2004
The latest Australian Education Union figures show that nearly 45 per cent of teachers engaged in professional development outside of school hours, and 16 per cent of women teachers surveyed are enrolled in further study. The state's leading teacher program does not sufficiently reward those people and does little to reward good, young, professional teachers. We need to look at more ways, like the recently announced professional year, to fast-track and reward good teachers. Thirdly, we need to stay focused on the physical infrastructure of state schools. While we have stemmed the tide from state to private schools in recent years, we need to do more to improve the physical infrastructure, particularly of older state schools. My electorate is like many established areas of Queensland in that the schools are old and in some cases well worn. While the Triple R and Building Better Schools programs of recent years mean that schools such as Bremer High in my electorate are now in much better shape than they were three, four or five years ago, school improvement should continue to be a major funding focus. I contend that Queensland needs a comprehensive school rebuilding program. This is more important, to my mind, than some of the more fashionable causes such as school airconditioning. Education creates opportunity. It is the best thing a Labor government can do. As we look for new ways to link government to people, we should start planning for schools to be genuine community hubs where local people come together to meet and through which other social services like child protection, public health, adult education and sport are delivered. To some extent this already happens. In some schools where the principal is local and long term, the school will run things like the local Anzac Day service and community groups might use a classroom at night. But this is not always the case. Schools have vastly underutilised physical infrastructure, so the idea that schools would be places where parents meet at night classes, where principals are involved with child protection conferences and where retired people come during the day to read to kids seems a sensible antidote to the social disengagement in communities and to the insatiable call for physical infrastructure. This idea was well developed by the Victorian principals association some years ago. I propose it as a useful planning goal for our government. I wish to turn now to Ipswich. The people of Ipswich delivered one of the biggest pro-government swings in the state at the last election. The seat, which was previously about the 20th safest for Labor, is now, on Associate Professor Paul Reynolds' calculation, fourth. To the people of Ipswich I am deeply grateful. Ipswich has a tremendous sense of identity and community, like nothing I have encountered anywhere else—and I have lived in many parts of the world and in many other parts of Australia. It is socioeconomically and culturally diverse, with the gritty honesty that comes from people from different backgrounds making a go of living through a long, sometimes hard, history together. A few weeks ago at Anzac Day at Woodend I looked around at the people who support me and who have known my family for generations, and I was struck by what good people they are and what an extraordinary privilege it is to represent them. I put my soul into representing Ipswich people and towards me they are warm and supportive. Ipswich is now more prosperous and optimistic than it has been at any other time in my lifetime. Our unemployment and crime rates are falling. The property market is booming. The economy is diversifying into tourism and a better integrated education sector and a new manufacturing sector exemplified by the Capral development at Bundamba is emerging. South-east Queensland planning was a key election issue. There now needs to be an understanding that one of the keys to creating a sustainable future for south-east Queensland is embracing Ipswich. In recent years the Gold and Sunshine coasts have experienced population growth of around four per cent per year, creating areas of urban sprawl with stretched social and physical infrastructure and limited capacity for jobs growth. To top it off for the people who have moved to the coast to live the dream, many of the new urban areas are not even very close to the beach. If this trend continues, we will have urban sprawl stretching from Noosa to Coolangatta. The biggest environmental issues facing south-east Queensland are protecting green space, including bush that is not in national parks for recreation, maintaining water supply and quality, and protecting air quality by ensuring that people live near where they work. To avoid the nightmare south- east Queensland could easily become, we need to draw the population west. Ipswich provides the south-east Queensland solution for two reasons. Firstly, it has the land capacity to accommodate jobs beyond the projections for its urban growth and, secondly, it is a community with existing social infrastructure, not a greenfield site. The Beattie government, I am pleased to say, gets it when it comes to the strategic importance of Ipswich. The evidence of that understanding is that our one major road funding commitment in the recent election campaign was $120 million to build a second Ipswich-Brisbane road by extending the Centenary Highway from Springfield to Ripley. This road will be built 20 years ahead of its projected time. My job, though, is not just to get people to Ipswich; it is to ensure that we get the planning and infrastructure for liveable, not dumb growth. In coming years Ipswich will see both industrial and urban growth. They must be done well. At its heart, Ipswich is an industrial town. If we fail to attract new, clean 19 May 2004 Standing Order 70(ii) 1251 green industry now, or if those industries are deterred by self-interested NIMBYs, then Ipswich will not see jobs growth; it will become nothing more than a satellite city of Brisbane and our identity will be lost. Industrial growth in Ipswich has been and will continue to be my first priority. For the record, I want Ipswich people to know that I am not pro development at any cost. The council, too, must assert that we are planning—not developer—driven and we must play to our strengths—maintaining our heritage, cleaning up our river, loving our sense of community and building new industry to make Ipswich again a workers' town. If we do these things, good urban growth will follow. If we are developer driven, then we will be no better than the suburban sprawl that other parts of south-east Queensland have already become. Already Ipswich has some clear examples of good and bad urban planning. Springfield and Winston Glades are connected, well-serviced communities because they have been built with forethought by developers who have stuck around. In contrast, we have patchwork developments where suburban streets meet horse paddocks in areas around Redbank Plains and Raceview. They are the signs of councils who have simply responded to developers' demands, and we live with the social consequences of that for many years to come. The next part of Ipswich to be developed will be Ripley. The large number of land-holdings there and the distance from the CBD mean that without tough planning guidelines we could easily fall into those same traps again. Today I call on council to insist that the gaps in our existing suburbs are filled before we start moving further out. We want quality development, and with demand for land in south- east Queensland so strong there is no reason why we should not get it. To make our claim, we need an attractive CBD and we need to improve our river. The Bremer River has always been one of my priorities and that work will soon start to come to fruition with the $6 million River Heart project which will develop parkland and walkways along the CBD stretch of the river. Still the Ipswich City Square shopping precinct is moribund—an embarrassment to the city. Hundreds of millions of dollars of retail spending flow from Ipswich each year while T.P. Tay, the owner of the prime CBD site, fails to properly maintain let alone renovate his centre. The empty shops are a blight on the city, and again today I call on the city square owner for the sake of the people of Ipswich to invest in his centre or to sell it to someone who will. This insistence on quality planning should extend throughout the city. In recent years I have been very concerned by the poor quality, cheap prefab concrete developments we are getting along the main city entrance on Brisbane Road between Bundamba and the CBD. This is not good enough for the main entrance to a heritage city, and I call on council to look at ways of ensuring better quality building in that area. The other side in addition to planning is building the infrastructure. My views on the Ipswich Motorway are well known and I will not go into a lot of detail today except to say this: the member for Blair, Cameron Thompson, has run one of the most deceitful campaigns I have ever seen in politics. His argument that the planning for the Ipswich Motorway upgrade is sufficient is outrageous given that his government, the federal government, set the parameters for that planning. The motorway is 100 per cent a federal road. The Howard government's ongoing refusal to provide the funds for its upgrade means that the gridlock that occurred there yesterday is 100 per cent the federal government's fault. Ipswich people almost universally want a six-lane upgrade and, if Cameron Thompson's government will not deliver it, then he should start looking for another job. At a local level, there are a number of big issues on the horizon. There is too much traffic flowing through the CBD and the council needs to reinvigorate its ring-road plan. As a state government, we need to improve rail. I have talked about a lot of ideas in this speech from schools to roads and protecting the environment in south-east Queensland. Not all of them will be taken up, but I will make the point that I see putting forward those ideas as my job. I do not think it is good enough to come in here and talk about things that you have not thought about. I do not think it is good enough to always be a populist and to squib the real issues. In electing me to the parliament again, an enormous number of people including my branch members, my family and my friends have supported me, and I intend to represent them genuinely to the best of my abilities. I put my mind and my soul into this job, and for the next three years I intend to continue to do this job with the greatest of my integrity. Debate, on motion of Ms Male, adjourned.
STANDING ORDER 70(ii)
Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (5.27 p.m.): I move that— Given the extraordinary abuse of this House by ministers who are continually refusing to answer questions, standing order No. 70(ii) be amended to clearly state that answers to questions by ministers and members must directly relate to and be directly relevant to the question asked. 1252 Standing Order 70(ii) 19 May 2004
Over the last few months we have been continually subjected to the spectacle of this increasingly arrogant government ignoring the standing orders of this parliament and treating not only the opposition but also the parliament and the media with contempt. We are seeing ministers over and over again going off on unbelievable flights of fancy as they seek to duck and dive and weave and dodge around the issues being brought to their attention by members of the opposition and by other members of this parliament. We really have to ask the question: what does the government have to hide when there are 63 of them and there are so few numbers on this side of the parliament—15 members of the official opposition, the Liberal Party, One Nation and the Independents? What do they have to hide when they have such numbers in this parliament? Why do they treat this parliament with contempt? That is the question. It is because the blowtorch is getting very, very close to their belly and they are uncomfortable with being accountable. They are becoming more intoxicated on their huge majority. They are becoming intoxicated on the trappings and the power of office. They are treating this parliament with absolute contempt. Standing Rules and Orders state— General Rules for Answers ... 70. The following general rules shall apply to Answers: (i) In answering a Question a Minister or Member shall not Debate the subject to which it refers. (ii) An Answer shall be relevant to the Question. (iii) If, in the opinion of the Speaker, the Answer is too long, he may direct the Minister or the Member to cease speaking. Of course, as we know, sessional orders now limit the time for those answers to three minutes. The last real ruling on the issue of relevance that we had in this place came on 20 February 1991 when the Speaker of the day responded to a point of order that was raised by the then member for Burnett, Doug Slack. The member's point of order related to a question that was asked of the then Minister for Family Services and Aboriginal and Islander Affairs. Mr Slack rose and said this— I rise to a point of order. My questions were quite clear. Does the Minister have sympathy for the claim of the Butchulla people with whom she has travelled to Fraser Island, as outlined in the submission? Does the submission reflect the Minister's well-known belief that Aborigines should hold inalienable title over other areas in Queensland? What the Minister is saying has no relevance to the question. The Speaker then said— Order! I am waiting for the Minister to get to the point of the question. She is setting the groundwork for it. Mr Slack raised another similar point of order. At that stage the Speaker said— I suggest to the Minister that she do not debate this matter and that her answer be relevant to the question. I have allowed her to set out the background to her answer, but I cannot allow her to debate the issue. Another point of order was raised as the minister continued to go off the track. The Speaker again said— Order! I cannot ask a Minister to answer a question in a particular way. The only recourse that I have is that Standing Orders set out that the answer must not debate the question and it must be relevant. I have allowed the Minister to set the scene for her answer. I suggest that she does not debate it. That is my ruling. That was the ruling of Mr Speaker on 20 February 1991. It was clearly apparent that the Speaker at that time was concerned that ministers were abusing their position in relation to answering questions that were asked of them by members of the opposition in particular. Since that time, we have seeing increasing contempt for that standing order by members of the government. I know that it has caused you, Mr Speaker, to reflect on this matter because on 4 April you said—and this is our own ruling—in response to a point of order— The member would be aware of the standing order that ministers can answer questions how they please. The member will resume his seat. I see an inconsistency with your ruling, Mr Speaker, of 4 April and Mr Speaker's ruling of 20 February 1991. In 1991 Mr Speaker tried to enforce the rule that a minister should not debate the question and that his or her answer must be relevant to the question that was asked. A situation has evolved where ministers, led by the Premier, continuously skirt around their obligation of accountability to the parliament. They are obliged to be accountable to the parliament and at least attempt to answer questions. Some ministers in this place do attempt to answer questions, but some do not. The Premier is the worst offender and the member for Rockhampton is becoming a serial offender. Yesterday he stood in this place and talked about a goat on a rope for three minutes. He would not answer the question, yet this morning information relevant to that particular question was divulged in the newspaper. Quite frankly, that is a case of treating the parliament with contempt. The Commonwealth parliament has similar standing orders. I draw the attention of the House to a couple of matters reported in federal parliamentary Hansard. On Tuesday, 17 February 2004 Mr Kelvin Thomson, who is a Labor or opposition member of parliament, rose and said— 19 May 2004 Standing Order 70(ii) 1253
Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Prime Minister was asked whether he would reject political donations from tobacco companies. I ask you to draw him back to the question. The Speaker asked the Prime Minister if he had finished and, when he said that he had not, the Speaker said— I invite the Prime Minister to come back to the question of tobacco. On 4 December 2003, in the federal parliament, Ms Gillard rose on a point of order regarding the Minister for Health and Aging. She said— The Minister for Health and Ageing is consistently straying from the question and consistently not referring to people by their proper title. I ask you to correct him on that and bring him back to the question. Following some discussion, the Speaker said— Order! The minister will come to the question. What I am saying is that, at the very least, we need a very clear and consistent ruling in this place. I would prefer that the motion that the opposition has brought before the parliament today be supported. There have been times when you, Mr Speaker, have made some quite direct rulings regarding the asking of questions in this place. We can debate the subjectivity of the latitude of those particular questions. Mr Lucas interjected. Mr SPRINGBORG: And he would be sitting the member down for irrelevance. That is what he would be doing. Mr SPEAKER: Order! We are not having a debate across the chamber. Address the chair. Mr SPRINGBORG: And he would be sitting the Premier down, through you, Mr Speaker— Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will address the chair. Mr SPRINGBORG: I said 'Mr Speaker'. The Speaker would be sitting the Premier down for irrelevance as well. We are seeing absolute contempt of this parliament exercised by ministers. That is why we believe that we should amend standing orders to ensure that they state that an answer must be directly relevant and directly related to the question. How else will we keep the government accountable? Today in this place we saw another example of the Premier seeking to duck, dive, weave and carry on when he was asked a straight question about the opportunity and the obligations that he had to provide information to the opposition as an FOI applicant. We simply asked why his office told us that there were no documents relevant to particular matters raised about the conduct of the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice. The office said that it had no documents. Only by the process of external review and appeal were we able to ascertain the fact that there were three documents, and then later we found out about another 24. If we do not have the capacity to come into this place to keep the government accountable and at least try to get that information, how will the government be accountable? This government is not accountable and it has proven it with the cars issue and the hiding of documents relating to accident reports involving ministerial electorate cars which were not tabled by the Premier today. We simply heard more weasel words from the Premier. There was the Lockhart River affair where the minister ducked, dived and weaved. Minister Schwarten does that all the time. It goes on and on and on and on and on. We have to exercise our legitimate right to the very end to catch the government out, as we did with FOI— Time expired. Mr SEENEY (5.37 p.m.): I rise to second the motion that has been moved by the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Southern Downs. I urge every member in the parliament to support this motion, because it is a very important motion. It goes right to the heart of making this parliament work. I think every member in this parliament should be aware of just what is being sought here tonight. We are seeking to make the parliament work better, to achieve one of the fundamental aims and purposes of the parliament, that is, holding a government accountable. It is a basic tenement of the Westminster system that members of the executive government, that is, the ministers, come into this place every day that the parliament is sitting and subject themselves to question time. There is a reason why that has developed over a great many years as part of the Westminster system. It is so that the executive government can be held accountable to the parliament. The executive government is questioned by all members of the parliament and that is why government backbenchers get a chance to ask questions of ministers as well, even though the reality is that party politics always means that those questions are never searching or very challenging. There is an opportunity for the opposition to ask questions of the government, to hold it accountable. Therefore, it becomes a farce when a situation is allowed to develop whereby ministers who are questioned as part 1254 Standing Order 70(ii) 19 May 2004 of that accountability process can stand up and talk for three minutes or their allotted time about anything that they like. It makes a farce of the whole accountability process. We have seen in this place and in the public arena the Premier talk endlessly about how accountable his government is and how accountable and open he is prepared to be with the people of Queensland. The most valuable accountability mechanism is question time every morning in this parliament. The best measure of the government's accountability is the way that ministers are prepared to respond to the questions that are put to them during question time in this parliament. In that regard, this government has a woeful record, a terrible record—a record that would indicate that it is not prepared to be accountable to this parliament or accountable through this parliament to the people of Queensland. Over the last few months we have seen an increasing tendency for ministers not to answer questions, to point-blank refuse to answer questions and to use up their allotted time in answering by reminiscing and talking about all sorts of things. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I suggest that repetition is also coming into this at the moment. Mr SEENEY: I am sorry, Mr Speaker, would you and I like to debate that point? The Premier is a serial offender. When he is questioned, on many occasions there is no attempt to answer the question. The other ministers are just as bad. The Leader of the Opposition mentioned the Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing. The Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing does his best to abuse the questioner. It is a trade mark that that minister has developed. When we ask him a question about anything we can be almost sure that we will cop abuse. The shadow minister has found this out. The member for Gregory copped abuse yesterday even though he did not ask the question. That is the type of response that has become the trade mark for the Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing. It makes a mockery of any suggestion that he is accountable to this government or that this government is accountable to the parliament. The Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy came into this parliament and simply refused to answer questions, refused to even attempt to use up the allotted time. That in itself indicates a very deliberate strategy. The Minister for Emergency Services unfortunately has demonstrated to this parliament that he does not have the capacity to answer questions. I guess we can feel sorry for someone who is as inadequate as he has proven to be. The ministers have consistently refused to answer questions. Unless that standing order requires them to answer questions, unless they are held to that standing order by the Speaker in the chair of this parliament, then this parliament becomes a farce. Question time becomes a farce. This motion will ensure that that does not happen. Hon. A.M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education and the Arts) (5.42 p.m.): The government will be opposing this motion. It does so for a number of reasons. Firstly, I think it is important at times like this that we contemplate the importance of the standing orders. The standing orders of this parliament, in conjunction with the sessional orders that are passed from time to time, govern the business of this House. They are not the fodder for political stunts. Make no mistake, this motion is nothing more than a cheap stunt. It is sloppily drafted. In fact it is not even drafted as an amendment to standing orders. Even if this motion were passed tonight in the form that it was put forward it could not change the standing orders of the House because it has not been drafted properly. No effort has been put into it. The Leader of the Opposition is well aware of the appropriate way to raise this matter. Firstly, if he has a concern about the way that the current standing orders are being interpreted by the Speaker, then, frankly, he should raise that matter with the Speaker. Secondly, I raise the fact that this parliament is currently considering draft standing orders to completely replace the standing orders of the House. The draft was tabled eight weeks ago and what the member for Southern Downs knows, but which other members may not be aware of, is that there is a meeting of the Standing Orders Committee scheduled for tomorrow afternoon, at which he will be present, when the standing orders of the parliament will be discussed. If he has a concern about this or any other issue that would be the appropriate time to raise it. One would think from the way people are talking tonight that there is no provision for ministerial answers in the current standing orders. Nothing could be further from the truth. I refer members to chapter VII clause 70 of the standing orders which states— The following general rules shall apply to Answers: (i) In answering a Question a Minister or Member shall not Debate the subject to which it refers. (ii) An Answer shall be relevant to the Question. (iii) If, in the opinion of the Speaker, the Answer is too long, he may direct the Minister or Member to cease speaking. The provisions are very clear. Relevance is inevitably in the eye of the beholder. But in the parliament the final arbiter of whether or not an answer is relevant is the Speaker and, as has been outlined tonight, speakers have constantly ruled on that matter. But I suggest that there is a higher 19 May 2004 Standing Order 70(ii) 1255 arbiter than the Speaker—that is, the electorate. If governments are made up of ministers who are unwilling and unable to answer questions, then, frankly, in a democracy the electorate will settle that pretty quickly. Labor governments in this state have a very proud record of parliamentary accountability and progressive reform. I will outline some of them now. It was a Labor government that introduced reforms in March 1995 increasing the scrutiny of ministers in relation to question time. It is a little known fact these days, but prior to the Goss government both questions on notice and questions without notice all had to be asked verbally during question time which limited the number of questions that could be asked and the number of members who could ask them. The changes allowed members to still ask questions in the House but also every single member, except ministers of course, could ask a question on notice every sitting day if they wished. An example of the effect of those procedures was that the average number of questions on notice asked in 1989 was 2.2 whereas by 1999 it had risen to 39. Hardly a government shrinking from accountability. Labor introduced reforms in 1998 to limit ministerial answers to three minutes. Anybody who was here when ministers under the Borbidge government took 11 minutes to answer questions can tell members about avoiding accountability, can tell members about ministers trying not to give an accurate answer. Mr Lucas: Your friend Santo. Ms BLIGH: Their friend Santo. That is right. I do not remember them complaining about that. Other reforms include estimates committees and a guarantee under the Beattie government that private member's bills will be debated, which was never a feature under any other government. This hour tonight is one which guarantees an opposition motion will be debated every sitting week. This is a reform of the Borbidge government. Frankly, the former Premier must shake his head in dismay to see the opportunity presented this hour being squandered with the kind of sloppy, foolish and ineffectual work that is being presented tonight. I have heard the Premier of this state accused of lot of things, but tonight is the first time I have ever heard him being accused of being shy of answering questions. Anybody who sits anywhere near him knows that he does not like it when he does not get asked questions. Anyone who has ever been to one of his media conferences knows that he stays until everybody who wants to ask a question asks it and he answers it. He is happy to answer questions in public, at community forums, at community cabinets, in the parliament, at media conference. As I said, members opposite can accuse the Premier of being many things but shy of answering questions is certainly not one of them. Ms NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (5.47 p.m.): I, too, rise to oppose the silly motion put to us by the Leader of the Opposition. So far in the argument from the member for Callide we have heard that this notion of relevance is a fundamental tenement of democracy. I used to live in a tenement. I lived in Scotland. Mr SEENEY: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. If the member is going to quote what I said, I ask that she do so accurately. I said 'accountability in this parliament'. Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Ms NOLAN: I accept that point of order. The member for Callide acknowledges he said that accountability is an absolutely fundamental tenement of democracy. Is that right? I lived in a lovely tenement in a beautiful cobbled street. In Europe 'tenement' is the word for a block of flats. In fact, I was a tenant of the tenement. Indeed, it is a fundamental tenet that tenants live in tenements. I think what the member was trying to say—and if we could put the words in his mouth—was that accountability is a fundamental tenet of democracy. Having clarified that issue, perhaps we could move on. The other problem with the opposition's motion is that it has moved to change standing order 72. Standing order 72, if I might just share it with the House, says— If a Motion or Amendment is irregular, or out of order, no Question shall be proposed thereupon by Mr Speaker. That is what the Leader of the Opposition said this morning. I imagine that we are talking about standing order 72 about irregular or out of order questions. Mr Springborg: No. Ms NOLAN: Standing order 72 was how I heard it this morning. Standing order 72 was how the Hansard reporter heard it and wrote it down, and they do not tend to make these kinds of mistakes. Given that I am a warm, generous, compassionate soul, perhaps we could apply what they call in academic circles the rule of charitable interpretation and we could charitably assume that the Leader of the Opposition meant standing order 70 (ii), which states— An Answer shall be relevant to the Question. Just to clarify these points, we are not talking about a fundamental 'tenement' of democracy being about an irregular motion or amendment; we are talking about a fundamental tenet of democracy—that is, that an answer shall be relevant to the question. Isn't it good to have cleared that up? 1256 Standing Order 70(ii) 19 May 2004
The amendment is, at best, redundant. Among other things, though, it is also dreadfully tautological. Listen to this, Mr Speaker. The motion says that the standing order be amended to say— ... Members must directly relate to and be directly relevant to ... Furthermore, as well as directly relating to, we are going to be directly relevant. I think the opposition could benefit from some lines about the definition of 'tautology', because it has just said the same thing twice in the same sentence. If what it is getting at is that it wants a succinct answer in a short space of time, then I do not imagine that it wants to say the same thing over and over and over again. How silly would that be! So let us just charitably interpret what it is saying and then let us deal with it. This is an embarrassing effort at a media stunt coming from an opposition who knows nothing about relevance—who cannot even write a relevant sentence—and from a party who knows nothing about accountability. Labor governments introduced freedom of information. We introduced questions on notice. We introduced e-petitions, and we introduced a three-minute time limit for answers to questions. Members opposite were so relevant and so accountable that when they were in government we had the Connolly-Ryan inquiry into the Carruthers inquiry. This motion tonight is bizarre in that it is the opposition talking about relevance and accountability. Time expired. Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (5.52 p.m.): The member for Ipswich has let sitting beside the illustrious member for Stafford go to her head. What a patronising and pathetic contribution we saw tonight with all of her esoteric lecturing of us about the meaning of words and so forth. This debate is far more important than some silly little stunt by the member for Ipswich. This debate goes to the heart of this parliament. This debate goes to the most important stage of the whole parliamentary process—that is, question time when ministers must stand on their feet under the glare of the media, the full House and the gallery and answer questions without notice. If there is one thing that makes this parliament accountable and keeps the Westminster system going, it is question time. Ministers are asked a question and are not supposed to know what is coming. They have to think on their feet. However, we see all of the ministers opposite furrow through their notes to give some sort of response that has been printed out by their office. Parliament—and the true parliament—will work when ministers can stand on their feet and answer a question without notice from the opposition about a subject off the top of their head. One reason this debate is so important tonight is that, for historical, political and electoral reasons, we have a parliament that has a massive majority for the second time in a row. That majority is coupled with the fact that the official opposition of the National Party has 15 members, then there are five Liberals, five Independents and then the one One Nation member. So the whole of question time is fragmented, disrupted and split up. Therefore, the traditional questioning that might follow from one question after another after another to test the mettle of the ministers, to test their knowledge and accountability is fragmented and split up by the very numbers in here. As I said, it is a historical fact and the result of an election win by the Labor Party and what is happening on our side of politics. That makes it all the more important that the questions that are asked in this parliament are answered properly by the ministers who sit opposite. We have seen the arrogance of this Beattie Labor government with its massive majority, especially this time around, where it treats this place like a dirty doormat and treats the principles of democracy like a dirty doormat. In particular, this government takes FOI matters into the cabinet process by the truckload and treats this parliament like a dirty doormat by not answering questions. The member for Rockhampton had no intention of answering any questions yesterday or any other day. He had his little green slip of paper and he was going to tell the goat story come hell or high water, because that was the ruse he was going to use to get out of answering awkward questions. As an example of the arrogance, in this parliament today we saw the Minister for Health stand up and try to shut down the democratic process of a member of parliament standing up for the people of his electorate— Mr SPEAKER: Order! I think this is getting away from the motion. Mr HORAN:—and speak without fear or favour about the electorate. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I think this is getting away from the motion. That was a point of privilege this morning. It was not an answer to a question. Mr HORAN: I know it was not, but it is an example of the arrogance that has crept in. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr HORAN: That is why it is important. Mr SPEAKER: Order! We will stick to the motion. Mr HORAN: That is why it is important. He refuses to answer in this parliament. 19 May 2004 Standing Order 70(ii) 1257
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Toowoomba South will stick to the motion. We are not going to go through the whole parliamentary process. Mr HORAN: I hear what you are saying, Mr Speaker, but it was an example of the arrogance— Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. Mr HORAN: I used FOI as an example of the arrogance. I get back to the issue of questions. If ministers do not answer the questions, the taxpayers are not getting value for money. These ministers fly to this place at taxpayers' expense, and the only way we can keep them accountable is questions without notice. There are only four or five questions that are available to us in each session of question time and then they go and dodge them. What is wrong with ensuring that public confidence and taxpayers feeling that their money is being spent in an accountable way is adhered to by ensuring that our standing orders make the answer to the question directly relevant so that there is no problem either for you, Mr Speaker, or for us or those who witness parliament and make judgment on it about whether or not ministers are undertaking their responsibility and answering the questions that they are supposed to answer? Mr Speaker, yesterday when you provided a lecture to us all about behaviour in this place, we saw the immediate bellicose bullfrog from Bulimba carry on with an interjection, and that is how this government treats this place. If we cannot get people to— Time expired. Mr REEVES (Mansfield—ALP) (5.58 p.m.): I rise to oppose the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition. This motion tonight moved by the Leader of the Opposition is a farce, and previous government speakers have clearly demonstrated the meaningless nature of this motion. I do, however, want to remind members of this House how this government can stand tall, as the Leader of the House said, when it comes to parliamentary reform. Let us look at what we do and what other parliaments do. On 30 July 1998 the Beattie government introduced sessional orders which put a three-minute time limit for answers to questions without notice by ministers. This sessional order is the toughest of any parliament in the country. Let us compare this to other parliaments. In the New South Wales Legislative Assembly, there is no time limit stated in standing orders. The Speaker may ask the member to finish if he or she feels that the reply is too long. In the Legislative Council of New South Wales, questions are one minute long and answers are not to exceed four minutes. In the Victorian Legislative Assembly, there is no time limit in the standing orders. The Speaker will ask the member to finish if he or she feels that it is too long. In the Legislative Council, the question is not to exceed one minute and answers are not to exceed four minutes. In the South Australian House of Assembly, there are no time limits stated in the standing orders but 10 questions are allowed in the one-hour period allocated for questions without notice. It should be noted that we get through about 18 questions in an hour. In the Legislative Council of South Australia there is no time limit in the standing orders. In Tasmania the time limit for answers in the Legislative Assembly is at the discretion of the Speaker. In the Tasmanian Legislative Council there are no time limits on answers. The Leader of the Opposition referred to the Commonwealth parliament. In the House of Representatives there is no time limit stated in the standing orders. The Speaker will ask a member to finish if he or she feels that the reply is too long. In the Senate the time limit for questions without notice is one minute and the time limit for answer is four minutes. A time limit of one minute each is applied to supplementary questions and answers. Anyone who watches the Commonwealth parliament's question time on television or listens to it would hear ministers rave on and on—usually for about 10 minutes—about nothing. In this parliament ministers are compelled to be concise on the issue, and they are. For the Leader of the Opposition to use the example of the federal parliament shows his ignorance. Obviously he has never watched federal parliament's question time. That parliament would be lucky to get 10 questions asked within the period allotted to questions without notice. This motion is another attempt by the Opposition Leader to avoid having debates on policy. In the 5.30 motion for the week, what do we have? A motion about a standing order—not about a policy— because the Leader of the Opposition does not want to talk about policy. I will refer to the record of those opposite. They want to ask questions, but they do not want to hear the answers. They want ministers to answer the way in which they want, not to hear the actual truth. What happened this morning is a prime example of the desperation and the gutter attitude of the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition should remember that if he stands for nothing, he will fall for anything. It has become obvious to me that the Leader of the Opposition's positive politics agenda must have been what he was running away from in those election ads. Since the election the Leader of the Opposition knows that the opposition's policies will not be supported by the community. So he believes that the only thing left for him is to get into the gutter and attack the person, not the policies, or move silly motions like this one tonight. The Leader of the Opposition does not want to debate policies, because he knows that he does not have community support. That is why the opposition was defeated at the last election. It is going down in the polls because it does not have the policy agenda 1258 Standing Order 70(ii) 19 May 2004 that the people want. It is only the Beattie Labor government that talks about the real issues. The opposition wants to talk about everything else apart from policies, because it does not have any policies. It is important to start debating policy. This motion tonight should be about policy—about the opposition's alternative policies to our policies. But we have just an absolute farce. It is a waste of the parliament's time. It is about time that the Leader of the Opposition concentrated on policies and not the farce and the gutter tactics that he used this morning. Hon. K.R. LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (6.02 p.m.): Since the ALP government's last election win—and its big win—its attitude and that of its ministers during question time is that it is hard to be humble and quite easy to be arrogant. This motion tonight tries to be more specific in the wording of the standing order. It seeks to amend the standing order to refer to the word 'relevance' as meaning 'directly relate to and be directly relevant' when the ministers are answering questions. The Australian Senate Practice, which is usually the authority that the Speaker of any government refers to, states that the purpose of a question is to obtain information. Erskine May is more specific. It states— An answer should be confined to the points contained in the question, with such explanation only as renders the answer intelligible, though a certain latitude is permitted to Ministers of the Crown. The House of Representatives Practice states— The only provision in the standing orders which deals specifically with the form and content of answers to questions is the requirement that an answer shall be relevant to the question. It is quite obvious that our standing orders have been written very specifically using the word 'relevant', yet we find that ministers are not being relevant to the question that is being asked. The House of Representatives Practice states further— The interpretation of 'relevant' has at times been very wide, with a basic requirement being that an answer must maintain a link to the substance of the question. In practice the word has been frequently accepted by the Chair as meaning relevant in some way or relevant in part, rather than directly or completely relevant. Nevertheless, although the test of relevance can be difficult to apply, Ministers have been ordered to conclude their answers or resume their seats as their answers were not relevant. The concern that has arisen in this parliament is that there have been some very strict interpretations of some of the standing orders in this parliament in some areas and very different interpretations in others. I refer to this particular debate— A government member interjected. Mr LINGARD: There is no need for the member to try to tell Mr Speaker what to do, either. I refer to this particular debate when the member for Toowoomba South was supposed to be speaking about matters that were not relevant. So there has been an interpretation of 'relevance' in this debate, but there is no interpretation of 'relevance' in the answers that ministers give. It is quite specific in the newly drafted standing orders. It has always been stated in the standing orders that the answer should be relevant to the question. Mr Speaker, if you are going to interpret parts of this debate as not being relevant, but not answers to questions, then I am saying that we are probably getting double standards. It is quite clear that the standing orders say very specifically that answers must be relevant to the question. The only response that I have ever heard in this parliament is that the ministers have the right to answer the question in the way in which they want to. But that is not what is said in our specific standing orders. Our standing orders have been changed. The member for Ipswich referred to the fact that maybe the member did not refer to the particular standing order. There are many standing orders that relate to questions. I think that the new ones that we look at tomorrow are standing orders 118 or 119. So there is no need to say that we have referred to the wrong standing order. The standing orders are very specific. Mr Speaker, you have been very specific in how you have handled questions in this parliament. We are not allowed to ask a question of you. That is stated quite specifically in the standing orders. You have ruled very specifically about the length of some of the questions. You have ruled very specifically about the content of some of the questions on notice. You have ruled very specifically on whether some of these questions are asked of the relevant minister. As an opposition, we have to accept that. But in accepting that, we are saying that there should be a very strict ruling on what is relevant as regards the answers to the questions. We cannot be specific just on the questions and not be specific on the answers. So we are saying that in this particular debate the standing order needs to be tightened up so that the ministers' answers must be relevant and relate directly to the question that is asked of them. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (6.07 p.m.): I rise to oppose the motion before the House. There is no substance to what the opposition is saying. It is a stunt. The opposition members should be exposed for what they are trying to do. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition spoke about this being a farce and hypocrisy. It is in that context that I wish to rebut those two elements of the earlier debate. The farce and the hypocrisy is well entrenched in the past practices of the opposition. The Leader of the Opposition made reference to Speaker Andrew, saying that he had asked ministers in the federal parliament to come back to the question. That is true. Speaker Andrew has also 19 May 2004 Standing Order 70(ii) 1259 given many rulings which state that the minister can answer the question as he or she sees fit. That is another example of what is happening with the opposition. The way in which it tells lies is by telling half- truths— Mr Springborg interjected. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: The way in which the opposition is distorting the truth is by telling part of the truth. The opposition tells part of the story and by leaving out the other part, it is absolutely not the truth. I will come back to a couple of other points raised by the Leader of the Opposition and his deputy. Part of the issue relates to the laziness and ineptitude with which the opposition members ask the questions. Some of the questions are so long that it is absolutely impossible for the ministers to try to answer them. The member for Beaudesert made specific reference to certain parts of the sessional and standing orders. This motion refers to one small part of the process relating to the asking of questions. What about some of the other parts? Leaving out the other parts of what should happen in this process shows the hypocrisy and the disregard of the opposition. The sessional orders state— (c) Questions shall not contain— (i) arguments; (ii) inferences; (iii) imputations; or (iv) hypothetical matters. They do that all the time. They also state— (a) In asking a question, no argument or opinion shall be offered, or any fact stated, except so far as is necessary to explain the question. Those opposite disregard that part of the standing and sessional orders every day in this parliament. They have no regard for what is set as the rule, yet now they get on their high moral horse— or high immoral horse in this case—and try to claim that our ministers are not doing what ministers in every Westminster parliament are permitted to do by their rules; that is, answer questions as they see fit. The members opposite know it. I think the greatest example of hypocrisy was the speech of the member for Toowoomba South. He claimed that this was somehow taking away members' rights because they could not get an answer to their question. The member for Toowoomba South will remember me sitting in a seat on the opposition benches when he was health minister. Day after day in question time I would say, 'Five,' when he had spent five minutes giving his prepared answer and, 'Six,' when he got to the next minute. On one occasion he got up to 11 minutes! I was pulled into line by Speaker Turner on many occasions for counting the member for Toowoomba South up to at least eight minutes time after time after time. His colleague from the Liberal Party, Mr Santoro, did the same thing in answer to a dorothy dixer. Those opposite turned question time into a dorothy dixer farce. Coalition ministers would give a 10- or 20-second answer to a question asked by a member of the opposition and then come back to another five-, seven- or 11-minute answer to a question from their own side. They denied any scrutiny by opposition members because the number of questions that could be asked under the early National- Liberal coalition was about half the number of questions that can be asked now. Mr Horan interjected. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: I am not taking the interjection. The Speaker has said— As the honourable member ... would be aware, the Minister may answer the question how he chooses. The Speaker also said— ... a Minister can answer a question however he likes. That is not Speaker Hollis I am quoting; that is Speaker Turner. Their own National Party Speaker said that that is what ministers can do. Members opposite do not even acknowledge their past practices. They tell the untruth—they tell the lie—by telling the half-lie. They do it all the time. Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is unparliamentary. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: They distort the truth by telling part of the truth. That has become the practice of this opposition. With the consent of certain people who are reporting their half-truths, in fact we do not get the truth. In one sense the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was right in identifying farce and hypocrisy. The problem is, the farce is on their side. Hypocrisy has always been their trademark. They never, ever wanted questions. Mr Horan was one who abused question time day after day. He knows it and he is embarrassed by it. Santo Santoro and some of his mates did the same. This motion should be defeated. Time expired. 1260 Standing Order 70(ii) 19 May 2004
Mr HOBBS (Warrego—NPA) (6.12 p.m.): I support this motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition. Standing orders continually change over the years to reflect the opinions of the government of the day and, more appropriately, methods of running the parliament. As time goes by we once again see the need to reform the parliament. The Beattie government should look at this proposal as a further step along the road to democracy and not defend the indefensible by denying it happens or by trying to blame someone else who operated under previous standing orders of this parliament. The member for Stafford went on and on about the past. We are talking about 2004. We want to talk about the reforms of the parliament from now on. We do not want to go back to the types of things the member talked about. We have moved on from there. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. I was not going back to the past. I was referring to the hypocrisy of their argument, given just 10 minutes ago. Mr HOBBS: The need to change is demonstrated in this House every day. Earlier someone mentioned the question asked by the member for Darling Downs of the Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing. He asked a genuine question in relation to a board member of Queensland Racing, which comes under the control of that minister. The minister responded by talking about goats on ropes. He went further and was tying goats to church bells. Talk about belling the cat! Mr SPEAKER: We could talk about repetition also. It has been mentioned about four times now. Mr HOBBS: I have not belled a cat yet. The minister proceeded to verbal the opposition's racing policy by saying that we wanted to select the stipes, the CEO and so on. His answer was totally irrelevant to the question. There was not a word said on the important issue. As the Leader of the Opposition said, the Courier-Mail actually ran the answer the next day. Another example is the Deputy Leader of the Opposition asking the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy about taking alcohol into an Aboriginal community. She totally avoided answering the question. The Legislative Assembly standing orders state that answers should be relevant to the question. This motion would not be before us today unless the process had been abused. As has been mentioned tonight, the House of Representatives goes further. House of Representatives Practice states that ministers have been ordered to conclude their answers or resume their seats as their answers were not relevant. That is totally contrary to what the member for Stafford said earlier. He is making up his own story to try to fit his argument. He does not have the intellectual capacity to actually carry the argument. The federal parliament can direct a minister to come to the question. How can a member of this government vote against the motion that seeks to have ministers answer questions? How can they possibly vote against that motion in this House? Mr Lawlor: Stick around. Mr HOBBS: 'Stick around', I hear in arrogance from the backbench. This government is going to vote against the motion to ask ministers to answer questions in the parliament. The member for Ipswich is a good example of why we need to change standing orders. Her comments were basically irrelevant to the motion—totally irrelevant in many instances. Ridicule and arrogance; that is all it was. There was really nothing there of any great consequence in relation to the debate before the House. The member for Mansfield tried to give many reasons why ministers should not answer questions. He gave reasons for why ministers should not answer questions! What are we coming to in this place? He went on to talk about the fact that the opposition did not have policies. Mr REEVES: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The member for Warrego is misrepresenting. I find his comments untrue and offensive and I ask him to withdraw. Mr SPEAKER: The member will withdraw. Mr HOBBS: I withdraw. What we have seen today is a totally arrogant government. The member for Stafford has shown another very arrogant side of this government. He said that questions from the opposition were not good enough. He is 'Mr Dorothy Dixer' himself. Mr Springborg: He does not even write his. Mr HOBBS: He does not even write the questions. Time expired. Hon. J. FOURAS (Ashgrove—ALP) (6.17 p.m.): I rise to oppose the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition. His motion accuses ministers of extraordinary abuse of this House—sadly, a grave and reckless reflection on the chair, and it should not happen in any parliamentary institution. Mr Springborg quoted positively one of my rulings from 1991 about the need for answers to be not debated 19 May 2004 Standing Order 70(ii) 1261 and to be relevant. He went on to talk about the need for consistency of rulings. He conveniently forgot to refer to rulings of the National Party's last Speaker, Neil Turner, who ruled on many, many occasions that he could not and would not direct how ministers answered questions. Speaker Turner was definitely consistent in refusing to rule on relevance. What we are seeing tonight is an inept opposition pulling down the pillars of this House. The motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition states that answers must directly relate and be directly relevant. New Zealand's Parliamentary Practice states— The Minister's reply to a question is required to conform to many of the rules applied to questions. It must be concise and confined to the subject matter of the questions asked. It goes on to say— But stringent as these requirements may seem to be, Ministers may add more than the bare facts in giving their replies. Any information which would supplement the reasons for the answer may be added. This motion is just ludicrous. It is a nonsense. It is ridiculous and totally impracticable. Imagine a question on the impact of, for example, stamp duty on home ownership. That takes up one per cent of the cost of a home. I am sure it is relevant, then, for the minister in answering that question to talk about the impact of negative gearing and capital gains tax on investment, the impact of interest rate and the size of mortgages, and the impact of developers pushing up land prices. Surely this position is not sustainable in a parliament. What we have seen in here worries me, and I have been known to be very friendly with the Leader of the Opposition. He has made accusations about disorder in this House because of alcohol consumption. What a joke! I have been here since 1977 and I can assure the House that the level of consumption of alcohol in this House has gone down, down, down, down. In fact, in the last few parliaments it has been quite negligible. How dare he bring down this institution by saying that we are here legislating while drunk. What a joke! Today he attacked the Attorney-General. He said that they did not get the answers. I ask members of the public to read the Hansard today and see how full the answers were, how properly they were answered and how due process was followed. The Leader of the Opposition went on TV tonight and accused the Attorney-General of trying to interfere with the CMC and its chairman, Mr Butler. Anybody reading the Hansard today will see that he did no such thing. This motion is a joke. It is a joke because this motion will not change the standing orders. As the member for South Brisbane said, if passed, it will not change standing order 70(ii). The appropriate forum for this change is the Standing Orders Committee, which is meeting tomorrow. In this House we talk about relevance. How does the Speaker judge relevance? It is not as easy as members opposite would tell you it is because I have sat in that chair. It is not like a motion or a clause where one has something tangible on which to judge relevance. I would like to conclude by commenting on what the Labor Party has done with regard to question time. Only the Labor Party has reformed question time. Over there we are seeing first-class whingers. We reformed question time. When I was first elected most of question time was spent on answering questions on notice. Someone would get up and say, 'Mr Speaker, I ask question No. 5 standing in my name,' and then ask No. 6 and No. 7. You would hardly ever get to questions without notice. We allowed a question on notice every day to every member. We limited the time to answer questions. We have reformed the processes of this parliament. We want it to be accountable and we are accountable. I am ashamed to see the Opposition Leader being dragged down this road of disgrace. He cannot be a man of positive politics, so he has to say that we have the numbers and, because we have the numbers, we are arrogant. We are winning elections because people will not vote for the opposition because it has no policies and it is using— Time expired. Question—That the Leader of the Opposition's motion be agreed to—put; and the House divided— AYES, 24—Copeland, E.Cunningham, Flegg, Foley, Hobbs, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Langbroek, Lee Long, Lingard, McArdle, Menkens, Messenger, Pratt, Quinn, Rickuss, Rowell, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg, Wellington. Tellers: Hopper, Malone NOES, 56—Barry, Barton, Bligh, Boyle, Briskey, Choi, E.Clark, L.Clark, Cummins, N.Cunningham, English, Fenlon, Finn, Fouras, Fraser, Hayward, Hoolihan, Jarratt, Keech, Lavarch, Lawlor, Lee, Livingstone, Lucas, Mackenroth, Male, McGrady, Mickel, Miller, Molloy, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nuttall, O'Brien, Pearce, Pitt, Poole, Reilly, Reynolds, E. Roberts, N. Roberts, Robertson, Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Spence, Stone, Struthers, C.Sullivan, Wallace, Welford, Wells, Wilson. Tellers: T.Sullivan, Reeves Resolved in the negative. Sitting suspended from 6.30 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 1262 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004
PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION BILL LAND ACQUISITION AMENDMENT BILL
Cognate Debate Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy) (7.30 p.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended to enable the Private Property Protection Bill and the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill to be considered as cognate bills for all of their remaining stages— (a one question being put in regard to the second readings; (b the consideration of the bills together in Committee of the Whole House; (c one question being put for the committee's report stage; and (d one question being put for the third readings and titles. Motion agreed to.
PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION BILL LAND ACQUISITION AMENDMENT BILL
Second Reading (Cognate Debate) Resumed from 20 April (see p. 142) and from 21 April (see p. 259) respectively. Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy) (7.31 p.m.): In all my years in this place, through governments of both sides of politics, I have never seen a bill to rival this one. The glossy sheen enshrining private property rights may dazzle the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, it may bathe him in a warm glow, but just like many other things that shine and glitter I would not advise that he takes it to the bank. Under the gloss, under the populous pandering rhetoric, is an attack on the fundamental principles of representative democracy. Not only does this bill play havoc with the separation of powers—and I will get to that later—it also replaces a multifaceted, many-sided consideration of what is good for the state, for the regions, for our catchments and for our communities with the narrow assessment of what is good for an individual based on short-term financial windfall. The member for Callide has forgotten one very important thing: it is regulation that guarantees our freedom. It is state regulation that guarantees the correctness of a land-holder's title. It is state regulation that gives them the ability to eject trespassers and protects them from the spillover effects of development on neighbouring land. It is the state that improves land values by building civic works like roads, drains, schools and hospitals and by protecting the amenity and streetscapes of urban and rural communities. This bill would thwart and defeat any kind of regulatory reform. The American experience has demonstrated beyond any doubt that with legislation like this the potential costs of compensation for implementing or appealing legislation would be so high that regulatory reform would be completely off the agenda, even if it was in the interests of Queensland. A sleeping reform agenda would result in the state retaining poor out-of-date legislation and any new legislation, even legislation necessary to facilitate economic development, would be fatally impeded. This regulatory chill factor would result in the state grinding to a halt. There would be no progressive regulatory reform. We would throw out the window the ideals of protecting public health, safety and the environment. Some members opposite may claim that stemming the tide of new regulation is desirable but, for their benefit, let us look at one recent example of a regulation that, if this legislation had existed, would have run into real strife. I am talking about the inclusion of fire ants within the plant protection regulation in February 2001. The action to control the spread of fire ants is fairly typical of government regulation that imposes a short-term cost on some individuals for the long-term benefit of the community. People all over Queensland want to see the menace of fire ants eradicated because of the threat they pose to our way of life and, in particular, to our rural sector, our export industry and our environment. The Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Research Economics has estimated that if fire ants were unregulated and were allowed to spread uncontrolled, the costs over 30 years could reach $8.9 billion, including everything from repairing the family home and maintaining the local school and golf course to the massive cost to the cattle industry in terms of damage to animals and property and lost production. ABARE's conservative estimate of potential property value loss as a result of the uncontrolled spread of fire ants is an average of $150.5 million per year over the same period. 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1263
If this bill had been law, the regulation to control fire ants would have been frustrated by cost and delay. First, the process of declaring the pest would have been prolonged for several months while a private property impact study was developed and potential objections were heard by the court. All the while, crucial time would have been ticking away, time that would have allowed a much greater spread of fire ants through aerial migration. Secondly, the huge potential for compensation payable to residents affected by these infestations needs to be considered and it was predicted at the time that within 10 to 15 years fire ants may have infested more than 80 per cent of households in greater Brisbane. Under this bill, Queensland property owners would have been able to take court action for any reduction in short-term property value as a result of the inclusion of their property in a declared control zone, regardless of whether it saved them both money and heartache in the long term. Regulation is not pernicious. It is not the enemy. It is almost always necessary for the good of the state. Now the costs of this provision go far beyond simple compensation. If the process of preparing a private property impact statement was similar to a simple regulatory impact statement, they would cost Queensland between $6.6 million and $13.2 million within the first 10 years. That is enough money to build an entire new primary school. Then there are the court costs. If the conservative estimate of the court objection process of up to $26.4 million is accurate, then there is another two primary schools gone. Then there is the compensation aspect. Compensation claims associated with a hypothetical regulation to curtail speculative developer acquisition of the Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast canelands could be in the order of $350 million or more, or around three times the current estimated unimproved value of those lands. Potential compensation claims for another hypothetical regulation, this time to increase building exclusion by 10 metres to the west of existing erosion prone area lines for 180 kilometres, could be in the order of $72 million. Therefore, using conservative estimates of the potential administrative and legal costs associated with this bill for one year and two hypothetical but not unrealistic examples of regulation at any point in time, we are already looking at a cost to the state of some $450 million. I cannot see—not for one moment—how the opposition can seriously propose this. How can they come into this place and promote laws that will see massive streams of money flowing into the pockets of urban land-holders and golf clubs at the expense of vital services and rural programs. The highly legalistic and adversarial processes proposed in these laws will create a minority of winners and a huge sector of the community will be losers. While compensation provisions will be available to all property owners, there is a considerable potential for much greater costs being associated with city based claims. It will create a gravy train for lawyers that will see them on the top of the ladder at every stage of the event, with consultants feasting on the spoils of litigious fervour. Compensation could flow from legislation introduced to enable governments to honour successive international treaties. Setting greenhouse emission limits, for example, could mean both real and perceived reductions in property rights and the market value of industrial land. The prospect of objections and claims for compensation from a myriad of urban industrial enterprises that have the means to pursue legal recourse and successive regulation, say to limit the pollution of air, water and land to levels expected by the community, is a very real and likely scenario. As we look at these bills in more detail, I would like to take a moment to remind the opposition of the referendum held in this country in 1988 that included a proposition to extend the federal constitutional principle of just terms compensation to the states. Every single state defeated that proposition, including the National Party government then incumbent in Queensland. Let us turn first to the compensation provisions of the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill. This is a very special piece of legislation. It reflects either a farcical exercise in pretending to give people rights that they already enjoy or it is very real evidence of an ill-conceived, reactive scheme that demonstrates a lack of appreciation and proper research into the existing law in Queensland. I say this because the majority of amendments proposed here serve very little purpose, because the majority deal with matters that are already well established in government policy, practice and procedure, which have been validated through directions and judgments of courts, including the High Court of Australia. But this bill is so clumsily worded that it might result in possibly unintended but certainly adverse consequences. For instance, the loose wording means that even when the bill attempts to duplicate existing provisions to pay the relocation costs of land-holders who have had land resumed, it does so in such a way that not only would reasonable and actual costs be paid, as currently happens, but it would make it automatic that exorbitant and unreasonable costs of relocation would also have to be met. If the person wanted to move to Lower Guam, for example, the government may well have to pay for it. If such an inappropriate change were made, I am fairly sure the Auditor-General would have something to say about inappropriate and unaccountable expenditure of public funds. 1264 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004
On the scope of compensation in the Private Property Protection Bill, the provisions are so very wide as to allow successive claims because they do not totally eliminate a further claim, even where there are more limited existing provisions for compensation. The ambiguous all-embracing language means that an interest as small as a contract to purchase a CBD apartment could trigger a right to seek compensation. The bill would see land-holders paid to obey the law, paid because the community, through its elected representatives, wants a change to the rights it previously granted. I turn to the inconsistency with longstanding parliamentary principles. The member for Callide has often stood in this House and lectured me about fundamental legislative principles, so I started to believe that he understood what they were. It seems I was wrong. The existing Legislative Standards Act 1992 and the Statutory Instruments Act 1992 set out a far fairer and more equitable process of regulatory impact assessment and requires that legislation have regard to fundamental legislative principles, including that the legislation have sufficient regard for the rights and liberties of individuals. The requirements in the Legislative Standards Act for explanatory notes ensures that members of parliament are informed about the objectives of a bill, alternatives to the bill and consistency with fundamental legislative principles. For subordinate legislation, the statutory impact assessment imposes requirements to prepare regulatory impact statements for subordinate legislation that is likely to impose an appreciable cost on the community. A regulatory impact assessment must include information about the objectives, benefits and costs of the subordinate legislation and also detail its consistency with fundamental legislative principles. Time expired. Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (7.42 p.m.): It is quite obvious, listening to the speech made by the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy, that the real reason for the government's opposition to this legislation is its old-style, socialist attitude to land ownership in the state of Queensland. It is anti compensation, it is anti private land ownership, it has a view and an attitude that it will take someone's land if it wants it. It will not justify why it will take it and it will not necessarily pay the person appropriate compensation. It is quite amazing that a government that says that it is casting off its old-style, socialist attitudes has a very strong socialist attitude when it comes to the notion of private land ownership in this state. Private land ownership is a fundamental tenet of a person's self-confidence in the land that they own and their capacity to be able to invest. This is a principle that has been upheld for a long time. It is quite extraordinary to see this government, this minister and this party keep whittling away the fundamental rights of private land ownership in this state. Nobody argues that the state does not have a fundamental right to acquire property if it justifies this for a range of community purposes. Those community purposes may very well be schools; they may very well be roads; they may very well be universities; they may very well be national parks. The government has to justify those purposes. Nobody argues against the government's right to acquire land for national parks, for roads, for schools or for other essential government and community infrastructure such as dams. This government has a creeping and insidious approach to this. It will continue to regulate away and take away people's fundamental rights. We have a serious problem. What we saw with the government's Vegetation Management Bill was a government going one step further than it has ever gone before in this state. Every other time the government has taken land for whatever purpose it has justified it and compensated for it. In the case of Vegetation Management Bill it sought to justify it in this parliament—and that is a matter for subjective debate—but it did not compensate for the rights which it regulated away. It is now regulating away people's rights which in no way requires it to pay compensation. That is a very insidious attack on the rights of private property owners in this state. The Commonwealth has an obligation to pay compensation if it acquires property. It is true, as the minister said, that the people of Australia voted against four questions in a referendum in 1988, but there were three other questions asked at that referendum that caused people some concern. The attitude of Australians was that they could not trust what the government was trying to do—and I would not have necessarily trusted that particular Labor government either—so they decided to throw the whole lot out. It was a stalking horse referendum. The state of Queensland has no constitutional obligation to pay compensation for land acquired. It is only by various acts of parliament that it pays it at all. There was a court decision in New South Wales in the last couple of years that led to the concerning presumption that maybe states can get away without having to pay any form of compensation. But it is dangerous that the government can now continue to regulate away people's rights for whatever political whim of the day and have no obligation whatsoever to pay compensation for that right which it has regulated away. These bills seek to make the government justify its decisions which impact upon the private property of citizens. If those opposite believe that they can justify it on environmental grounds, then justify it on environmental grounds. If they believe that they can justify it on other grounds, then justify it 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1265 on other grounds. But justify it! If the government can justify it scientifically—which it has been doing little of lately; it is justifying it perceptually and emotionally but not scientifically—then fair enough, go out there and do it. If it does justify it, then at least enshrine the right to properly compensate people. Insofar as vegetation management is concerned—and this is something that those opposite do not know and do not appreciate—when people bought the freehold right to their property they actually had as part of that calculation the cost of the commercial value of the timber on their property. They actually bought that property. That was a fundamental tenet of legislation and the statutory instruments of this state, and has been for decades. When they converted from freehold to leasehold they bought that timber. Anything of the commercial value is theirs. Any non-commercial species are considered to have no value. So people have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy the commercial value of timber on their property which is, in effect freeholding, and the government has come into this place and snatched the viability and value of those properties without paying compensation. The government has regulated away that right. The minister knows that. That is just not fair. If the government wants to justify and do something because it has a policy to do it, then that is its right and prerogative. Just because it only affects maybe several thousand Queenslanders and it sees them as expendable, it does not mean that they do not have some justifiable right to be treated decently and given compensation. Mr Terry Sullivan interjected. Mr SPRINGBORG: Did the honourable member for Stafford know that those people bought the commercial value of the timber on their property and there has been nothing in the government's legislation that seeks to compensate them for a commercial transaction between them and the state which gave them the freehold title of that land? The government has taken that away without giving them any opportunity for compensation. In the legislation that passed through this place some time ago it did not even call it compensation. People are not even entitled to it. It was called a special project development. A person has to justify that they have a special project and then they may be entitled to a grant if the people driving around in white cars do not burn it all up in the meantime. What is fundamentally wrong with the government being able to justify its decisions, whether it is to regulate away a right or whether it is to directly acquire a right and then lay down a charter of property rights which basically says that those people have a right to fair compensation and that they have a right to know that the government is indeed justifying the decision which it is making that impacts upon their property? If it is so absolutely convinced that its policy position is right and that it is doing the right thing, then the government should have no problems whatsoever in doing that. I use by way of example what we have seen with regard to the salinity debate in the state of Queensland—that is, the red maps, the blue maps and a whole range of other maps. It is easy to prey on the fundamental and genuine concerns of the consumers in the electorate at large when we say that there is a salinity risk and that there is salt in the soil. Well, there is salt in all of the soil across Australia, and there always has been. It is a very old country. The very real issue is where it is going to manifest itself and become a problem. So it is easy to be very historical and to use those sorts of genuine concerns to then seek to justify a change that the government wants to make. With regard to issues of vegetation management, it is like seeking to say that all vegetation clearing is wrong. A lot of it may not necessarily be justifiable, but some of it is sustainable. There are areas in Queensland which never historically had timber on them prior to European settlement that have today and areas which do not today which did during the time of European settlement. They are the very real facts. The National opposition does not argue against sensible regulation to protect the environment. We do not argue against that at all. In actual fact, we had a very strong policy position which moved to protect all endangered species of timber and of concern species of timber. All we are seeking to do is to ask the minister and his government to justify its decisions and to then give a commitment that they will pay appropriate levels of compensation to those particular people. Again, what is wrong with that? It provides people with security of tenure. It provides them with the opportunity to invest with confidence, and that is what people want. What the government is doing at the moment is providing them with no opportunity to invest with confidence, because it has proven a willingness to come into this place and use its numbers and use perception—and that is its right if it wishes to do that—to regulate away their rights without in any way seeking to compensate them, and that is insidious and that is wrong. That is the government copping out on what has to date been its obligation and its duty—which it has recognised—to pay compensation to people if it has sought to impede or impact upon their land or to take their land. Mr MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (7.52 p.m.): I rise to speak on the Private Property Protection Bill 2004 and the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 2004. It is clear that the member for Callide had a naive intention in introducing these two bills, but the proposed legislative changes are not well considered and in most cases unworkable. It is on these grounds that I oppose the bills. Now more than ever government faces a responsibility to develop a better understanding of our natural resources and the best way to manage them. Queensland already has enshrined in legislation property rights for water users. The Water Act 2000 recognises water property rights and provides for compensation to be paid if 1266 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004 a land-holder's legal water entitlements are reduced any time during the 10-year life of the particular water resource plan operating in his area. At the crux of the property rights debate is the balance between the rights of an individual and the rights of the populace. I believe in our system of government and its capacity to provide for the greater good which underpins the strength of our society. When it comes to the environment, governments at all levels now apply a precautionary principle and seek to avoid damaging outcomes by applying the best available research, knowledge and science to a proposed activity. Damage to the environment can be cumulative and the full extent not appreciated for many years. Under the Private Property Protection Bill, the government would be required to issue an impact statement and pay compensation when private property rights in land or water are adversely affected by new legislation—delegated or subordinate legislation. Every portfolio that administers legislation dealing with the use of land or water would be affected, and the potential adverse economic impact on our state is significant. Objections to the proposed impact statements could clog up our court systems, which would be both costly and time consuming. What the bill also does through its broad, open-ended provisions for landowners to request compensation is give higher priority to ownership of property above all other considerations in our community funded by the state government. The Land Acquisition Amendment Bill is also an ill-conceived and impractical piece of legislation which does little to improve on the security provided to landowners under the current acquisition process which has been validated through directions and judgments of courts. These bills to a large extent ignore the overriding need for governments to put community investment and shared responsibilities of stewardship of our land ahead of individual concerns. This follows an argument put forward by property rights proponents that preventative government intervention and precautionary confiscation of existing property rights cannot be justified by anticipated or alleged damage. The Beattie government believes that precaution represents a commonsense approach, not a radical intervention in the rights of others, especially when we consider that the environment is a resource that belongs to us all. Regulatory controls put in place by our government in recent years correlate to an increased understanding of our environment and a desire to preserve the sustainability of our natural resources. Left untreated, problems like salinity, erosion and water quality will threaten the economic viability of the same lifestyle that property rights advocates wish to see maintained. The member for Callide's assertions that the government is employing scare campaigns instead of tested scientific information to make decisions regarding property rights is simply untrue. He is burying his head in the sand if he truly believes there is not a real and urgent need to change the way we manage our natural resources. There is credible scientific evidence pointing to the fact that factors such as salinity will affect the future sustainability of primary producers in our state. Definitive information about how salinity will affect property requires more time and research, but it is clear that the government cannot sit back and watch when a potential threat has been identified. If we do not recognise the early warning signs and take action now, we may lose productivity capacity on our lands, damage the environment and ultimately undermine the economy of our cities and towns. Impinging the rights of property owners must be balanced by the common good, which demands that the environment be preserved for future generations. The very fact that property owners expect that government should guarantee security of title is in recognition of a historical basis of property in Australia of all natural resources originally belonging to the state. The state, on behalf of the community, acts as the agent for natural resources, allocating them fairly for private and public purposes, regulating their use and upholding the laws that protect ownership rights. The government invests significant money and resources into providing assistance to land-holders to avoid harm, repair damage or encourage long-term economic and ecological sustainability. The Queensland and Commonwealth governments have jointly committed $162 million over seven years to the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality in Queensland. A few other examples of government assistance include the $400 million greenhouse gas abatement program; the $31 million Great Artesian Basin sustainability initiative; the $25 million rebate for farmers to adopt environmental management systems; $41 million for the rural water use efficiency scheme; $8.5 million to combat the spread of weeds in agricultural areas; and $30 million in grants under the FarmBis program. These programs are funded by taxpayers, both rural and urban, and are in the interests of the greater good. Landowners do not have unconditional property rights, just as the government cannot shirk its responsibility to adequately provide assistance and programs to manage natural resources. If property rights proponents would argue that preventative government intervention cannot be justified, then the government's contributions in assisting landowners must also be questioned. The issue is a complicated one, and I can appreciate the frustration of landowners, who feel that their livelihood is being threatened. I know, however, that most property owners have a deep respect for the harsh beauty and the irreplaceable quality of Queensland's natural environment. Our unique and diverse range of natural resources needs to be protected, and the government must make decisions about conservation based on the best science available, imperfect as that science may be. The Private 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1267
Property Protection Bill and the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill do not provide a balanced, commonsense approach to the issue of property rights, and I therefore oppose the bills. Hon. K.R. LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (7.59 p.m.): This legislation is a reaction to the whole concept of private property ownership being challenged by a seemingly never-ending raft of restrictions, rules, regulations, taxes, fees, fines and levies being forced upon Queensland land-holders. We believe that land-holders and home owners must have security of tenure and that they need a legislative and regulatory regime that enables them to use their land productively and sustainably. We accept the need for government resumptions if there is a community benefit. But we believe in a charter of property rights in law to give land-holders security of tenure. We believe that there should be a legally binding obligation on the state government to provide full and fair compensation. In relation to governments compulsorily acquiring land for roads, schools or hospitals, land- holders must be compensated. They must be compensated for their special knowledge of the land, the personal cost of moving, legal fees and all of those things that are involved in a resumption. Obviously, we are concerned that at present there seems to be no legal obligation on the state government to provide this compensation. I believe that there are three examples in my electorate that demonstrate the concerns that residents have. The first is the Wolffdene dam. In 1989, before the Goss government came to power, Labor believed that it would be beneficial to gain three and a half thousand votes in the Wolffdene area. So it proposed to cancel the Wolffdene dam—simply to try to win the seats of Albert and Fassifern, as it was known. The Labor Party won the seat of Albert, with the preferences of the Liberal Party, and we got a three-year wonder. I forget his name. He was a bloke who wore thongs. He was a male nurse. You could never pronounce his name— An honourable member interjected. Mr LINGARD: Was he in for six years? Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O'Brien): Order! The member will address the chair. Mr LINGARD: The three and a half thousand votes must have really counted. I did not remember that he was in this place for six years. Still, Labor won the seat of Albert. The difficulty was that, having said that the Wolffdene dam would not go ahead so that Labor could gain the votes of three and a half thousand people, it had to go somewhere else to try to build a dam. So Minister Casey at that time went out and approached 20 land-holders. So the Glendower site was resumed. This land is now virtually a wasteland of magnificent agricultural cultivation. It has never been used by the ALP government. It promised that that dam would be built in 2005. Now we have the Minister for Natural Resources coming down to Beaudesert saying that he does not believe in the future of dams: no more dams for south-east Queensland. So the government said to the people of the Wolffdene dam area, 'Okay, go ahead, build in this magnificent dam area completely and we will go and resume this Glendower area. We will take it off 20 land-holders because we would rather affect 20 land-holders than affect three and a half thousand people.' So here sits this magnificent piece of land and since it was resumed virtually nothing has been done to it. The second example is the Warrill Creek area of Boonah. Once again, the government hides behind SunWater. Moogerah Dam is now down to 10 per cent capacity. That 10 per cent will just allow skiers to use the dam. But if it goes down below that 10 per cent capacity, then there will be no skiing. That dam was built for agricultural purposes. All of those people who live along the Warrill Creek had riparian rights. They were always of the understanding that when the dam was built, they would never be worse off than what they were. Yet we find now that, when the dam is at only 10 per cent capacity, those people's irrigation rights are cut off completely, and they have been cut off for two years. So what do these people receive? The only thing that they receive is a bill for the management and maintenance of the whole irrigation set-up. Now that the capacity of the dam has gone down to 10 per cent, they cannot use any water out of it. They have not used any water from it for years. We now find that the government has allowed SunWater to make a decision that Swanbank, which at present is connected to the Wivenhoe Dam, is to reconnect to the Moogerah Dam and take water out of that dam, even though it is at only 10 per cent capacity. Why? So that the government can vindicate the costs of the water in the Moogerah Dam. There is no other reason. There is plenty of water in the Wivenhoe Dam. Swanbank is connected up to the Wivenhoe Dam. So what does the government allow Swanbank to do? To take water to put into their storage dam so that they can store it for their use. So Moogerah Dam will now obviously fall below 10 per cent capacity. The skiers will be off Moogerah Dam. There is no chance anymore of irrigation in that particular area. Boonah will receive water, because it can. Ipswich will receive water from the Moogerah Dam. Yet for viability, for financial gain, the government hides behind SunWater. It says that SunWater is making these decisions. SunWater says, 'Yes, but the government is telling us that these are the rules. These are the dividends that we have to return to the government.' So the government gets $16 million profit from SunWater. But what does it put back into the dams? Absolutely nothing! What does it give back to the people there? Absolutely nothing! What do the people do? Previously they had the use of the Warrill 1268 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004
Creek. Now they have absolutely no use of the water rights there. I have no doubt they all signed up in good faith for the Moogerah Dam to be built on the understanding that they could keep their water entitlements. The third example is Maroon Dam. It is now at 20 per cent capacity. It is also run by SunWater. What happens when Maroon Dam gets down to 20 per cent capacity? SunWater decides that a company such as A.J. Bush, a company that the government took down to Beaudesert from Murarrie; Davis Gelatine, a company that Wayne Goss brought in and put down there and said, 'Righto, we will give them water rights from the Maroon Dam; and Beaudesert, which needs water from the Maroon Dam, can use the dam.' But who misses out? Those agricultural people. The dam was built to provide agricultural viability. The first people whose water rights have been cut off are those people who need water for irrigation. Even worse, the people between the dam and Beaudesert who have creeks which SunWater believes they can get water from also lose their riparian rights in times of drought. So we find that those people in that area who might have experimented with growing special crops are now not able to experiment. They know that they have a limitation on their water. They know that they have nowhere near the water rights that they had previously. All of these decisions are government decisions which provide absolutely no compensation. The people of the area could probably accept those decisions if the government agreed to compensation by building more dams. But now we have a policy from this minister to not build any more dams in that south-east corner. The government sits there and says that there is no need for any more dams in south-east Queensland. So what do we have? We have people who have lost their property rights, people who have lost their confidence in agriculture, people who do not experiment anymore with crops because they are not sure of their water and, worst of all, the government is not providing anything more for those areas. This legislation is simply a charter of property rights in law to give land-holders some sort of security of tenure, which is not there at present. Hon. K.W. HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (8.07 p.m.): In rising to oppose this bill, firstly I must say that its financial irresponsibility is breathtaking. When the Opposition Leader, the member for Southern Downs, spoke earlier tonight he used the term 'extraordinary' in his speech. Seriously, this bill is extraordinary in its financial irresponsibility. If passed, it could blow the state government's budget out of the water. It has the potential to create hundreds of millions of dollars in new debt. It is unclear whether the member for Callide meant to open the floodgates or whether it was a simple mistake that he introduced a bill that was so poorly worded that it would make the government liable for compensation for an enormous range of government regulations, even those that exist only to protect the wellbeing of all Queenslanders. This proposed legislation would have far-reaching effects. Certainly, it would have a major impact on the management and protection of the environment, biodiversity, vegetation, water, land and mining. But this bill is so broad that it could also affect many other fields of public interest regulation and generate claims for compensation. That could include such things as the banning of smoking in clubs, building works on heritage properties and such fundamentals as workplace health and safety laws. The government could well be liable when it comes to the issue of general building standards. Under this bill, new laws and standards for upgrades such as the fencing of outdoor pools could attract claims for compensation. The government would be unable to ever improve the operation of the Integrated Planning Act by amending the definition of 'assessable development' in the schedule. The ambiguous and all-embracing language of the bill means that the consequences are difficult to predict. But there is one thing for sure: it would cost the state a lot of money. If this bill were to become law it would result in a significant fiscal burden because of its dangerous combination of administrative complexity; its broad sweep that could capture many new regulations; its legalistic framework; and its provisions for unbounded compensation. We only have to look as far as South Australia to see the sort of compensation bill the Queensland public would be burdened with. In 1985 the South Australian government introduced the Native Vegetation Management Act. Under this act compensation was available, subject to placing areas where clearing was refused under heritage agreements. The original estimate for this scheme was $20 million. However, this figure had blown out to about $80 million in compensation when it was replaced in 1991 by the Native Vegetation Act. South Australia learnt from the experience and in the 1991 legislation removed the automatic and open-ended provision for payment of compensation for loss of market value, similar to that which is proposed in this bill. This provides a cautionary example of the likely escalating fiscal impact. I think we would all do well to learn from that experience. What is more, the amount of vegetation protected was relatively small compared to the remnant areas in Queensland. This bill could make the state liable to pay uncapped compensation, simply by fulfilling its legislative duty on behalf of the citizens of Queensland; that is, by protecting not only our environment, waterways, the Great Barrier Reef and our national parks but also public health and safety. This could be in the order of hundreds of millions of dollars a year of public money going into the private pockets of those who own land—not to schools, education, hospitals or housing. 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1269
All of us in this place know that there is a widening gap in our society between those who can afford to buy their own property and those who have to rent. A number of members of parliament have said to me that, given the price increases that are occurring, they despair that young people will not be able to own their own homes in the future. The problem for them is trying to find a deposit to even get into their own home. That is before the loans and the commitment involved. This bill will widen the gap even further by favouring those who own property over all others, who would have to pay them for their privilege. We have to ask the opposition: where is the money to pay for this going to come from? There are a number of possibilities. I think all of those possibilities are unacceptable to the future of Queensland. The first is the most obvious. Are they planning to cut spending for health, education, police and other vital programs? Without new sources of revenue, funding this legislation would have a direct impact on the delivery of government services. This includes health, education, law and order and, importantly, from the point of view of not only the member for Callide but also all members of this parliament, all rural based community services—not just limited to natural resource management programs—already undertaken by the government. Let us consider who may be the most affected. Is an across-the-board reduction in government services going to be good for rural communities? One does not have to think very long and very hard to realise that such cuts will hurt the bush first—these are the people the member for Callide purports to represent—long before urban communities begin to feel the bite. The impact of closing a school or a hospital in a rural community would be far greater than in the city. But this is what the opposition is proposing—that we close schools and hospitals because the money to pay for them is going to go into private pockets. The opposition needs to tell the people of Queensland where these cuts would be made. They should tell us this. Which schools will lose their teachers or close classrooms? Which hospitals will have to shut down whole wards or sack nurses? Which suburbs will lose police off the beat? The bill talks about compensation for government regulations, but will the opposition compensate the community for the loss of essential services? If they are not going to cut essential services, a second possibility is increasing taxes and charges. These things have to be funded. To maintain the government's services, huge increases in taxes and charges would be required. The question that needs to be asked here by all of us is: is the opposition proposing new taxes to pay for the legislation we are debating tonight? Using the logic of this bill, if compensation is paid for the loss of land values due to government regulations, is the opposition proposing to tax land-holders when the value of their land increases due to the actions of government? I do not know. It is not clear. I would not think so, but we do not know. When the government builds a road or a school that increases the value of someone's property, is a National Party government proposing that it will send that person a bill for that? That is the logic of what this is about. Is what the opposition is hiding from the Queensland public a massive tax slug? I look forward to the member for Callide replying to the second reading debate. I look forward to hearing him address two issues. If he is going to pay this to people who already own the asset—if he is going to transfer the wealth of the state to them, as in the case of these compensation payments—is he proposing to cut services? If he is not going to do that, is he proposing to increase taxes to fund the transfer of wealth into the pockets of private landowners? There is one more possibility even more unthinkable than the other two, and that is to do nothing. That is the stark reality of this bill. It may halt the formation of all laws in Queensland. The sheer cost of complying with the bill may see progressive reforms to protect public health, safety and the environment grind to a halt. No more COAG water reforms, no more regulations to protect the environment and no new regulations to insist that factories control toxic waste. The really crazy thing about this bill is that the people who will be hit hardest are the very people it purports to protect. The minister touched on this issue in his speech. In the long term this bill may well have the effect of devaluing private property as a result of weakened or unenforced regulations that will result in damage to neighbouring properties—things like fire ants, acid sulphate soils and salinity. There will be only a handful of winners and an awful lot of losers with this bill. Only property owners whose use of land is restricted under a regulation can claim compensation. So if a property is devalued because of the lack of regulation on an adjacent property, there is no ability to claim for the off- site impact of their private property because it was not the result of new legislation. Is this what the opposition is really talking about—tying the hands of government in parliament so it cannot pass fair and just regulation that provides for the good governance of Queensland? The cost of this bill would be exorbitant, not only in terms of the budget bottom line but also in terms of the future impact on regulations to protect the community's interests and health. This bill should be rejected out of hand. This bill should have all members demanding one thing from the opposition: show us where the money is coming from. I urge all members to oppose the bill. Time expired. 1270 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004
Mr HOBBS (Warrego—NPA) (8.17 p.m.): I have never heard such a diatribe. The member for Kallangur is a person I respect in relation to a lot of issues in this House. Unfortunately, he has no doubt been influenced by the minister. I am very pleased and proud to speak to the Private Property Protection Bill and the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill. We need to address some of the emotional debate that is going on here tonight. The minister talked about an attack on democracy and about the separation of powers. The member for Kallangur said that we are going to pay land-holders for the privilege of owning land. He talked about closing hospitals and schools and about a transfer of wealth. That is not the point. That is not the issue. The simple reality is: if someone owns something now and somebody wants to take it from them, they should be able to get compensation. If the community requires a natural resource for community purposes, the community should pay. It is as simple as that. If the community, on the broader principle, needs and wants a resource then they have to pay for it. Why should the individual have to pay for it? This is exactly why this bill is before this House tonight. It takes in a number of issues. I can give a few examples of what we have seen in recent times—for instance, land clearing, the salinity debate, Cubbie and water management plans. All those issues come under the same principle, and that is that this government wants to take over that natural resource. However, those people who use that natural resource at the present moment will have to in some manner or form be wound back in their ownership of that natural resource. Who is paying for that? The individual. Is this fair? Of course it is not fair. Quite simply, if governments know that they will have to pay to take this resource, they will look at other ways of doing it. There are many other ways of doing things. In years gone by the government resumed land or acquired land by a third party. There are other ways of doing these things. It can be done in partnership or with incentives. There are numerous ways in which the government can still gain a benefit for the broader community without having to resume land. The national park estate we have at the present moment is a good example. In many instances the government—and this started in the Goss era— wanted to protect a certain section that was important. That is fine; we all agree a certain section might be very important to be protected but the government would acquire the whole station. What for? We could have quite easily left it to the previous owner to use or utilise or the neighbouring people to utilise. So we ended up with all this land that we cannot manage. That is just one example. Another example is Cubbie Station, which was probably the catalyst where this government fell down. With the water management plan for the Condamine-Balonne, the government was intent at one stage on trying to dictate the amount of water that the government wanted to retain. What the government did was determine a certain figure and then tried to make the rest of the calculation match that. It simply did not work. We had several public meetings at Dirranbandi. People were pretty much hanging from the rafters at the public hall. The Premier then learnt that what he was doing was entirely wrong and I do not think he has used the word 'Cubbie' ever since. The simple fact of the matter is that if you require a natural resource for committee purposes the community should pay. That is the way it should be. Let me turn to vegetation management because it is a good example. There are numerous properties that will be unviable with the recent government legislation that has been put in place. What are the compensation principles that have been put in place for them? Virtually nothing. We have heard about the $150 million, and government members are whingeing that the federal government should put more money into it as well. The reality is that the compensation principles really are not there. It is not a compensation package that the government is providing. All it is doing is providing some incentive for the department to help, it is providing some incentive for the industry groups to go out and do extension work and it is providing some incentive for, in some instances, some people to do some additional projects. It may be a feedlot, as the Premier said. In many instances you cannot do that. It is not feasible or possible. Under these bills if the government knew that it could not proceed without it costing a lot of money it would then look to alternative ways that are far cheaper. In many instances it does not have to cost a lot of money. It can be done quite simply by talking with people and negotiating your way through it. That can be done. It has not been done. The bull-at-a-gate approach has been the general consensus of the Beattie government and the Goss government as well. I remember when Wayne Goss put a freeze on freehold land simply on the basis that it was wrong. It was a philosophical thing. There is nothing wrong with freehold land but there seems to be a chip on the shoulder about freehold land. Freehold is a good tenure and there is no reason why anyone cannot have freehold tenure but it has to be earned. You have to buy it, you have to own it and then you can have some rights. I think there is a lack of understanding. There seems to be this attitude by government today in Queensland that it is some sort of a money grab, some sort of a land grab that we are looking for. We are not looking for that. All we are looking for is natural justice to be given to people who happen to have the ownership of the land for various reasons. The people who own this land are not necessarily the wealthiest people in the whole world. They can be the pensioners, the hard doers, the pioneers and all those people. They are not necessarily the squatters of the past. Those days are gone. What is wrong 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1271 with being fair? What is wrong with giving natural justice to everybody? Is natural justice a thing that happens to Labor Party people? No, it happens to everybody. I do not see why we cannot allow that to happen. We can do it. All we have to do is look at this legislation carefully and see what it really means—not what the Labor Party thinks it means and not what the minister is talking about. I came in here a while ago and the minister was speaking, and I was quite amazed at the statements he was making. They are so far off the mark it is unbelievable. Talk about an attack on democracy! The member for Kallangur talked about what schools we are going to close down. It is nothing about that. It is not about closing schools down. Mr Reynolds interjected. Mr HOBBS: Well, quite clearly you have not learnt. What more can we do? All we can do is talk about the fact that we think this issue is particularly important not just to land-holders but also to potential land-holders. It relates to householders. If a road goes through the backyard of somebody's home, is that person not entitled to compensation? Do they get it now? Yes, they do. So why should somebody else not get compensation? If a person can get compensation for a road going through their backyard, why is that okay but somebody on the land cannot have such compensation? I think it is a bit unreasonable when we look at that aspect. The charter of property rights really means that the lawful owners of private property in Queensland shall have unequivocal rights to use and enjoy the benefits of a legitimately owned private property. Private property owner rights include the rights to responsible use— Time expired. Dr LESLEY CLARK (Barron River—ALP) (8.28 p.m.): The members opposite, and particularly the member for Callide, has argued that individuals should not be left to bear the cost of environmental protection alone. On this we agree. However, to take the next step and suggest that this hotchpotch ideologically driven, American inspired, legalistic path is the way to share costs of managing natural resources is one step too far. It is also impractical and is economically irresponsible. It has been made clear from the contributions of members tonight that there will be a cost—a very large cost—of implementing this legislation. But the opposition has not tried to indicate how that cost would be funded. It has not indicated whether it would raise taxes or cut services. It is interesting to look at the explanatory notes for this legislation to underscore the economic irresponsibility of the legislation. Under the heading 'Estimated administrative cost to government' the bill states— There is expected to be a cost to government but this cost will be more than justified by the benefits of the legislation. And that is it. One sentence and that is all. It will just be justified. The Leader of the Opposition has lectured us about justification and the scientific grounds for this legislation. However, the members opposite come in here totally unprepared to justify the benefits of this legislation. They have not done their homework. Why is that the case? We need to ask why this legislation is being debated in the parliament. The answer is this: the opposition is trying to shore up its support in the bush. That support was undermined by One Nation and the members opposite think that they have learnt that lesson. Indeed, we have seen the support of One Nation disappear largely. What has taken its place in the bush is the property rights movement. I have been to property rights conferences, I know the kind of ideological manifestos that they support and I know how much pressure the National Party is under not to be seen to be backing down on this issue. Therefore, what does it do? The opposition introduces this legislation, which has been attempted elsewhere and failed, to prove their bona fides in the bush. Instead of working with the landowners who are responsible and who understand the need for change, they want to go back to the past to try to re-create some ideological fantasy land where anybody has a right to do anything they want to their land. That is an ideology that we have long passed. We have moved forward from the point that said anybody who owns land can do anything they like with it, but, no, not the National Party. They want to anchor us in that past. It is a past that nobody but the National Party believes in anymore. Mr Shine: Like John Howard, they like the fifties. Dr LESLEY CLARK: And, like John Howard, they are living in the past. It is very disappointing that they are not working hand in hand with progressive farmers and the rest of the community who recognise that we need to manage our natural resources in a way that will be sustainable. It is also quite wrong for members opposite to come in here and argue that the government does not recognise the costs involved in this type of legislation. The other reason for bringing this legislation to the parliament is to have another attempt at debating the Vegetation Management Act. Tonight we have just heard a rerun of that with the denial of any scientific validation for that legislation. The opposition simply wants to write off all of the scientific expertise that we know exists to support that legislation. Opposition members want to deny the fact that there is a package of measures to support farmers. It is not just the minuscule things that the member 1272 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004 for Warrego blithely dismissed. It is working in a responsible way with landowners to provide the incentives and support for them to make the transition to managing their land responsibly. It is very disappointing that we have to have this kind of legislation in the House, simply so that the National Party can parade their credentials to the people in the bush. Basically, they are misleading those people into thinking that this is the answer, but it is not. Therefore, I appeal to the National Party to recognise the reality. I urge them to actually move into the 21st century and adopt more enlightened natural resource management approaches, rather than this return to the past. With that, I urge members not to support this legislation. Mr ROWELL (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (8.34 p.m.): In rising to support these cognate bills, I have to recognise land-holders and their investment. This is a thing that has not received any conciliatory direction at all from the current government. I am extremely disappointed about that because land- holders in the bush are doing it extremely tough at the present time. They have acquired land and, all of a sudden, they find that there are a new set of rules and that the goal posts have changed. Basically, we need resource management, although we do not need it on an ad hoc basis as implemented by this government. It is extremely disappointing that this is occurring. Legislation is brought into the House with no recognition of the hardship and the difficulties that people in rural Queensland are facing because the security that they thought they had over their resources is suddenly being denied them. Of course, this bill reinstates some of the equity that they really need. It lightens the load if some portion of a person's resource is taken away. If governments think that they can sacrifice people's rights, they have an obligation to pay for them. That is the basic philosophy of this legislation. It is disappointing to hear members on the government side coming up with a whole lot of frivolous arguments about that. The Queensland Vegetation Management and Other Legislation Act 2004 will be noteworthy historically for its failure to address the issue of freehold land and civil rights in contrast to other Queensland legislation. The Queensland Land Title Act 1994 defines a deed of grant as '... an instrument evidencing the grant of land by the State'. Section 5(1) of the Queensland Land Act 1994 defines a deed of grant for freehold land as 'land granted in fee simple under the Queensland Land Act 1994, and includes indefeasible title under the Queensland Land Title Act'. In other words, a piece of paper says that this land is yours and if there are things that have to change on it there should be some entitlements, as far as governments are concerned, for compensation. The term 'indefeasible' is legally defined as 'not liable to being annulled or voided or undone', 'an indefeasible right to freehold', and 'an indefeasible claim to the title'. Legislative violation of such rights clearly consists of the violation of civil rights of property owners of freehold land and, therefore, legally undermines existing Queensland property legislation. The civil rights violation has now been converted into law, a precedent which the government is morally required to correct by approving the enactment of the Private Property Protection Bill now before parliament. We really have to have a very close look at what happens to adjoining land in the event that it is decided not to clear a property. We have seen a whole plethora of things going on in national parks, for example. There are wild pigs in the national parks and a whole range of species of plants that we do not want and that are not properly looked after. What we are looking at is taking people's property or their rights away, and I say 'taking their property' because often they cannot use the property as it is not suitable for grazing or agriculture. Of course, for the most part that property then does not have any great value whatsoever. There should be a clear basis for acquisition. There should be equity. The government should bear the responsibility for how it goes about accessing the rights to take property, and we see that with roads, dam sites and so on. What is the difference between those situations and cases where people want to clear trees from their land because they hope to do something with the property in the future? They are being denied that opportunity. I am not talking about using the land irresponsibly; I am talking about using good, sound agricultural principles, or the principles of any other type of development such as tourism. People should have the indefeasible right, particularly when they have paid for a property in fee simple, to carry out improvements that our society would think were reasonable. It is quite evident that the government has another determination about what it wants to do with property rights in the state. I turn to issues in the Cardwell shire. A chap wanted to expand into the cane industry in the shire. He did the right thing. He got the EPA people down. They went along the creek banks and said, 'We'll keep these areas treed, but the areas in between can be cleared. That sounds okay.' They mapped it all out and made a very clear determination as to what the right thing was. Unfortunately, when they put the application for clearing in, they were knocked back. In other words, those people acquired the property and they paid quite a sizeable amount of money. It was a father and son operation. They bought the property with the intent to increase its viability. They were denied the opportunity to do that on the grounds that there were other rules in government besides those of the EPA. I thought that was quite interesting. I thought the EPA was really 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1273 the paragon of all things that should happen as far as the birds, the bees and the trees are concerned. That is not the case. The officers working with the Vegetation Management Act were quite clear about the intent of the legislation and did not allow these people's application to clear their property. That was one instance. I have another instance of a person who wanted to clear some land for a quarry. He only wanted to clear a couple of hectares. He was a canefarmer. He was short of funds so he thought that, if he could clear the land and sell the quarry material for making roads and fill and so on, it would assist his cash flow situation. Of course, he would have done it in a manner that took into account good environmental principles. But there was a flat no. He was not able to do it. Under the Vegetation Management Act, he was denied the opportunity to use the land that he thought he could use to get some cash flow. He was seeking to provide a closer source of road material for councils and so on. It is more and more difficult for people who have trees on their land to use that land. But, of course, the councils want the rates for the land. These people cannot use it but the councils charge them rates because they have to build roads past the properties. In places like the Cardwell shire well over 70 per cent of the area is under trees. There are World Heritage areas, forestry areas, national parks and so it goes on ad infinitum. Yet people in that area cannot clear a miserable amount of land— not even a few hectares, which would amount to a small percentage of the actual total area of the shire. I think it is an indictment on governments when they go to the extent of not allowing people free access to their land and commonsense arrangements regarding the use of their land. I know we want to make sure that we protect the reef. A lot is going on in that regard with the sugar industry and the banana industry at the present time. I see there are DPI programs designed to measure nutrient levels. All of a sudden the government has no money to continue on with those programs. All the rot that went on in terms of looking at the nutrients levels going out to the reef is not worth a bumper, because the DPI made a decision that it has to divert its funds to things like growing slow-growing grass or building rock walls or something of that nature. We have got away from the whole principle of the DPI and how it can assist a range of primary industries in this state to do things better. If the government's intention is to cut off the organisations that provide the research and extension services and the government says that land-holders cannot clear their land, then the landowners are between a rock and a hard place. It makes me wonder what this government is all about. All we are trying to do with these bills is recognise the problems that people experience when they cannot make use of their properties. If there is a necessity to use land for some purpose other than what the property owner wanted to use it for, then some form of support should be given. Time expired. Mr HOOLIHAN (Keppel—ALP) (8.43 p.m.): I rise to oppose these bills. I will mention shortly the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill, which appears only to duplicate well-established government policy. I will deal firstly with the Private Property Protection Bill. I thought it was rather interesting to hear the member for Warrego mention the separation of powers. It has always amazed me that no-one from the National Party ever seems to be able to explain the doctrine of the separation of powers and yet the member stood up and relied on it. Basically, if we were to accept the tenets of this bill, we would witness a fundamental shift from a society based on shared membership of communities to one based on aggressive individualism. I listened to what has been said. It appears that those opposite want to make one law for those people on the land and another law for urban people. I bear in mind that the definition of private property relates to land Queensland wide. What would be created by this legislation is neighbour pitted against neighbour and rural communities pitted against urban ones in a legal battleground for personal compensation claims. While compensation provisions will be available to both rural people and property owners, there is considerable potential for significantly greater costs associated with city based claims. It could become a gravy train for lawyers and consultants. They would be feasting on the spoils of litigious fervour at every stage of the event. The effect of the bill is to add a complicated and expensive step to the process of enacting legislation. As the only test for compensation relates to the ownership of private property, foreign persons and transnational companies, especially those with the financial capacity to take maximum advantage of the legalistic framework proposed, will be able to seek potentially huge payouts funded by Queensland taxpayers. If members do not think that will be the effect, they should look at clause 19 of the bill and subsection (2) which deals with the amount of compensation. The whole bill deals with the private property impact statement and then goes on about the reduction in fair market value. Subclause (3) reads that for subsection (2), it is not necessary for the impact to have been identified in a private property impact statement. So we can dream up anything later anyway. That is what could happen. 1274 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004
It has the potential to see the donation of public resources—the member for Kallangur mentioned schools—and resources that could have otherwise been targeted to meeting local development, environmental and community programs to create windfalls for investors overseas. It makes overseas interests the winners and Queensland communities the losers. It is a recipe for impoverishing the remainder of the community to enrich some property holders. The bill, if passed, would certainly have unexpected and bizarre fiscal consequences out of all proportion to the state's obligation to minimise overbearing legislation. Large compensation payouts to individuals would have a significant flow-on effect on budgets and regulatory evolution that would bequeath a less congenial society in economic, social and environmental terms for generations to come. For instance, under section 54 of the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995, government can declare or amend a coastal management control district by regulation. Such subordinate legislation would be captured by this bill and is just one of the triggers which could promote massive claims for compensation from the old white-shoe brigade. The bill would require the state to pay compensation for loss of market value, even if the new restriction on clearing has saved the land-holder money by preventing uneconomic property development of marginal country and also save the community and future generations billions of dollars in repair, remediation costs and reduced capitalisation of natural assets. This is particularly objectionable in the case of leasehold land on which the trees are the state's property. The bill would require the state to pay compensation to others when it wishes to change by statute the way it deals with its own property. The use of changes in market value to estimate compensation is not only risky but is illogical to anyone with a basic appreciation of the long-term imperatives of sustained resource management and inherent flaws within the land market. The proposed legislation extends the statutory right for compensation for seizure of real property to compensation for notional loss of intangible value on account of regulatory restrictions; in other words, for exercising parliament's prerogative to pass legislation. Any legislation which fetters any right of parliament to carry out its duty should be avoided. The bill is based on a myopic view of the creation and maintenance of property rights and values. It is legislation that defines property which in turn preserves the entitlements and specifies the obligations. In western legal systems, without government there is no property. Regulations guarantee private property owners their freedom to manage. It is state regulation that guarantees the correctness of their title, legal access to their front gate and protection from fraud or intimidation by the commercial interests. The value of land is determined not only by its productive capacity but also by the community. Land attracts a value because of the growth and development of the community in which it is situated, including the public infrastructure and other private investment constructed at no cost to the individual land-holder. The land-holder enjoys the benefits of public investment. This could be seen as part of the social contract between the individuals and the community. It could be argued that landowners have already received a significant subsidy from the community through increased land values associated with every law or every action which increases their property value, every road, every Landcare grant and every new school. The bill does not provide for payment by land-holders of a tax whenever they enjoy rising land values from this source. One response to balance the fiscal impacts of liberal compensation provisions would be the levying of betterment—that is, by charging land-holders every time the state constructs some infrastructure or provides some service that increases property values. Betterment is simple enough if levied only on development approvals in urban areas, but if extended beyond that to general increases in property value the calculations would be enormously complex and land-holders would be sorted into winners and losers regardless of need rather than members of a shared community. In relation to the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill, that really only duplicates well-established government policy and sets out and extends the basis on which courts allow compensation. If anyone wants to take into account what sort of compensation the people who proposed this bill are talking about, they should look at clause 4 and the new subsection (2A) (g). Any taxation liability, including capital gains tax, is going to be paid by the state. I would urge members to oppose the bills. Mr RICKUSS (Lockyer—NPA) (8.51 p.m.): This is a bill that I fully support, as would 90 per cent of all Queenslanders and Australians. This is a bill that all Queenslanders who own their own homes or aspire to own their own homes would support. If members feel that people have a right to private property, then they must support the Private Property Protection Bill. Compensation for property owned will be mandatory. The property protection bill aims to ensure that parliament is well informed when a law is considered. The importance of a private property impact study is a part of the process. Impact studies are now part of most council requirements when one wants to do any changes to their property. So if we are going to introduce new legislation to affect private land-holders, a reasonable impact study should be done. This way we will see who will benefit and who will be disadvantaged. 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1275
The Private Property Protection Bill will at least bring in an element of fair play. These private property impact studies will be able to be challenged in court. They will keep the integrity of the studies high. These studies must be done to the highest scientific standard and they must be above reproach. The certainty of the high standard of the science will give people confidence. The parliament must see that people are fairly compensated for any loss of value in their property. People who are disadvantaged by a change to their property rights must be compensated. If we take people's rights without fair compensation, it is totally unfair. The bill will go a long way to address this. We must compensate people for their loss if we have created the loss—that is, where the government has taken the title of the property or has just restricted the use of the land. If we affect the owner of the land financially or emotionally, we must treat the owner fairly. This is the Australian ethos of a fair go. If we are going to bring in legislation that is going to affect part of the community in some detrimental way, we must on behalf of the whole community look at fair compensation. In the Lockyer riparian land-holders are to be disadvantaged by government regulations and SunWater without compensation. Land-holders who have had water rights since the 1930s are going to lose these rights without fair compensation. How can farmers, some of them third and fourth generation, know what to do? The government is going to regulate them out of existence without compensation. The younger people of our area are not sure of where they should go or what they should do. The regulations that the government is bringing in are doing us no good at all. Regulation without some form of compensation is just unfair. We must not have unjust regulation. All it does is stifle people. People in our area are being stifled by this sort of regulation. With regard to the regulation on the size of agricultural land blocks, most of the land blocks in the area have been 15 to 30 hectares. But by regulation, the blocks now must be of a larger size—that is, 60 hectares. This has been brought in by regulation. It does not advantage the people of the Lockyer. Some of the most productive farms in the area are of very small areas—that is, three to six hectares. So broad-brush regulation just does not work. Mr Robertson interjected. Mr RICKUSS: To respond to the minister's interjection, I actually worked on a two hectare farm at Rochedale just across the road from where he lives. It is still a very productive farm, yet there are regulations in the Lockyer Valley that say that farmers have to have a 60 hectare farm. Because of the lack of accountability by putting these issues in by regulation with no compensation, the government is making bad regulation. I have already stated that the government must pay fair compensation. The inclusion of the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill and the Private Property Protection Bill in legislation would seem to be a logical procedure. As I stated earlier, this will ensure that the government has the right to acquire land but must pay fair compensation. Queensland governments of the past have always been fair and just in their compensation of land and property holders. I think it is only just that the government of the day always deals with people fairly when land and property are acquired. The bills do seek to ensure that people are treated fairly and justly. Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (8.56 p.m.): I rise to speak against the Private Property Protection Bill 2004. The problem I have with this bill is that it reflects the belief that government is an inherently hostile force, not a partner in helping individuals and communities achieve their potential—a partner in state development, a deliverer of services to all citizens equitably and according to need. Queenslanders have always been willing to help rural land-holders and their communities in times of need—during drought and flood, fighting fires and battling pests and noxious weeds. But, as is in keeping with the great Australian tradition, this arrangement is a two-way street. The community at large also expects land-holders to do the right thing and look after the land and waterways of this state for future generations. I do have some personal understanding of this issue, because as members opposite know only too well I was born and raised on the land. My family, my father and my brother are still on the land. They have gone to great lengths to preserve the integrity of their land, and that includes putting money that they did not always have into doing things like contouring the land, into creating firebreaks, into making sure that there were windbreaks and nature refuges on the land and to ensure that their practices included rotation planting and leaving land lie fallow. Governments are responsible for easing the transition to sustainable management of natural resources using the range of tools available across all tenures. This can include payments of structural adjustment or incentives to facilitate this process so long as they are for public benefit and are set by an equitable formula. The government has assisted land-holders throughout the state through numerous programs from the Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy, the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Queensland Rural Adjustment Authority. Great success stories of Queensland rural incentive assistance programs include the Queensland Rural Adjustment Authority. This organisation delivers to land-holders every year a comprehensive, proactive and reactive structural adjustment program. 1276 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004
Over just the last three years, QRAA has provided $18 million to approximately 24,000 primary producers for skills enhancement on an individual and group basis, as well as professional advice. It has provided $54.4 million in concessional loans under the PIPES, or Primary Industries Productivity Enhancement Scheme, to 398 farm business producers and $5.4 million in grants to 47 primary producers for on-farm water infrastructure development projects. In relation to drought assistance, QRAA provided interest subsidies to 1,263 primary producers and small businesses totalling $17.1 million, subsidising some $439.2 million in debt, and assisted 380 primary producers affected by natural disasters with loans totalling $24 million. This initiative is a runaway success by anyone's standards. This program is on track to achieve its key goal of providing the equivalent of 180,000 megalitres of irrigation water a year and has vastly increased the value of agricultural production. To provide the same volume of water by regional irrigation schemes would cost between $150 million and $270 million, and that is excluding distribution works. This benefit would not be distributed throughout the state as occurs with the incentive scheme. To date, there have been over 4,600 approved applications under the Financial Incentive Scheme, accessing $12 million in funds. To date, irrigators have invested a further $32 million under the FIS. Not only has this initiative delivered real results, it has also forged a robust relationship between government, peak industry and growers. The relationship and the shared common understanding that has developed provides a foundation for expanding the initial focus on water use efficiency to the broader activities of improved management practice. To this end, I am pleased to say that $7.5 million is available over the next two years for a second stage of the initiative to be shared again by the sugar, fruit and vegetable, dairy, lucerne, pasture and cotton and grains industries. The continuing support of Cotton Australia, Canegrowers, the Queensland Dairyfarmers Organisation and Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers has been and will continue to be invaluable to the success of the initiative. This second stage of the initiative will continue to promote rural water use efficiency but in the context of broader natural resource and environmental management outcomes such as the protection of the Great Barrier Reef, the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality and Queensland's commitment to the Murray-Darling Basin. It will include the development of a framework for improved resource management practices for all cropping industries. The Queensland Farmers Federation has been invited and has agreed to play a key role in the development of this framework. Another great success story is the Great Artesian Basin sustainability initiative. Over $60 million of Commonwealth and Queensland investment is being used to finance projects that will improve groundwater management and use at a property level. Through the GABSI, land-holders can be involved in bore rehabilitation, bore drain piping or a project involving both rehabilitating and piping. Land-holders also contribute to the project cost. The project has contributed to enhanced environmental outcomes and improved water infrastructure management practices in Queensland. A partnership approach between the federal and state governments and pastoral bore owners is essential to achieve the sustainable use and management of the Great Artesian Basin. For more than a decade the state government has developed strong partnership programs with communities around the state to help protect our environment. State investment into hundreds of communities has been substantial. For example, through the Natural Heritage Trust I—or NHT I—state and community groups contribute $100 million in in-kind support. Through the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality, the state and federal governments are providing over $162 million over a five-year period. An additional $150 million in state funding over five years has been allocated as part of the vegetation management package. The proposed package includes $130 million in financial incentives to assist land-holders with the transition or for exit assistance if necessary. A further $12 million has been allocated as an incentive to improve the management of more valuable remnant vegetation and $8 million has been allocated to develop best practice farm management plans. The bill before the House shifts the focus from community investment to compensation to specific individuals. In short, all the programs that I have just mentioned would go to the wall and many others besides. This bill represents a major philosophical departure from the present policy. It would be very reasonable for the public to perceive that individuals receiving the compensation outlined in this bill as well as incentives from other programs would be double-dipping. There could be significant political and financial pressure to end the incentive based natural resource management programs in regional Queensland, especially considering the huge potential costs of this bill on the state's coffers. Yet we have seen how these targeted programs are delivering effective, on-the-ground outcomes. As I have already noted to members, the water use efficiency initiative, with a relatively small investment by the state, has already delivered huge increases in the value of agricultural production and is moving Queensland to a more sustainable future. I have seen the evidence of this for myself in the Mackay- Whitsunday region where canefarmers are taking up the opportunities offered under this program to rethink water use and establish innovative and practical measures to minimise water use. Yet if this bill passes, we could see a substantial scaling back of initiatives and community partnership programs as land-holders succumb to fighting the government in court to tap into taxpayer funds. Queenslanders' generosity is renowned. We are always willing to help those in need and give 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1277 people a helping hand when they need it. Yet this bill goes against the values Queenslanders hold dear. It pits neighbour against neighbour, city against country. Instead of finding people in the regions working in partnership with the government to manage precious national resources with significant accountability and reporting mechanisms built into every one of the established programs to ensure that taxpayers' funds are well— Time expired. Mr COPELAND (Cunningham—NPA) (9.06 p.m.): It gives me great pleasure to rise tonight to speak in this cognate debate on the Private Property Protection Bill and the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill, because we have been waiting to debate these bills for quite some time. These bills were originally introduced in the 50th Parliament, but they did not get debated before the election. The government refused to bring those debates on. In fact, these bills were introduced on 10 September 2003. They stayed on the table of the parliament until the dissolution of the 50th Parliament on 13 January 2004—a total of 125 days. To be generous, I also calculated how long they could have stayed on the Notice Paper and potentially been debated in the final sitting of the last parliament, and that was 78 days. There was a very good reason why they were not debated. The government knows what a big issue this is around Queensland. The government knows how damaging this issue has been to it and did not want to go to the election having voted against the concept of property rights in Queensland. I am very pleased that we are debating these bills. I am pleased that they have been reintroduced by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, because they were a plank of our election policy for the February election. It is important that we stand by the principles that we espouse and I am very pleased to be doing that tonight. There has been an absolute mire of legislation that has been introduced into Queensland over the past several years. It is a mire of legislation that land-holders have had to try to work their way through, in many cases with very little assistance from this government and, in fact, in some cases being hindered by this government. There are few movements that have gained so much groundswell in such a short period as the Property Rights Australia movement. It is made up of people of all political persuasions. For members of the government to stand in this place and say that it is only the National Party that is concerned with this issue is absolute rubbish. There are members of all political parties who are involved in that organisation. The Property Rights Australia movement has been treated with disdain. The contribution by the member for Barron River is symbolic of the disdain that the entire government treats people who are involved in this organisation or the people who sympathise with this organisation. It shows just how much difficulty the government has with this issue. On 14 February in Roma, the Property Rights Australia organisation held a conference and I looked at a couple of the papers that were delivered at that conference. I would like to quote from just one. It is on the web site and it was delivered at that conference by Dan Creevey, a partner in Clewett Corser and Drummond, Lawyers—a well-respected lawyer and, I have to say, a very eminent and successful lawyer. I will disclose that I know Dan Creevey. The member for Toowoomba North would also know Dan Creevey. I am sure that the member for Toowoomba North would agree with me when I say that he is a well-respected and very able lawyer. I will quote quite a substantial section of the paper he delivered, because I think it is worth while. It states— Rural property owners in Queensland could be forgiven for thinking that they are no longer masters of their domain as government assertion of control over use of property becomes more invasive. In the late Nineteenth Century, when the Australian Constitution was prepared, the rights of property owners were largely unfettered by legislation and were regarded by legislators as almost inviolate. Indeed, consistent with that philosophy, Section 51(xxxi) of the Australian Constitution provided that acquisition of property by the Commonwealth shall be on 'just terms': This constitutional safeguard remains to this day and has been interpreted liberally by the Courts over the years such that 'acquisition' may extend to abolition in some cases and 'property' includes intangible property, as well as rights in property. Importantly, the Queensland State Parliament has no such constitutionally-entrenched fetters, although accepted notions of fair play have dictated that, for example, compulsory acquisition of real property may be on just terms in the form of fair compensation to the landowner. However, there has been an increasing volume of legislation in recent years which has impacted on how a landowner, particularly a rural landowner, may use their land—arguably a less direct incursion into property rights. The paper goes on. I would encourage all members to have a look at that paper, as well as some of the other papers that were delivered at that conference, because they would be very educational to a number of members who have made contributions today. It really is with some concern and some disappointment that we continue to hear things such as were said by the members for Barron River and Whitsunday. I am disappointed with the member for Whitsunday, because I know that she does have family involved in rural pursuits. As she said, there are a lot of responsible landowners—I have spoken about this many, many times—who have been trying to do the right thing and who have been trying to work with the government to do the right thing. Unfortunately—I know that the minister is going to get sick of me saying this—this government has 1278 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004 walked away from working with those responsible land-holders on the ground by not providing extension work so that the real environmental outcomes are achieved in Queensland. To continue to say, as those two members have tonight, that it is the responsible landowners who are working within this and do not agree with the concept of property rights is absolutely incorrect. Those people who have been trying to do the right thing, who have continually had the rug pulled out from beneath them by this government, are especially the people who have been involved in trying to enshrine property rights. They are especially the people who know what this government has been doing and know the restrictions that have been placed upon them. For government members to come in here and say that those responsible landowners agree with the government is not correct. Many government members have come in here tonight saying how expensive these bills would be if passed. I actually do not agree with that, but I ask those members who say that it is too expensive for government to afford: why do you think the cost is bearable for those people it is being placed upon—those landowners right across Queensland? There is no divide between city and country; it is right across Queensland. This government has made an absolute art form of driving a wedge between urban and rural Queenslanders. We saw that at the last election. We can see it in the results of each of those seats that lay on the west and the east of the Great Dividing Range. This government has provided that wedge between those two groups, and we are trying to address it. We are trying to put in place some real solutions to the problems this government has been creating over the last several years. In fact, it began with the Goss government in the early 1990s. As the Leader of the Opposition said earlier, the Labor government is simply displaying its disdain for private property ownership. I am proud to stand up as a member of the National Party—a member of a party that respects private property ownership. Any person who aspires to own their own home, to own property and to do something for themselves should be supporting these bills. I commend the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for the work that has been done on this. It is not an easy area, but it is an area that warrants the work that has been done. I commend these bills to the House. Mrs REILLY (Mudgeeraba—ALP) (9.14 p.m.): I rise to oppose the Private Property Protection Bill 2004, brought before the House by the member for Callide. This is the bill of a legislator who believes that The Magic Pudding was a book of non-fiction. This bill purports to provide a simple solution to the very complex issues involved in balancing private and community rights, responsibilities and obligations. It is based on the flawed assumption that new government regulation introduced to achieve wide community benefits should compensate individuals who share an obligation to achieve it. It fails to consider whether such an obligation existed on the individual as a member of their community in the first place. Regulation is required when off-site effects can be caused either innocently, as a result of a lack of awareness of the consequences of an action or a limited appreciation of the influence of their actions, or deliberately, as a result of unfettered greed. I am not alleging that Queensland's rural land-holders are guilty of unfettered greed. When I say 'greed' I have in mind the factory owner who dumps toxic waste into the creek in the middle of the night when inspectors are not around. Under this bill, people who are reckless with the health and wellbeing of their communities would be compensated along with the farmer who is prevented from clearing trees to increase carrying capacity on his property. I am sure members of the House all agree that the freedom to own and manage private property to generate wealth represents one of the fundamental freedoms of a liberal democratic society. The problem with this bill is that it comes from a very simplistic definition of the term 'freedom'. The person who drafted this bill is trying to enshrine in law the freedom to snatch and grab Queensland's natural resources. This bill would have a devastating effect on any new legislation that sought to protect property by enacting provisions which provided property owners freedom from the diverse impacts of the poor management, lack of knowledge, antisocial or greed motivated activities of a few. This bill is written in a fashion which suggests that freedom to do something is the only form of property right, and this is its fundamental failing. This bill has been written by a property lawyer named 'Rosy Scenario'. Using the simplistic argument put forward by the member in his second reading speech, it might seem easy to find reasons to support it and, as exemplified in the second reading speech of the member for Callide, it is easy to provide simple reasons to support this bill, but in the above context the arguments are simply wrong. Let us look at one of the targets of the bill identified by the member in his speech—the 'salinity scare campaign'. One would presume by the use of such language that the member is one of those who believes that salinity is a South Australian problem or perhaps not a problem at all. Perhaps he should get in his car and drive two and a half hours up the road and look at the saline scalds in the Lower Mary, look at the stunted cane and the fenced off paddocks and look at the salt encrusted creek lines that look like a lunar landscape. A recent resource survey shows that in this area salt affected land is a minor occurrence being visible over around 175 hectares. However, the soil scientists predict that, if on-farm 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1279 and catchment management strategies that prevent salinity are not maintained or implemented, salinity has the potential to affect a quarter of the study area. Is it fair that people trying to graze cows or grow cane on lower slopes have to suffer loss in production because someone else cleared the marginal hill country? Is it fair that the community should pay compensation for legislation trying to protect the rights of property owners from the adverse effects of their neighbours' actions? So what do we do? Do we wait until the high-risk regions in Queensland resemble the Western Australian wheat belt, where CSIRO has suggested massive investment in catchment scale revegetation of up to 80 per cent of the area, and engineering work is required? Restoration ecologists frequently identify that it costs in the order of 100 times more to rehabilitate a landscape compared to the initial action of stopping the degrading of it. So do we sit on our hands, as this bill would have us do, or do we take the fiscally responsible approach of protecting vegetation in high-risk landscapes through balanced, pre-emptive and targeted incentives combined with a regulatory action? The bill would not even affect land-holders evenly. Those whose well-managed properties that had, for example, been highly productive and responsibly cleared for 50 years would receive nothing upon passage of a new vegetation law. But those who had more recently acquired economically marginal land and may have had no intention of ever clearing it would receive an unearned windfall. Legislation protects rather than removes property rights. This is particularly easy to comprehend in urban areas where, in the absence of regulatory town planning, every land-holder is potentially threatened by ugly development of the property next door. The land-holder who demands compensation when a permit is refused for a block of flats or a factory on their land also benefits because ugly flats or factories cannot be built next door. Outdated legislation may remain on the statute books because of the risk of compensation for updating in the longer term. The bill may have the effect of devaluing private property as a result of weakened or unenforced regulations that result in damage to neighbouring properties. Only property owners whose use of land is restricted under the regulation can claim compensation. So, for example, if a property is devalued due to the lack of regulation of a noisy, polluting use on an adjacent property, there is no ability to claim for the offsite impact on their private property as it was not a result of new legislation. So the aggrieved owner would have to take civil action to defend the enjoyment of their own property. In other words, property holders would lose the protection of the government and would be left to fight for their rights themselves. What are some of the nuisance type laws that this bill will capture? It opens the gates for abandoning future regulations ranging from those limiting the sale of alcohol from private premises to a suite of pollution controls including noise. The legislation could empower land-holders to claim compensation— Mr SEENEY: Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise to a point of order. I think the member is completely misleading the House. I think she has the wrong speech. I think she is talking about some other bill altogether. There are some rules about relevance that even in a second reading debate need to be remembered. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Poole): Order! There is no point of order. Resume your seat. Mr SEENEY: Mr Deputy Speaker, I would ask you to provide guidance to the speaker about honesty in debate in this House. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mrs REILLY: The legislation could empower land-holders to claim compensation even though the offending prior activity arguably was a breach of the general environmental duty of care. New legislation setting standards which authorise a factory to operate in a certain way could give rise to claims if a neighbour felt that the threshold was too high. In the rural environment we know from experience the viability of the beef export industry; it is threatened by spray drift from adjacent uses. Regulations which tighten the restrictions on chemical pesticides to the extent that, for example, product contamination standards were met on adjacent properties would be subject to claims for compensation under this bill if it was considered that the alternative treatment reduced the productive potential of that operation. This is a classic scenario affecting constituents of the electorate of—oh, I don't know—maybe Callide, which one would think the Deputy Leader of the Opposition would understand. He obviously has not thought of the real implications of the bill. In the long term this bill would have the effect of driving conflict between neighbours where the long-term ethic of land care, stewardship and community endeavour is replaced by an individualistic and very here-and-now assessment— Mr Seeney interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Callide! I have been very patient, too. This is your legislation that you have introduced into the House. You might be watching it from your office. 1280 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004
Mrs REILLY: Property rights have risen to prominence during the past two decades of reform in Australia's administration of its natural resources. Those who hold property have sensed that their prerogatives have been constrained by expanding environmental regulation and have demanded greater recognition of their rights. Many resource holders equate protection of their right to use their property with democratic freedom—a misunderstanding on several levels. If the National Party really believed in what it is advocating in this bill, it would be arguing here to return all of Australia to the original traditional owners of the lands—the Aboriginal people. Imagine the cost of that compensation claim. Just imagine the cost of that compensation claim, taking the Nationals' bill to its nth degree. Governmental activity is critical to the protection of the freedoms and rights that owners cherish. It is legislation which defines property, which preserves the entitlements and specifies the obligations. In Western legal systems without government there is no property. Regulations guarantee private property owners their freedom to manage. Supporting this bill is supporting a society which is based on a 'blow you, Jack' mentality; 'I will do whatever I want.' It is one which fails to recognise the social and economic benefits of regulatory regimes which provide property owners the freedom from the negative impacts of the actions of others. This bill is the death rattle of the last of the agrarian socialists. It marks the final demise of the National Party as a credible force capable of arguing for the economic good of Queensland, and I urge all members to oppose the bills. Mrs MENKENS (Burdekin—NPA) (9.24 p.m.): I rise this evening to support the Private Property Protection Bill and the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill. One of the major freedoms that we as Australian citizens enjoy today is that of ownership—the ability to own our own home, the freedom to own freehold or leasehold title of property. Owning one's own home, being a landowner or owning one's own piece of land, be it a quarter of a hectare or be it thousands of hectares, is one of the most wonderful rights that we as Queenslanders have. It is probably the dream of most people to own their own piece of ground. However, increasing fees, rules, fines, restrictions, taxes and so many other imposts are being put upon Queensland land-holders to an extent that our pioneers would probably be appalled. Our ancestors battled to give us a better way of life, but those rights are being eroded unless we take serious consideration of them. Land-holders, water licence holders, home owners—I am looking at home owners as well in this bill—have a right to security of tenure, to security of ownership of those assets that they have worked long and hard to earn. In other words, should there be a need to resume those assets, then those owners should be fairly and equitably compensated for their loss. In many previous cases this has happened, but it is currently on an ad hoc basis. There is no legislative protection currently in force for Queensland land-holders and property owners. I feel sad that this bill has seemingly become a political football. There seems to have become a major mistrust of it, no doubt because the opposition has introduced it. I have heard a lot of rhetoric this evening, much of which has not had a lot to do with this bill. In amongst the rhetoric I have heard the term 'social justice', and I can relate to that term very seriously. The principles of this bill affect householders in urban areas in metropolitan Brisbane. This is not a bill just for the bush. Please consider an elderly couple living in a house that they have worked all their life to pay for. They are no doubt pensioners and they have worked very hard to own their own home. A freeway is planned to go through this area. Consider the situation: for 10 years this freeway has probably been on the agenda. During that time they have been unable to sell their home. It has lost its value. Sure, they get compensation from the government, but is it fair compensation? Can that elderly couple who have worked their whole life get sufficient compensation to cover buying another home in another area? This is also an area that this bill encompasses. Mr Shine: It will be market value. Mrs MENKENS: But it is no longer market value when the cost of it has been taken away by the knowledge that it will be resumed. The Nationals' charter will place a legally binding obligation on the state government to provide full and fair compensation in the event of governments compulsorily acquiring land or water acquisitions. This is not a big ask and it is not an unfair play in politics. This is surely simply a basic right that we as Queenslanders should be able to expect, and to this extent I really urge all members to seriously consider the importance of this bill. When land is resumed, the costs involved are not just the dollar value of that property. The real loss to the owner, to the property owner, to the home owner, is often the special knowledge that they have in that particular property which is sometimes handed down through generations. It involves the personal cost of their moving to another area, the financial cost of finding and purchasing another property, which involves such imposts as legal fees, stamp duty and bank fees. Other costs include relocation costs for household effects, for stock, for machinery and often a taxation liability as a result of this forced sale. These are the hidden costs that this bill hopes to address and to allow land-holders redress to fair and just compensation from the government of the day. 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1281
This bill seeks to ensure a decent basic security for genuine citizens who, through no fault of their own, are disadvantaged because of government decisions to resume certain areas of land. It is their right to resume certain areas of land for roads, schools, hospitals or the like. A particular example where property owners are greatly disadvantaged is where their property comes under heritage listing. In many instances they are currently unable to gain compensation for the real value of their property as a saleable item. As a result, they are severely disadvantaged. This is unfair and should not be allowed to happen. This legislation encompasses situations that exist not only in rural areas, as has been said so many times this evening. They occur in urban and metropolitan areas as well. As I said before, this is not a bill just for the bush. It affects each and every Queenslander and I urge all members to consider the basic fair merits of this legislation. Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (9.30 p.m.): I must say that for the first time in over three years I have been tempted to support the opposition. That is not because of the artful drafting of this legislation, the force of their argument tonight or their oratory. It is because, in proposing this bill, the honourable member for Callide can now rightly be regarded as the patron saint of lawyers. If, God forbid, this bill should be passed tonight, it will deliver to that noble and honourable profession an assured and bountiful harvest such as could never have been imagined before. Over the past three years in this place, honourable members of the National Party have expressed very strange and contradictory points of view when it comes to compensation. For example, when we are dealing with workers compensation, that is, an injury to a worker, compensation for an inability to carry on work or to be restricted in one's ability to work, their attitude is quite conservative and reactionary. However, when it comes to anything to do with property rights, they are the most liberal persons one could ever imagine. As it was 150 years ago in this very chamber, the opposition is a party of property. Nothing much has changed. Tonight I refer to the separation of powers that this bill raises. A person might be forgiven for thinking that, considering the grief caused to the opposition by the doctrine of the separation of powers over the years, they would have finally learned to get it right. However, the process in this bill proves that, just like Joh, they just do not get it. I will explain it for them. The legislature or the parliament, the place where we are right now, is where laws are made and reviewed. The executive branch or the ministry puts those laws into operation. The judiciary, that is, the courts, is where one assesses compliance with those laws, the compliance of a law with the Constitution or the compliance of the process of government with the law. The courts are not the place where one makes policy judgments regarding the cost and benefit of the laws. The court is not the place where submissions from the public in regard to proposed legislation should be heard, nor is it the place that should assess how government has responded to those submissions. The bill requires a private property impact study to be prepared if proposed legislation, including subordinate legislation, will have the effect of diminishing, removing or restricting a person's rights to the lawful use or enjoyment of the person's private property, and an objection may be made to the Land Court on the basis that the impact study does not include the required information. The objection process outlined in the bill is an inappropriate use of court time and could see the Land Court clogged with objections to the content of private property impact studies. A person may object if their rights of private property will be diminished, removed or restricted by the proposed legislation. Given the wide definition of private property, it is conceivable that, with the given regulation, thousands of objections could be received. Although the bill provides that a court may hear two or more objections, it could be a very costly and time-consuming process. The reverse problem may also apply where a wide-ranging proposed legislative reform is frustrated by a single individual. Even for the court to determine whether an objection is properly made could be time consuming and expensive for all concerned. Another fundamental concern about the proposed objection process is that it is inappropriate for the process of policy development to be subject to the review of the courts. Contrary to the doctrine of separation of powers—and the opposition should let me know if they are still confused about this one— this provision will, in effect, elevate the role of the courts, advised by the expert witnesses, to that of a reviewer of cabinet evaluation and decision-making processes. A matter of concern is that new and amended delegated legislation made routinely in the proper administration of existing legislation will require a formal consultation process before it can be enacted. The process of court review of impact studies would set up a de facto parliamentary inquiry system with judges undertaking this vital role. This goes significantly beyond the normal scope of judicial review. Considering the potential scope of legislation caught within the broad net of this bill, it is unlikely that the Land Court would have the experience and specialisation required to consider the diverse range of legislation that will potentially require redrafting. The legislation affected is likely to go far beyond existing legislation dealt with by the court. 1282 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004
The courts have traditionally had the role of protecting the rights of individuals from the arbitrary and excessive use of power by kings and parliament. As shown by the large damages claims paid out against public authorities in civil litigation, it can be expected that the courts will often exercise discretion in favour of land-holders rather than the state. The role proposed for them in this bill would present significant challenges. Currently, the Statutory Instruments Act imposes requirements to prepare regulatory impact statements, RIS, for subordinate legislation. An RIS must include information about the objectives, the benefits and the costs of the subordinate legislation and also detail its consistency with fundamental legislative principles. The Scrutiny of Legislation Committee also monitors the application of fundamental legislative principles. Similarly, the Legislative Standards Act outlines requirements for explanatory notes that ensure members of parliament are informed about the objects of a bill, alternatives to the bill and consistency with fundamental legislative principles, including that the legislation has sufficient regard to the rights and liberties of individuals. These provisions provide for an appropriate level of checks and balances for the legitimate role of the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. They are not broke, so we do not need to fix them. We certainly do not need to replace them with the lemon put up by this bill. It is possible that the proponents of this bill have been surfing too many web sites from the United States, where the doctrine of the separation of powers has, of course, a different meaning because the executive and the legislature are far more separate than here in Australia. In Australia, these come together in the office of the minister, which allows a greater degree of coordination and consistency. In the US, the courts are often called in to protect the public interest because public interest considerations fall into the cracks between the administration and the Congress. The judiciary in Westminster systems do not have the same role. Democratic accountability is a cheaper and more direct method of protecting the public interest, one that is accessible to all citizens free of charge. The bill's process presents a sharp contrast with the principles of the doctrine of the separation of powers. The envisaged processes would give to the courts rather than the parliament the power to evaluate the relative impacts of regulation in a role that they are unaccustomed and ill-equipped to undertake. Perhaps it should not be a surprise to us that the National Party is still struggling with the concept of the separation of powers. Only yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition displayed his breathtaking lack of regard for it by making the outrageous claim that the executive should be responsible for a decision made by a magistrate and that the Attorney-General ought to be able to explain it. However, demolishing the separation of powers and, by extension, the entire Westminster system, as this bill aims to do, is premature, hasty and completely unjustified, to put it mildly. I urge honourable members to oppose this bill. Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) (9.39 p.m.): I rise to support the Private Property Protection Bill and the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill introduced into this House by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. I will pick up on a point that the member for Toowoomba North finished on. He talked about the separation of powers. It is a separation of powers all right—this government is removing the rights of people via legislation. That is exactly what this government did with its legislation. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is trying to get some sanity and fairness back into the debate. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition stated in his second reading speech— This bill recognises that the principle of fair compensation is no less applicable to an owner of private property who, while retaining title to property, loses the rights to use that property normally associated with property ownership. It enshrines in law that, where acting in the broader community interest a government imposes statutory regulations that remove or restrict existing property rights, property owners shall be entitled to compensatory payments at least equal to the loss of value caused by the new regulations. I will deal with that for a moment. Those members in the chamber tonight or those who have their monitors on in their offices would have heard the very precise and well calculated speech by the member for Burdekin a few minutes ago. I think she identified all the factors of this legislation. It is about reinstalling fairness into the property and land acquisition rights of people in this state. We had the vegetation management legislation go through this parliament. There has been a lot of controversy surrounding the bill last year and the one this year. In the 14 years I have been in this parliament, I have not seen anyone with a more sound grasp of these issues, without departmental first-hand knowledge, than the member for Callide. He has grasped these pieces of legislation. He has debated them thoroughly in this place. I think the minister acknowledged that he does have a sound grasp of this sort of legislation. That is the reason for the legislation that we are debating tonight. As the member for Burdekin said a moment ago, we are trying to get the dislocation out of people's lives. It is about trying to get viability back into their lives. It is about trying to give them purpose in their lives. It is about trying to give them a future. It is thinking about their children's future and their children's children's future. The member for Cunningham said that when one buys a home one wants security of tenure of the lease in question. I have constituents in Longreach who want to sell their homes but they are trying to get the freehold title through. These are all important things. Whether it is the home block in town or the 19 May 2004 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 1283 big pastoral aggregation or the small farm or the hobby farm, it is all important. It the rights of people that we are debating this evening. It is about fairness. The real issue is not 'what is yours is mine', but fairness. I cannot emphasise that enough. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said in his second reading speech in relation to the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill— We as a community have a duty to ensure that individuals are not unfairly deprived of their private property when we need to resume their land for our community benefit. This bill seeks to ensure that approach. It is fair and reasonable ... It is fair and reasonable. There is another issue that is not fair and reasonable—that is, taking those rights away. I can talk about numerous people in this House who have been deprived of those rights. The minister knows this well. This afternoon I was walking down the street and I ran into an officer from the Department of Natural Resources. Government members interjected. Mr JOHNSON: Those opposite think it is a joke. It is not a joke. This person is a professional within the Department of Natural Resources. This person worked in Longreach for a number of years and is now based in Brisbane. I asked him about the vegetation management legislation, the property rights legislation and so on. I talked to him about the cognate legislation we are debating this evening. His words to me were, 'Those pieces of legislation are going to haunt this government for a long time. They are going to be brought back into the parliament on numerous occasions with amendment after amendment because they are not fair.' That comes from an officer of the Department of Natural Resources. During the debate on that legislation I saw the minister look up and smirk at the backbench as much as to say that everybody on this side of the House has it horribly wrong and they are not going to take any notice of us. The member for Mudgeeraba is laughing. She can laugh all she likes. Her contribution tonight was totally removed from the detail of these two pieces of legislation. Let us talk about fairness. A headline of Queensland Country Life read 'Betrayed'. Who betrayed them? This minister over here and this government. Government members interjected. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs Croft): Order! The House will come to order. Mr JOHNSON: It is in order, as far as I am concerned. When one gets close to the nerve they do not like it. They patronise these people, abuse these people and take advantage of these people. It says in that article— Acting in good faith NACC agreed to a memorandum of understanding with multinational firm Ecom Trading to clear 25,000 hectares of Billies Lagoon to grow crops for export from the port of Weipa direct to Asia. It is estimated that the project would have created 100 jobs and $4 million a year plus flow-on effects of the broader economy. This is a community that is fighting the ills of alcohol, fighting the ills of domestic violence, fighting the other ills that go with a lot of those Aboriginal communities. There are a lot of good people up there who are having a go and want to have a go. But what has happened? Their progress and development opportunities have been retarded by a government that sees fit to shut them down. We talk about the Cape York land development strategies and the alcohol management plans. We are trying to give those people a better education so that they can go into jobs and develop opportunities, better health conditions and a better quality of life. But these people are deprived of that type of operation totally. It is a sad situation. It is a sad indictment on what we are trying to achieve in this state. I emphasise again that that is the reason we are debating these two pieces of legislation tonight. It is to create fairness. I say to the minister: show some compassion and show some understanding to these people, because at the end of the day they are never going to make it to the top while there are impediments put in their way. I believe it is our right as the legislators and custodians of this parliament to make absolutely certain that we create an environment in which they can better themselves. I know that the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy mentioned in this House yesterday—and I referred to it again last night—the cattle drive from the north. That is all about training those people and training them in an environment where they can be custodians of their land and run cattle and be good operators. Some of the best ringers and stockmen I have ever seen in my life are Aboriginal people. I know the member for Callide and the member for Charters Towers, who are in the House tonight, would vouch for that. Probably members on the government side would, too, because they have seen them work in those places. Madam Deputy Speaker's family up in the north would vouch for that. We have to take stock of what this legislation is about and listen to what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is saying. Just because we say it does not mean it is wrong. The minister should allow some fairness in the debate and listen to what we are saying. Time expired. Mr WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (9.49 p.m.): It is absolutely vital that these two bills be forthrightly opposed. The member for Warrego, who spoke earlier, exhorted us to believe that this proposal of the opposition is a simple one. It is a simple one: when there is any legislation that is passed 1284 Private Property Protection Bill Land Acquisition Amendment Bill 19 May 2004 that has an adverse effect upon property rights, defined as it has defined it, then compensation is to be paid. He, too, like the member for Callide earlier, is a little hamstrung with language. It is not a simple matter; it is a very simplistic matter as put forward by the opposition. It is in fact a complex area, and it is having a very simplistic approach to a complex area. The key issue that is being addressed here—and I am principally focusing on the Private Property Protection Bill—is the balance between private interest on the one hand and public interest on the other. If either of these two bills were passed, there would be a radical shift of benefit to the private interest away from the public interest to the enormous detriment of ordinary men and women and families in the community who have very little but their quarter-acre block, their job and their car to call their own, and I will explain why. When this legislation has been argued for by those on the other side, one would expect that international experience, were it to be available to them, or even domestic Australian experience that illustrates that the radical legislation that they are proposing would have certain practical and beneficial effects would be referred to. There would be examples given. But we have not—unless I am mistaken, and I stand to be corrected—heard one example being put by the opposition illustrating the practical implementation of this legislation and how it would actually work and how it would actually augment private interests in favour of public interest. Do members know why they have not heard even one example? Because there is not a positive example of where this legislation has worked before. Furthermore, there are examples of where this legislation has been a total disaster, and that is in the American state of Oregon. The bill is a clone of a highly regressive piece of American legislation introduced in the 1990s. If the opposition had done its research a little more closely and done as little as click on the links on some of the web sites that it visited, it would have known that these cloned laws had failed. In the wake of the Reagan free market, many of the mainland US states enacted laws aimed at protecting property rights. Most of those laws did not survive very long because members of the public found out just what their communities would lose. Like most clones, this bill has fatal flaws in its make- up. As we have heard from the minister, 60 per cent of voters in Arkansas and Washington voted to repeal similar legislation. The majority of people when faced with the prospect of huge public compensation payments quite reasonably felt it was more important to have a strong legislative system to protect the quality of property in the state and the benefits it brings in terms of liveability and sustainable development. In September 2002 my good friend and colleague the member for Southport—who is no doubt listening to this contribution on the monitor—and more recently the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines, also my good friend and colleague who is actually in the House, brought to the attention of the House the experience of the US state of Oregon where a citizen initiated referendum introduced measure 7—a timely case in point. Members may recall that the state of Oregon in the Pacific north- west of the United States has long been regarded as having the most vigorous land use planning systems of any state in the USA. Its 19 'Oregon Principles' have been widely adopted by jurisdictions around the world as a rational and beneficial statement of land use planning objectives and principles. Portland in Oregon annually nearly tops the list of the United States' most livable cities. With its surrounding metro district, it has enacted an urban growth boundary to manage urban sprawl and save costs in infrastructure to the community. This is an initiative that other states have studied and it may well be worth investigating for south-east Queensland as we face the prospect of another million people moving in during the next few decades. In November 2000 a small lobby group of Oregon's conservative land-holders sponsored a citizen initiated referendum which would have the effect of compensating land-holders for any loss in value of their land whenever the state or a council passed legislation restricting property rights. It very much resembled the measure now in front of this House. It was a proposed amendment to the state's Constitution and was passed by a six per cent margin—53 to 47. It is estimated that the law could have cost the state and local governments between $US150 million and—wait for it—$US5.4 billion in compensation every single year. The variation between upper and lower estimates indicates the large ambiguity in the measure's wording—another similarity it shares with the bill before the House today. At the high estimate—$5.4 billion—within 15 years the state would have paid as much in compensation as the total value of all property in the state of Oregon. Even at the lower limit, $150 million, the other services supplied by the state or government— health, education, police, parks and so on—would have suffered and even been eliminated or else taxes would have had to rise across the board, as my friend the member for Kallangur raised in his contribution. Unlike this bill, however, measure 7 had a major contradiction at its core: it specified certain types of regulation covering natural resources, cultural values or low income housing that could attract compensation. However, it exempted historically recognised nuisance laws such as those affecting the selling of alcohol, controlled substances, pornography and allowed dancing or operating casinos or gaming parlours on private property. At least they had the foresight to make explicit their conservative moralistic focus. Community and government dissatisfaction with the outcome of the referendum gathered pace and a community protection coalition was formed to advance rearguard action to prevent the implementation of the amendment. 19 May 2004 Adjournment 1285
The Land Conservation and Development Commission held an emergency session within a week of the referendum and announced that it would hold in abeyance much of its work relating to planning amendments, urban growth boundaries, land use zoning and planning due to the uncertainty created by measure 7. The first claims under measure 7 were filed. One potential claim was by a truck driver who had been prevented by local ordinances from mining stone out of an old goldmine claiming $50 million. Local governments enacted ordinances that waived land use regulations in order to avoid measure 7 compensation, and community groups appealed nearly 50 of these actions. Law suits challenging measure 7 were filed by citizens and local government. Two years later, the Supreme Court of Oregon ruled to invalidate measure 7 on constitutional grounds. The Mayor of Wilsonville—a distant relative—summed up the sentiments of the government with regard to the bill when he stated that— This ruling is a victory for the Oregon taxpayer, who won't be forced to pay a handful of landowners and special interests just to obey the common-sense laws that protect our quality of life. This government, like the president of the League of Women Voters in Oregon, is firmly of the belief that those 'who cherish the liveability of our state can breathe a sigh of relief' that such a measure did not proceed in Oregon and will not proceed in Queensland under the Beattie Labor government. There are similarities between Oregon and Queensland in terms of populations, the type of economies and our pride in the liveability of our state. The relevance of the Oregon experience with measures similar to those proposed by this bill provides a timely and frightening warning of the potential impacts of the proposal. The arguments which the opposing parties are using there parallel those being used in Australia by property rights advocates. Government regulation through, for example, an official permit has two faces. One face places a ceiling on the intensity of the development which can be undertaken—thus far shall you go but no further. But those who rail against the constraints on their freedoms of government red tape fail to recognise the other face—thus far you may go. The permit authorises as well as restricts. There is a dual role: government is both a curb on private power but is also a source of private power. Underlying this bill is a world view that presumes the public purse is there to be stolen, not to be managed for the greater good. It is a view that conveniently ignores the fact that the government's funds are the people's funds. I urge members to steadfastly oppose these bills. Debate, on motion of Mr Malone, adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy) (10.00 p.m.) I move— That the House do now adjourn.
Discover Sarina Week Mr MALONE (Mirani—NPA) (10.00 p.m.): I rise to speak about Discover Sarina Week, which begins on 21 May and goes through to 31 May this year. This is the third annual discovery week and it is designed to promote the rediscovery of the Sarina district by local residents. It begins on Friday, 21 May, with a gala opening of the Sarina Scope Visual Arts Show, which now has such a high reputation that it attracts visitors and exhibitors from all over Australia. This year there are 780 entries—100 more than in previous years—and judge John Massey of the Queensland Art Gallery returns for the fourth time to judge these entries. The Scope Visual Arts Show is an integral part of Discover Sarina Week, which also includes a Sarina Impressionist Painting and Photography Group display; a CWA craft day; a live ABC Radio broadcast from the little town of Koumala, which is just to the south; and the Art and Soul Exhibition at the Art Shack. Also there will be other exhibits and displays and competitions by the Sarina CWA, the Pioneer Potters, the Sarina Fibre Arts, the Sarina Potters, the Art Shack Painters, Emma's Country Creations, the local Military Museum, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community, Leanne's Pots, a Balinese cultural display, and Homebush Pottery and Craft featuring Ruth Osborn's award- winning fibre art creations, which I opened last weekend. There will also be a country and western night at Armstrong Beach; theatre workshops, including Madness and Mayhem and other activities for kids in Anzac Park and at the youth centre; lunch box concerts in Broad Street, Sarina; picnics in the park at various locations throughout the district; a bush poets' night at the Sarina Bowls Club; sporting activities and events including Rugby League, golf and junior Rugby League; a morning tea for cancer; various cent sales and morning teas right throughout the Sarina shire; Sarina Apex Club's Rum n Rock Rage at the Field of Dreams—and now that is something to behold; live band youth music at the youth centre; the Sarina market day at the showgrounds; and celebrations for the first anniversary of the Field of Dreams complex, which is that great complex on the edge of Sarina as you drive into it. 1286 Adjournment 19 May 2004
Discover Sarina Week is an important event for the Sarina district. As I said, it involves exhibitors and visitors from all over Australia. It puts Sarina on the map again. There is major involvement from the Sarina Shire Council, other organisations and the general public. Sarina will be a great place to visit next week. I would like to congratulate all of those who are involved in Discover Sarina Week. It really does make a great display for Sarina. Also, as I said, it puts Sarina on the map.
Indooroopilly Electorate, Traffic Concerns Mr LEE (Indooroopilly—ALP) (10.03 p.m.): I want to bring to the attention of the House my concerns about a number of traffic issues within the Indooroopilly electorate. I believe that of late the Brisbane City Council has taken its eye off the ball in relation to a number of traffic problems within the electorate of Indooroopilly. The one that concerns me most involves the intersection of Verney Road East and Oxley Road. There is a pedestrian traffic island there that I believe is exceptionally dangerous. Basically, heading northbound on Oxley Road, two lanes become one; heading southbound, traffic makes a dash for the traffic lights at Graceville Avenue. There is also a number of, I think, quite foolish motorists who rat-run up Verney Road East to avoid the traffic lights at the intersection of Graceville Avenue. Why in the name of heavens they do that when there is a left arrow on those traffic lights is beyond me, but they still do. I think that there is a severe risk that motorists, distracted by their desire to get to the lights or to merge in with the traffic, will cause an accident with some of the residents who are crossing at that traffic island. I know that that particular pedestrian crossing area is used by children going to Graceville State School and also Christ the King primary school. I also know that people on their way to church at the Uniting Church in Graceville and Christ the King and also people who are on their way to buy fish and chips at Graceville Seafoods, which I think is a great little fish and chip shop, use that particular intersection. I believe that that is an issue that the Brisbane City Council needs to examine. They need to look at that entire precinct and work out exactly what remedial action they can take. Otherwise I fear that in the near future there could potentially be a quite serious accident. I want to also raise my concern about the installation in Chelmer, without any consultation with the local community, of a no-right-turn zone between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. at the intersection of Queenscroft Street and Luxford Street in Chelmer. The majority of the people who use that particular right turn are residents of Queenscroft Street, Harte Street and Hargreaves Street. By and large they are on their way to the Walter Taylor Bridge. They are not people from outside the area who are rat-running; they are simply local residents who believe that it is safer and better to turn up Luxford Street, go along Rosebery Terrace and join Wharf Street to get onto the Walter Taylor Bridge as opposed to trying to dice with the traffic on Oxley Road at some of the other intersections. I think that the council should have consulted with local residents. I also believe that if there is a desire on the part of the council to maintain that no right turn, some provision should be made so that genuine local residents are not penalised. I know that this morning some people were fined for making a right turn there and that concerns me.
Aldoga Smelter Project; Aurukun Associates Agreement Dr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (10.06 p.m.): Concerning the recent trip of the Minister for State Development and Innovation to China, the Aldoga smelter project and the repeal of the Aurukun Associates Agreement, let us have a look at what various people claim. Firstly, on 11 May in this place, the Minister for State Development said that he had never met or had any discussions with representatives of Aldoga. He made this claim on six occasions most emphatically, but qualified it slightly by saying that he briefly shook hands with them. He said that he had taken a group of businessmen from Gladstone to China and introduced them to influential Chinese organisations. On 29 April in this place he said that the main interest of the Chinese parties whom he met were the Aurukun leases. Aldoga has a different slant. On 5 May, the Port Curtis Post in Gladstone carried an article with a posed photograph of the minister with the directors of Aldoga and Aldoga's Chinese partners, the Chinese Non-Ferrous Corporation—NFC—under the headline 'Aldoga Partners Welcome Queensland's Delegation'. I table this document. Aldoga claims they welcomed the minister and his delegation to Beijing. In a press release dated 27 April from the Aldoga web site, which has subsequently been removed, Aldoga representative Brett Smith said that it was a credit to Minister McGrady and the Beattie government that so soon after the election they had taken the initiative and visited Aldoga's Chinese partners. NFC went on to thank the minister and the Beattie government for their support of the Aldoga smelter project and further said that the expression of continued interest by NFC and the Aldoga consortium supports the recent decision of the Queensland government to repeal the Aurukun Associates Agreement. I table this document. 19 May 2004 Adjournment 1287
The Gladstone Engineering Alliance that went with the minister to China said in a report on the front page of the Gladstone Observer dated 13 May— We weren't a front for Aldoga ... but we were interested in learning how to get work from Aldoga in the future. I table this document. We then have this most intriguing meeting. The minister went off to meet with Chinese officials whilst the director-general of the State Development Department, the Commissioner for Queensland and the Gladstone Engineering Alliance conducted a meeting during which Aldoga just appeared, all groups denying knowing that they were coming or having invited them. This is bizarre and stretches the imagination. To recap, the Minister for State Development takes a group of engineering company representatives who are seeking work from Aldoga and introduces them to influential Chinese companies. They are welcomed to China by the Aldoga partners. Aldoga is seeking a source of alumina for its smelter in Gladstone. The executives of Aldoga are previous business associates of former Prime Minister Paul Keating. Time expired.
Polish Ex-Servicemen's Association Branch Mr CHOI (Capalaba—ALP) (10.09 p.m.): Last Saturday night, 15 May, I attended a function on behalf of the Premier in my electorate of Capalaba—the 50th anniversary of the Polish Ex-Servicemen's Association Branch No. 8. It was formed by the soldiers, sailors and airmen who decided not to return to their homeland when Poland had become a communist state but to live in exile. As the years passed they organised themselves into worldwide association devoted to the ideal of a free and independent Poland. The course of their lives was closely linked to the history of their country, Poland. The victorious outcome of the Second World War appeared to many Poles, whose nation had been a member of the coalition against Hitler from the first day to the last, as another defeat—exchanging one form of subjugation for another. Because of the part they played in the war—fighting, as the old Polish revolutionary slogan has it, 'for your freedom and ours'—Polish exile veterans and their descendants now live scattered in almost every country of Western Europe, the New World and Australia. In 1939 Britain and France allied themselves with Poland against Hitler. In 1940 Winston Churchill broadcast to the Polish nation. He spoke from Britain under siege, carrying on the war against Hitler alone. He was not quite alone, for in the skies defending London were Polish fighter squadrons and Polish fighter pilots with RAF squadrons. He said— This war will be long and hard, but the end is sure. The end will reward all those who faithfully serve the cause of European and World freedom. No nation served that cause more painfully than the Poles. But the end of war turned out a poor reward for 'all toil, all disappointment'. Allies had withdrawn recognition from legal government to which most Poles had given allegiance and forced upon the nation 'new red subjugation'. This was hardly the independence that the British guarantee to Poland in 1939 had sworn to restore. Tens of thousands of Polish soldiers in the West, who had for six years told themselves that every pace in their march through so many foreign countries was a step on the way home, were utterly disappointed. On the other hand, I congratulate the ex-servicemen who have been living in Capalaba and many parts of Queensland for many years for their contributions. I took the opportunity last Friday to congratulate them on their success. I met with His Excellency the Ambassador of the Republic of Poland and his wife, as well as the Honorary Consul for Poland in Queensland, Mr Kilmartin, and his wife. I wish them all the very best. I am looking forward to the next 50 years of their service in Queensland.
Queensland Government Agent Program; Dingoes Mr KNUTH (Charters Towers—NPA) (10.12 p.m.): I rise to speak on an issue that is affecting many rural and regional constituents when they access the service offered by QGAP. As the member for Mulgrave mentioned on 29 April, QGAP offers a vital service to rural and remote communities. QGAP is able to accept money on behalf of the Transport Department, Suncorp Insurance, the Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and the Justice Department. As the member stated, 206,000 transactions occurred in QGAP offices last year and are normally collected at courthouses. The Clermont QGAP office in my electorate has collected $1.1 million in the first nine months of this financial year. Moranbah QGAP accepts an average of $7,000 each working day. The majority of these payments are collected on behalf of the Transport Department. However, the way in which they collect this money is prehistoric. QGAP agencies are not equipped with EFTPOS facilities. Consequently, the only way they can process payments is by cheque or cash. Often, due to the lack of banking facilities in rural and regional towns, customers using QGAP 1288 Adjournment 19 May 2004 services are forced to pay extra bank charges to withdraw money from a bank that is not the bank at which their money is deposited. Other towns in my electorate to which QGAP does not offer EFTPOS facilities are Georgetown, Hughenden, Richmond and Aramac. Customers are disappointed because they cannot be offered up- to-date payment methods. I urge this government to rectify this situation by installing EFTPOS facilities in all QGAP offices to provide better services for our customers. I would also like to speak tonight on an issue that has been affecting many people in my electorate. I call on the government to seriously consider introducing a government funded dingo bounty. These pests are causing considerable damage, and people have been reporting losses of calves, sheep, kangaroos, ducks and other farm animals. People are increasingly frustrated with the wild dogs growling around as they are becoming more confident and are roaming around the towns. Just like the incident on Fraser Island, it will be only a matter of time before someone is injured. Just recently one landowner in my electorate was attacked by a small pack of wild dogs and was extremely lucky not to have been seriously injured. Another person was out pig shooting and was stalked by a group of dingoes. The dingo is now more abundant than ever and, as such, is becoming more and more a nuisance. The present council bounty offers little incentive for roo and pig shooters to hunt wild dogs. The use of 1080 has been the preferred option; however, it has a negative impact on other animals. A government funded dingo bounty increase to $60 or $70 a scalp would provide incentives for shooters to hunt dingoes. This in turn would drive wild dogs away from the outer fringe of rural towns, remove the risk of potential attacks and save millions in lost revenue. I urge the government to take this into consideration. Bayside District Showcase Awards Mr BRISKEY (Cleveland—ALP) (10.15 p.m.): This week, as we all know, is Education Week. Each year the Bayside district holds a showcase awards gala. I was fortunate enough once again to attend the awards on Monday night of this week. The night showcased entries from schools in the Bayside district. The number of entries continues to rise. There were eight in 2002, 22 last year and 26 this year. The schools that submitted entries included Wynnum North State High, Darling Point Special School, Victoria Point State High, Cleveland District State High, Wondall Heights State School, the Bayside alternative education schooling provision at Vienna Woods State School, Thornlands State School, Hilliard State School, Redlands District Special School and Wellington Point State High School. There was also an entry from the Redlands district University of the Third Age. The night began with the wonderful singing of the Cleveland State School senior choir. Their songs were made even more enjoyable with the beautiful voice of one Alison Briskey. The night showcased the amazing work that the schools are doing in the Bayside district. The students who are a part of the various programs that were showcased are benefiting greatly from the hard work, expertise and commitment of the teachers, teacher aides, administrative staff and parents who give and keep on giving to ensure that their students achieve. I would like to make special mention of Darling Point Special School, which had an amazing 13 entries on the night. I would like to sincerely congratulate four wonderful young people who acted as emcees on the night. There was Lionel Scicluna, who is the school captain at Capalaba State High; Bradley Fuller, a year 8 Wellington Point State High School student; Kate Fenton, a year 7 Capalaba State School student; and this amazing preppie from Vienna Woods State School Juliette Langford, who won us over with her wonderful emceeing on the night. They did an outstanding job and should feel very proud of the way they were able to ensure the smooth running of the evening. I will outline the winning entries on the night. The middle phase of learning was won by Wellington Point State High School. The senior phase of learning was won by Darling Point Special School. The leadership section was won by Darling Point Special School. The joint winners of innovation were Redlands District Special School and Darling Point Special School, winning with their 'Lady leading the way'. This is quite amazing, because Lady is actually a dog. Lady works full time at the Redlands District Special School providing unconditional love, friendship and therapy to many students with disabilities from birth to 18 years of age. Her mate Porridge works over at Darling Point Special School and does exactly the same thing there. I congratulate the winning entries. Their educational programs are outstanding. I congratulate also each and every entry and all those involved in the showcase awards. Their dedication to their students ensures that state schools are indeed great schools. Time expired. Dairy Industry Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (10.19 p.m.): It distresses me to still see today, almost three years after the Queensland dairy industry deregulation, once viable dairy farms continuing to close each 19 May 2004 Adjournment 1289 week with no let-up. Recently I visited the Nambour High School's agricultural farm and met with some of the young people directly affected by the dairy industry deregulation. The dairy section of the ag farm has been part of a practical learning ground for agricultural students whose goals range from farm work through to better understanding farm issues and dealing with farm animals. It is also one section of the school's farm which makes a profit. The dairy industry deregulation has meant that one-third of the farm's profits has been lost— income which directly benefits school students. One of their teachers, Mr Ray Pembleton, who has been teaching agricultural subjects at Nambour High School for over 25 years said that dairy deregulation meant there had been a cutback in the range of activities that they were able to offer students. While the school did achieve a compensation package to help reduce some costs and improve efficiency, the school faced other deregulation challenges including the very difficult issue of introducing a quality assurance program for the large number of student milkers who were trained as part of their farming education. But they qualified. They meet the standard. The popularity of the agricultural studies at the school has been strong—it has been unbelievable—with teacher numbers increasing from originally two teachers 25 years ago to five full- time teachers today. Over 800 students go through the agricultural farm and are genuinely interested in what it offers. As well as the dairy section, the farm has some beef cattle, goat, sheep, poultry, aquaculture, bees and a whole range of small crops. Whilst I was there, year 9 students Jodie Pitman, Breanna Tonkin and Jacqui Southam were working like old hands in the dairy. The 'agricultural assistant' Sally Angus was on hand and she was a former Nambour High student who graduated from Gatton Agricultural College before returning to Nambour High to help in running the farm. It is great to see the continuation of our local community's support for the ag farm, notwithstanding the loss of significant income as a result of the dairy industry deregulation. Global dairy farmers also support the farm through donations of livestock which have good blood lines—good genetics. Our local milk processing company, Pauls, also provides assistance with samples for the students and through milk quality testing. Local motor vehicle dealer Ray Grace also services the trucks. I use this opportunity to congratulate and thank Ray Pembleton and the Nambour High School management for their great work and their great support for the continuation of this very important ag farm project at our Nambour High School.
Aboriginal Councils, Audit Report Mr O'BRIEN (Cook—ALP) (10.22 p.m.): I refer to audit report No. 7 of 2003-04, which examines last year's financial performance of Aboriginal councils and the subsequent negative comments by the Leader of the National Party and the opposition spokesperson on indigenous affairs. A further examination of the report indicates that there are a number of positives that have been overlooked in media coverage and certainly in the analysis provided by the National Party. For instance, I believe it is noteworthy that the New Mapoon Aboriginal council has received its seventh unqualified audit report. The CEO of the New Mapoon council is an indigenous man by the name of Mervyn Bond, and he and his team deserve congratulations for this achievement. There must be something about Mapoon people because the Old Mapoon council has never received a qualification on its audit since it came into being in April 2000. Congratulations go to CEO Jason Pfingst and the council headed by Peter Guivarra. Injinoo, Kowanyama and Wujal Wujal councils again received unqualified audit opinions this year. Also noteworthy is that the Napranum community council, under the stewardship of Ross Andrews, and the Umagico community council have both attained unqualified status for the first time in many years. The budgetary pressures that are placed on Aboriginal councils are different and in many cases far more extensive than those experienced by their mainstream counterparts. In addition to providing the normal local government services, community councils also provide police officers, employment services, administrative support for Centrelink, tourist information, funerals, family media, housing—and the list goes on. It does this without a rate base and where the people they serve are amongst the poorest in Queensland. Given this reality for Aboriginal councils, it is a wonder that all of them are not in a financial quandry. Certainly another problem community councils endure is the difficulty in attracting and training highly qualified accounting staff. Customary law can also affect the operations of community councils. Most Aboriginal councils that I have spoken to in my electorate—and I have made every effort to speak to all of them—are in in-principle agreement to the proposed changes as outlined in the white paper on community governance. Obviously they want to see the detail. There will be disagreement from some councils on some points and there is certainly a need for training for councils and staff. I am very pleased that the government is currently providing information sessions to councils throughout the Cook electorate on the changing government arrangements and requirements. The changes are not the be-all and end-all. In fact, what we are doing is entering a transition phase which will take four years or more to complete. No doubt some councils are going to slip up as they go about implementing the new changes. 1290 Adjournment 19 May 2004
Burdekin Grower Race Day Mrs MENKENS (Burdekin—NPA) (10.25 p.m.): I rise tonight to speak about an exciting annual function in Home Hill, when Burdekin hosts one of the biggest days on the north Queensland racing calendar: the sixth Burdekin Grower Race Day on Saturday, 29 May. The Burdekin Race Club, an hour south of Townsville, is situated in the cane and horticultural area on the Burdekin delta. The Burdekin Race Club has had a very successful history fighting back the imposts put upon it by cutbacks in country racing. Due to the enthusiasm and hard work of many volunteers, they have succeeded in putting Burdekin on the national racing map. Burdekin Cup sports $16,000 in prize money as well as five other races for a prize purse totalling $52,000. This attracts many of north Queensland's top racehorses and top jockeys. What sets this race day apart, though, is that it is a celebration of the primary production carried out in this area. There is a $10,000 north Queensland farmers produce challenge held, huge prize money for canegrowers and for horticultural producers. At the end of the day, due to the generosity of local farmers, about 15 tonnes of fresh fruit and vegetables are given away to racegoers. The other feature that sets this day apart is that the Burdekin Grower Race Day has the richest Fashions of the Field awards in Queensland, with prizes to the value of $11,000. This attracts a fabulous array of international standard fashions as well as the real spin-off of a huge boost for local fashion houses. Attendance in previous years has been approximately 4,000 people, which at a country race day is enormous. An economic impact study of the 2003 Burdekin Grower Race Day conducted by the AEC group showed very interesting results. Thirty-six per cent of attendees were visitors from outside the Burdekin—both Queensland and interstate. The survey showed that the aggregate spending by visitors in the town was nearly $180,000. Expenditure by local people both on and before the day was approximately $270,000. The estimated impact of the race day on the north Queensland economy is a total impact on gross output of $1,038,000. This is a great day. It is a truly spectacular event, and I personally invite and encourage you all to come to the Burdekin Grower Race Day on Saturday, 29 May. Lions Club of Queensland—Parliament Mr HOOLIHAN (Keppel—ALP) (10.27 p.m.): I would like to bring to the attention of the House the place in our society today of service clubs and volunteers. On Monday night I had the pleasure, along with many members of the House and staff, of becoming a member of the Lions Club of Queensland— Parliament. Nobody seems to stop and think of the input into our society by those volunteers and service clubs. As well as Lions we have Rotary, Zonta, Quota and many other clubs that provide large amounts of money for those less fortunate people in our society. I would like to urge all members who have not become members to consider becoming a member of the Lions Club of Queensland— Parliament. I listened to the Minister for Emergency Services mention 88,000 volunteers in emergency services and we see the SES volunteers who are out in all sorts of weather and who undertake a great service to this community. The people who form parts of those service clubs and those volunteers really contribute to the quality of life that we enjoy in Queensland. It is a quality of life that every one of us is charged with supporting, and I would like to commend all of those volunteers, all of those service club members, for the good that they do in society. They raise moneys which go to overseas countries, and in that way we show the benevolence of our society and the benefits that the whole world receives from the goodness of Queenslanders. Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 10.29 p.m.