16 Oct 2003 Legislative Assembly 4219

THURSDAY, 16 OCTOBER 2003

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

PETITIONS The following honourable member has lodged a paper petition for presentation—

Pedestrian Crossings, Petrie Mrs Lavarch from 225 petitioners requesting the House to provide traffic lights, including pedestrian crossings, at the existing Petrie roundabout located at the junction of Dayboro Road/River Street/Gympie Road/Anzac Avenue/Whites Road, Petrie in order to: allow pedestrians to safety cross these major roads; improve pedestrian access to local shops & services; and reduce traffic congestion at peak hours. The following honourable member has sponsored an e-petition which is now closed and presented—

Taxes on Water Usage Mr Hobbs from 125 petitioners requesting the House to not impose the $50 fee for licensed water bores and dams as well as the interim $3 per mega litre charge for water harvesting until such time as meaningful consultation has been undertaken with Queensland's water using communities and a social and economic impact study has been conducted to determine the effect of the taxes on water users and their communities.

PAPERS MINISTERIAL PAPER TABLED BY THE CLERK The following ministerial paper was tabled by The Clerk— Minister for Education (Ms Bligh) ¥ Response from the Minister for Education (Ms Bligh) to a paper petition presented by Mr Copeland from 2036 petitioners and an E-petition sponsored by Mr Copeland from 335 petitioners both regarding class sizes and wage and non wage benefits to teachers in the state school system 15.10.03 Mr Neil Laurie The Clerk of the Parliament Queensland Parliamentary Service Parliament House Cnr Alice and George Streets BRISBANE QLD 4000 Dear Neil, Thank you for your letter received on 25 August 2003 enclosing a petition, tabled paper numbers 5652 and 5654, lodged by Ms Melanie Richards and received by the House on 19 August 2003. I sincerely apologise for the delay in replying to you. I am pleased to advise that the Government, the Queensland Teachers' Union and the Queensland Public Sector Union have recently reached an historic agreement that will be voted on by teachers in the near future. Amongst other wage and non-wage benefits, the agreement proposes a range of benefits to teachers and to our state school system and follows the release of the Middle Phase of Learning State School Action Plan. The proposed agreement heralds a new era in Queensland State education with the reduction of class size targets in Years 4-10 from 30 to 28 by 2007. This will be first reduction in class size targets in more than two decades and will mean Queensland has the lowest class size targets in Years 4-10 in the country. Underpinning this initiative is the Government's commitment to employ approximately 300 additional teachers and 184 teacher aides at an annual cost of around $38m. This is over and above the 800 teachers being employed as part of the Government's 2001 election commitment, which in itself was the largest single initiative to provide additional classroom teaching positions to schools and until now, the only initiative with a focus on reducing class sizes since 1980. It is my belief that the agreement reached with the unions on the issue of class size targets will effectively address the concerns expressed by the petitioners referred to in your correspondence. I invite you to contact Mr Paul Leitch, Director, Strategic Human Resources on telephone (07) 3404 3966 should you wish to obtain further details in relation to this matter. I trust this information will be of assistance to you. Yours sincerely (sgd) Anna Bligh MP Minister for Education 4220 Ministerial Statement 16 Oct 2003

MINISTERIAL PAPER The following ministerial paper was tabled— Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services (Ms Spence)— Community Services (Aborigines) Act 1984— Community Services (Aborigines—Dissolution of Palm Island Aboriginal Council) Regulation (No. 1) 2003 (Subordinate Legislation 2003 No. 249)

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT TAB Merger Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.33 a.m.): Last week here at Parliament House I met with representatives of both UNiTAB Ltd and TAB Ltd of New South Wales and I have had a number of conversations with them since. At that meeting was Dick McIlwain, the CEO of UNiTAB, Warren Wilson, the CEO of TAB Ltd, the two chairs of the respective organisations, George Chapman from UNiTAB and Graham Kelly from TAB Ltd, as well as representatives from my office and Queensland Treasury. The state government has been involved in recent weeks in detailed discussions with UNiTAB and TAB Ltd concerning a merger. While this is essentially a commercial transaction between two companies, the government has insisted on delivering a result that is in the best interests of Queensland. The Queensland government is backing a winner by enabling a merger which will create a top 50 Australian company headquartered in Queensland. It will be Queensland's second biggest company. And it will bring real and direct benefits to the racing industry in this state. We will amend legislation—and I will be introducing that into the House at 11.30 a.m. this morning—to enable a merger between the former TAB Queensland and the New South Wales TAB. UNiTAB Ltd, the old TAB Queensland, and TAB Ltd, the NSW TAB, will be known as UNiTAB Ltd after the merger. The merger remains subject to the approval of the normal corporate regulatory processes, including shareholder approvals, the ACCC and the normal gaming regulatory approvals. While the company will still need to work through its detailed integration plan, it has provided an assurance to the government that job numbers in Queensland will not decline for at least the next three years—and hopefully increase. In addition to gaining a major headquarters, Queensland is also likely to benefit through an increase of up to $10 million a year in payments to the racing industry, an increase in betting tax revenue of up to $5 million a year, and significant IT infrastructure investment for network upgrades. We have come a long way since 1999 when the Queensland TAB was owned by the state government and was seen as isolated and ailing in trying to compete with larger, privatised TABs. I said then that the TABQ needed greater access to capital—something that governments are reluctant to divert from core social services such as hospitals, schools and family services. The capital needed to compete with its bigger competitors was gained when TAB Queensland was floated at the end of 1999. Queensland mums and dads who wanted to be part of the action received 530 shares at $2 each. The float raised about $270 million. We said then that privatisation of the TAB would enable it to be better able to compete with its southern counterparts. Since then the company has taken over the Northern Territory and South Australian TABs and the value of its shares has more than tripled to be worth around $6.50. Now we will have the headquarters of the combined TABs of four states in Queensland, operating as the biggest wagering operation in Australia and Queensland's second-biggest company. When we privatised the TAB we built in safeguards to protect jobs. We said that there should be a 10 per cent shareholding cap until August 2004 to prevent hostile takeovers. We are going to extend that protection now forever. We recognise that if the new company is going to prosper and expand, it will need to attract the best directors available from anywhere in the world. But we also believe we need to ensure Queensland's interests are very much to the fore. So we will legislate to ensure that at least three of the 10 directors live in Queensland and that there are at least four board meetings in Queensland every year. In addition, annual general meetings and the board's key annual strategy meetings will take place in Queensland. Finally, it is worth pointing out that the National and Liberal Parties are threatening to pull $10 million a year out of core services such as health and education to give to the racing industry while my government has made it possible for the racing industry to gain this money through this 16 Oct 2003 Ministerial Statement 4221 private sector merger. That's a win for the racing industry and a win for the taxpayer. Mr Speaker, I should stress to you, as I said— Mr Horan: How can you stand up there and lie? Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is unparliamentary. Mr BEATTIE:—we will legislate to ensure that at least three of the 10 directors live in Queensland so that there are at least four board meetings in Queensland every year. As I said, in addition annual general meetings and the board's key annual strategy meetings will take place in Queensland. When I introduce the legislation at 11.30 a.m. this morning it will also provide that three key office bearers, as required in the legislation, will be ordinarily resident in Queensland. Not only do we have the head office; we have that guaranteed by those three key officers who will need to be resident in Queensland. This is a substantial merger. It is in the best interests of the racing industry, the best interests of the TAB and in the best interests of Queensland.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Tree Clearing Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.38 a.m.): Yesterday, New South Wales Premier Bob Carr announced the end of broadscale tree clearing in his state. The fact he did this with the support of the federal government, environmentalists and New South Wales farmers is commendable. I particularly congratulate New South Wales farmers for recognising that broadscale tree clearing is not sustainable and former federal National Party leader Ian Sinclair for helping broker the deal. The announcement is good news for the environment and for New South Wales farmers. The strongest feature of this announcement is confirmation yet again that the package being proposed to phase out broadscale tree clearing in Queensland is an exceptional one. Under the $406 million package announced by Premier Carr yesterday, a total of $30 million has been provided as new money by New South Wales to offer incentives to farmers to protect native vegetation. The remainder of the package is made up of existing state funds for land and water management and state and federal funding under the Natural Heritage Trust and the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality. If Queensland were to calculate its funding allocations to natural resource initiatives on the same basis as the New South Wales package, the total contribution of state and Commonwealth funds would be $433 million—a full $27 million more. As well, it includes $150 million of new funds—five times more than that announced for New South Wales. Not only will Queensland farmers be better off under the Queensland proposal; so will the environment. Unlike the New South Wales initiative, which sets no target dates for an end to clearing, the proposal being discussed by the Queensland and Commonwealth governments aims for a full-scale phase-out of broadscale tree clearing by 2006. Queensland farmers are being offered five times the extra financial incentive offered to their New South Wales counterparts to do the right thing. Today I call on the Prime Minister and Queensland rural organisations involved in this issue to end their deliberations and repeat in Queensland what occurred yesterday in New South Wales. There can be no argument now that anything less is sustainable. Further delays in finalising an agreement between the Queensland and federal governments is simply putting off the day when money can start flowing to our rural producers. I will be continuing my efforts with the Prime Minister to finalise the $150 million package negotiated with the federal government earlier this year. Only through this proposal will there be an end to uncertainty for Queensland land-holders and real protection for our remnant natural vegetation. It is only through the finalisation of this package that the moratorium the two governments placed on further tree clearing application will be lifted.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Community Cabinet, Royal Brisbane Hospital and Royal Women's Hospital Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.41 a.m.): A focus on our state's ever improving health services will be highlighted further when cabinet meets at the refurbished Royal Brisbane Hospital and Royal Women's Hospital on Monday. The Royal Brisbane Hospital and Royal Women's Hospital community cabinet meeting will be our 67th community cabinet meeting since our election in 1998. It is appropriate that cabinet meet in such 4222 Ministerial Statement 16 Oct 2003 a venue. We have met in locations with a geographic and cultural focus, and it is right that we gather as one to enhance our awareness of health matters and particularly the world-class facilities at Royal Brisbane Hospital and Royal Women's Hospital. We have just completed an ambitious $2.8 billion 10-year hospital rebuilding program across the state, including a major refurbishment of Royal Brisbane Hospital and Royal Women's Hospital. The program was conceived by the Goss Labor government in 1992, commenced in 1993 and completed by my Labor government in 2003. It is the biggest health rebuilding program of its type ever undertaken in the southern hemisphere, possibly indeed the world. In the past 18 months community cabinet meetings have been held in Cairns, Barcaldine, Longreach, twice at the Royal Queensland Show—the Ekka—Gympie, the Redlands, Capalaba, Carina, Ipswich, Mount Ommaney, Indooroopilly, twice on the Gold Coast, Townsville, Aspley, Springwood, the Queensland Art Gallery and the Sunshine Coast. Mrs Edmond: This is a first for a health district. Mr BEATTIE: It is indeed.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT University Places Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.42 a.m.): Queensland needs more funding and places in its universities. I have written to the Prime Minister to point out the growth in demand needs of our regional universities. It was only two years ago that Queensland achieved parity with average national higher education participation rates. It is expected to experience the highest rate of growth in the 15 to 24 age group range over the next decade. According to the Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee, we currently have the highest level of unmet demand for higher education places. In my letter I have referred in particular to the University of the Sunshine Coast. We need more places. I seek leave to have the remainder of my speech incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. The creation of the University of the Sunshine Coast in 1996 had a marked impact on the rate of regional participation in higher education, with the proportion of people engaged in full-time university study increasing three-fold between the 1996 and 2001 censuses. Despite these gains, Sunshine Coast regional participation rates are still well below the national figure of 3,250 for every 100,000 people, with participation now at 2,254 for every 100,000. Over the same period, the University has also sustained rapid growth in its fee-paying programs, established an innovation centre for technology incubation and is working with local businesses and all levels of government to establish a regional technology park to expand the software engineering and informatics industries. The University is continuing to experience a high level of unmet demand (particularly in teacher education and nursing) and I am seeking Commonwealth co-operation to: ¥ address the opportunities within the higher education reform package to grow the student load needed for the Sunshine Coast to achieve true economies of scale; ¥ a greater choice of degrees available in the region; ¥ a closer match between the number of student places and the population; ¥ and to enhance participation rates in a low socio-economic area. Specific growth priorities of the University are: ¥ creation of teacher education, nursing and software engineering/informatics as new discipline areas; ¥ securing additional student places based on the expectation of 14% of the State's population growth being on the Sunshine Coast over the next five years; and ¥ capital assistance from the Commonwealth—$8 million for a new nursing and educational sciences building. I have asked for the help of the Prime Minister and the Minister for Education to address the growth profile of the Sunshine Coast university and the other regional Queensland universities in order to respond to these unique pressures.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Trade Missions Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.43 a.m.): After an enforced break, the Queensland government special trade representatives are back doing what they do best: showcasing the Smart State to the world. The SARS outbreak brought all non-essential travel by the representatives to a standstill, but following the all-clear from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade it is business as usual. Mike Ahern, Tom Burns and 16 Oct 2003 Ministerial Statement 4223

Sallyanne Atkinson are once again leading Queensland companies on international trade missions. I seek leave to have the details incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. Tom Burns was the first cab off the rank, leading a successful mission to Vietnam and China in August and September. The mission's many positive outcomes included: ¥ Meeting with Chinese interested in investing about A$300 million dollars in Australian land and tourism development; ¥ Identifying opportunities for Queensland companies to tender for construction in Vietnam worth around A$87 million; ¥ Hosting a meeting with Beijing Olympic officials and Queensland company HOK sport. Following the meeting, HOK was one of three Australian companies invited to submit prequalification documentation for the Beijing Olympic equestrian facility; and ¥ Facilitating the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between Cairns City Council and Zhongshan and Zhanjiang City, regarding education and training and tourism. Sallyanne Atkinson led a successful mission to Malaysia, Thailand, and Singapore in mid-September. The mission succeeded in:- ¥ Expanding Queensland's retail food interests in Singapore and Malaysia, under the umbrella of the Dairy Farm International Group; ¥ Starting export negotiations between Queensland automotive part suppliers and Thai buyers; and ¥ Meeting with the Jurong Bird Park and Singapore Zoo. Representatives of the bird park and zoo are now in Queensland, taking steps towards partnerships with Queensland tourist attractions ¥ Mike Ahern will lead a trade mission to India on 4 November. The focus of this visit will be mining and tourism. A group of Queensland firms with tourism development expertise will accompany him to the Sunderbans wildlife reserve south of Kolkata where export opportunities will be discussed with Indian conglomerate, Sahara India. The mining mission will meet senior representatives from Sterlite Industries, Aditya Birla Group and Tata. The mission will also visit Delhi to follow-up visits to Queensland last month by the Indian Minister for Mines and a Coal India delegation. Mr Ahern will also lead business missions to the United Arab Emirates and Qatar between 27 November and 6 December. He will support Queensland companies exhibiting at the BIG 5 Construction Expo in Dubai and also lead a group of food companies seeking further business. In addition, he will work on establishing Queensland's presence in Doha, Qatar. A Queensland representative will be based at the GHD office in Doha, and will foster business opportunities linked to the $1 billion in infrastructure projects for the Asian Games in Doha in 2006. GHD has the master planning contract for the Games. I pay tribute to the three special trade representatives. These well-respected Queenslanders are blazing a trail across the world, opening up new trade markets for Queensland businesses.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Australian Magnesium Corporation Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.43 a.m.): There has been some debate in recent times in relation to the AMC project. I have written to the Leader of the Opposition today setting out the details of the project and how the government handled it. Because it is such a matter of importance, I seek leave to have this letter to Mr Springborg incorporated in Hansard so that everybody understands how thorough and how accountable my government is when it comes to dealing with these projects. Leave granted. Queensland Government Premier of Queensland and Minister for Trade 16 October, 2003 Mr Lawrence Springborg, MP Leader of the Opposition Parliament House Alice Street BRISBANE Qld 4000 Dear Lawrence In light of your interest in obtaining further details on the AMC project, I thought it would be useful if I provided you with details of the risk management measures (of which due diligence is a component) that the Government has had and continues to have in relation to this project. 4224 Ministerial Statement 16 Oct 2003

As you are no doubt aware, Government dealings with AMC (or Queensland Metals Corporation Limited as it was at the time) stem back to the discovery of the Kunawara magnesite deposit in 1985 and the establishment of the Queensland Magnesia (QMAG) plant at Parkhurst, Rockhampton in 1991. Both the Queensland and the Commonwealth governments knew that AMC contemplated the production of magnesium metal itself and both governments provided assistance to the fledgling industry through numerous measures. For example, CSIRO collaborated with AMC to develop a new magnesium metal process technology and in 1997 AMC secured funding from the Ford Motor Company and began construction of a magnesium metal demonstration plant at Gladstone to test process technology provided by CSIRO. This demonstration plant produced its first magnesium ingot in August 1999. In March 2000, AMC completed its Feasibility Study for a full-scale production plant of 90,000 tonnes of magnesium metal production capacity, which, because of its energy requirements, was to be located adjacent to the Stanwell power plant. AMC intended to finance the Stanwell project through a combination of secured debt from a consortium of banks, mezzanine finance from potential further providers of debt, and new equity capital from a new share issue to be placed both internationally and domestically. AMC sought a range of financial measures from both governments to assist AMC in assembling its proposed financing package. The period from May 2000 to January 2001 was a period of intense activity at both Queensland and Commonwealth levels in responding to the requests forwarded by AMC. The Queensland Government took a risk management approach, with a view to seeking to secure the very positive outcomes which Queensland and Australia would have realised from the successful development and operation of a major magnesium production facility at Stanwell, whilst protecting against risk. The activities undertaken included extensive reviews of AMC's business case and the financial models developed by both AMC and its Stanwell Project banks including scenario and sensitivity analyses. My department and Treasury (Office of Economic and Statistical Research) reviewed the economic impacts of the project as set out in the project's publicly-released Environmental Impact Statement. Ultimately my department developed an infrastructure arrangement that would have realised the benefits from the project at minimal risk and cost to the Government by providing the Stanwell project with $50M for infrastructure subject to the infrastructure being completed by AMO and AMO then paying commercial user charges to the State. My department engaged Clayton Utz to provide expert legal advice in relation to the proposed infrastructure arrangement and on 15 January 2001 the Queensland Government executed the Stanwell Industrial Park Development Deed (SIPDD) with Australian Magnesium Operations Pty Ltd (AMC's Stanwell project company) to give effect to the Queensland Government's commitment. The SIPDD arrangement bolstered the due diligence and review work undertaken by both my department and Treasury by effectively requiring AMC to complete both its bank arrangements (a separate and extensive financial and technical review and due diligence process was underway) and then develop a successful prospectus (which is subject to strict regulatory requirements) before it would "activate". Even then, the arrangement would only provide assistance after the relevant infrastructure is successfully constructed and commissioned by AMO and title passed to the State. The Commonwealth Government also provided a $50M arrangement to the project through CSIRO, and in addition, the Stanwell Corporation, in line with its own risk management and approval measures, put into place an Energy Supply Agreement and other commercial arrangements for the project. The formal sign-off and review of the Stanwell Project's financial models for the Stanwell Project banks was ultimately provided by William M Mercer Pty Ltd on 30 May 2001. The State was provided with a copy of this independent review which notes the State's interest, and confirms the soundness of the modelling (upon which the State had based its decisions). Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd also undertook a taxation review of the models, which was finalised on 29 May 2001. The independent technical review of the Stanwell Magnesium Project (a summary of which is included in each of the two prospectuses) was provided by Behre Dolbear Australia Pty Ltd (BDA). With these arrangements in place, AMC finalised its bank debt arrangement, and in June 2001 issued a prospectus both internationally and domestically seeking equity finance for its project. AMC's June 2001 prospectus was not successful, and from late July to early October 2001 AMC sought further assistance from Normandy Mining (its major shareholder) as well as the Queensland and Commonwealth governments and Stanwell Corporation. The Queensland Government engaged Andersen Corporate Finance Ltd and Clayton Utz as its commercial and legal advisors, ultimately entering into the "State of Queensland Subordinated Debt Arrangement" and "Distribution Support Facility". These arrangements provided for the payment of distributions to subscribers under a proposed new prospectus. The State would finance the distribution payments subject to repayment by AMC. Stanwell Corporation also entered into additional arrangements with the project. The Commonwealth entered into a "Commonwealth Subordinated Loan Arrangement" with AMC, and Normandy Mining entered into a "Normandy Equity Contribution Deed" with AMC. On 15 October 2001 AMC issued its second prospectus which provided, in its Appendix 7, details of all of these and other material contracts. In view of the extended Government arrangements to be disclosed in the second prospectus, the Queensland Government, together with Clayton Utz as its expert legal advisor, was careful to review the relevant sections of the proposed prospectus to ensure that the Government arrangements were correctly reflected and specifically did not indicate a more general Government support, and also to ensure that the risks of the Stanwell project, as known to the Queensland Government, were disclosed. In this regard Section 8 of the second prospectus (which commences with a warning that an investment in AMC "involves a high degree of risk"), details the risk factors associated with the Stanwell project. 16 Oct 2003 Ministerial Statement 4225

The second prospectus was successful and the Stanwell project's financing package was complete, with AMC announcing on 22 November 2001 that AMC would proceed with the Stanwell project. In May 2002 AMC announced the appointment of Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd under an Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) contract which would encompass a majority (80%) of the Stanwell project's capital works. AMC at the time publicly valued the EPC contract at $987M, and announced that AMC would, in negotiations with Leightons, seek to convert the $987M into a lump-sum fixed price amount, with this conversion to be completed by the June quarter of 2003. At AMC's 21 November 2002 Annual General Meeting however, AMC executives advised shareholders that the $987M indicative price of the EPC contract had, in negotiations between AMC and Leighton, increased by $168M to $1155M. AMC told its shareholders that the price was still within its "funding envelope" and remained confident that the continuing negotiations between AMC and Leighton, especially as the engineering and design work advanced on critical areas of the plant, would see the expected price stabilised at a level acceptable to AMC and within AMC's funding capability by the June quarter of 2003 target date. On 17 April 2003 AMC announced that the negotiations between AMC and Leighton Contractors had not been successful. AMC then sought to secure the additional funding and balance sheet support required to complete the funding package, however by early June 2003 AMC had not succeeded in this search. From AMC's public information releases, including its regular quarterly reports to the Australian Stock Exchange, Government agencies were aware, as was the market generally, of the ongoing negotiations between AMC and Leighton Contractors in the lead up to the publicly announced June quarter 2003 date for the finalisation of the fixed price lump sum. AMC was also required to provide month-end reports to its secured lenders on a confidential basis which, because of the State of Queensland Subordinated Debt Arrangement (and the Commonwealth subordinated arrangement) were also received by the Queensland and Commonwealth Governments. In its confidential monthly reports AMC provided updates of its negotiations with Leighton Contractors regarding the EPC contract lump-sum fixed-price, however these monthly reports did not provide any advance indication of a revised cost of the project or a funding gap that could not be resolved. As you are aware, the specific matter of AMC's level of disclosure has been the subject of an inquiry by the Australian Security and Investment Commission. Overall, the Queensland Government position is that the risk management arrangements (of which due diligence is only one component) put into place by the Government in relation to all of its dealings with the AMC project were both robust and sound. Specifically, the SIPDD is terminated without any cost or obligation to the Government and I understand that Stanwell Corporation has also terminated all of its arrangements in relation to the Stanwell project. The State of Queensland Subordinated Debt Arrangement remains in place for the benefit of holders of AMC Distribution Entitled Securities however this arrangement (which, by late 2004, is expected to have a potential balance of up to $100M), together with the Commonwealth's $100M loan guarantee, is secured against the assets of AMC and the Stanwell project. Under the Heads of Agreement which was signed by the Queensland and Commonwealth governments on 13 June 2003 both governments (with appropriate security) will allow AMC a further opportunity to test the feasibility of the replacement magnesium production project. Of course, should AMC's efforts in this regard not be successful, the two governments can require AMC to repay the balance of monies to them. I trust you will find this brief chronology and explanation of the risk management measures which the Queensland government put into place useful. Yours sincerely (sgd) PETER BEATTIE MP PREMIER AND MINISTER FOR TRADE

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Crime and Imprisonment Rates Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.44 a.m.): Our crime cutting strategies are working. Key crime rates are falling, and more serious criminals are behind bars. Crime rates in many categories are lower than they were five years ago. The State Penalties Enforcement Registry, introduced in November 2000, has virtually emptied the jails of fine defaulters. The prison population is 11 per cent higher than when the effects of SPER were realised, and historic numbers of serious violent criminals are behind bars. The commonsense application is that the real criminals are being caught and sentenced more vigorously than ever. There are more police to catch offenders, with the force growing by 21 per cent between July 1998 and January 2003. There are also more specialised police squads, including the State Flying Squad and the tactical crime squads. The expanding Police Service has at its fingertips 4226 Ministerial Statement 16 Oct 2003 smarter tools for cracking crime. DNA testing is on the increase and, thanks to recent government amendments, our police can now crossmatch DNA samples with those in other jurisdictions. Our police are carving inroads into the drug trade. They closed down an illicit amphetamine lab every 2.2 days in 2002. We now have the nation's highest amphetamine related arrest rate. They are also closing illegal brothels at an average rate of one per week. Government policies mean that more serious criminals are staying longer in prison. The Department of Corrective Services has provided a table showing a particularly steep increase since July 1998 in the number of serious violent offenders serving 10 years or more. I show this to the House. I thank the minister for preparing it. Members can see a very clear increase in the time that serious offenders are spending in jail. We have a lot of nonsense from the opposition about these issues. This graph clearly shows that serious violent offenders in secure and open custody—males and females in Queensland—are staying in jail longer. They are where they ought to be. I table that graph for the information of the House. A series of government reforms effectively prevent early release of prisoners considered an unacceptable risk to the community. Reforms introduced by the state government with the support of corrective services ministers Tony McGrady and, in the last term, Tom Barton, include abolishing remission for offences committed after 1 July 2001, abolishing remission for prisoners on community release who have been returned to custody for breaching conditions of release or breaking the law, increasing the periods of non-eligibility for release to work and home detention, abolishing parole for prisoners serving two years or less, and introducing a Community Corrections Board guideline in December 2002 that community safety must be paramount in all decisions. Other factors include more imprisonments resulting from cancellations of suspended sentences. In 2001-02 there were 43, but in 2002-03 more than 200 imprisonments were sparked by the cancellation of suspended sentences. Our recent reforms include amendments that increase the maximum penalties for a range of child sex offences and give the courts new powers to further detain extreme sex offenders posing an unacceptable risk of re-offending. Prison remains a last resort in most cases, but our effective diversion and drug court strategies are succeeding in rehabilitating drug-addicted offenders without taking up prison cells. Our community corrections system is the nation's most successful in preventing recidivism, but some criminals ought to go to prison and stay there for extended periods. I make no apology for saying that. Because we are tough on crime and its causes, these offenders are being caught, tried and imprisoned, and our communities are becoming safer. If we look at what is happening with breaking and entering, we see that the rate of reported offences per 100,000 went up and has now come down. If we look at unarmed robbery and armed robbery, we see the same thing. People can see that we are tackling crime head-on. Mr McGrady: Those figures are not ours. Mr BEATTIE: I take the interjection of the minister. These are independent figures which cannot be argued against. When we hear this nonsense from the opposition about crime, we can look at what the real figures are. One crime is one crime too many, but our strategy of being tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime is absolutely working.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Partners for Success Hon. A. M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education) (9.48 a.m.): For too long Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in our schools have performed at lower levels than non-indigenous students. This is clearly not good enough. Our government, in partnership with parents, teachers and communities, must do better for these children. I am pleased to announce today that the Partners for Success strategy, trialled in 38 schools since 2000, will be introduced in every state school from next year. All state schools will receive a Partners for Success school information kit to help them implement the first year of the three-year strategy. A copy of this kit has been distributed to members this morning and will be available on the Education Queensland web site from 10 a.m. In a first for Queensland, every state school will be required to work towards achieving specific outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. This will help to close the gap between indigenous student achievement and the achievement of all of our other state school students. Our key priorities are to improve indigenous student attendance, retention and literacy. To do this, quite frankly we need to see more students at school, more often and for longer. 16 Oct 2003 Ministerial Statement 4227

The kit identifies actions and strategies that can be used to achieve these priorities—strategies such as working with the Queensland Studies Authority to ensure greater inclusion of indigenous cultures in the syllabus, cross-cultural training for Education Queensland staff, increasing the number of indigenous employees and role models in the system, plus establishing statewide targets on core business such as literacy and numeracy. Currently, there are more than 29,000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in Queensland state schools. These children represent more than six per cent of all state school students. Some 1,100 of the almost 1,300 state schools have Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander students. This is why every school, every teacher and every staff member needs to be involved in this effort. Challenging, yet achievable, targets have been set for every priority area with the first set of targets to be attained by 2005. These are not unrealistic statewide targets. In fact, many schools are already achieving them and there are some outstanding individual examples of success. It is easy to become disheartened in this area of work, but today I am pleased to announce the first three of up to eight centres of excellence in indigenous education will be established. Each will receive $20,000 to continue with and document their innovative local practice. These three proven success stories will lead the way. They are Cherbourg State School, Badu Island State School in the Torres Strait and Cunnamulla State School. Their principals, Chris Sarra, Stephen Foster and Chris Jewell, will be the first of up to ten principals who will form the high achiever principals network. The rest of the state will benefit from their experience through school visits, hands-on assistance, online communications and learning by what they are seeing happening at the centre for excellence schools. I will be officially launching theses initiatives at 1.15 today at the Queensland Art Gallery. I look forward to meeting with and thanking the many people who have worked towards making Partners for Success a reality in these schools. All members are invited to attend.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Australian Fashion Design Awards Hon. T. A. BARTON (Waterford—ALP) (Minister for State Development) (9.52 a.m.): I would like to congratulate two outstanding Queensland companies who were honoured last night at the Australian fashion industry's night of nights. Driza-Bone and Wendy Makin Bridal Designs took out awards sponsored by the Department of State Development to honour local companies on a national stage. Driza-Bone took out the Manufacturers Award and Wendy Makin the Manufacturers Small Business Award at the prestigious Australian Fashion Design Awards here in Brisbane. This year, the event organisers divided the manufacturers' award into two categories to enable a small business to step into the limelight. Both these categories are open only to Queensland companies. These companies' success was extremely well deserved and recognised as such last night. Driza-Bone has been clothing country Australians for more than a century with its signature oilskin work coat and now it is just as well known for its smart, modern and quintessentially Australian outdoor leisure wear. It is the second time that both Driza-Bone and Wendy Makin Bridal Designs have won State Development awards. For Driza-Bone, it was the second win in three years. For Wendy Makin Bridal Designs, the result repeated the company's success in the inaugural Manufacturers Award in 1997. Another reason for celebrating was the fact that 2003 marks 10 years since Wendy opened the doors of her business in Stones Corner in 1993. Wendy Makin gowns are recognised for the quality of their design, manufacture and fit and are now sold in over 60 Australian boutiques. They are also worn by brides in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and Hong Kong. Both companies will have the opportunity to display their collection at an international fashion event. I should also note that the member for Woodridge's daughter-in-law also won a major award last night for some very spectacular clothing. As I said earlier this week, the Department of State Development is committed to supporting one of Queensland's strongest manufacturing industries, which thrives on creative ideas and continues to grow strongly. 4228 Ministerial Statement 16 Oct 2003

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Mornington Island Police Citizens Youth Club Hon. T. McGRADY (Mount Isa—ALP) (Minister for Police and Corrective Services and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Carpentaria Minerals Province) (9.54 a.m.): I rise to inform the House of an excellent initiative on Mornington Island to promote sport and recreation and to boost crime prevention. I recently officially opened the new $2 million Mornington Island Police Citizens Youth Club, which our government helped to fund with $1.4 million from Sport and Recreation Queensland and also Education Queensland. This PCYC is the first facility on the island to enable young people to participate in sport, recreation and cultural activities all year round. The facility will provide a safe social environment for young people. This is an ideal venue for sport and recreation, incorporating multipurpose courts that will support a range of activities including netball and basketball. This centre will provide young people on Mornington Island with a place for structured activities, especially during the island's long wet season from November to March when outdoor activities are limited. It is plain to see that this facility is a big step forward for the Mornington Island community and indeed some of the other areas that are close by. Obviously, I am delighted, as the local member, to see my area benefiting, but on the flip side of the coin, as Minister for Police, I strongly support the role that PCYCs play in crime prevention. It is important to give kids options so they are not bored and do not experiment with living an antisocial lifestyle. PCYCs contribute to both of these tasks. As police and prisons minister, I see plenty of young people in trouble with the law and see the devastation that is wreaked on families and young people when they end up in prison or on the wrong side of the law. This is what we do not want to see. So it is vital that we as a government and we as a community are supportive of our youth but, above all, offer them alternatives to antisocial or criminal behaviour and assistance to face life's challenges. The government realises the important role that sport and recreation plays in strengthening Queensland's communities, in particular indigenous communities. I know the local community is delighted with this new facility and I have no doubt it will benefit the people of Mornington Island for many years to come.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Lexmark Indy 300 Hon. S. D. BREDHAUER (Cook—ALP) (Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads) (9.56 a.m.): Tomorrow, construction starts on the track for one of the most important events on Queensland's tourism calendar, the Lexmark Indy 300. At 10.30 a.m. at the Nerang traffic control centre, the Department of Main Roads will release the traffic management plan for the 2003 Indy 300. This year, the event is expected to draw crowds of more than 300,000 between 23 and 26 October. This popular event obviously presents transport challenges for the Gold Coast. There are more people, more vehicles and road closures to contend with. For the past two years, the Department of Main Roads has had a close working relationship with the Indy 300 organisers. This year, the state government will again work with organisers to allow the smoothest possible flow of traffic on the Gold Coast. We will have the latest traffic management technology backed up by on-site engineers to keep an eye on the road network. Fifty cameras will monitor urban roads and motorway approaches. Two roving traffic inspectors will provide immediate reports from areas without cameras and there will be additional staff in the Nerang traffic management centre to keep the information and the traffic flowing. We will also be making sure this information is getting to the motorists who need it. There will be regular live radio crosses to the traffic management centre for traffic updates and daily television updates, variable message signs will alert drivers to the conditions ahead, traffic conditions will be posted on the Department of Main Roads and Lexmark Indy 300 web sites, and the Main Roads 13 19 40 traffic information line will provide up-to-the-minute assistance on traffic during the Indy event. While the Lexmark Indy 300 is all about speed, drivers will need to be patient and heed traffic advice. The Indy is a big event for Queensland and the Gold Coast and the state government is working to minimise traffic disruptions. 16 Oct 2003 Ministerial Statement 4229

This is not the only way the Beattie government is listening to the transport needs of the Gold Coast. Tomorrow, I will meet with the Gold Coast City Combined Chambers of Commerce—a forum that represents 12 chambers of commerce presidents—to hear their views on transport issues on the Gold Coast. I have been working closely with Labor members on the Gold Coast about issues in relation to roads, public transport, congestion and dredging. All members are playing a positive role in achieving transport improvements for their constituents and across the Gold Coast. But, as always, the Beattie government is prepared to listen, which is why I have agreed to meet with the chambers of commerce.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Drug Courts Hon. R. J. WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (9.59 a.m.): Three years ago, our government introduced an innovative program to try to break the cycle of drug related crime in our communities. The drug court marked a comprehensive shift in the way the Queensland criminal justice system dealt with drug related crime. Instead of jailing addicts who have committed crimes to feed their habit, this program aims to cure people of their addiction once and for all, and enable them to reclaim their lives—tackling the causes of crime, not just the crime itself. The drug court has received outstanding endorsement from the Australian Institute of Criminology, which found there was a marked reduction in criminal activity by drug-addicted offenders who completed the program. And there is more positive news. This week the north Queensland trial of the drug court will celebrate its first graduate—less than 12 months after the program began. This is in addition to the 70 graduates from south-east Queensland's drug court program. All of these people have been given another chance at life—another chance to embrace their families and to contribute constructively to a society free of drugs. I would just like to point out to members that a large percentage of these graduates would never have got the chance to reclaim their lives under a coalition government led by the Leader of the Opposition. Many of these people committed robberies or assaults to get money to pay for drugs. They were drug addicts. This week the Opposition Leader told us he wants all people who commit robberies or assaults to go to jail—no exceptions. Minimum mandatory sentencing, he says. Let us not think rationally about it. Let us not give judges a discretion to make sure the punishment fits the crime. Let us just act—or overreact—by jailing everyone who commits these offences. Forget innovative strategies like the drug court. Just put them in jail. It is an approach that not only denigrates our judges but also condemns many young people who are not criminals but whose lives have been taken over by drug addiction. Let me give the House two examples. A young woman was charged with armed robbery. She was single, unemployed, 19, a heroin addict and a mother of a five-year-old child. She was persuaded to help her 38-year-old boyfriend in an armed robbery. She was not a participant in any violence. The judge gave her another chance and suspended her sentence. Mr Springborg would have sent her to jail. Another person was charged with armed robbery. He was 17, unemployed and using heroin. He was a lookout for his brother in a robbery. He committed no violence himself. The judge in that case gave him another chance and placed him on an intensive correction order. Mr Springborg would have sent him to jail. These are just two examples of the difficult situations our judges confront every day, but they are examples of young people who through the drug court program get a second chance to make a start in life. Taking away a person's freedom is the most serious decision a judge can make. It should never be treated in the simplistic fashion sought by the Leader of the Opposition. Let us face it: the Leader of the Opposition, contrary probably to his own personal beliefs, is determined to spark a law and order auction in the lead-up to the state election. Bereft of any decent social policies, bereft of any ideas when it comes to practical and rational sentencing reform, the Springborg law and order policy is not tough on crime; it is simply short on ideas.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Billie Watts; Dugongs Hon. D. M. WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (Minister for Environment) (10.03 a.m.): I rise to pay tribute to a remarkable woman and tireless worker for the environment, especially Fraser Island. 4230 Ministerial Statement 16 Oct 2003

Billie Watts was known to many in this House through her involvement in the Fraser Island Defenders Organisation—an organisation whose efforts contributed to the cessation of sandmining and logging and subsequently to World Heritage listing. Billie spent the early part of her life on Fraser Island. Her father was a surveyor with the forestry department. Lake Allom was named after him in recognition of his work. Those early years left a lasting impression on Billie and she went on to be a significant driving force in the preservation of this magnificent island. Billie Watts was a woman of great vision, boundless energy and amazing tenacity. In many ways she was a long way ahead of her time and took up issues with great passion. For many years she was active in the Queensland Conservation Council, the campaign against nuclear power, the peace movement, the women's movement, the Australian Labor Party and advancing Aboriginal rights and reconciliation. Billie had the honour of being granted life membership of the ALP—an honour she did not seek, as she was not the sort of person who did things for accolades, but an honour that she richly deserved and which gave her great pride. Like many other members of our community, Billie was happy to work behind the scenes, but many of the things that she worked for would simply not have been possible without her tenacity, toil and vision. It was with great sadness that we learned of her passing. But, as anyone who was touched by her during her long and active life would agree, that sadness is offset by knowing that she truly did leave a lasting and worthy legacy. I would like to briefly update the House on the dugong court case. Yesterday in The Cleveland Magistrate's Court fines of $600 and $400 were handed down to four people convicted under the Nature Conservation Act for unlawfully killing a protected marine animal. Mr Schwarten: So they should. It should have been more. Mr WELLS: I thank the minister. This follows the laying of charges by the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service in May last year, when it was reported that a dugong had been hunted and killed in Moreton Bay. It was argued by some that the defendants were exercising native title rights when this occurred. The court did not think so. None of those convicted yesterday were native title holders or claimants in Moreton Bay and did not have a right to hunt in the area. The court's decision also confirms that these people did not ask for and could not have obtained permission from the Quandamooka people—the traditional owners of Moreton Bay—to take the dugong. Let me go further. There is no implied right in the Constitution to hunt a species to extinction, and there is no implied right in the Constitution to inflict cruelty on an animal. The courts have not gone this far yet, but some day they will. This successful prosecution sends a clear message to the community that we will not tolerate the unlawful killing of protected animals and the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service will pursue anyone who breaks the law.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Public Works and Housing, Smart Initiatives Hon. R. E. SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing) (10.06 a.m.): The departments of Public Works and Housing are putting some real runs on the board when it comes to working smarter for Queenslanders. Last week I launched a virtual tour of our Research House in Rockhampton that is bringing smart housing design and innovation to all Queenslanders—and, in fact, to anyone anywhere in the world with access to the Internet. The web based tour showcases the research being undertaken in what is Australia's first house to test and demonstrate new and innovative technologies, building practices and products. It shows the community and industry how to integrate smart housing principles into a regular home through good, commonsense design and conscious product selection. Seventy-six sensors in the house are testing the effectiveness of its design, materials and products, measuring water and energy use and thermal issues. These results are complemented by qualitative feedback from the family of five who have now been living in the house for a year. In the first summer of the research period, Research House used 460 litres of water per day less than the average Rockhampton household, and in this same period the solar panels contributed 726 kilowatt hours back to the main grid, saving the family $90 on their electricity bill. For the 2002-03 summer quarter, the Quantum heat pump hot- water system used 507 kilowatt hours of electricity less than the family's hot-water system at their previous home—a saving of more than 40 per cent. 16 Oct 2003 Ministerial Statement 4231

In another smart move, I was delighted last week to sign a new partnership agreement with the Royal Australian Institute of Architects—RAIA—to promote smart and sustainable housing design and construction. The RAIA will provide links to relevant partners and projects to advance the uptake of smart housing and will promote the government's smart housing initiative to its Queensland membership as well as architecture schools in Queensland tertiary institutions. The RAIA will reflect the values of smart housing in its Queensland chapter's annual awards and encourage its subsidiary company, Archicentre Ltd, a building advisory service, to offer smart housing design advice to the public as a service and have a register of smart housing professionals available at its Queensland branches. Another smart achievement for Queensland was the recent awarding of this country's first five-star energy rating for a commercial office building in William McCormack Place in Cairns built by the Department of Public Works. William McCormack Place was officially opened by the Premier last September, and this rating makes it the most energy efficient commercial office building in the nation. Ms Boyle interjected. Mr SCHWARTEN: I thank the member for Cairns for her interjection. The rating, awarded under the Australian Greenhouse Building Rating Scheme, was certified by Queensland's Environmental Protection Agency—I thank the minister for his contribution—and ratified by the Sydney based Sustainable Energy Development Authority. I am delighted that this Department of Public Works constructed building has pipped other buildings in the southern states for this illustrious title. The building combines innovative, energy-efficient design and construction technologies, particularly in the airconditioning systems. The energy costs per square metre for the building are nearly 40 per cent lower than those for similar north Queensland government office buildings, and this equates to savings of almost 360 tonnes of greenhouse gases annually. The design of the airconditioning will also result in significant maintenance and capital cost savings over the life of the building. The Beattie government is taking a leading role in the protection of the environment, and I congratulate the Cairns community and businesses on their contributions to this fine achievement.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Aboriginal Councils Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services and Minister for Seniors) (10.10 a.m.): Last week in this House I detailed the government's commitment to reforming the system of Aboriginal councils, making them much more transparent and accountable. I also gave a commitment to boost the support for councils to build their governance capacity. Today I am announcing the first step—an increase in funding to assist Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities build effective and accountable councils. This financial year we are providing $1.9 million under the financial accountability improvement program—up $200,000 on last year. This program provides direct funding, services and training to 32 indigenous councils, not just those that will make the transition to the status of shire councils. Training is a major focus of the funding boost. Nine professional training providers have been chosen to deliver an upgraded councillor training program. They are to be located throughout the state. An innovative leadership training stream has been added to the program, with units focusing on personal development and community accountability. Intensive training sessions will be offered to all Aboriginal and Island councillors in the lead-up to the March local government elections, with ongoing follow-up training available after the elections. The training program will cost $248,000 this year, with councils also offered direct funding to purchase internal audit services, upgrade computers or purchase other equipment and services to improve their financial accountability. These initiatives are an important step in helping councils improve their governance arrangements. Over the next four years DATSIP will introduce a wide range of measures to ensure councils in Aboriginal communities are equipped to meet the same standards as any other local government in Queensland. Those standards are expected by residents like Des Bowen, a former chairman of the Hope Vale Community Council. He issued a media release last week stating that Aboriginal people across Cape York Peninsula were disgusted with the behaviour of their councils and longed to make them accountable. The practical support from initiatives such as the financial 4232 Ministerial Statement 16 Oct 2003 accountability improvement program will give Aboriginal councils the tools they need to exercise effective and accountable community governance. The future looks bright for many councils. We have announced proposed new laws. We are supporting councils with dedicated operational improvement strategies and we are now increasing funding and enhancing councillor training opportunities.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Australian Broadcasting Corporation Hon. H. PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Minister for Primary Industries and Rural Communities) (10.13 a.m.): Mr Speaker— Mr LINGARD: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER: A point of order. Mr PALASZCZUK: Those sworn in to the so-called— Mr SPEAKER: Order! We have a point of order. Mr PALASZCZUK:—new-look Howard ministry last week must promise to— Mr SPEAKER: Order! We have a point of order. Mr LINGARD: As to standing order 107, I move— That the minister be not heard. Mr PALASZCZUK: Mr Speaker, am I being gagged? Mr SPEAKER: You are indeed. I am going to put the motion. Question—That the minister be not further heard—put; and the House divided— AYES, 19—Copeland, E. Cunningham, C. Foley, Hobbs, Hopper, Horan, Johnson, Lee Long, Lingard, Malone, Pratt, Quinn, E. Roberts, Rowell, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg. Tellers: Lester, Watson NOES, 61—Attwood, Barry, Barton, Beattie, Bell, Bligh, Boyle, Bredhauer, Briskey, Choi, L. Clark, Croft, Cummins, J. Cunningham, Edmond, Fenlon, Fouras, Hayward, Jarratt, Keech, Lavarch, Lee, Livingstone, Lucas, Mackenroth, Male, McGrady, Mickel, Miller, Molloy, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nolan, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Phillips, Pitt, Poole, Purcell, Reilly, Reynolds, N. Roberts, Robertson, Rodgers, Rose, Schwarten, C. Scott, D. Scott, Shine, Smith, Spence, Stone, Strong, Struthers, C. Sullivan, Welford, Wells, Wilson. Tellers: T. Sullivan, Reeves Resolved in the negative. Mr PALASZCZUK: Thank you, honourable members. Thank you for your vote of confidence, government members. Government members: Hear, hear! Mr PALASZCZUK: One of those issues is the ABC's request for additional funding to establish a dedicated TV news service in north Queensland and extend the broadcast reach of Triple J and Radio National into regional and rural communities. This proposal for the new TV service came from the ABC following the decision by Southern Cross Broadcasting in 2001 to close its bureaux in Cairns and Townsville. There can be no doubt that north Queensland had been disadvantaged with reduced local TV news following the Southern Cross Broadcasting closures. The ABC sought to fill that void in local TV news coverage for 400,000 residents by basing a TV news service in Townsville with a footprint from Mossman in the north, Atherton to the west and Bowen to the south. I would urge the new Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Services, De-Anne Kelly, to show an interest and ensure that the ABC proposal is reconsidered. In terms of ABC's Triple J and News Radio services, the ABC had proposed an extension of News Radio to all Australian communities with a population of more than 10,000. Currently, News Radio, which broadcasts federal parliament, is heard only in south-east Queensland. In terms of Triple J, the ABC had proposed extending the Triple J radio coverage to Emerald and Gympie. As we all know, the former federal Communications Minister, Richard Alston, held a vendetta against the ABC. Not only did he ensure the ABC funding requests were denied he also questioned the impartiality of the national broadcaster. He has now gone. We now have a new Communications Minister in Darryl Williams. I believe the new minister should re-examine the ABC funding issues. The proposals for a dedicated TV service in north Queensland and taking Triple J and News Radio to more rural and regional communities warrant reconsideration from the federal government. We want to see a new approach from the new minister. I certainly hope that this is not a case of B1 and B2 and that Williams is simply a carbon copy of Alston. The ABC and its 16 Oct 2003 Ministerial Statement 4233 audience, particularly in rural Australia, deserve a better reception from the federal government, and this new minister should ensure that that happens. Finally, this morning I picked up a copy of the Country Life which says 'Nats back Telstra sale'. It states that a handful of National Party members oppose the privatisation of Telstra. One person was Miss Hulls from New South Wales. I did not see the Leader of the Opposition's name mentioned. He is missing in action! Where does he stand with policy in relation to the full sale of Telstra? Let the people of Queensland know.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Native Title Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines) (10.25 a.m.): Mr Speaker— Interruption. PRIVILEGE Business of the House Hon. K. R. LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (10.25 a.m.): I rise on a matter of privilege. No-one else except the ministers are allowed to speak in this first hour of parliament. Therefore, I move under standing order 107— That the minister be not further heard. Mr SPEAKER: The question is that that motion be agreed to. As many of that opinion say 'aye', to the contrary 'no', I think the noes have it. An opposition member: Divide!

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Native Title Resumed. Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines) (10.25 a.m.): Mr Speaker— An opposition member: Divide! Mr ROBERTSON: On Tuesday the full Federal Court handed down a decision that provides a level— Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: No, you missed the call. He was speaking before— Mr ROBERTSON:—of certainty to native title holders, government agencies— Mr SPEAKER: No, you missed the call, I am sorry. Mr ROBERTSON:—and indigenous councils of deeds of grant in trust—DOGIT— communities. Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: You did not call 'divide'. You called it after the minister had commenced. Mr LINGARD: Under standing order 107, I move— That the minister be not further heard. Mr SPEAKER: Are you moving it again now? Mr ROBERTSON: The member cannot move the same motion again. Mr LINGARD: It is a different point of order. Mr ROBERTSON: What an incredible waste of taxpayers' money. Mr SPEAKER: I call the minister. Mr ROBERTSON: What an incredible waste of taxpayers' money. Mr SPEAKER: That is out of order. I call the minister. 4234 Questions Without Notice 16 Oct 2003

Mr ROBERTSON: The native title holders and the Queensland government sought clarification from the full Federal Court on the very complex provisions of the Commonwealth's Native Title Act 1993 dealing with public works and the extinguishment of native title. These matters arose out of negotiations last September towards consent determinations of native title over five DOGIT island communities in the Torres Strait. The full Federal Court decided that the Commonwealth Native Title Act has the effect that any public works constructed on DOGIT communities prior to the High Court's Wik decision on 23 December 1996 to extinguish native title over the area covered by those public works. This decision reflects the submissions that the state made to the court on the operation of the Native Title Act. As part of the decision, the full Federal Court also decided that public works constructed after 23 December 1996 on DOGIT communities do not extinguish native title. This provides a basis of certainty for the parties to give effect to the Beattie government's stated position of applying the non-extinguishment principle to public works, at least for the post-Wik period, on DOGIT communities wherever possible. His Honour Chief Justice Black referred to this matter as a 'very difficult case' involving 'very complex provisions' of the Native Title Act. As such, the state government will need to fully assess the ramifications of the court's decision and its impact on the form that these Torres Strait consent determinations now must take. Most importantly, however, my department and the TSRA will continue to maintain a positive dialogue on these matters. The court decision now allows us to agree upon a simple and certain system that balances the rights of Torres Strait islanders with the provision of much-needed infrastructure. I plan to discuss with Mr Waia at the earliest opportunity options that will allow the state and the TSRA to move forward and finalise the native title consent determinations over the five community islands.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION Question to the Treasurer Mr QUINN (Robina—Lib) (10.28 a.m.), by leave: In question time yesterday in asking a question of the Treasurer I stated that he had been contacted by the New South Wales Treasurer. That was wrong. The contact occurred at senior officer level, and I apologise to the House for any misleading that may have occurred.

TRAVELSAFE COMMITTEE Report Mr PEARCE (Fitzroy—ALP) (10.29 a.m.): I lay upon the table the Travelsafe Committee's annual report for 2002-03. The Travelsafe Committee was appointed by the House to monitor, investigate and report on all aspects of road safety and public transport in Queensland. This annual report gives a summary of our inquiries and other activities over the past year to discharge these responsibilities. As chairman, I would like to thank the committee members and staff for their contribution and support over the year. I commend the report to the House.

MEMBERS' ETHICS AND PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE Report Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (10.29 a.m.): I lay upon the table of the House report No. 59 of the Members' Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee titled Report on a citizen's right of reply No. 14. I commend the report and the committee's recommendations to the House.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Department of Families Employee, Arrest on Child Pornography Offences Mr SPRINGBORG (10.30 a.m.): My question without notice is to the Minister for Families. When did the minister first become aware that a Families Department employee had been arrested for the possession of material depicting child pornography? Ms SPENCE: I believe that I became aware of that yesterday. I would like to state that this person, it should be noted, was a temporary employee. The material was allegedly found on his home computer. There is an ongoing police investigation. I am told that this man has not even 16 Oct 2003 Questions Without Notice 4235 been to court yet, where he will be charged. I cannot comment further because I do not want to prejudice that case, but I can say that criminal history checking had been carried out on this man and that it indicated that there was nothing in his history to concern the department. Department of Families Employee, Arrest on Child Pornography Offences Mr SPRINGBORG: My question without notice is to the honourable Premier. Is it true that the Premier was rung on Tuesday evening by the Police Commissioner informing him of the arrest of this departmental officer in question? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for his question. No, it is not true.

Engagement with Asia Ms STRUTHERS: I have a question for the Premier. The Smart State's position on the doorstep of the Asia Pacific is one of the key selling points the Premier uses in his overseas trade missions. What steps are we taking to strengthen our relationship with this region? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for her question. There are a number of things. Firstly, I would like to congratulate Griffith University on an initiative that will aid the fight against infectious diseases in China. Griffith University has signed an agreement with the China Centre for Disease Control and Prevention which will enable Chinese students to learn about infectious disease control and prevention from some of the Smart State's finest experts. As the SARS outbreak has shown, disease prevention and control poses enormous challenges. SARS was a sobering lesson in how a failure to control an epidemic in its early stages can claim lives around the world and disrupt international travel and commerce. From February next year 80 Chinese students a year will study at Griffith University in Brisbane. Griffith University Associate Professor in the School of Public Health, Cordia Chu, will teach at Peking University for one month each semester. This agreement highlights the Smart State's place at the cutting edge of research and development and will enhance Queensland's reputation in the export education sector. In addition to that, closer engagement with the Asia-Pacific region is essential to the expansion of our export industries and the development of the Smart State. Next week, the Lord Mayor, Tim Quinn, and I will welcome delegates from 60 cities to Brisbane for the 2003 Asia Pacific Cities Summit. Honourable members may recall that the summit was due to be held in April this year but was postponed because of the SARS epidemic, so it is great to see it finally going ahead. Mr Speaker, as you know, the government has put money in to support it. The summit offers the opportunity to showcase the Smart State's industries and attractions to delegates. That is particularly important considering that 11 of the world's 15 largest cities are in Asia and all of them will be represented at the summit. This year's theme is Emerging Futures of the City. I am certain that one of the issues bound to be discussed is the greater concern we have for the environment in which we work, play and, increasingly, live. Five major topics have been developed to facilitate discussion and the exchange of ideas. They are transforming urban sprawl, greening our cities, creating healthy communities, global-local governance, and alternative futures—all of which I know the member is interested in. Throughout the Asia Pacific, as in the rest of the world, there is a trend towards living in the heart of our cities again. I will be part of the opening ceremony on Monday morning and on Monday night Tim Quinn and I will be hosting a function. I will be telling delegates that it cannot continue, if we do not all work together to clean up our cities. We have impoverished our cities in the past by neglecting or abusing their natural attractions, such as waterways, open spaces and bushland. Our city buildings, too, have to become much smarter than they have been in the past. They must, of course, incorporate 21st century technology—particularly communications—but now we are also looking at smart ways of cutting down waste and pollution. I am sure that this conference will shed light on many matters of mutual concern and at least suggest solutions to some important issues. In 1996, Brisbane was the venue for the first of these meetings. I thank the Lord Mayor for participating jointly with us.

Department of Families Employee, Arrest on Child Pornography Offences Mr SEENEY: My question without notice is to the Premier. Further to the question that was asked by the Leader of the Opposition, can the Premier inform this parliament when he was first 4236 Questions Without Notice 16 Oct 2003 made aware of the arrest of a Family Services employee for child pornography offences and by whom was he made aware? Mr BEATTIE: Let me be very clear. I was asked a question by the Leader of the Opposition about whether I had had a conversation with the Police Commissioner on Tuesday night. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Hang on. The answer is, no, I have not had any discussions with the Police Commissioner this week. Are we really clear about that? Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I know the member finds it difficult to restrain himself, but I will actually answer the question if he just for once stops being rude. I want to be really clear about this, because members opposite are the masters of misrepresentation and deception and I am not going to have my words misrepresented by some of the most dishonest people who have ever sat in this parliament. Let me finish what I am about to say. Have I had a conversation with the Police Commissioner this week? The answer is, no, I have not. That is the first thing. The second thing is that, to the best of my recollection on all these matters, my office was advised yesterday sometime—and yesterday, as members may be aware, was Wednesday. I was advised yesterday. I became aware of this yesterday. I get a whole string of briefs that flow through my office. I get advice to my office all the time. I was advised— Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Hang on, it is easy to be the village idiot. If the member wants to be a member of parliament I will give a serious, sensible answer. I was advised yesterday—to the best of my recollection, it was by a staff member. Was it by a member of the Police Service? The answer is no. My staff member told me. Now, whether there was some advice that came from the Department of Families or an advice from another area, including the police, I do not recall. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Listen, my office receives briefings regularly, and I am advised by my staff. I do not read every item that comes into my office from other departments. I have staff who read those. I believe that, to the best of my knowledge, I was in fact advised by the Minister for Families' staff—by her office. That is what I think was the case. I am happy to check and come back in here. But was I advised by the Police Commissioner? No, I was not. When did I become aware of it? Yesterday afternoon! You have got to say to yourself, 'What is the big deal about all this?' The fact of the matter is that there was— Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Hang on, let us deal with this. What is the big deal about when we were notified? When we found out, the department took action and he was sacked. Frankly, that is the important thing: we became aware of it yesterday and he was sacked. Let me make it clear: my government has a policy that any public servant or anyone who works for this government, whether they are temporary, which is the case here or permanent, and who accesses pornography is sacked. In the time that I have been Premier a number of public servants have been sacked for accessing pornography on the Net. Let me make it clear today that any public servant or any staffer who works for this government and who accesses pornography on a public computer or accesses it on the web will be sacked. Not only that, we have in place a process to check every computer. As the minister indicated, we have a system that regularly checks every computer. Anyone who accesses pornography through a government computer will be sacked, and there will be no ifs or buts about it; they will be out the door. I make no apology for that. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the member for Bulimba, could I welcome to the public gallery students and teachers of Burleigh Heads State School in the electorate of Burleigh. Interruption.

PRIVILEGE Department of Families Employee, Arrest on Child Pornography Offences Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (10.40 a.m.): Mr Speaker, I rise on a matter of privilege. Let me complete that advice so that there is no misunderstanding in this House and no misrepresentation. I have been advised by my staff that a Deputy Director-General of the Premier's Department advised my office yesterday of the incident and also advised my office yesterday that the person would be sacked. End of story. 16 Oct 2003 Questions Without Notice 4237

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Resumed from p. 4236. Department of Families; Child Abuse Mr PURCELL: My question is directed to the Premier. I refer to the fact that for two and a half years the government of which the member for Southern Downs was a member failed to tackle the need for greater funding and reform in the Families Department. I also refer to the fact that this government has massively increased funding to this area and made major reforms as well as triggered the Crime and Misconduct Commission investigation into foster care and child abuse. Will this government maintain this commitment to child protection by implementing the recommendations of the commission of inquiry? Mr BEATTIE: I want to be very clear about the government's response to the CMC inquiry, which we helped establish by referring matters there. I referred them there after consultation with Judy Spence and Anna Bligh and after we had released material publicly. I want to make it clear that we have more than doubled the child protection budget and are now spending more than $171 million this year on child protection. The number of front-line child protection workers has almost doubled, to 499. We are spending an additional $188 million over four years from 2002-03. We are spending an additional $7.24 million to support foster-carers through new staff to coordinate services and information for carers and undertake recruitment and training plus short-term respite services. We are increasing payments to foster-carers and streamlining foster payment systems. We are investing an additional $12 million over four years in IT. We have a new 10-person unit to review and assess decisions made at local office level. We are appointing 25 new SCAN coordinators. We instituted an independent audit system to assess all foster-carers. We established a hotline to receive complaints. We have provided an extra $1 million each year, beginning with $700,000 for the remainder of 2003-04, for training and development, on top of the $3.8 million set aside for staff training this financial year. There were 40 new permanent child protection workers announced last month. The latest annual intake of family services officers will be the first to receive six weeks of concentrated training before they start work. I say to the member for Bulimba that we are investing more money in the Department of Families than has been invested at any time in the history of this state, both in money terms and in real terms. We are investing that money to ensure a better outcome for children. Let me deal with the second part of the question, which related to what we will do with the recommendations. I believe that I have made it clear to everyone that my government is intent on implementing reforms that will improve protection of children. After two and a half years of inaction by the previous mob, we have decided to fix these things. I recently tabled more than 90 statements which outlined some of the improvements we have made since June 1998. As I said yesterday, I was instrumental, along with the minister, in instigating the Crime and Misconduct Commission inquiry. Unlike the opposition, I am giving the independent inquiry my full support. I and my government intend to implement all of the recommendations of the inquiry that prove to be sensible as soon as possible. I would like to be in a position to implement all of them. As I made it clear last week, especially to the media, I cannot take a lock, stock and barrel approach to implementing each and every recommendation in its entirety. For instance, further research might reveal disadvantages to a recommendation, or unforeseen consequences to a recommendation might involve more harm than good to children. Those matters will have to go to cabinet. When I say that I will implement the recommendations, I will do so with those minor provisos.

Department of Families Employee, Arrest on Child Pornography Offences Mr HORAN: I refer the Minister for Families to the arrest of a Families Department employee on child pornography charges. Has the minister advised the CMC inquiry of this latest incident in her department? Will she be asking the CMC to widen its inquiry to ensure that there are no more paedophiles in her department? Ms SPENCE: I made a statement about this man earlier. I am not going to prejudice the police inquiry or a court case by making further statements. The CMC obviously will be well aware of this case and it is up to it to determine whether it is appropriate for it to undertake an investigation. 4238 Questions Without Notice 16 Oct 2003

University Funding Ms KEECH: My question is directed to the Minister for Industrial Relations. An incident having occurred in the gallery— Mr SPEAKER: Order! Ms KEECH: I refer the Minister for Industrial Relations to the federal government's current attempts to tie university funding to confrontationalist industrial relations policies. What effect will this have in Queensland? Mr NUTTALL: The federal government is determined to bring in its unacceptable industrial relations policies at any cost. Of the 22 pieces of industrial relations legislation brought to parliament by the federal government in this term, two-thirds have failed to become law. I think that speaks volumes about the quality of the Howard government's industrial relations reforms. The federal government has now introduced yet another piece of legislation—this time a policy to tie funding for universities to industrial policies that will significantly disadvantage Queensland workers. Put simply, for universities to receive funding from the federal government from now on they must abandon all previous collective agreements and awards that operate in the workplace and replace them with the federal government's Australian workplace agreements, better known as AWAs. Do members know how many workers in this state currently work under Queensland workplace agreements? It is 0.02 per cent. The number of workers across Australia who choose to work under workplace agreements is approximately two per cent. ABS figures from May show that the minority of workers in the education industry on individual AWAs or contracts receive an average weekly wage of $632. The majority of education workers under collective agreements, which this government supports, receive $752 a week. That is more than $120 a week extra. Eighty-three per cent of Australia's education workers are at this moment working under collective agreements. These proposals spell disaster for the majority of our workers in education, but it gets worse. The federal government's proposal will not allow universities to limit casual employment. That means that job security will be lost. Let us forget about the advancement for workers regarding redundancy pay. Under the Howard government rules, sacking workers without entitlements will be allowed if it can be linked to business needs and/or improved productivity. As well, under the new proposal workers are not to be represented by unions. This is not just about the education industry. These are the same militant tactics that the federal government is applying to the building and construction industry, that is, 'agree to play by our outlandish rules or there will be no funding'. Queensland workers have made it very clear that individual agreements do not work. The federal opposition, the Democrats, the Greens and the trade union movement have all agreed that the federal government's industrial policies do not work. The irony is that the Howard government's twenty-third piece of IR legislation looks set to be rejected yet as well.

Department of Families; Child Abuse Mr COPELAND: My question is directed to the Minister for Families. A Public Sector Union organiser yesterday told the CMC inquiry that the minister was warned 12 months ago that university students on work experience were conducting unsupervised assessments of suspected child abuse victims. The minister then told the media that she was unaware this was happening. Which is it? Did the PSU organiser lie to the inquiry or did the minister mislead the media? Ms SPENCE: I met with the QPSU for several hours last Friday and it did not raise this issue with me. I would be very concerned if university students who were doing placements with the Families Department were doing unsupervised or inappropriate work. As I said, the QPSU met with me for two hours on Friday. We discussed many issues. They certainly did not bring that one up. Mr Copeland: They said they brought it up 12 months ago. Ms SPENCE: The department is now checking each of our individual area offices to determine whether this is in fact the case. At this point, not every officer has been able to respond, but at this point all indications are that students are not doing unsupervised work in the Families Department. I will make sure that we get a full response by the end of the day and I will be pleased to provide that information to the opposition. 16 Oct 2003 Questions Without Notice 4239

Salinity Mr RODGERS: My question is to the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines. Can the minister inform the House how much money to date the government has allocated to the war against salinity in Queensland? Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the honourable member for the question and acknowledge his ongoing interest in issues pertaining to salinity, particularly in the Burdekin area which he represents so well. To date, the Queensland and Commonwealth governments have jointly allocated over $46.5 million for National Action Plan on Salinity and Water Quality activities throughout the states. This includes an additional $5 million in priority action plan funding that I and my Commonwealth colleagues announced recently. Queensland was the first state to sign up to the National Action Plan on Salinity and Water Quality to jointly spend $162 million in Queensland on projects to combat emerging salinity and improving water quality. The Beattie government has been working hard in collaboration with regional communities, local government and industry stakeholders to prevent, stabilise, or reverse dryland salinity and improve water quality in Queensland. To date, progress has been very good. Salinity hazard mapping in Queensland's four priority NAP regions has now been completed. Regional natural resource management groups are in place and these groups are well advanced in the development of strategies to deal with salinity and water quality issues at a local level. The government is also maintaining a steady flow of funds to the regions to ensure that these groups are getting on with the job. The additional $5 million in priority action plan funding that I announced a few days ago is a good example. The priority action plans are time-critical, vital steps towards achieving salinity and water quality targeted outcomes in local areas during the 12 months prior to accreditation of regional natural resource management plans. This new funding will go to the Burdekin Dry Tropics Board—some $275,200; the Condamine Alliance, $1.625 million; the Burnett Mary Regional NRM group, $1.741 million; and the South East Queensland Western Catchment Group, $1.4 million. Queensland is making such good progress in combating salinity that our efforts were showcased recently at a major national salinity conference held in Yeppoon. The ninth Productive Use and Rehabilitation of Saline Land conference provided positive examples of government, industry and community working together to provide solutions to the degradation threatened by salinity. More than 200 delegates from throughout Australia attended the conference, which showcased the science behind dryland salinity and practical ways of remediation and profiting from the problem. Queensland is in a unique position. It has the opportunity over coming decades to stop the spread of salinity, which is a major problem in other states. We also have the chance to learn from what other states have done to manage salinity and use that information to put in place here best practice land and water management systems to maintain and improve healthy landscapes. We must all recognise that salinity poses a clear and present danger to all Queensland communities. That is why the Beattie government is taking all necessary steps to tackle this emerging threat head-on before it becomes a problem of the scale that we see in the southern states.

Biodegradable Plastic Bags Mrs PRATT: My question is to the Minister for Environment. On 23 May 2003 all state and federal environment ministers met to find a solution to Australia's current ecological disaster resulting from the overuse of oil based plastic bags. The production of biodegradable sugar- derived plastic bags have been successfully used in many countries, including America and Italy. Five hundred thousand sugar plastic cups were successfully used during the Winter Olympics at Salt Lake City, and I ask the minister: has any consideration been given to supporting the production of sugar based plastics in Queensland? Mr WELLS: I thank the honourable member for a very insightful question. Queensland is, in fact, in the lead in respect of this matter. On 22 or 23 December the environment ministers around Australia first met to discuss this issue and there have been meetings subsequently. The process is going on very nicely. The end result of that is that we have given the industry five years to phase out the non-biodegradable plastic bags that are being used in supermarkets. 4240 Questions Without Notice 16 Oct 2003

At the meeting in December, I indicated to environment ministers around the country that we had in Queensland biodegradable plastic bags that were being used for fishing bait. One of the problems with the biodegradable bags that are available overseas is that they biodegrade too fast so that when people put them in contact with water—say they got the ice-cream out of the refrigerator and put them in the bag—the bag would then start to biodegrade by the time they got home. This was one of the problems in the UK supermarkets. But this is obviously not a problem with Queensland technology. In the Smart State we have biodegradable plastic that is capable of biodegrading when it is wanted to rather than at other times. I indicated this to the ministers in December. The federal minister said to me, 'Dean, we do not doubt you at all, but we do not have this technology, nor do we have an Australian standard. Let us work on an Australian standard.' I have to say that the federal Minister for Environment was right. We need to work on an Australian standard. Perhaps Queensland's desire—the desire that I expressed—that we should get rid of these bags within three years and immediately substitute them with biodegradable technology was too high an aspiration. So we are going with the rest of the Commonwealth of Australia: five years for them to phase out that non- biodegradable technology. We would like to see it replaced with biodegradable plastic bags. Mrs Pratt: The sugar industry? Mr Palaszczuk: The member for Nanango should support our legislation. Mr WELLS: I thank the member for Nanango. As the Minister for Primary Industries says, I urge her to support the government's moves to go down this track. There is enormous potential for the Queensland sugar industry, enormous potential for Queensland's agricultural industry, because the biodegradable plastic that is available in Queensland is a commodity that is made out of Queensland agricultural products. Biodegradable plastic changes everything. It changes the perspective for agricultural industries in Queensland. Here in the Smart State, we are leading the charge. We are leading Australia. It is in Queensland where the initiatives in developing biodegradable plastic are taking place. I expect that where the honourable member who is on his feet now comes from is going to be the site of the first major endeavour in the development of non-biodegradable plastic bags. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the member for Kawana, could I welcome a second group of students from the Burleigh Heads State School in the electorate of Burleigh.

Mooloolah River Mr CUMMINS: My question is to the Minister for Transport and Minister for Main Roads. I refer to the sand that has been known from time to time to build up at the mouth of the Mooloolah River. Could the minister advise the House of the current situation of the Mooloolah River mouth and the sandbar? Mr Robertson interjected. Mr BREDHAUER: I thank the honourable member for the question. Tempted though I may be, I will not take the suggestion of the Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines. I am happy to advise the member for Kawana that the dredging of the Mooloolah River mouth has now been completed. The dredge moved away on Tuesday afternoon. This has been a difficult issue for the people of Mooloolaba. I appreciate the patience that many of the people have shown and, more particularly, I appreciate the very constructive and cooperative way in which the member for Kawana has conducted himself in his representations of his students and the recreational boat users who use Mooloolaba boat harbour and, indeed, commercial users of the Mooloolaba boat harbour. The sand build-up at the mouth of the Mooloolah River has, as the honourable member said in his question, occurred from time to time. Generally speaking, it corrects itself through the natural processes of climate. It generally builds up in particular wind and weather conditions. When there are rough seas, there will be deposits of sand placed there in the mouth of the Mooloolah River. Generally, in the right weather conditions, it will dissipate. What we have been doing throughout the course of this year since March when the build-up of sand was first detected is Maritime Safety Queensland has been regularly monitoring the availability of safe navigable access to Mooloolaba boat harbour, and at all times safe navigable access has been maintained. We have had to change the navigation aids which mark the approaches to the channel and those kinds of things, and put out notices to mariners to advise 16 Oct 2003 Questions Without Notice 4241 them of changing conditions, but about two months ago MSQ advised me that it was concerned that the natural processes were not dissipating the size of the sand build-up and that at some stage in the future we might get to the point where that navigable access would not be available. As soon as that advice was received, and following representations from the member for Kawana, I made the decision that we would undertake dredging there. I do issue the note of caution that on previous occasions no sooner had the dredging been completed when the next rough weather had led to the build-up of the deposit. So we will continue to monitor that and make sure safe navigable access is maintained there. McQuaid Marine from the Gold Coast were the people who did the dredging. It took eight days. We shifted 16,000 cubic metres of sand to an offshore disposal site—about 400 metres offshore—that was approved by the EPA. Because of the sand that was removed, we have three metres of navigable depth at lowest astronomical tide. Once again, I thank the honourable member for Kawana for his support through that process.

Department of Families; Child Abuse Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: My question is directed to the Minister for Families. Investigations continue into the Department of Families' handling of the safety of children in its care. Can the minister clarify what level of concern has been raised over time by the official visitors or by any person appointed by the chief executive officer for the review of child placements? Ms SPENCE: In terms of official visitors, that is done by the Children's Commissioner to the institutions that we have in this state. The Children's Commissioner reports on that regularly to the Department of Families. The whole point of the official visitor program is that they go around and talk to the children and talk to the people running those institutions—let us not call them institutions; they are residentials, and we do not have many in this state. But they do go around to those organisations. If they have any concerns, they report back to the Department of Families. We are the funding body of those residentials, and those concerns are addressed immediately. I believe that the Children's Commissioner reports on this in her annual report. There are no secrets; there is no cover-up. I understand it is working very well. One of the interesting things about the debate being had this week—and, let us face it, the CMC is hearing a lot of different philosophies and views expounded from a lot of different people on how to improve our child protection system—is that some people think it would be good to extend the official visitor program to all the children in foster care. We have heard that this week. Other people do not think that is necessarily going to improve the system, and we have very valid arguments for both sides of those cases by people who are professionals in the field. I have been saying all week that I think the CMC inquiry is very useful. It is giving professionals the opportunity to share with us their views on how to improve the system. I have been pleased at the way those views have been aired for the most part. Occasionally we are getting some statistics and figures thrown around that we would dispute or we would not necessarily agree are accurate. The Department of Families will have the opportunity at the end of the inquiry of reporting back and giving its views on the accuracy of some of the information that is being given during the course of the inquiry. Interruption.

PRIVILEGE Answer to Question Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (11.03 a.m.): I rise on a matter of privilege. I advise the House that the Police Commissioner's office has been contacted by my staff. The Police Commissioner's office has advised that neither the commissioner nor his office has had any contact with the Premier or his office on this matter this week. The Premier's office was first advised on this matter by a Deputy Director-General of Premier and Cabinet yesterday morning, and my department in turn was advised by the Department of Families. Yesterday evening the Department of Families issued a statement saying that it cancelled the contract of a temporary employee who has been accused of possessing material depicting child pornography. It goes on to say that his employment was terminated, he is to be paid out, 4242 Questions Without Notice 16 Oct 2003 and talks about these matters going before the court. I repeat what I said before: anyone who works for my government who accesses pornography will be sacked. There will be no questions asked; they will be sacked.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Resumed from p. 4241. Ethanol Trial, Cairns Ms BOYLE: My question is directed to the Minister for Environment, and I ask: can he outline to the House how the Caltex trial of E10 unleaded petrol is progressing in Cairns? Mr WELLS: It is very fortuitous that the honourable member should ask that question just at this moment, because minutes ago Caltex announced that it would be extending its trial of E10 in Cairns for a further six months until May 2004, and that is because the trial is going so well. One of the earlier indications that it was going well was that it was extended to Mareeba. Caltex Mareeba has been selling E10 over the last couple of months. During the period that this trial has been running, about 24 to 25 per cent of people have been opting to get E10 from service stations where it is available in Cairns. It is true that the ethanol industry in Queensland is having a difficult birth; nevertheless it is true that this is going to grow into a very robust infant, because E10 is good for the environment, it is good for Queensland's agricultural industry and it is good for Queensland. If E10 were used in every car that was configured for unleaded petrol, it would have the effect of taking one million tonnes of greenhouse gasses out of the atmosphere every year. That would be a massive improvement in our greenhouse performance and it would lead to a massive improvement in the throughput of Queensland agriculture. I am aware that there has been a bit of a scare campaign running about E10, but it is basically the case, with few exceptions, that modern cars that are configured for unleaded petrol can safely take E10 with no negative effects. The Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing has advised me that there has been no negative effect as a result of the experiment which was undertaken by his department in running the government fleet on E10 for a period of time. E10 is something which, if we foster and cultivate it, will lead to very good outcomes for the environment and for Queensland. I will be writing to honourable members in the very near future indicating to them which cars can safely use E10 according to the latest information that has been made available to my department. As I have said, that is practically everything that is configured for unleaded petrol that was made in recent times. I will also be indicating to honourable members the successes that we have had in Cairns. In New South Wales it is true that they were selling E20 and E30 and that damaged some cars, but E10 does not have that effect and the experiment in Cairns has been highly successful.

Heroin Addiction, Alternative Treatment Miss ELISA ROBERTS: My question is directed to the Minister for Health. Last week I was visited by a young man who was addicted to heroin and who has been for many years. He wants to get off heroin but has been told by staff at Gympie Hospital and local GPs that all they can offer him is a methadone program. The man does not really want to swap one addiction with another, which is essentially what happens on the methadone program. Can the minister advise whether Queensland Health has any programs or detoxification processes which would enable this man to become drug free without having to use methadone? Mrs EDMOND: There is a range of programs that deal with heroin addiction. Methadone is one which maintains people and allows them to come to terms with their addiction and come off it over a long period of time, and that is certainly used by a lot of people. I think Queensland has one of the most successful methadone programs. Contrary to comments that we often see in the media, most people on the methadone program do over time reduce the amount they are using. They conduct useful lives without committing crime, and that is the whole purpose. They keep clean, they do not get infections, et cetera. It is something that the vast majority of heroin addicts find easier to cope with than going cold turkey. There are other programs where people do get support to completely withdraw from drugs with detoxification. There are other products on the market now such as buprenorphine, which 16 Oct 2003 Questions Without Notice 4243 has been very useful and is used in the prison system as another drug that can aid in drug addiction. Most of the work is done through funded agencies and non-government organisations who run these programs. GPs can also maintain these programs. Queensland Health has provided training courses in the use of buprenorphine and other agents for the use of drug addiction right across the state. It depends on the local GPs taking up that offer—being interested and wanting to take it. If the member wants to contact my office and give me some personal details on the young man, we will try to get back to him with advice about who in the area has the experience and knowledge of those other programs. I think buprenorphine is shaping up as a very worthwhile option. It is used in a number of countries. Naltrexone tablets have also been used in some cases. Although they may have recently been recommended for heroin use, they are used more for alcohol addiction. There are a range of different programs. Sometimes the organisations may not be known to the individual, but if the member will contact me we will make sure that he gets the information that is relevant to the member's electorate. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the next question, could I welcome to the public gallery pupils and teachers from Stonehenge school in the electorate of Gregory.

Small Business Franchises Mrs CARRYN SULLIVAN: My question is directed to the Minister for State Development. Queensland's small business franchising sector has grown strongly, realising valuable new jobs for Queenslanders. Can the minister outline how the state government is actively supporting the franchising peak body to sustain this growth? Mr BARTON: I thank the honourable member for Pumicestone for the question. The member takes a great interest in small business interests and franchising in her electorate. Australia has adopted franchising in small business as enthusiastically as any country in the world. Queensland is no exception to this trend. The state has over 400 franchisee businesses—more than half the national total—and currently these provide employment for around 85,000 Queenslanders. Independent small businesses here have seen that franchising can provide access to a range of competitive advantages not usually available to their sector. However, along with the great potential it offers, there are always some problems that can emerge. The Department of State Development's strategy for assisting this sector was developed two years ago in close consultation with the Franchise Council of Australia and also overseen by the Queensland Small Business Advisory Council that I chair. Its main work has been in informing potential new franchisees about what is involved and assisting franchisors to keep growing. Workshops and seminars have been conducted across the state, while at the same time department specialists have supported efforts to attract new franchise chains to Queensland. Some notable chains to be brought to Queensland in recent times include Oporto Chicken and Burgers from Portugal; Signwave from the United States, whose licence has been acquired by Quickcopy; and New South Wales computer games franchise The Games Wizard. More recently the focus has been on helping our own franchisors to expand overseas and to become export ready. This is an area where an exciting number of new initiatives are under way, again in partnership with the Franchise Council. An example is a pilot project in which Queensland franchisors will have the chance to talk to marketing experts in other countries via video conferencing, finding out how business is done in these markets. Conferences are currently being set up for New Zealand, Singapore and Malaysia. What the department is telling franchisors is that in today's global environment, business opportunities can be found not just nationally but internationally. In another initiative interested companies from several Asian countries, including China, will be introduced to progressive Queensland franchisors at a national franchise conference in Queensland next year. There is no doubt that franchisors are the main drivers of this growing sector. We are committed to assisting them. I had the great privilege of speaking to a breakfast yesterday of the franchisors association. We are going to continue to work very closely with them, putting the weight of the Queensland State Development Department right behind franchisors 4244 Questions Without Notice 16 Oct 2003 and franchisees to continue to develop small business in this sector, which is a very strongly growing market.

First Home Owners Grant Mr QUINN: My question is directed to the Treasurer. I refer to the 97 recipients under the age of 18 who have been given a first home owners grant by his government, and I ask: in addition to the first home owners grant, has the government also granted to any of the 97 under-age recipients transfer or stamp duty concessions when they applied under the first home owners or principal place of residence categories or the first home owners mortgage category? Mr MACKENROTH: To get the first home owners grant they would be required to live in the house, so they would get a principal place of residence stamp duty concession. That goes without saying. That is the only way that the system would work. The properties for children under the age of 16 would have been bought in trust and they would have been required, with their family, to have lived in that house for a period of I believe six months to be eligible to get that and to retain the stamp duty concession.

Corrective Services; Billabong Sanctuary Mr PITT: My question is to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services. Can the minister inform the parliament of any activities prisoners are undertaking to help our native fauna in north Queensland? Mr McGRADY: I thank the member for Mulgrave for the question. This is all about the greening of the police and prisons minister, because— Mr Nuttall: It's a big effort. Mr McGRADY: Yes. A couple of Sundays ago I went to Townsville to the Billabong Sanctuary where I saw the results of an agreement between Corrective Services and the sanctuary. I have to say that I was very, very impressed with the enthusiasm of the three young park rangers. I even got the opportunity of holding a koala. I also looked at some of the crocs that are in the park, too. The situation is that the Department of Corrective Services has entered into an agreement with the sanctuary whereby we have just started growing 2,000 eucalyptus trees as part of the prison industries program. These trees will be grown by September/October next year and they will be harvested to provide a regular source of food for the koalas at this sanctuary. As most people know, koalas do consume an enormous amount of leaves, and the sanctuary is currently sourcing them from national parks. Mr Palaszczuk interjected. Mr McGRADY: Who is the Environment Minister? I do not know. I think there could be— Mr Schwarten: You could be the green police minister. Mr McGRADY: That is right. I think I could prove my— Mr Schwarten: We've heard about the green police before. Mr McGRADY: Yes. I think this is a very serious matter, because we are using the prisoners to enable us to conduct an industry which is leading to a huge tourist potential in the north. The Sunday morning I was there, there were many people there, particularly from overseas and particularly from Germany. As I said a moment ago, I was very, very impressed. A similar project is also under way between Lotus Glen prison up in the far north and the Kuranda rainforest, wildlife and tourist park which, as we all know, is just outside of Cairns. Mr Palaszczuk interjected. Mr McGRADY: The Tourism Minister? That could be another position that I may have my eye on, too, because I am more than happy to proceed along the track which I have just started, and that is to promote this industry not just around Queensland but right around Australia. Mr Schwarten: With a job like that you can promote anything. Mr McGRADY: I could promote anything. On a serious note, this is what the prison system is about. It is about promoting our state. It is about working with the private sector so that we can produce goods like this. At the end of the day, it is a win-win situation. 16 Oct 2003 Questions Without Notice 4245

Can I have recorded in Hansard my delight at the enthusiasm of these three young Queenslanders for the way in which they approach their job and promote the sanctuary to people from all around the world.

First Home Owners Grant Dr WATSON: I refer the Treasurer to the intergovernmental agreement, a copy of which he tabled during his ministerial statement yesterday, and particularly to clause D(1)(9), which states— The relevant state and territory legislation will contain adequate administrative review and appeal mechanisms, along with the provision to prevent abuse of the first home owners scheme. The state and territories will cooperate in the exchange of information to identify eligible first homeowners. I ask: given that New South Wales Treasurer Michael Egan fulfilled his obligations under the agreement, why did the minister not ensure that appropriate mechanisms were implemented to fulfil his obligations? Mr MACKENROTH: Yesterday I outlined the situation in relation to Queensland. I became aware on Tuesday of this situation where young people were able to access the first home owners scheme. I became aware of it on Tuesday. I informed the parliament yesterday that on the next sitting Tuesday I would introduce a bill to amend the act, and I will do that. That will be passed this year.

Home Building and Renovating Mr CHOI: I refer the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing to the fact that the latest domestic building statistics show that Queenslanders are continuing to invest billions of dollars in home building and renovating. As building and renovating are often stressful and involve many important decisions, what is the state government doing to help Queenslanders make the right choices? Mr SCHWARTEN: I thank the honourable member for his interest in this matter. We all know of course that he has a great interest in the building industry. The good news in the building industry in Queensland is that in this current quarter the BSA has insured something in the vicinity of $2.3 billion worth of work. In the previous quarter that figure was $1.7 billion. What that says is that there are many people out there making the decisions of their lives on a daily basis in terms of investing in the family home. Just as an aside, that has also brought with it a building shortage. In today's Financial Review there is a story about the skills shortage in bricklayers and so on. As Public Works Minister I am very cognisant of that and the pressure cooker atmosphere in terms of how hard it is to get blockies and brickies. It is pretty difficult. One thing I did not know is that, according to the Financial Review—I must admit that I have not seen it—Queensland women apparently like builders' steady earning power. It believes that the fact that women find builders attractive will make people want to turn to the trades more and more, but we will wait to see about that. Today I have pleasure in informing the House that we are releasing Facts for home builders and renovators, something that I hope every member will obtain a copy of, and we can arrange to get it into their electorate offices. Anyone who has built a home or had large renovations would know that there are a lot of pitfalls for the unwary out there. I have to say that this is the best document I have ever seen which can be used by a family, a couple or anybody who is building or doing work over $3,300. This is the BSA insurance scheme that my ministerial colleague, the now Minister for Families, saved from privatisation by the Tories. However, $3,300 is that threshold and after that all work up to $200,000 is covered, and that is specified. It has dos and don'ts and the sorts of questions that one would ask a builder or a designer. It has some tips as to how a person might identify a block of land and the pitfalls that exist in that regard. It has all of the questions that anyone could think of. I would urge all members of parliament to study this. It is a very valuable document. As the minister responsible for the BSA, I am aware that all building contracts do not go smoothly. I am sure that each and every member of parliament can attest to that, because they would have had complaints from constituents in that regard. If they take this document and study it, we will have fewer of those problems.

Convention and Exhibition Centre, Gold Coast Mr BELL: I refer the Minister for State Development to the fact that little has publicly been said of late about progress in construction of the Gold Coast Convention centre, a small part of 4246 Questions Without Notice 16 Oct 2003 which lies within the electorate of Surfers Paradise. Minister, what is the latest information as to expected completion of this convention centre? Mr BARTON: I can assure the member that it is on track. We had a community cabinet meeting there only a short number of weeks ago. It has bookings in place. It is on time and will be opened on time. I think the first event is in June next year, but it is well on track.

Pornography, National Party Members Mr REEVES: Is the Premier aware of anyone in the National Party who has had to resign as a result of involvement in pornography? Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for the question and the answer is, yes, I am. In 2001 the National Party candidate for the seat of Hervey Bay was a gentleman called Randal McLellan. He was a National Party candidate for the seat of Hervey Bay. He was the deputy mayor. An article headed 'Porn scandal—deputy mayor quits' states— Hervey Bay councillor Randal McLellan has resigned as deputy mayor over the computer porn scandal. Mr McLellan tendered his resignation at a closed-door meeting of councillors yesterday morning after admitting inappropriate material had been stored on his computer and the council's computer system. Although he will no longer be deputy mayor, Mr McLellan will continue to serve as the councillor for Division 3, which takes in Scarness and Kawungan. It goes on— In a prepared statement, Mr McLellan admitted he was responsible and apologised for any distress he had caused. Let us have no double standards about this. He should resign as a councillor in the same way that I have made it clear that anyone who works for this government who is involved in this activity should be sacked. I want to know from the Leader of the Opposition: what action did the Leader of the Opposition take to throw him out of the National Party? Mr Horan: Twenty months you kept D'Arcy there. Mr BEATTIE: Oh, they do not like it now. They do not like it now. I want to know: what action did the— Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Member for Toowoomba South, order! Mr BEATTIE: What action has the Leader of the National Party taken to throw him out of the party? What action did he take? What action has he taken? You see, I regard these issues of pornography as unacceptable. Anyone who is involved in these matters either goes to jail or they are thrown out under my government. I want to know: what action has the Leader of the National Party taken? What action has the Leader of the National Party taken to throw this man out? I say to the Leader of the Opposition: is Randal McLellan still a member of the National Party? Is he still a member? Let us get him to answer the question. Is he still a member of the National Party? Is he still a member? He sits there silently. He has taken no action whatsoever. Do not come in here and have double standards. If he is a member of the National Party, why has the leader not thrown him out? Why has he not thrown him out? I table this for the information of the House. Opposition members interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Well may they squeal, because when faced with the reality of looking after a mate or taking some action, they look after the mate. He was a National Party candidate. I want to know what you have done about it, Lawrence. What have you done about it? The answer is nothing! So do not come in here and talk about others. Get your own house in order before you talk about others.

Queensland Ambulance Service Mr MALONE: I ask the Minister for Emergency Services: in respect of the annual QAS staff satisfaction survey, is it true that the minister through his director-general has directed that there will be no report this year because of staff dissatisfaction with pressure put on them through community ambulance cover, through staffing levels and overtime concerns, with a resultant blow- out in response times? Minister, has this decision been taken because this survey might highlight the total mismanagement of the QAS by this government in the lead-up to the state election? 16 Oct 2003 TAB Queensland Limited Privatisation Amendment Bill 4247

Mr REYNOLDS: No, I am not aware of any such attempt. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The time for questions has expired.

PRIVILEGE Drug Courts Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (11.30 a.m.): I rise on a matter of privilege. Earlier this morning the Attorney-General again tried to smear me by complaining that I am opposed to the drug courts program in Queensland. I table for the information of the House a motion I moved on 23 March 1999 where I became the first MP in this state to champion the introduction of drug courts. The motion called for the government to introduce a trial of the drug court program in Queensland. For the benefit of the House, I also table the votes of that motion. Mr Deputy Speaker, you will notice that not only did the current Attorney-General actually vote against trialling the drug court program in Queensland, the Premier and the Police Minister did as well. I just say to the Attorney and other government members: enough of the personal smears.

TAB QUEENSLAND LIMITED PRIVATISATION AMENDMENT BILL Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (11.33 a.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— That leave be granted to bring in a bill for an act to amend the TAB Queensland Limited Privatisation Act 1999. Motion agreed to.

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

Second Reading Hon. P. D. BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (11.34 a.m.): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. I present to the parliament the TAB Queensland Limited Privatisation Amendment Bill 2003. This is a short bill. It is technical in nature and it makes only a few amendments to the legislation which led to the very successful privatisation of the then Queensland TAB in 1999. It is, however, a very significant bill to the future of wagering and the racing industry in Queensland and, indeed, throughout Australia. These changes will allow a friendly merger between two private sector companies—UNiTAB Limited, the former Queensland TAB, and TAB Limited, the New South Wales TAB, and are being made at the request of these companies. This merger is another significant step in the consolidation of wagering in Australia. We have seen in recent years UNiTAB absorb the Northern Territory and South Australian TABs with extremely positive benefits to all participants through the creation of larger betting pools and the realisation of significant economies of scale. As we know, Mr Speaker, there are a number of competitive factors both nationally and internationally in relation to gambling. The merged entity—which will continue to be known as UNiTAB—will be the largest wagering operator in Australia, with somewhere over 60 per cent of wagering turnover. It will be a top 50 listed company in Australia and will have a strong platform for further growth and expansion, both domestically and overseas. Within Queensland, the merger will result in significant IT infrastructure investment, as the new UNiTAB updates its existing network and expands the number of its agencies. While the company will still need to work through its detailed integration plan, it has provided an assurance that job numbers in Queensland will not decline over the next three years, and obviously there is enormous potential for it to increase. Absolutely critically though, the new UNiTAB will have its headquarters in Queensland. It will become the second largest Queensland listed company, and this was my aim when I got involved in the negotiations. While I am talking about that I should thank Gerard Bradley and his key staff as well and Dennis Molloy on my staff. 4248 TAB Queensland Limited Privatisation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003

On 18 August 1999, in introducing the TAB Queensland Limited Privatisation Bill, I set out for the House the importance of this. Let me refresh the memories of honourable members— To ensure that TABQ retains its Queensland character, the Bill requires that the headquarters of TABQ be located in Queensland, and so they should be ... The provisions will ensure that TABQ remains Queensland based. Those important provisions remain in place. Except for relatively minor changes to allow a greater number of non-Queensland directors and to allow more board meetings to be held outside Queensland—necessities for a multijurisdictional body—the stringent provisions regarding the TABQ head office and the services which must be provided remain untouched by these amendments. Indeed, the amendments will spell out that not only are the key offices of UNiTAB to be located in Queensland, but at least three members of the key management group are to be ordinarily resident in Queensland. This is a major gain for Queensland. The benefits are not, however, restricted to the location of the corporate headquarters for the new and much larger body. It is expected that the new UNiTAB will generate significantly greater turnover simply because of the size of the pools it will attract. This alone is expected to provide, by the third year after the merger, up to an additional $10 million per annum for the Queensland racing industry. Along with the reform agenda for this industry, which this government is already putting into place, this additional funding will allow the racing industry to further strengthen its position as a major part of the Queensland economy and a key contributor to the leisure and entertainment sector. The merger is also, in the same time frame, expected to generate an additional $5 million per annum in state taxes. In turning to the detail of the bill, I should stress that its objective is simply to remove unnecessary obstacles to a very desirable merger. It does not make the merger happen—that is a decision for the two companies and their shareholders based on their commercial judgment. They will have the ultimate judgment in general meetings for that purpose. In addition, of course, the merger will be subject to the approval of the normal corporate regulatory processes such as those imposed by the ASX and the ACCC and the normal gaming regulatory approvals, in accordance with this government's strong commitment to the absolute integrity and probity of gaming operators. The bill extends in perpetuity the current maximum shareholding limit in UNiTAB of 10 per cent. Without this change, this would have expired in August 2004, and have left the company vulnerable to a takeover at that time. I want to stress that because that is a very, very important point. It removes the cornerstone investor provisions in the act. These provisions made sense at the time of privatisation in that they allowed for a wider range of corporate structuring options at the time. That sale is long over and the provisions are redundant. The bill amends the provisions regarding directors of UNiTAB. Rather than a majority being required to be ordinarily resident in Queensland, a minimum of three directors will need to be Queensland residents. Similarly, the act requires board meetings to be generally held in Queensland. Under the amendments, at least four board meetings per annum will need to be held in Queensland. Both of these changes reflect, as I have already indicated, the multijurisdictional nature of the new UNiTAB and recognise that the future of the company may involve further expansions and acquisitions in jurisdictions outside Queensland and even Australia, which means that obviously some future board members may, indeed, come from overseas; that is the nature of the industry. In these circumstances, good corporate governance standards would require a broader spread of directors and board meetings. In addition, the new UNiTAB's annual general meetings and the board's key annual strategy meetings will also be held in Queensland. The bill also contains transitional arrangements which allow for the 10 per cent maximum shareholding to be exceeded in the short term to allow the merger process to take place. These are very constrained and focused transitional provisions and will cease to be of effect once the merger is completed. This is a short but very important bill. It will facilitate the creation of the second largest public company in Queensland—a company which will have its headquarters in this state. It will facilitate the creation of the largest wagering operator in Australia. This will bring real and direct benefits to the racing industry in this state. The provisions which I have set out are specifically provided in the bill, but I do want to draw the attention of the House to one clause, and that is clause 8, 'Amendment of s44 (TABQ group companies to have constitutions containing certain provisions)'. It states— (1) Section 44(2)(b)— omit, insert— 16 Oct 2003 Magistrates Amendment Bill 4249

'(b) at least 3 of the directors of the company to be ordinarily resident in Queensland; and (c) the holders of the following positions, however described, in the company to be ordinarily resident in Queensland— . chief financial officer; . general counsel; . chief human resource officer; and (d) each annual general meeting of the company to be held in Queensland.'. Clause 8(2) states— (c) in each year, at least 4 of the company's board meetings are held in Queensland; and (d) each meeting of the company's board held annually for the purpose of strategic planning is held in Queensland.'. Those provisions, which I was directly involved in negotiating, are about ensuring that the headquarters are here and there is substance, in a practical sense, to the headquarters being here. I draw those provisions to the attention of the House. I say to the opposition spokesman that I have asked for the opposition to be specifically briefed by the merger group. I would hope that we would have bipartisan support for it. The stock market was advised of the details just after 9.30 this morning. There will be briefings tomorrow of the various industry sectors, including the trade union movement. The opposition will also be briefed. I say to the Leader of the Liberal Party and the opposition spokesman that if they want to meet me specifically about this matter then I am happy to do so. I am quite enthusiastic about what this means for Queensland and I would be surprised if any member in the House sought to oppose the bill. We are talking about the merger of two private sector entities. I brought legislation into the House in 1999 to safeguard the headquarters. We have done that, and we have put meat on the bones to ensure that there is a practical application of the headquarters being here with provisions relating to the appropriate numbers of meetings, the numbers of directors, the annual general meeting, the strategic meeting and those key officers. I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Quinn, adjourned.

MAGISTRATES AMENDMENT BILL Hon. R. J. WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (11.41 a.m.), by leave, without notice: I move— That leave be granted to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Magistrates Act 1991, and for other purposes. Motion agreed to.

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

Second Reading Hon. R. J. WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (11.42 a.m.): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. The Magistrates Court represents the coalface of the Queensland justice system. It handles more than 90 per cent of all matters brought before Queensland courts. Our magistrates and court staff play a crucial role in maintaining the social fabric of our community by upholding the law and helping people resolve their disputes. Since 1991 when the Magistrates Act was passed by the Goss government the Magistrates Court has become a more professional organisation. Those changes in 1991 changed the Magistrates Court from an arm of the Public Service to a fully independent part of our judicial system. Since that time the court has continued to evolve and members of the court now come from a diverse range of backgrounds and experience. 4250 Magistrates Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003

This bill is an important step in the continuing evolution of the Magistrates Court. It fosters a more collegiate approach to the court's administration. These amendments will enable all magistrates to have a much greater say in the administration of the court, and foster a sense of shared ownership about the direction and future of the court. The most significant initiative is the establishment of a Court Governance Advisory Committee to assist in the administration of the court, particularly in relation to decisions regarding placement of magistrates throughout Queensland. The amendments aim to ensure that the process for making decisions regarding the transfer of magistrates is transparent and more inclusive. The Court Governance Advisory Committee is established to develop a transfer policy and to consider and make recommendations to the Chief Magistrate on transfer decisions and on other matters relevant to the operation of the Magistrates Court. The transfer policy will be developed by the advisory committee in conjunction with the Chief Magistrate. The bill outlines some core principles that must be included in the policy. For example, the policy will state that magistrates are expected to serve in regional areas. Expressions of interest will usually be called for transfers. Where no expressions of interest are received, magistrates who have not served in a regional area will be priority for transfer. The policy will provide that magistrates must be consulted about transfers and that a magistrate's personal circumstances must be considered. The Court Governance Advisory Committee consists of the Deputy Chief Magistrate, the State Coroner and three magistrates, one of whom must be serving in a regional centre outside the south-east corner of the state. The three magistrates are included on the committee to ensure that there is representation by rank and file magistrates and also to reduce the Brisbane focus of the advisory committee by guaranteeing that at least one person is from a regional area. The three magistrates will be appointed by the Chief Magistrate in consultation with the Deputy Chief Magistrate and the State Coroner. The Chief Magistrate will continue to be the decision maker for transfer decisions. The objective of this legislation is not to detract from the authority of the Chief Magistrate as head of jurisdiction but rather to ensure that transfer decisions are made in an open and fair manner. If a magistrate requests a transfer, or a transfer decision is required to be made for some other reason, the Chief Magistrate must refer the matter to the advisory committee for consideration and a transfer recommendation. The Chief Magistrate does not need to refer temporary transfer decisions, made in urgent circumstances for less than three months, to the advisory committee. The bill sets out detailed procedures that the committee must follow to ensure that all interested persons are treated fairly before any recommendation is made. The amendments make it clear that the Chief Magistrate is not bound by the recommendation of the advisory committee. However, the Chief Magistrate must consider the recommendation and the transfer policy when making a transfer decision. If the Chief Magistrate accepts the recommendation, there is no need for further consultation with the magistrate recommended for transfer. If the Chief Magistrate proposes to make a decision that differs from the recommendation of the advisory committee then the Chief Magistrate must give the relevant magistrate an opportunity to be heard in relation to the proposal. This collegiate approach to transfer decisions will circumvent the need for outside review by superior courts. The bill replaces the current merits review by the judicial committee with limited judicial review of transfer decisions. There will be no review of a transfer decision made in accordance with a recommendation of the advisory committee. There are no rights of review if the Chief Magistrate accepts the advisory committee's recommendation. Where the Chief Magistrate rejects a recommendation of the committee, the decision may be reviewed by the Supreme Court, however the grounds for review are limited to denial of procedural fairness or that the decision is manifestly unreasonable. Each party to a review application must bear their own costs unless the judge determines that there are exceptional circumstances that justify a costs order in favour of the magistrate. Although review rights are limited, this is balanced by other measures such as the establishment of an advisory committee and the requirement to develop a transfer policy. These measures are designed to make the decision-making process fairer and more transparent. It is also undesirable to have matters of internal court management subject to any protracted judicial proceedings. 16 Oct 2003 Magistrates Amendment Bill 4251

In keeping with the move to a more collegiate approach to court administration the bill removes the Chief Magistrate's powers to discipline magistrates by way of reprimand. Such powers are inconsistent with judicial independence and the principle that the head of a jurisdiction is to be regarded as the 'first among equals'. The circumstances in which a magistrate may be removed from office are clarified to make it clear that a failure to comply with a transfer decision could be grounds to remove the magistrate from office. The bill also clarifies the process for suspension and removal of magistrates from office in circumstances where a magistrate is charged with an indictable offence. A magistrate who is charged with an indictable offence is automatically suspended on full pay. If the magistrate is convicted, the magistrate is automatically suspended without pay. However, a magistrate may be reimbursed for lost income if they are acquitted on appeal. A suspension will continue if, on appeal from a conviction, the appellate court quashes the finding but orders a new trial. In this situation, the magistrate would be entitled to remuneration during the new trial and may be reimbursed for income lost after conviction. A suspension will lapse if the magistrate is not convicted, if the charge is not proceeded with or if the Governor in Council lifts the suspension. If a magistrate is suspended from office and the suspension has not lapsed—because the magistrate is convicted of the offence—then the Attorney-General must apply to the Supreme Court for a decision about whether proper cause exists to remove the magistrate. The application should not be made until after the appeal period has lapsed without an appeal having been commenced or, if an appeal has been started, the appeal has been finally decided or abandoned. A magistrate cannot be removed from office unless the Supreme Court decides that proper cause exists to remove the magistrate. The bill provides that proper cause to remove a magistrate may include conviction of an indictable offence. The Supreme Court would need to look at all of the circumstances, including the gravity of the offence and whether or not a conviction is recorded, to determine whether proper cause for removal is established. If the Supreme Court decides that proper cause is not established, then the suspension would lapse and the magistrate could be reimbursed for income lost after conviction. The bill confirms that a District Court judge may be appointed as Chief Magistrate. It is crucial to the performance of the role of Chief Magistrate that the Chief Magistrate has the respect and confidence of the magistracy and, in a given set of circumstances, it may be appropriate to appoint a District Court judge as Chief Magistrate to achieve this objective or to attract senior lawyers to the office. The bill makes it clear that appointment as Chief Magistrate does not affect a person's salary, title, tenure or seniority as a District Court judge and service as Chief Magistrate is taken to be service as a District Court judge. The Chief Magistrate is not able to exercise, however, the jurisdiction of a District Court judge while appointed and acting as Chief Magistrate. The bill also provides for the appointment of part-time magistrates for the first time. This will ensure a broader pool of people who are eligible for appointment as magistrates and may facilitate the recruitment of women to the magistracy. It will also assist present magistrates to undertake further study or training and may assist in obtaining magistrates in some remote areas. Part-time magistrates are to be appointed on a permanent part-time basis and will receive the same salary and leave entitlements as full-time magistrates but on a proportional basis. The act currently allows for magistrates to be appointed to a specific area for a specified period of up to five years. The bill allows the Governor in Council to nominate two places where a magistrate is to constitute a Magistrates Court. This amendment enables a magistrate to obtain supervision and training in a metropolitan centre for a period of up to 12 months before being transferred to another centre which could be a regional centre. The government considers that the changes introduced by the bill will help to create a collegiate approach to the internal management of the Magistrates Courts. Magistrates are the coalface of the administration of justice and it is crucial that the public has confidence in the Magistrates Courts. Transfer decisions are necessarily contentious, but this must be balanced by the need to ensure that regional Queenslanders have access to a strong justice system. The government believes that the bill contains a fair and balanced mechanism for transferring magistrates. I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Seeney, adjourned. 4252 Surveyors Bill; Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 16 Oct 2003

SURVEYORS BILL SURVEY AND MAPPING INFRASTRUCTURE BILL Second Reading (Cognate Debate) Resumed from 9 September (see p. 3245). Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (11.53 a.m.): I am pleased to make a contribution to this consideration of the Surveyors Bill 2003 and Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 2003 and to lend the opposition's support to their passage through the House. The Surveyors Bill 2003 and the Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 2003 replace legislation dealing with surveyors, surveying and mapping in Queensland. The bills are designed to protect the public by ensuring that surveys are carried out in a professional and competent manner through a system of registration for surveyors and to update and modernise the system that governs that activity in Queensland. Surveyors provide a range of important services for Queensland residents. They provide an important range of services for investors and businesses. Surveyors provide the positional control for most engineering projects. They ensure that roads, railways and bridges are in their right places. Indeed, they ensure that all property boundaries and land titles are properly identified and identifiable. Surveyors ensure that our ports and rivers can be navigated safely through the provision of accurate mapping systems and the information they provide on the terrain that exists, both marine and geographical. They also have an important role to play in a range of industries, such as mining, where they have an important role in controlling the location of shafts and tunnels in underground mining operations and, once again, identifying and locating particular titles. The surveyors collect the mapping information that forms the basis for planning and development in Queensland. The bills before the House arise from a national competition policy review of the Surveyors Act 1977 and concerns about disciplinary provisions in the old act and the need to modernise and consolidate old legislation. Two bills allow for the repeal of the Surveyors Act 1997. The Surveyors Bill 2003 essentially rewrites the old legislation, replacing those parts of the Surveyors Act 1997 that provide for the system of registration of surveyors in Queensland. Overall, the general structure and operation of the registration and disciplinary system provided for in the act will be continued in this bill. But there are, of course, some changes to be made. The bill retains the current system of registration but removes restrictions that require the majority of surveying company directors to be registered surveyors. This is designed, according to the explanatory notes, to allow flexibility in the way surveying companies are set up. The Surveyors Board of Queensland, which administers the registration system, will be able to assess the competence of individual surveyors employed by any surveying firm. Corporations may be registered in a particular category if they employ a person who holds registration in that category and if they meet other requirements, such as holding a specified level of insurance. The company is obliged to maintain the employment of appropriately registered surveyors for as long as it holds that registration. This is understandably important as it helps to ensure that the public can have continued confidence in the surveying services of the company that they are using. The registration of cadastral surveyors will be mandatory, because they undertake work that contributes to the issuing of land titles and the importance of the accuracy and the integrity of those land titles cannot be understated. Registration of other surveyors remains voluntary and it is to be based on competency rather than academic qualifications. This recognises that qualifications alone cannot adequately test an applicant's ability to work as a professional surveyor. This is in line with national trends in assessing those in professional and technical disciplines. Further, the board may also issue registrations for surveying graduates, surveying associates, and emeritus surveyors. The board is required under this legislation to develop a code of practice to provide guidance as to what is appropriate professional conduct. The code will also provide the basis for assessing whether or not there has been professional misconduct as part of a disciplinary process. The complaint handling and disciplinary procedures and processes have been refined under the new legislation with a three-tiered process available to the board to ensure that complaints are handled properly and penalties are appropriate. The board will be able to ask a registered person to meet with board members and caution or reprimand a person for misconduct. If the matter is more serious, the board will be able to authorise an investigation and may then refer the matter to a professional conduct review panel or a disciplinary committee. 16 Oct 2003 Surveyors Bill; Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 4253

This bill before the House will change the appointment of the eight-member Surveyors Board of Queensland to ensure that there is one less surveyor and one more community representative. The bill will also change the structure of the nominations for industry bodies and provide for half the board members to be appointed each year. Under the current renewal system, there had been potential for a completely new board to be appointed. But the changes encompassed in this legislation will mean that the board will always have at least four continuing members and the corporate knowledge of that organisation will be ensured. This is important for skills retention on the board and to provide continuity and stability for the business community. I note that there were two other anticompetitive provisions identified in the competition policy review of the Surveyors Act and these have not been reproduced in this bill. One was the issue of business names, which do not need to be regulated by the board as business names can be assessed and approved using the Business Names Act 1962. The second issue identified was the provision for the board to set fees. This has not been used by the board for many years and was judged not to be required. The second bill—the Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 2003—provides a consolidated legislative regime for the development and maintenance of the state's survey and mapping infrastructure. Along with the Surveyors Bill 2003, it allows the existing Surveyors Act 1997 to be completely repealed. This bill consolidates a number of acts and replaces parts of the Surveyors Act that deal with survey standards and obligations on surveyors. The bill deals with issues concerning survey marks, various data sets kept by the government, and defining and interpreting administrative boundaries established under the act. The demand for spatial data is increasing within the community, especially due to advances in technology and advances in the data available. It is important that the government maintains and keeps the state's survey and mapping infrastructure up to date. This bill before the House will set out survey standards and survey guidelines, and it will require the department to consult with appropriate stakeholders when establishing these standards. It also sets out processes for establishing and maintaining survey marks and protects them with appropriate penalties from interference. The bill also details the obligation of surveyors to capture and provide information to the department about new and existing survey marks to ensure the survey control register is as up to date as possible. The bill goes into detail about obligations on surveyors when entering land to perform surveys in clauses 22 to 24. Obviously surveyors have to take measurements outside the property being measured at times, and sometimes that requires their entry onto neighbouring land. The bill sets out a process where surveyors must first seek the occupier's consent. If they are unable to obtain consent, then the bill will give them the power to enter property in appropriate circumstances. However, in doing so, they are not exempt from other requirements such as those under the Workplace Health and Safety Act, and they do not have permission obviously to damage property. The bill outlines processes for notice of damage. Obviously the bill is seeking to strike a balance to ensure surveyors are able to do their jobs, but recognise the responsibilities they have to other property owners. The bill carries over a number of provisions from the Administrative Boundaries Terminology Act 1985, but no longer requires the chief executive to have a dispute resolution function. This function dates back to the days when Queensland had a surveyor-general, a position which was abolished in 1992. Essentially, removal of this section leaves disputes resolution in the hands of the court. Overall, this legislation should ensure that the Surveyors Board can function more effectively and the community can have confidence in Queensland surveyors' professionalism. The Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 2003 also provides a more modern, up-to-date legislative regime for the state's survey and mapping infrastructure. This is vitally important, as accurate and detailed information about land and land titles is crucial to ensuring sustainable social, economic and environmental development in Queensland. I commend the bills to the House. Mr MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (12.02 p.m.): I rise to speak in support of the Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 2003. Our entire way of life is sustained by geographic information. Queenslanders are relying more and more on information about land to support our social, economic and environmental development. We take it for granted but, without accurate, reliable and consistent survey and mapping infrastructure, our way of life would be unrecognisable. Many 4254 Surveyors Bill; Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 16 Oct 2003 of the great technological advances of the past decade would be rendered useless without accurate geographic data and effective ways to share that information. The second of these two bills—the Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill—deals with coordinating surveys in Queensland and integrating natural resource information within the state and throughout Australia. Mobile phones, national security, satellites, environmental planning and GPS tracking systems all rely on accurate integrated geographic information. The growing demand for spatial data and the increased number of people who need access to that data means that our laws must allow us to take advantage of emerging technologies and be flexible enough to adapt to new uses. Navigation systems in vehicles are becoming more and more popular, particularly in the bush. They are also vital for Emergency Services vehicles as they go about their work. But they absolutely rely on good geographic knowledge of our road network. That means we need to know the position of roads in the reference frame being used and the frame must be able to be shared with the navigation tool being used, like GPS. It is no surprise that the current legislation did not envisage some of the situations we now face, because the Survey Coordination Act was passed in 1952. The bill allows for the geodetic reference framework—which is a wordy way to describe the mathematical framework of the earth—to be defined and changed as better information and technology becomes available. This bill ensures that any new framework is nationally coordinated and can be adopted effectively in Queensland. It also means that agencies involved in survey and mapping infrastructure projects will be able to consult more effectively. This is good for everyone. The data is potentially more valuable than simply the purpose for which it was initially collected, and it reinforces the link between those who capture data and those who store the data and secondary use of that information. Let me explain. The data collected is often specific and based on an individual project, and it may not be in a form that is consistent with the state's data sets. This bill creates an opportunity for a holistic approach to survey and mapping projects, and providing benefits to all users at minimal cost. I just mentioned the state's data sets. An essential component of the state's survey and mapping infrastructure is a group of core data sets that are vital to the community for a broad range of land related activities. The old act is quite restricted in that it allows us to establish a state aerial photography library but does not allow for broader means for obtaining remotely sensed imagery. Now that the aerial photography library is in considerable demand to meet the information needs of the wider community, it is a valuable asset providing records of the change on the land over time as well as providing a record of specific activities. I am glad to see that this bill retains the provision for the state aerial photography library and expands it to include remotely sensed images obtained by other means. Remotely sensed images include photography and infra-red scanning from aircrafts and satellites. I know that the successful and very innovative SLATS program relies on satellite imagery, for example. In my own electorate of Mackay, Mackay Sugar uses satellite imagery to calculate the size of the annual sugar crop. It revises that throughout the season which gives it very important data so that it can schedule the operation and the season length of the mill. This bill ensures that all this information will be preserved for future generations. That is just one of the key data sets that the state holds. Other state data sets that are absolutely vital include the survey control register, the administrative area boundary data set and the state digital cadastral data set. These are useful for the state, but they are also useful to individual Queenslanders, and I am glad to see that this bill allows the public to have access to the information in these data sets. These bills represent a real step forward and an investment in the future of the state's survey and mapping infrastructure which will benefit all Queenslanders. I commend the bills to the House. Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (12.08 p.m.): The Surveyors Bill 2003 is a response to a number of matters that have arisen—first of all, the national competition policy but also the concerns of the Surveyors Board itself over administrative arrangements under the previous act, particularly regarding disciplinary provisions. In general, these have been regarded as being unnecessarily restrictive. Another feature of this piece of legislation is that the bill concentrates solely on the regulation of surveyors, which will entirely be administered by the board. In essence, therefore, the bill is a 16 Oct 2003 Surveyors Bill; Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 4255 complete rewrite of the previous legislation. The minister in his second reading speech has made reference to these matters. The bill also retains a system of occupational regulation for surveyors but removes three anticompetitive provisions relating to limits to the participation of non-surveyors in surveying businesses, the regulation of use of business names and the setting of fees for surveying boards. One hopes that that move to remove the restriction on non-surveyors being involved in the surveying business is likewise reflected in reforms to the legal profession which hopefully will be dealt with in the not-too-distant future. The minister organised for a discussion paper to be issued in this matter as a result of the national competition policy requirements. That was put out in 2000. What we see today in this form of legislation is a result partly of the feedback obtained from that discussion paper. I commend the bill to the House because it provides a surveyors act for Queenslanders that is relevant to the 21st century. I take the opportunity to refer to some developments in Toowoomba in relation to surveyors and the facilities that surveyors have. I also want to acknowledge the tremendous assistance that I received from the minister in terms of the maintenance of access not only by surveyors but by lawyers and other members of the public to the Department of Natural Resources facilities at Clopton Street. I had the opportunity to make representations to the minister in the hope that certain facilities there would be retained. By and large those representations were successful in that the types of facilities that are available at Clopton Street particularly relevant to surveyors remain as follows: title documents lodgements, including associated survey plan lodgements; receipt of accredited plan copies for processing by surveying officers; title searches; survey plan image copies; original deed and title image copies; and products sourced from Basic Land Information Network Smartmap being survey search, survey plan details, BLIN map products to A3 size, cadastral, surveying, custom, property sales and valuation. I do recall that in the days when I was involved in conveyancing, up to about 1990, there were no titles office presence or Department of Natural Resources presence in relation to this type of operation in Toowoomba. All our searches and all our lodgements had to take place in Brisbane at great expense in terms of the clients involved. I am sure that the surveying profession is as grateful as the legal profession is to the government for maintaining this service, not only at Clopton Street but a more elaborate service again at Tor Street. We have these facilities in Toowoomba now in abundance compared with what was the case prior to the Goss government, which was no presence in Toowoomba at all. I want to place on record, first of all, the interest that the minister took in this matter himself—in the maintenance of substantial services at Clopton Street as well as Tor Street. I also want to recall that only a fairly short time ago these services simply were not available at the downs at all. I commend the bills. Hon. K. W. HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (12.13 p.m.): In rising to speak on the Surveyor Bill and Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill, I would like to take the opportunity to focus my comments on the first of them, which deals with surveyors themselves. Surveyors define, measure, collect and manage information on, above and below the land surface. They define and position most of the civil works carried out in Queensland. They are instrumental to the construction of most engineering projects—buildings, roads, railways, bridges—and they ensure that these projects are constructed to their design specifications. They are fundamental to our ports and rivers because they provide the information that allows for safe navigation. They provide crucial information for the safety of underground mining operations. They underpin the entire property market, whether it is in re-establishing old boundaries, controlling the placing of improvements or working on new subdivisions. Our economy relies on confidence in the state's land and property market, and for that we rely in part upon surveyors. By requiring registered surveyors to obtain endorsement from the Surveyors Board we are offering the people of Queensland the certainty and security to know that when they hire a surveyor that person is qualified and competent to do the job. The new requirements to ensure that only competent surveyors are able to work in Queensland include provisions to require evidence of continuing competence. This legislation puts the onus on the industry to do the job properly. A surveyor cannot be registered without sufficient professional indemnity insurance—insurance that will make sure that if a surveyor makes a mistake it is not the landowner who will pay for it. 4256 Surveyors Bill; Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill 16 Oct 2003

I welcome the bill's new requirements for the composition of the Surveyors Board, which will reflect the costs section of expertise that exists in the surveying industry. This legislation allows more flexibility than its predecessor by ensuring that as professional bodies that represent surveyors change their structures, the membership of the board can be altered as well. In addition, the new board will include a second member representing the community, further ensuring that the community is heard and, importantly, protected in matters that involve surveyors. Surveying is a highly technical field. If a person needs a surveyor they are probably not going to be in a position to assess whether the service they receive is technically accurate. The registration system, composition of the Surveyors Board and the powers given to the board will mean that Queenslanders can rely on the fact that their surveyor is able to do the job. It is about reinforcing the checks and balances in the registration system to ensure that we can rely on our registered surveyors. The bills are in the best interests of all Queenslanders and I commend them to the House. Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines) (12.16 p.m.), in reply: Prior to making some closing remarks I table, for the information of the House, an amendment to be moved in committee and the explanatory notes. I first of all thank all members who participated in the debate on these two pieces of legislation. I thank my shadow minister, the member for Callide, for his support and his contributions. I am glad he found the explanatory notes so useful. These two bills are complex pieces of legislation that are vital to Queensland's future. The work of our surveyors underpins almost every aspect of our lives and the information they collect has more and more applications as technology becomes more advanced and more widespread. The most important facet of the Surveyors Bill is the enhanced consumer protection measures it introduces—an extra community representative on the Surveyors Board, a regulatory system that assesses and reassesses competency of the surveyors, and recognises that an academic qualification is not automatically synonymous with competency. In particular, the provision allowing the board to require annual evidence of continuing competence recognises that a piece of paper alone cannot adequately test a surveyor's ability to operate effectively. Let us make no mistake, we rely on surveyors for public safety, among other things. The standards must be kept high. Those enhanced consumer protection measures extend to a more efficient and effective complaints handling and disciplinary mechanism, ensuring more transparency of process and more appropriate penalties for misconduct. Along with the complementary Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill, which deals with how our geographic and surveying information is stored, maintained and developed in a new century, it is a bill that will keep our surveying industry at the forefront of practice in Australia and in the world. That is why I commend these bills to the House. Motion agreed to.

Committee Hon. S. ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources and Minister for Mines) in charge of the bill.

Surveyors Bill Clauses 1 to 11, as read, agreed to. Clause 12— Mr ROBERTSON (12.20 p.m.): I move amendment No. 1— 1. Clause 12— At page 15, lines 13 to 15— omit, insert— ‘(3) A surveyor may be appointed as a member only if the surveyor— (a) has been registered as a surveyor for periods totalling at least 5 years, including any registration as a surveyor under the repealed Act; or (b) has held, for periods totalling at least 5 years, a mine surveyor certificate granted by the board of examiners under the repealed Mines Regulation Act 1964 or the repealed Coal Mining Act 1925; or 16 Oct 2003 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4257

(c) has been a member, for periods totalling at least 5 years, of a professional body for surveyors that the Minister considers an appropriate entity to nominate an individual for appointment.’. The proposed amendment in committee will broaden the scope for persons to be nominated to the Surveyors Board of Queensland. Clause 12(3) will be amended by adding further criteria under which registered persons might be nominated for board appointment. This will allow recently registered mining and engineering surveyors, for example, to be so nominated. Amendment agreed to. Clause 12, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 13 to 206, as read, agreed to. Schedules 1 to 3, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, with an amendment.

Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Bill Clauses 1 to 81, as read, agreed to. Schedule, as read, agreed to. Surveyors Bill reported, with an amendment. Bill reported, without amendment.

Third Reading Bills, on motion of Mr Robertson, by leave, read a third time.

GRAMMAR SCHOOLS AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Resumed from 19 August (see p. 2921). Mr COPELAND (Cunningham—NPA) (12.23 p.m.): I rise this afternoon to participate in debate on the Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill and advise that the opposition will be supporting this legislation through the House. The purpose of this bill is to maintain public confidence in grammar schools. The objectives of the bill are stated as to act on the recommendations from the Department of Education's public benefits test report that found the Grammar Schools Act to be anticompetitive, to provide for the protection of the grammar school name, and to provide greater clarity in relation to the minister's powers in the event that a grammar school experiences serious financial difficulty. I note that the bill also proposes an amendment unrelated to the act to the Education (General Provisions) Act 1989 which will allow the minister to provide transport assistance to students with disabilities. Queensland currently has eight grammar schools constituted as statutory bodies under the Grammar Schools Act 1975. These are the Brisbane Grammar School, Brisbane Girls' Grammar School, Ipswich Grammar School, Ipswich Girls' Grammar School, Rockhampton Grammar School, Rockhampton Girls' Grammar School, Toowoomba Grammar School and Townsville Grammar School. All of these were established on the basis of community need and initiative. They are governed by boards of trustees comprising government nominees, elected donors and subscribers. They are all afforded full autonomy in operational matters similar to other non-state schools and they have no religious affiliations. Queensland currently has two schools accredited under the Education (Accreditation of Non- State Schools) Act 2001, the accreditation act, which use the word 'grammar' but are not constituted under the Grammar Schools Act 1975. These are the Anglican Church Grammar School, which all of us probably know better as Churchie, and the Sunshine Coast Grammar School. There are also currently two registered business names using the grammar school name—Charters Towers Grammar School and the Gold Coast Grammar School. These business names are not being used in connection with an accredited school. The Department of Education conducted a public benefits test review of the Grammar Schools Act 1975 in 2002 and recommended that provisions in the act were anticompetitive and should be removed. A steering committee comprising representatives of grammar schools and their peak body, the Grammar Schools of Queensland Association, produced a discussion paper 4258 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003 in December 2002 and, following its circulation and subsequent feedback, submitted a report and recommendations to the minister in early 2003. The bill is a result of the steering committee's report and recommendations and anticompetitive findings in the public benefits test. The bill addresses five main areas, and I will go through them individually. Firstly, there is national competition policy. The Department of Education's 2002 public benefits test report found that section 6 of the Grammar Schools Act 1975 was anticompetitive. Section 6 stipulates that a community must raise a minimum of $100,000 or property to that amount towards establishment of a grammar school to enable the Governor in Council to make a determination as to whether a grammar school should be established at that location. If successful in having the Governor in Council establish a grammar school, the community would also be eligible to receive from the government up to two times the amount it had raised towards the establishment of the school. The sum paid by the government could take the form of money or property valued to that amount. The bill will remove the requirement for the community to raise $100,000 and subsequently the government will no longer be required to make a contribution towards the grammar school's establishment. Secondly, the bill provides for the future establishment of a grammar school through the following two mechanisms: firstly, on application from the community, subject to the minister's satisfaction that the submission meets the establishment criteria; and, secondly, on the minister's own initiative, subject to the minister inviting submissions from grammar schools and the public and meeting the establishment criteria. Upon receiving an application from the community or the minister, the minister must be satisfied on the following criteria laid out in the bill: there is a demonstrated need for a grammar school in the proposed location; there is sufficient community support for a grammar school in the proposed location; the persons proposing the establishment of the school fully understand the governance requirements of grammar schools; the likely financial implications for the state; and the compatibility with announced government education policies. All grammar schools, of course, must also meet non-state school accreditation requirements prior to commencing operation. The bill also prevents the use of the word 'grammar' by entities establishing or operating schools that do not have a legitimate claim on the use of that name. This will protect 'grammar' as a valuable brand name that extols excellent educational outcomes, admired values and attitudes, and competent school governance. Currently, there is no protection of the grammar school name against use by others in the education sector. Alternative legal remedies to protect 'grammar' through the Trade Practices Act 1974 and Fair Trading Act 1989 are considered inadequate in effectively protecting grammar schools and redressing any misuse of the grammar school name. The bill creates two offences in protection of the grammar school name: for persons establishing or operating a school that includes the word 'grammar' under this act, and for persons who hold out a school that is not a grammar school under this act to be a grammar school. The bill also contains provisions that protect the rights of schools already operating under the grammar name. Transitional arrangements will be made to allow currently accredited grammar schools to continue using the grammar name. These schools are the eight grammar schools already established that I mentioned earlier and the two schools that were not established under the act but are accredited, the Anglican Church Grammar School and the Sunshine Coast Grammar School, and of course any other grammar schools that will be established under the act in the future. The bill does not protect the proprietors of the two registered business names with the 'grammar name', those being Charters Towers Grammar School and the Gold Coast Grammar School. I would ask the minister to advise the House of what contact she has had with the owners of those names during the consultation period of this bill, given that they will be disadvantaged by its passage. The minister currently has, and will continue to have, the power to recommend to the Governor in Council that the board of trustees be removed. However, experience with the Rockhampton Girls Grammar School in 2001-01 highlighted the lack of powers available to the minister when a school does experience financial difficulty—for example, in terms of the authority to obtain full financial records and the authority to appoint an external person to assist in or take over the administration of the school. The bill provides four direct remedies to address these experiences. It amends corporate governance requirements to place an onus on boards of trustees in terms of any issues that raise concern about the school's financial viability. For example, the board must advise of any legal proceedings against the school that may lead to significant financial loss, and the board must 16 Oct 2003 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4259 advise on the significant decrease in student enrolments. The board must comply with the minister's reasonable requests for any information and documents to prove that the school is being properly administered. The minister may give a board a written direction about a matter relevant to the board's functions in the interests of the school's financial viability, which the board must comply with. The minister has the power to appoint an administrator to the board of trustees of a grammar school if the board requests the appointment, if the board is given a show cause notice under the accreditation act or if the minister reasonably believes that the school is no longer financially viable or is in danger of becoming non-viable. The administrator will be answerable to the minister. Of the seven members of the boards of trustees for grammar schools three are elected by donors and subscribers. The requirement for the holding of these elections and the eligibility to vote in and stand for elections will be removed from the act and placed in the regulation. The bill provides for boards to have by-law making power in relation to the election of members to the board, including the electoral eligibility amount to be paid by donors, the maximum number of terms a person may serve, and subscribers to be able to participate in elections for trustees. I also note that the electoral eligibility amount specified in the by-law is subordinate to the minimum and maximum amounts specified in the regulation applicable to the boards. There has been an additional amendment circulated in the House this morning. I expect that the minister will, during her response, detail the reasons for that amendment being required to this bill. There are a number of other amendments in this bill, and I will just touch on those. Firstly, the bill will bring corporate governance requirements for boards into line with current regulatory practice. Currently, the board determines whether a conviction should warrant disqualification from holding office. Considering the minister must make recommendations to the Governor in Council for appointment of board members, this is now being seen as unsatisfactory. Therefore, the bill provides that board members convicted of an indictable offence or who are affected by bankruptcy action will be automatically disqualified from office, pending the minister's suitability assessment. Current board members who would be affected by these provisions will be excluded from an examination. Finally, transport assistance—as a result of the state government's Aligning Services and Priorities Project, the responsibility and decision making for school transport assistance for students with disabilities went from Queensland Transport to Education Queensland on 1 June 2002. The bill will insert a head of power in the Education (General Provisions) Act 1989 to enable the Minister for Education to provide transport assistance to students with disabilities. That is a very important area of assistance. In my electorate office there is no one issue that I get more constant phone calls on than school transport assistance, both for students with disabilities and students without disabilities. This is an area of great challenge, but it is also an area that needs a lot of work done to ensure smooth operation and, more importantly, to ensure that there is a commonsense approach brought to the operation of the School Transport Assistance Scheme. I know that the School Transport Assistance Scheme in total will still remain with the Department of Transport, but for that portion, that being for students with disabilities, that now will come under Education Queensland, that in itself has some very big issues that need to be dealt with. I hope the minister will be looking closely at that scheme to ensure its smooth operation. I should probably state that I do have an interest in this bill. I do not think it would qualify as a conflict of interest, but it is an interest, nonetheless, given that I was educated at one of the eight grammar schools, that being the Toowoomba Grammar School. Like many young people who live in country areas, for those of us who did not have access to year 12 in our home towns, the only option for many of us was to go to boarding school. For my family that meant going to the Toowoomba Grammar School, at which I completed years 8 to 12. It is an excellent school. There is probably a small touch of bias there, but it is an excellent school. The start it gave me from which to continue on with both my education and further career was invaluable. During my time at that school, it was very heavily focused on boarding. Because a large number of country children went to school at Toowoomba Grammar and, we could fairly say, to all of the grammar schools, the vast majority of them are also boarding schools. They provided an opportunity for young people from regional and rural Queensland, and indeed from other states and internationally, to gain a very good education—not just an academic education but an all-round education. The range of extracurricular activities that I was able to participate in at Toowoomba Grammar was astounding, in particular the sporting activities. Being one of the GPS schools, Rugby was always a major focus, but it was not the only focus. To varying degrees, depending on 4260 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003 the strength of our teams, we had success in swimming, tennis, soccer, cycling and all sorts of other sports. It really does offer well-rounded learning, not just academic learning. I participated in public speaking and debating. We had a very strong team throughout my time there, and not because I was on the team; the whole focus on public speaking and debating was exceptional. Clint Howitt, who was the master in charge of that while I was at Toowoomba Grammar, is still at Toowoomba Grammar and is still making an essential contribution. Madam Deputy Speaker, I note that you are trying to calculate just how long ago that was. It was not that long ago, but it was not too recent, either. Clint Howitt has been there for an exceptionally long time. The skills that I learnt under his tutelage have stood me in good stead for the career that I have embarked upon. There are all sorts of extra curricular opportunities—cadets, adventure club, scouts, music, drama and plays. There was an incredible range of things. That is very important for any of our schools to provide. There were some things that were not provided when I was there that I feel I perhaps missed out on. For example, manual arts was introduced in the later years when I was at the school so as to give a more practical focus to the learning as well, not just an academic focus. An agricultural science program was also introduced. They are continuing to develop the program for the boys and young men under their care. The school has a proud tradition. It earned a very strong reputation and incredible loyalty during the seventies. As I said, it was predominantly a boarding school until recent times, when the numbers of day students started to increase. During the cattle crash of the seventies, an awful lot of families were reliant on the beef industry. And I know, given where your family is from, Madam Deputy Speaker, that you will understand that it was an incredibly difficult time. The only way for families to continue to provide an education for their children was to keep them at boarding school. During those years, it was very difficult financially to be able to do that. Bill Dent, who was the headmaster at the time, bent over backwards and went beyond what a headmaster would normally be expected to do in allowing families to keep their children at the school at a time when perhaps financially they would not have been able to do so otherwise. That engendered an incredible amount of loyalty to the school. Toowoomba Grammar was not the only school to do that. To those families that was a huge gesture, and that loyalty has continued until today—30 years later. In my family, my three elder brothers were all at boarding school at that time. For my family that was an incredibly difficult time. Without the generosity of the school in allowing my brothers to stay at school, they certainly would not have been able to go on to achieve what each of them have achieved in their careers. During the eighties, when I was there, Bill Dent was still the headmaster. He was an incredible man. Unfortunately, he passed away some years ago—too early, which was a real tragedy. All of us who were at grammar during his days remember him fondly, I am sure—probably not always but in general we do. He was replaced by Hugh Rose, who spent quite a long time at the school as well. He retired at the beginning of this year. Hugh put his stamp on the school, as all new headmasters do. Hugh is very highly regarded. Since his retirement, he has been assisting other private schools on a part-time and temporary basis with their administration. That is a tribute to his skills both as a headmaster and an administrator. Hugh was replaced by Peter Hauser, who took over at the beginning of this year. Peter is a very different person from Hugh. That is probably a good thing when taking over as headmaster, so that they are judged on what they themselves are able to achieve. Peter has already made his mark—which is a very different mark but also a very valuable mark—on the school and I know that he will be a great success during his term as principal, which I am sure will be very long, just as his predecessors were. The board of trustees in these schools is very important. Glen McCracken is currently the chair of the board of trustees at Toowoomba Grammar. The board has done an excellent job of fundraising which has provided funds for the development of the school. It is not that long since I have left the school, but the amount of development that has occurred is just astounding. For a school in an area that has experienced quite difficult economic times, with families experiencing difficult times, it has done an amazing job developing to the extent that it has in the past few years. When I was attending Toowoomba Grammar you could not imagine that more buildings could fit between the ones already there, but more and more buildings are going up all the time. These are very important resource buildings, things like the music centre, the admin centre, the science centre; there is a whole range of different buildings being constructed. The board of trustees can be very proud of what they have been able to do. 16 Oct 2003 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4261

They are also expanding into the primary school sector. Eventually it will be a full P-12 school, providing education exclusively for boys. That is one of the real commitments of Peter Hauser, the current headmaster, who has been doing a lot of work, not only within his school but also within the Toowoomba community, raising awareness of the special needs of educating boys and young men. Toowoomba Grammar School is focusing on that and is providing it in an excellent way. There has been a lot of discussion in the community at large, and certainly in the Toowoomba community, about which is better: single-sex schools or co-educational schools. I do not think one is better or worse than the other. It is simply a range of options to ensure that young people going through our school system have a choice; they can attend a same-sex school if that is the best option for that young person, and in many instances that certainly is the case. Peter Hauser has done an excellent job of raising the profile of that particular issue, not only within the school but also within the community. I have spoken on a number of occasions in this parliament about how Toowoomba's standard of education is unbelievable. It really is a centre of education excellence. It is because of the private schools like Toowoomba Grammar, Downlands, Concordia, Fairholme, Glennie, the Christian Outreach College—and I am going to get in a lot of trouble because there are so many of them— Mr Terry Sullivan: Don't forget St Mary's and St Joseph's. Mr COPELAND: Yes, St Mary's and St Joseph's. There is a whole lot of them. I will have missed some of them because I did not have them written down, but they are all very, very good schools. They provide a lot of boarding places, which is very important for a town like Toowoomba servicing the areas that it services. It has also lifted the general level of education across Toowoomba. I do not think you could say there is a bad school in Toowoomba now, and I suspect that a couple of decades ago you probably could have. Because of the way that schools have developed and the way that they compete, as the member for Toowoomba South has said in the past, parents now do not say, 'I am going to consider Toowoomba Grammar or Downlands'; they say, 'I am going to consider Toowoomba Grammar, Downlands and Harristown State High School', or one of the other high schools. I think that is very good thing, and I think it is because we have such a good private sector and a good public sector that the general standard of education has risen. The opposition will be supporting this bill. The protection of the grammar schools' name is a very important aim that we need to be ensuring. They are schools that have been established with a lot of community support, they are schools that would not have been established without the input of the community, and we have to make sure that the standards in those schools are upheld. Looking at the list of schools that are affected by this bill, they have produced some outstanding people over the years. It really does show how lucky we are to have so many schools providing such a good level of education, regardless of what sector of education they are in, whether it is state or independent. The grammar schools are certainly playing their part and I pay tribute to the work of all of them. I know I have concentrated on the Toowoomba Grammar School but, as I said, I have a little bit of a personal interest. It is not in my electorate; it is in the electorate of the member for Toowoomba South. I know that the three members who cover the Toowoomba region—in fact, four with the member for Darling Downs—are very proud of all of the schools in our area. Children from each of our electorates go to those schools, so we all take a very strong interest in them. We all appreciate the level of service that those schools are providing. Looking at the list of communities that are covered by these grammar schools, one can see that they include major regional cities as well as Brisbane. It is important that we have boarding schools in those areas to keep providing educational opportunities for those young people who simply do not have them where they live. I think that is a very valuable outcome. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Jarratt): Order! Before calling the honourable member for Mundingburra, may I welcome to the public gallery Principal Brett Webster, school captains and vice captains from Springwood State High School in the electorate of Springwood. Ms NELSON-CARR (Mundingburra—ALP) (12.45 p.m.): It gives me great pleasure to rise in support of the Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2003. The purpose of the bill is to maintain public confidence in grammar schools. To achieve this objective the bill regulates the establishment and governance of grammar schools. The environment in which grammar schools now operate is very different from when the original 1975 act was drafted. It is much more competitive today and, of course, there are higher 4262 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003 standards of corporate governance which apply. This bill seeks to achieve a better alignment between the act and the changing social environment. I would like to talk a little bit about the characteristics of grammar schools. We do know that the first grammar school was established in 1863. I do not have any grammar schools in my electorate, but I border one with the member for Burdekin and, of course, we have another grammar school in Townsville, and students who live in my electorate go to those schools and I know that they have a very good reputation. Queensland grammar schools provide a rare model of governance based on cooperation between government and the community, and the schools borne of this unique public-private partnership can be defined by certain characteristics, including the philosophy of excellence in preparing the whole person to contribute productively as a member of civil society through such things as scholarship, aesthetic appreciation and so on. It is non-discriminatory, secular education that is tolerant of a diversity of religions and cultures. One of the other characteristics is a well developed system of governance and management with accountability through the democratic process. There are a number of other characteristics, but if we look at the establishment of grammar schools we can see that this was clearly a community initiative. At present a grammar school may only be established by the Governor in Council being satisfied that a community has raised $100,000, or property at least to that value, towards the establishment of a grammar school, and this mechanism was ruled to be unacceptable under national competition policy. The bill replaces this with two mechanisms for the establishment of new grammar schools—on community application or on the minister's own initiative. The community application mechanism essentially replicates the current mechanism in allowing a community to demonstrate its desire for a grammar school, but without requiring the community to raise a given amount of money. Members of the community may lodge an application requesting the minister's consideration of their proposal to have a grammar school established. The actual establishment of a grammar school is no longer determined based solely on money, but rather requires the minister to be satisfied that there is a demonstrated need for a grammar school as opposed to any other type of school; that there is sufficient community support for this school as opposed to any other type of school; that establishing a new grammar school is compatible with government policy; and that the financial implications for the state need to be acceptable. The new grammar school would have to be funded at the same levels as funding provided to other grammar schools at comparable stages in their development, and the people proposing the school and likely to become the first board members have to understand the grammar schools' rules of governance. This bill recognises that while grammar schools are non-state schools and essentially run as independent entities, they are statutory bodies and the Minister for Education has portfolio responsibility for them. In recognition of this responsibility, the minister is provided with improved powers similar to those provided to other ministers in relation to statutory bodies in their own portfolios. The improved powers that are provided to the minister include allowing the minister to require from a board of trustees information or documents within the board's knowledge or control and also to allow the minister to direct a board, if the minister is satisfied it is necessary, to ensure the school's financial viability. Grammar schools are protected in the exercise of these powers by the minister having to consult with the board prior to taking any action unless exceptional circumstances exist. This consultation will allow boards to state a case as to why they should not have to provide the information or why the direction should not be issued. The most significant of the minister's new powers is the ability to appoint an administrator to manage a board and to run the school. An administrator is to be appointed only in the most severe circumstances, where the board of a school is internally conflicted, the school is about to fail financially, or to lose its ability to operate as a school. Such an appointment may be made only when the board requests the appointment, or if a show cause notice is issued by the Non- State Schools Accreditation Board, which may actually affect the school's accreditation, or where the school is no longer financially viable or indeed is in danger of becoming that way. In the second two instances, the minister has to issue the board with a notice advising of the proposal to appoint an administrator and give the board—usually, I believe, 14 days—to make submissions on that matter. In terms of protecting the grammar school name, the bill creates two offences in relation to the use of the grammar school name: to use the name in connection with a school that is not a grammar school and to hold out that a non-grammar school is a grammar school. Each offence carries a maximum penalty of $15,000. The creation of these offences is required to protect the 16 Oct 2003 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4263 valuable brand name of that grammar school that it may have built up over a number of years—at least over the past 140 years. Until this bill, any school was able to establish itself using the name 'grammar' therefore diluting the grammar brand and potentially affecting the reputation of grammar schools that has been established and subject to the act. An additional reason for the inclusion of the offences is that the public benefits test report on the bill found that protection of the grammar name was integral to the objectives of the bill and was necessary to justify the criteria for establishment. The PBT report found that without protection of the grammar name, the establishment criteria would be of no consequence as non-grammar schools would be able to take advantage of the name without having to comply with the other requirements placed on grammar schools. This would place grammar schools at a significant competitive disadvantage compared to those schools merely calling themselves grammar schools. This bill also recognises that there is significant variation among Queensland's eight grammar schools, because the schools vary in a number of tangible ways. The variations make it essential that the individual schools are provided with the ability to tailor certain requirements to their school's specific needs and attributes. In recognition of this bill, it will enable the boards to make by-laws about a number of matters and the amount that persons must donate to a school in order to vote in an election or stand for election will also differ markedly between schools. The school's particular circumstances are also relevant when considering how many terms a person should be eligible to be elected to a position on the board. Some schools value the continuity and organisational knowledge that long-serving members provide. These schools will not make a by-law limiting the maximum number of terms a person may serve. Other schools may consider that a board can stagnate if it has the same members for years and sometimes even decades. So the by-law making power enables these schools to individually decide how many terms is too many and to limit eligibility accordingly. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs CHRISTINE SCOTT (Charters Towers—ALP) (12.53 p.m.): It is my pleasure to rise to speak in support of the Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2003. I should say at the outset I do not have any grammar schools in my electorate. I am not aware of any of my independent schools which would fall into all of the necessary criteria and certainly there are no government nominees on the school boards or councils of any of my independent schools. However, I would like to use this opportunity to reaffirm my support for all the schools in my electorate, whether they be state or independent. I am a past student of the Queensland Primary Correspondence School, the Charters Towers Central State School and the State High and Intermediate School. However, I have worked in both state and independent schools. So one might say I have an appreciation of the two systems and have been part of various school communities during good times and bad. It is interesting to find the registered proprietor of the business name 'Charters Towers Grammar School' is the Blackheath and Thornburgh College Association. Blackheath and Thornburgh College is currently going through some very trying times, but we have saved each of the independent schools in my home town at least twice. Interestingly enough, it is their competition who come most fiercely to the rescue of any of our schools at risk, because, apart from the vital contribution they make to the economy of our city, there is also a very real recognition of that unique sporting and academic interaction that exists between the three independent schools and our local state high school as well as the three primary state schools. So I am pleased to note this new legislation requires a board of a grammar school to notify the minister on becoming aware of a matter which raises significant concerns about a school's financial viability and provides for the minister to require information and documents on any matter relevant to the way a board is carrying out its functions. It is only sensible indeed that the bill provides for the minister to give a direction to a board if they are satisfied it is necessary to ensure the school's financial viability. Experience with the Rockhampton Girls Grammar School in 2000 and 2001 highlighted indeed the lack of powers available to the Minister for Education when a grammar school experiences financial difficulties. The minister was unable to require from the school's board of trustees financial records that would have enabled the minister to determine the exact extent of the financial difficulties being experienced by the school. The minister had and will continue to have the power to recommend to the Governor in Council that the entire board of trustees be removed if necessary. Additionally, the minister had no power to enable the appointment of an external person to assist in or take over the running of the school to ensure the students of the 4264 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003 school, the employees of the school, the school's creditors and the state's investment in the school were not detrimentally affected by the financial difficulties. The bill provides four direct remedies for the difficulties experienced with respect to the Rockhampton Girls Grammar School's financial difficulties. The remedies may also be used in situations that do not specifically relate to financial matters. Indeed, I have experienced many of those things among my independent schools in years gone by. A number of the grammar schools fulfil the same function almost all of my independent schools do, and that is they take boarding students. That, indeed, is a very valuable role because for many students in my electorate this is the only way they can access a secondary school education. In the 44 small communities I represent, less than half have schools of any kind, and of these only seven offer education from P-12. So for children who come from rural, remote and regional Queensland, who live in isolated communities on islands, station properties and mine sites, the only opportunity they may have to interact with young people their own age or to learn to play a musical instrument or a team game may come via an independent school which offers boarding facilities. I applaud the work done across Queensland in all our schools, whether private or state. I salute the work done by staff, parents, P&Cs and the students, because without them we would have no schools and indeed no future. I commend the bill to the House. Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (12.58 p.m.): The Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill has the objective to act on recommendations from the Department of Education's 2002 public benefit test report that found section 6 of the Grammar Schools Act 1975 to be anticompetitive. It also has the objective to provide for the protection of the grammar school name and to provide greater clarity in relation to the minister's powers in the event that a grammar school experiences serious financial difficulty. The Toowoomba Grammar School is located in my electorate. It is one of the fine grammar schools of Queensland. It was established in 1875 and provides a wonderful education for some 900 boys. That school has been part of the consultation process and it is grateful for that opportunity. One of the important things for the Toowoomba Grammar School was the policy objective of protecting the integrity of the grammar school name so that when it applies to those schools that have it, or to those schools who want to have that name at any time in the future, that name brings with it that integrity of what the schools were set up for way back in the mid- 1800s and the ethos that has been maintained in those schools. Toowoomba Grammar School makes a wonderful contribution to Toowoomba. The school has always had a very strong ethos of providing education for boys. All of the respective headmasters have had a strong commitment to that. For the past 10 years, Mr Hugh Rose has been a magnificent headmaster and brought a very strong direction to the school. That was typical of Hugh's experience at other schools that he taught at and his own personal commitment to life and to high standards. Sitting suspended from 1.00 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. Mr HORAN, continuing: Prior to the luncheon adjournment, I was talking about the importance of the Toowoomba Grammar School in my electorate of Toowoomba South in providing quality education to young men. The school now has some 900 students. The school was established back in 1875, so it has been an integral part of our city for well over one and a quarter centuries. Recently the school expanded, with the establishment of Toowoomba Grammar Junior, which has now been expanded even further to provide for junior students right through from years 1 to 7. I think this is a good move. It has provided parents with a choice in sending their children to Grammar Junior and it is almost a seamless education going through primary school and Grammar Junior through to secondary school. I recently had the opportunity to visit Toowoomba Grammar School with the Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson. It was a good occasion and a proud moment for the school to host the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, who addressed the boys. He also had the opportunity to meet with some of the boys who live in his electorate. We had a large group of year 12 boys who came from rural areas which John Anderson represents, and that was a good chance for him to meet those boys. I think it demonstrates the wide range of areas around Toowoomba—not only in south-western Queensland, central Queensland and northern Queensland but also interstate and overseas—from which students come to Toowoomba to board. 16 Oct 2003 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4265

The school provides a great range of activities. It has been noted for many years for its academic activities. Recently some very good science laboratories have been constructed at the school. It also provides wonderful sporting activities. It has one of the best locations for a school in a provincial city you could ever imagine. The Margaret Street entrance of the school is a beautiful entrance. It takes up an entire block and overlooks the city. As I said, the school has wonderful sporting facilities as well as good academic and cultural facilities. I commend the school for its involvement in the community. One thing that strikes me every year is its involvement in the Anzac Day ceremony. The school has traditionally placed great importance on its old boys who have served our nation in the various wars. The school has always taken part in the Anzac Day ceremony and usually in the changing of the guard at the Mothers Memorial. The boys at the school are encouraged to take part in many charitable collections that occur around the city. They take part in doorknocking for various good causes. Last year when we had quite severe bushfires around the city, particularly on the eastern side of the city, the school was opened up to provide facilities for people to be fed and to be a staging point for some of the operations to take place. The school is one of eight boarding schools in Toowoomba. The city is quite well known for the educational facilities it provides. There is a total of 15 secondary schools in Toowoomba and some eight boarding schools, being one primary boarding school and the others secondary boarding schools for girls and for boys, and a coeducational boarding facility at Downlands College. The city certainly provides a wonderful mix with regard to education. I think the boarding schools provide a great opportunity for children from western Queensland. That was why most of the boarding schools were originally established. I have spoken to a number of headmasters and parents about these boarding schools. Whilst I think we would all like our children to be with us for all of the years that they are at home before they leave to go to uni or work, it is important that they have a quality education. By going to a regional city like Toowoomba, I think many of these country children still feel comfortable because it is not a big capital city but it is a large regional city. There is a sufficient mass in the student body to enable them to be involved in various cultural activities, music and stage productions and sporting teams and to compete with all the schools involved in that city. A good example of that is the Darling Downs regional athletics championships, where all of those schools and some high schools outside the Toowoomba area come together. There is a large mass of schools providing very good competition for the young students. It provides these young people with good opportunities. Nowadays there is sometimes the opportunity for weekly boarders, but generally speaking many of these boarders come from long distances. I spent a couple of years coaching football teams at Downlands and I remember we had players from as far away as the Gulf Country and Cape York Peninsula. It took them a long time to get home once school broke up. They spent two or three days getting home and then another two or three days getting back to school. They were a long way from home. I know the schools in Toowoomba have all sympathetically looked at the fee structure. If there is any increase in fees at Toowoomba Grammar School, it is usually announced at the parent body at the speech day at the end of the year. I know that the board of the school, under the leadership of Glen McCracken, looks at this very carefully, particularly in view of the drought in recent years. I know the member for Cunningham spoke about the cattle slump that occurred during the seventies and how difficult it was for families in those five or six years to send their children away to school. I know all of the boarding schools in Toowoomba during periods of drought, particularly in the nineties and particularly in the late eighties during the high interest rate period, had to in many cases look very carefully and sympathetically at how they handled the fee structure and how they provided assistance, particularly to big families who had a number of children at the school. This bill changes the oversight or the purview of the transport of students with disabilities from the Department of Transport to the Department of Education. That seems to me to make good sense. It is wonderful to see the way in which students with disabilities are being assisted to have every opportunity to receive a first-class education. I know that during the nineties under a principal called Mike Norris the Glennie School brought in children with disabilities. It had not happened before and the school found there was an enormous number of things it had to do. I do not think it realised, in that old timber school with different levels, the number of things that it had to do. There were some young women with spina bifida, and a lot of adjustments with ramps had to be made. It helped the school community and the students themselves to realise the importance of providing access and equitable assistance to those with a disability. It certainly 4266 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003 helped the young women at the school to realise they may be fortunate in that others have a disability that needs consideration and care. I congratulate all the schools in Toowoomba which have been working very hard to provide those with a disability every opportunity. In particular, Centenary Heights State High School in my electorate was virtually a pioneer in providing disability services to students, particularly to deaf students. Being an older high school, it had the difficulties and problems with steps. It did not have buildings on the ground. It had to make a number of adjustments with new buildings. The dedication of the staff at Centenary Heights State High School was quite outstanding, as were the efforts that they put in to provide quality education for those with disabilities. Likewise, I had the opportunity to visit the Harristown State High School unit last year. I was quite overwhelmed at seeing the care and commitment of some of those teachers to their students who had a disability. We are supporting this bill. It is a good bill. If it can maintain the high standards that we have seen at magnificent schools like the Toowoomba Grammar School, and particularly maintain the integrity of the name 'grammar' for grammar schools and the other principles of the bill, then I am sure it will enhance secondary school education in our state. Ms NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (2.40 p.m.): I rise to speak briefly in support of the Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill brought to the House by the Minister for Education, Anna Bligh. There are two excellent grammar schools in my electorate, the Ipswich Grammar School and the Ipswich Girls Grammar School. Mrs Reilly: My husband is an old boy of Ipswich Grammar. Ms NOLAN: The member for Mudgeeraba's husband is an old boy of Ipswich Grammar, which is better than his being an old boy of the Ipswich Girls Grammar, I imagine. Mrs Reilly: Well, I am pleased. They got it right. Ms NOLAN: They got it right. Ipswich Grammar School is the oldest secondary school in Queensland, having been established in 1863. It is a school of considerable reputation in Ipswich and statewide. Interestingly, one of the founders of the school was Arthur Macalister, who was the member for Ipswich on and off over a number of years and the second Premier of Queensland. I have to admit that in my role as the member for Ipswich I had not heard of this Macalister character until quite recently when the Speaker approached me to gain the support of the community to purchase a portrait of Mr Macalister to hang in the parliament. That I did. Ipswich Grammar School very kindly donated most of the money, along with Tom Edwards and his brother Sir Llew Edwards, which allowed us to purchase the portrait of Mr Macalister for the parliament. As well as being a founder of the Ipswich Grammar School, this Macalister character was the key person who established the first railway in Queensland from Ipswich to Grandchester, and then the railway to Brisbane. He was involved in the establishment of St Stephens Presbyterian Church and he was very active in the lodge. The Ipswich Grammar School has been very proud to find this character and to claim him as its own. He was certainly an interesting character. He became known as 'Slippery Mac' for his dodgy political deals. Despite the reputation of the time, 150 years or so has somewhat redeemed him. These days, we in Ipswich are happy to claim him as our own. Since those beginnings the Ipswich Grammar School has established a reputation for education and excellence all around the state. Last year it was the third most successful school academically of all the boys schools in Queensland. It has a tremendous sporting reputation and a good record of pastoral care as well. I know a little bit about the Ipswich Girls Grammar School, having gone there myself. My mother is now its deputy principal. It is a school that has changed enormously over the years. It has gone from having only a small number of girls, focusing on the education of ladies to be good wives, to a school that has a tremendous academic record. It continues to produce, I would hope, quite respectable young women. Grammar school governance is unique, and this bill takes a number of steps to protect grammar schools and to alter their governance. The bill protects the grammar school name, which I think is very important. All of the state's grammar schools have worked very hard to develop a reputation over a number of years. This bill takes some important steps, as the member for Toowoomba South touched on, to protect that name. Importantly, the bill also gives the minister power to question boards when she is not satisfied with their financial accountability and to direct boards to act in particular ways. The need for these powers was highlighted by the collapse of the Rockhampton Girls Grammar School which to many 16 Oct 2003 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4267 people came as a real surprise in the grammar school community. In a way, grammar schools had traded on their name for many, many years. One of the grammar schools getting itself into serious financial difficulty was, in a sense, unexpected in the broader education community. It highlighted the need for the new powers that we are seeing today. The nature of grammar schools has very much changed. Most of them are boarding schools, but in recent years we have largely seen the collapse of boarding due to changes in the rural economy. Grammar schools have also come under much greater competition from state schools, which improve their reputation and excellence all the time, and from other independent schools. In Ipswich, for instance, the West Moreton Anglican College has been in a good position to receive very generous federal funding, as new independent schools do, and has placed considerable pressure on the existing grammar schools. In that environment it is important to shore up the processes of grammar school governance. It is not enough for grammar schools to trade on their time name and to trade on their reputation. I think that is primarily what this bill is about. This bill establishes much stronger governance and management procedures. I think it is an important step to emphasise to grammar schools that they need to take very seriously their financial accountability. It also says to grammar schools that we as a government are extremely interested in them and supportive of them. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs MILLER (Bundamba—ALP) (2.46 p.m.): It is a pleasure to rise in support of the Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill currently before the House. I would like to congratulate the minister, Anna Bligh, on bringing yet another piece of legislation before the House that will reinforce, support and protect schooling in Queensland. This time it is about grammar schools. The purpose of the bill is to amend the act in respect of the Department of Education's public benefit test, which found it to be anticompetitive, to provide for protection of the grammar school name, and to provide greater clarity in relation to the minister's powers in the event that a grammar school experiences serious financial trouble. There are currently eight grammar schools in Queensland constituted as statutory bodies. The first, Ipswich Grammar, was established in my home town in 1863, yet another first for Ipswich. This school claims such famous past students as Sir Harry Gibbs, the former Chief Justice of the High Court, footballers Kerrod and Kevin Walters, cricketer Craig McDermott, tennis player Roy Emerson and celebrated cinematographer Charles Chauvel. It was followed by Brisbane Grammar School in 1868 and then Brisbane Girls Grammar School in 1875. The founder of Brisbane Girls Grammar, Sir Charles Lilly, had what was probably a novel concept at the time. He had a vision to provide young women with the same educational opportunities as their brothers. These were followed by Toowoomba Grammar in 1877, Rockhampton Grammar in 1881, Townsville Grammar in 1888 and finally Ipswich Girls Grammar and Rockhampton Girls Grammar in 1892. The Ipswich Girls Grammar motto is 'Omnia Superat—' Ms Nolan: 'Dilgentia'. Mrs MILLER: '—Dilgentia'. I thank my honourable colleague the member for Ipswich for helping me out with the Latin. Ms Nolan: A motto which was a 'super rat'. Mrs MILLER: I am advised that they used to have a motto, which was a 'super rat'. That was the mascot at the school! Bremer State High School, which is my old high school, did not provide for the study of such dead languages. In the absence of my classically educated colleague the Minister for the Arts, the Hon. Matt Foley, I had to resort to the Internet for translation. The member for Ipswich might be able to correct me on this, but I believe it is: diligence overcomes all obstacles. Ms Nolan: It's the first time I've heard it. Mrs MILLER: The member for Ipswich has had some education today. That is certainly evident in the spirit of the school. Can I say to the House that my Auntie Isabel Verrall was a student at Ipswich Girls Grammar School. She went on to teach many, many primary school students in our state school system over many decades. She also taught at Silkstone State School where I was a student. I can tell members that it was very difficult having an aunt teaching year 2 when I was there in year 1. Everything I did was reported home. My Auntie Jean Pringle was also the infants principal at Silkstone State School at the time so I could not move. I think I had a very inhibited years 1 and 2 at that school. 4268 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003

Ms Keech: Were you a perfect student? Mrs MILLER: Yes, I think I probably was a perfect student. My elder daughter, Stephanie, was a student at Ipswich Girls Grammar School, and the father of the member for Ipswich, Mr Nolan, was one of her favourite teachers at the school. He was a supply teacher. I do not know whether she was just telling me this to crawl to the member for Ipswich, but never mind. My younger daughter, Brianna, is currently a student at the grammar school. Principal Susan Just does a fantastic job supported by Mrs Nolan, the mother of the member for Ipswich. Everything is going well at the school. The eight grammar schools share a number of distinctive characteristics. They were initiated by their communities to fulfil a perceived need; they are governed by boards of trustees, including nominees of the minister, elected donors and subscribers; they have no religious affiliation; and they enjoy autonomy in operational matters similar to other state schools. It is true that grammar schools as part of the non-state school family have made a substantial contribution to education in Queensland. There has been comprehensive consultation on this bill not only within the ranks of the grammar schools but also within the broader educational community. The bill continues the work of the Minister for Education in ensuring that the legislative instruments that govern education in this state are current, practical and relevant. The grammar schools in my home city of Ipswich are certainly a great part of our community. Many parents really struggle to send their children to grammar schools, which really are doing a wonderful job. I have pleasure in commending the bill to the House. Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (2.51 p.m.): I rise to speak in support of the Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2003. I want to spend a short time talking about the significance of grammar schools in Queensland. I first became aware of the singularity and the significance of these schools when I was studying for a Diploma of Education at the Adelaide University. Readings in education philosophy and history went to great pains to talk about institutions such as the Rockhampton Grammar School and other grammar schools in Queensland and the fact that they were significant in a number of respects. They were significant, first of all, in terms of their timing in that they were established so early in the development of this country and state. Essentially, these schools of excellence were set up to provide a very sound education, particularly in what might be described as the classical education curriculum. The way that they did that and how they were governed and set up at the time are particularly significant. In the latter half of the 19th century Queensland was a very young state and was still a fairly wild and undeveloped place. For instance, at that time there were fundamental concerns in Brisbane with regard to its articulation of water and sewerage, ensuring that the place did not burn down and that it was safe to live in. The fact that these major secondary schools of excellence in education were established while at the same time those very basic concerns were being addressed is quite an achievement. Whilst the establishment of these schools was seen in those times as a very advanced concept, we have come full circle in that the conclusion of the minister's second reading speech refers to the continuation of the productive private-public partnership in respect of these schools. In that sense, the structure of these schools being a joint collaboration between private interests and the state government foreshadowed what is seen today to be a very desirable approach to the world. That is, we have provided a facility within our state school system to allow for private- public partnerships to be established. I understand that there are a couple of those already being trialled, and I wish them well. It is a very advanced concept and a great concept, because these institutions have shown that they have worked well under that combination of governance and funding. That is testament to the strength of that structure and that system of governance. I also understand that the sites on which these schools are established are predominantly deeds of grant in trust properties, and that provides a specific character to that relationship with the government. The concept of these schools is very interesting in terms of the form of curriculum and the fundamental characteristics under which they operate. They can be summarised very briefly as a philosophy of excellence in preparing the whole person to contribute productively as a member of civil society through scholarship, aesthetic appreciation, sporting achievement, self-awareness and community service. They provide a non-discriminatory secular education that is tolerant to a diversity of religions and cultures. The word 'secular' is very interesting in that it comes from a 16 Oct 2003 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4269

Latin derivation referring to the world as opposed to the church. It can also be referred to as non- ecclesiastical, non-religious or non-sacred. That does not deny the pursuit of interest in the study of religions or any other exposure to religions. It also encompasses well-developed systems of governance, which I have already mentioned; a strong reputation for the provision of a first-class educational experience; financial security afforded by government guarantees, et cetera; a strong market presence; and successful and influential past student bodies that give the status of those schools great carriage. These certainly are unique institutions. I congratulate the minister for bringing this legislation to the House, because these amendments will ensure the continuity and safety of these institutions, that their financial status is stable and guaranteed and also that their accountability to the wider community is guaranteed. In that regard, they have two principal spheres of accountability: to the public—that is, the many past, present and future students and families who will have involvement with these institutions—and also to the government in the sense that they employ government resources on a recurrent basis as well as have use of very significant pieces of land which are of great value in today's market on which those schools are located. Previous speakers have covered the content of this bill very well. All of those matters bring this very important piece of legislation regulating grammar schools in Queensland up to date. It is a very timely review which recognises the realities of today's environment. I commend the bill to the House. Hon. A. M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education) (2.58 p.m.), in reply: Grammar schools have played a very significant role in the history and development of Queensland, not only in its educational sector but also in the broadest sense of its development. Like all schools, grammar schools have touched the lives of thousands of people. They continue to provide outstanding educational services in a number of regional centres in Queensland as well as here in the capital. I think that was reflected in the speeches of members, who made many references to their own personal experiences and to the personal experiences of their families and family members, as well as to the role that grammar schools have played in their own local communities and, indeed, the history of Queensland and the development of Queensland as a state. The shadow minister indicated that the opposition will be supporting the bill. I thank the opposition for its support on this issue, which I would hope would always enjoy bipartisanship. The shadow minister raised an issue in relation to consultation with the two organisations which have registered business names as grammar schools. This bill will prohibit those organisations from using the word 'grammar' in any school they may set up at some stage. He asked about consultation with those organisations. I advise that neither of those organisations is actually operating as a business, despite having registered business names some years ago. Gold Coast Grammar School failed in an attempt to have a non-state school accredited. I was also concerned that these organisations be afforded the opportunity to put their case. Both of the business name owners—that is, Charters Towers Grammar School and Gold Coast Grammar School—were issued with copies of the consultation draft with an invitation to make submissions to the department and no reply was received from them. I thank a number of people involved in the development of this bill. It has been a partnership between Education Queensland and some representatives of the grammar school community. The Grammar Schools Association of Queensland is chaired by Stuart Durward, and he was representing the association along with Cherrell Hirst from Brisbane Girls Grammar, Peter Phillips from Ipswich Girls Grammar and Susan Bain, the executive officer of the association. They were assisted in the task by Leigh Tabrett, the assistant director-general for Education Queensland with responsibility overall for non-state schooling, and her officers Laurie Vogler, Robert Kidston and Ian Maconachie. I thank all of those individuals for their contribution. This is not an easy area sometimes. It is inevitable where we find competition. I think a number of members commented on the competitive environment of schooling these days. We find that where there is competition, even when it is a good thing, there is inevitable friction from time to time. I am very pleased to say that it was a very constructive process. I appreciated the amount of time members gave to the steering committee. I think the bill represents a very good outcome for both the grammar schools community and the people of Queensland. I commend the bill to the House. Motion agreed to. 4270 Grammar Schools and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003

Committee Hon. A. M. BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education) in charge of the bill. Clauses 1 to 6, as read, agreed to. Clause 7— Mr COPELAND (3.03 p.m.): This clause refers to the criteria of the community raising $100,000 being removed and other criteria being inserted. One of the things I raised was that the requirement for government to contribute financially is now no longer there. The explanatory notes go into the different criteria that are there. One of the considerations the minister must have regard to is the financial considerations. Would the minister envisage in the future that the state government would still be contributing to the establishment of grammar schools should the criteria be met in relation to the community and need? Ms BLIGH: It is important to read the provisions of this legislation in conjunction with the provisions of the non-state schools accreditation act and to understand that not only in the legislative framework but also within what are quite complex funding arrangements between both the Commonwealth and state governments. Obviously I cannot predict what they may be into the forever future, but I would certainly envisage that any school, regardless of whether it is set up under the Grammar Schools Act—it would still be required to go through an accreditation process—approved for accreditation both through that process and ultimately by the Minister for Education of the day, would then become eligible for government funding through the normal government funding eligibility processes of that act. As I said, I cannot say that that will never change, but it would only change if it were changed through the deliberations of this parliament. The current arrangements provide adequately that any new grammar school, along with any new non-state school, becomes eligible for the funding that is available through both the Commonwealth and state governments. Clause 7, as read, agreed to. Clauses 8 to 22, as read, agreed to. Clause 23— Ms BLIGH (3.05 p.m.): I move the following amendments— 1 Clause 23— Page 28, lines 11 and 12— omit, insert— '(b) for the Sunshine Coast Grammar School— (i) at a time during the period of 1 year starting on the commencement day—the entity operating the school at the time; or (ii) at a later time—the entity operating the school on the day that is 1 year after the commencement day.'. 2 Clause 23— At page 28, line 14 to line 15, 'its current operator'— omit, insert— 'Sunshine Coast Grammar School Pty Ltd ACN 064 506 814'. These amendments go to clarifying the circumstances in which those two grammar schools which have been established for some time and are using the word 'grammar' in their title but which were not established under the Grammar Schools Act and are not bound by the provisions of that act may continue to use the word 'grammar'. The two schools are Sunshine Coast Grammar School and Anglican Church Grammar School. The bill provides that those two organisations can continue to use the word 'grammar' and are protected in their use of that name, but only if they continue to be operated by the same organisation. I think members will appreciate that, while both of those schools are providing excellent educational services, I felt it was necessary legislatively to protect against the possibility, even if it might be remote, that they could be taken over by an organisation at some stage in the future which would not meet those circumstances. However, after the bill was introduced it was brought to my attention that the Sunshine Coast Grammar School, which is currently set up in a unique way, as a business, is going through a process within its school community of changing its governance structures and possibly moving to a different operator. While those issues are unresolved, it is anticipated that they will be resolved within 12 months, and I was satisfied that it ought to be given that sort of latitude. It was clearly the intention of the legislation to ensure that the school as it is currently operating could continue 16 Oct 2003 Dissolution of Palm Island Aboriginal Council 4271 to operate with the name it is well known by in that community. The effect of these clauses is simply to preserve the original intention and to accommodate information that came to my attention after the bill was introduced into the House. I seek leave to table the explanatory notes to those amendments. Leave granted. Amendments agreed to. Clause 23, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 24 to 31, as read, agreed to. Schedule, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, with amendments.

Third Reading Bill, on motion of Ms Bligh, by leave, read a third time.

COMMUNITY SERVICES (ABORIGINES—DISSOLUTION OF PALM ISLAND ABORIGINAL COUNCIL) REGULATION (No. 1) 2003 Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services and Minister for Seniors) (3.10 p.m.): As required under section 73 of the Constitution of Queensland 2001, I table the Community Services (Aborigines—Dissolution of Palm Island Aboriginal Council) Regulation (No. 1) 2003.

DISSOLUTION OF PALM ISLAND ABORIGINAL COUNCIL Hon. J. C. SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Families and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Minister for Disability Services and Minister for Seniors) (3.11 p.m.), by leave without notice: As required under Section 75 of the Constitution of Queensland 2001, I move— That the House ratify the dissolution of Palm Island Aboriginal Council. This regulation, which purports to dissolve the Palm Island Aboriginal Council, was made earlier today by the Governor in Council pursuant to section 20 of the Community Services (Aborigines) Act 1984. Although the purpose of the regulation is to dissolve the Palm Island Aboriginal Council, the Constitution of Queensland Act 2001 requires that it be ratified by the Legislative Assembly before it can take effect. Until then it has the effect only of suspending the Palm Island Aboriginal Council. So it is a matter of the utmost urgency that the regulation dissolving the council is ratified, enabling the Governor in Council to appoint an administrator to continue the operation of the council. Following the ratification of the dissolution regulation, I intend to immediately recommend to the Governor in Council the appointment of an administrator. Let me explain the context for this action by the government. On 28 May 2003, I issued a notice pursuant to section 15 of the Community Services (Aborigines) Act 1984 requesting that the Palm Island Aboriginal Council show cause why it should not be dissolved. Section 20 of the Community Services Act empowers the Governor in Council to dissolve an Aboriginal council if the minister is satisfied that the council has acted unlawfully or corruptly; has acted in a way that puts at risk its capacity to exercise properly its jurisdiction of local government; or is incompetent or cannot properly exercise its jurisdiction of local government. In issuing the show cause notice, I had significant concerns about the ability of the council to properly exercise its jurisdiction of local government. Among the most serious concerns I held was that the council was insolvent and there was evidence of serious mismanagement of essential services, community services and business operations by the council. There is inherent instability and ongoing conflict among elected councillors and there has not been a permanent council clerk appointed for over 12 months. The third acting council clerk has only just been appointed this week. However, the council has not been able to demonstrate in its submissions that it is currently solvent. 4272 Dissolution of Palm Island Aboriginal Council 16 Oct 2003

PricewaterhouseCoopers conducted an independent assessment of the council's response on behalf of the department. PricewaterhouseCoopers concluded that it was unable to determine the council's financial position from the information provided by the council. No organisation can operate effectively and accountably under these circumstances. The membership of the council has been unstable since the elections in March 2000. Out of the nine members elected then, six councillors have resigned, including a former chair. In excess of 50 council meetings were held in the 2001-02 financial year, which typifies the council's inability to make effective and binding decisions and to resolve matters promptly. Council minutes are so poor it is difficult to know what decisions the council has made from time to time. There is a lack of process in staff appointments and the significant overstaffing of council's operations has meant the council is spending well beyond its means. A recent appointment of an acting council clerk ended in conflict in recent weeks with the appointee resigning and leaving the island. The council's Coolgaree Bay Tavern lost over $100,000 in 2002- 03. Residents have been unable to obtain cash from the council-run Commonwealth Bank agency and there have been complaints from residents that mail is opened illegally by staff within the council-run Australia Post agency. The council has struggled to deliver on major infrastructure projects and it has only been through the assistance of the Australian Army that this vital work has progressed recently. There is a backlog of critical infrastructure work that has not progressed, including government accommodation units, community housing, and operations and maintenance of water and sewerage facilities. The lack of activity also threatens the continuation of employment and training programs at the island and it is vital that opportunity for continued and meaningful employment is not lost through a lack of will by the council. There is considerable public unrest within the community resulting from the poor or non- existent service delivery in many of the council's community and municipal functions. The elected council has not demonstrated that it is willing or able to address these issues, and the level of conflict among councillors has meant that the needs of the community are not being met. The opportunity was provided for the council to reassure me that the issues of concern which I raised were being effectively dealt with. The council has simply failed to provide that assurance. After careful and thorough consideration of all relevant information, including the advice of PricewaterhouseCoopers and the Crown Solicitor, I came to the view that council has acted in a way that puts at risk its capacity to exercise properly its jurisdiction of local government. Under section 20 of the Community Services Act, that is one of the grounds for me to be satisfied that the council should be dissolved. Following dissolution of a council, the Community Services Act requires an administrator to be appointed. I will be recommending to the Governor in Council the appointment of an administrator with the necessary skills and experience to return the council to solvency and restore an acceptable level of service delivery in the community. The period of administration will be until a new council is elected in March 2004. The proposed administrator will be an experienced insolvency practitioner with extensive experience in managing diverse businesses and organisations, including Aboriginal corporations. The administrator's key tasks will be to implement systems and procedures to support good corporate governance, improve service delivery and ensure the council's future financial viability. It would be unrealistic to expect an administrator to resolve all of the council's problems within the six-month period of administration. However, I am confident that the administrator will make immediate improvements in the delivery of essential services and will lay a very solid foundation for a new council to be elected in March 2004. The ongoing problems at Palm Island leave the government with little alternative but to exercise its power to intervene. The state's power to intervene in local government exists as a safeguard for the interests of residents such as those at Palm Island. It is a sad day when the government finds itself in the position of having to intervene in this way. The dissolution of a council and the appointment of an administrator is, of course, a measure of last resort. The situation at Palm Island illustrates the wider problems of accountability and poor governance affecting Aboriginal councils across the state. Last week in this House, I announced the government's plans to overhaul the current system of community governance in Aboriginal communities. We will be legislating to introduce the best practice standards for strong, accountable local governance applicable to other local governments across the state. We will also be boosting the level of support for councils to improve their capacity to deliver good governance. With the implementation of these reforms, it is my hope that situations such as that at Palm Island will not arise in the future. The government is committed to 16 Oct 2003 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 4273 being proactive to avoid a recurrence of the problems at Palm Island. In the meantime, however, it is our obligation to the residents of Palm Island to intervene on their behalf. Hon. M. F. REYNOLDS (Townsville—ALP) (Minister for Emergency Services and Minister Assisting the Premier in North Queensland) (3.18 p.m.): I rise to second the motion moved by the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy to ratify the regulation dissolving the Palm Island Aboriginal Council. As the member for Townsville, I commend the minister for taking this action to safeguard the interests of the Palm Island community. I know that this is not a course of action that the minister has taken lightly. Every effort has been made to give the Palm Island Aboriginal Council the opportunity to address the serious problems the minister has spoken about. Sadly, the council has proven to be either unwilling or unable to get its act together and the residents of Palm Island are suffering as a result. I can see no prospect of the situation improving without urgent intervention by the state. The council employs more than 250 staff and is responsible for a range of essential services to the community. I say today that the council is on the brink of collapse, which will throw the community into even more disarray. The insolvency of the council demands urgent remedial action and the council is clearly unable to make the hard decisions necessary to turn around the current situation. The council has a track record of excessive meetings, resulting in substantial meeting fees to councillors. All of these meetings have clearly not improved the level of service delivery. My Palm Island constituents are fed up with the constant infighting, which is a waste of time and effort, while basic services are not delivered. I believe that it is incumbent upon the government to act to protect the interests of the Palm Island community and overcome the negative impacts that the community has suffered. I urge members to support this motion so that an administrator can be appointed to Palm Island. Motion agreed to.

SECOND-HAND DEALERS AND PAWNBROKERS BILL Second Reading Resumed from 19 August (see p. 2933). Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (3.21 p.m.): I am pleased to be able to make a short contribution to the consideration in this parliament of the Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill. It is a machinery type bill. Certainly, I do not believe that there is anything controversial in the bill and, as such, we will be pleased to lend our support to the government for the passage of this bill through the House this afternoon in a relatively short period. The bill comes about because of the national competition policy reforms that arose out of a meeting of the Council of Australian Governments back in 1995. There have been a number of pieces of legislation considered in this session of the parliament that are these machinery type pieces of legislation that are aimed at putting in place the necessary changes to ensure that the Queensland statutes conform with the national competition policy agreement. That agreement required all state and territory governments to review and, where appropriate, reform all anticompetitive legislation. That is the approach that has been taken by this amending bill before the House today. The Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984, the Pawnbrokers Act 1984 and the Funeral Benefit Business Act 1982 have all been reviewed in accordance with that process that arose from the national competition policy requirements. That review has been conducted by a unit within the Office of Fair Trading, hence the fact that the minister has the carriage of the bill today. The report found that the benefits of the anticompetitive provisions contained in the Funeral Benefit Business Act outweighed the cost to the community as a whole and it made a number of recommendations. In looking at the impacts that this legislation will have on the funeral benefit business, I think it is important to recognise and to reassure people that there will be no change to existing contracts. That is made pretty clear in the explanatory notes that accompany the bill and that is the way it should be. The whole area of funeral benefits and prepaid funerals and arranged funerals is certainly an area of some sensitivity and people who engage in those types of arrangements need to know 4274 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 16 Oct 2003 that they can do that with security. The bill before the House seeks to provide that security to people who enter into those arrangements. In recent times, those businesses that provide this service have increased the amount of business that they do. We have seen some aggressive marketing of those types of arrangements and it is well that the legislation seeks to provide the types of security that consumers in Queensland should be able to expect. The requirements for all of the contracts under this legislation are listed in the explanatory notes and they are fairly comprehensive. The contracts will require that any type of entity will be permitted to operate as a funeral benefit business. The legislation is to apply to any business that sells a funeral benefit in Queensland or to Queensland residents. It is important that the legislation covers not just companies that operate within Queensland but also anyone who sells these benefits within Queensland. The other requirements of the legislation are that all funeral benefit businesses are deemed to be trustees under the Trustees Act in respect of prepayment money entrusted to them, unless they are already regulated under relevant Commonwealth legislation. That type of regulation is certainly warranted given the amounts of money that are being entrusted to these entities. It will also be a requirement under the contract that the contributors may choose whether they deposit their prepayment money with a funeral director or with an authorised investment manager. That certainly widens the choice that is available to consumers. It will also be a requirement that, if contributors deposit their prepayment money with a funeral director, the funeral director must comply with the provisions of the Trusts Act in respect of those prepayment moneys and, most importantly, the cooling-off period of 30 days is to be introduced. I think that cooling-off periods are a great idea, especially for elderly people and people who are vulnerable to the techniques of high-pressure salespeople and aggressive marketing in whatever form. Certainly, the people who are more likely to be consumers of these funeral benefit businesses fall into that category. It is good to see that that cooling-off period concept has been introduced into this legislation. In respect of the funeral benefit businesses, there is also a requirement for a short client care statement and there are substantial penalties for non- compliance listed in the bill. The bill also covers second-hand dealers and amends the Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984 and the Pawnbrokers Act 1984. It consolidates those two acts into a single piece of legislation. Once again, the changes that are envisaged to be made to the second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers industry arise out of national competition policy recommendations. The changes are not great, but I think that they are mainly for the better. The legislation retains the licensing of second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers and entrepreneurs where it repeals the provisions relating to collectors. There is also a modification of licensing requirements, including the introduction of a single licence type for both second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers for multisite licences and a new option for one or three-year licence renewals. There is also the introduction of optional computerisation of transaction records and the disposal of unredeemed pledges by auction to be made optional. That is an interesting addition to the legislation that the minister might like to comment on. I was surprised to learn that that was not an option under the old act. I have to confess that I was not aware of that. It seems commonsense that those unredeemed pledges should be able to be disposed of by auction. Certainly, the bill before the House fixes up that particular area. I think most people would be surprised to know that pawnbrokers did not have the option of redeeming those unclaimed pledges using the auction method. This is a non-controversial bill. I certainly have not had any controversies raised with me regarding it. It is a machinery type bill that has arisen out of the national competition policy process, and I see no reason why this bill should not be passed through this chamber this afternoon in a fairly speedy manner. I commend the bill to the House. Mr REEVES (Mansfield—ALP) (3.30 p.m.): It is with great pleasure that I rise to support the Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill. This is another great bill introduced by the consumers' friend, the Minister for Fair Trading. I congratulate the member for Callide on supporting the bill. The Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 2003 will implement the national competition policy recommendations for the Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984, the Pawnbrokers Act 1984 and the Funeral Benefits Business Act 1982. The NCP report on the Funeral Benefits Business Act 1982 made the following recommendations which have been included in the bill: retaining all of the existing consumer protections in the current act for existing 16 Oct 2003 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 4275 contracts; introducing for all new contracts a 30-day cooling-off period and a client care statement; extending the act to apply to any person selling funeral benefits to a consumer in Queensland; and introducing substantial penalties for non-compliance. The NCP report for the Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act and the Pawnbrokers Act 1984 made the following recommendations which have been included in the bill: consolidation of the two acts into a single piece of legislation; repeal of the provisions relating to collectors; modification of licensing requirements including introduction of a single licence type for both second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers; multisite licences; replacement of the fit and proper person test with a suitability test for applicants and a new option for one- or three-year licence renewals; and introduction of optional computerisation of transaction records. Also, the current disposal of unredeemed pledges by auction is now optional, with the introduction of the option to sell the unredeemed pledge at the place it was pawned. At a meeting of the Council of Australian Governments on 11 April 1995, the Queensland government, together with the other states and territories, signed an agreement with the Commonwealth to implement national competition policy reforms. The competition policy agreement requires all state and territory governments to review and, where appropriate, reform any anticompetitive legislation, which is what is happening here. The guiding principle is that legislation should not restrict competition unless it can be demonstrated that the benefits of the restriction to the community as a whole outweigh the costs and that the objectives of the legislation can only be achieved by restricting competition. In accordance with the competition policy agreement, the Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984, the Pawnbrokers Act 1984 and the Funeral Benefit Business Act 1982 have all been reviewed. The objective of this bill is to implement the NCP recommendations for those three acts. This bill will be welcomed by consumers and industry. New funeral benefit business contracts will provide greater consumer protection, greater choice, and peace of mind when it comes to the sensitive matter of prepaying funerals. The modernised licensing requirements for second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers will be far more efficient and provide much more flexibility to licensees. This demonstrates the beneficial results achieved by acting on recommendations from the NCP review. With respect to new contracts regarding funerals, the NCP recommendations provide greater consumer protection. The bill will provide for a 30-day cooling-off period, giving consumers enough time to carefully consider the terms of the contract they have entered into. This is particularly important, as consumer groups most likely to take out prepaid funeral benefits are aged 60 years or over, are on incomes that are low by community standards and are particularly vulnerable as they often enter funeral benefit contracts at a time when they are organising a funeral for a loved one and are still grieving. It is only natural if a partner dies and the funeral home offers a double choice—for want of a better word—that the person would not be in the best mind to make decisions. To assist consumers with understanding fully what they have committed to under a prepaid funeral contract, the bill also makes it mandatory for the providers of funeral benefits to give consumers a client care statement, containing details in plain English of the rights and responsibilities the consumer has under the contract. Finally, the current act applies to only 15 registered corporations. The bill extends the application of the act to any type of entity if they operate as a funeral benefit business. Queensland residents will be protected from shonky businesses, no matter what form they take. To deter industry from breaching the new requirements, substantial penalties have been introduced. I have one question which has come to mind which I would like to ask of the minister. If someone signs up for a prepaid funeral, what safeguards does that person have if the funeral operator goes out of business a couple of years later? I congratulate the minister on this legislation. She has once again shown that she is the consumer's friend, and I commend the bill to the House. Ms STONE (Springwood—ALP) (3.35 p.m.): I rise to support the bill before the House today. As a member of parliament, and in my former role as an electorate officer, I have had raised with me several complaints about funeral services. These complaints have usually come from people who are emotionally upset and some are embarrassed to have to query the cost of their loved one's funeral. Many of them do not understand why their family member has paid contributions over many years and still the family is left with a large bill to pay. People are grieving, and it is 4276 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 16 Oct 2003 without doubt many do not have the energy to raise queries during this time. I am sure there are many inquiries not raised because of the fact that it is just too hard during this time in people's lives. Prepaid funeral contracts are most likely purchased after a loss. The cost and organisation of a funeral are rarely in anyone's mind until a loss occurs. People are vulnerable and many times they are grieving and not thinking rationally. Unfortunately, it is most common during this time for people to be targeted to purchase prepaid funeral fund packages. I welcome the 30-day cooling- off period this legislation introduces. The cooling-off period gives consumers 30 days to ensure they understand what they have committed to. It gives them the time to assess their decision, it gives them a chance to change their mind and it gives them a chance to notify that change of mind in writing before any money exchanges hands. People have also informed me they may not have made the same decision that they would have if they had not been so emotionally upset. So the 30-day cooling-off period gives them a chance to rectify this. I am also pleased to see the removal of the $5,000 benefit limit as this reflects the true costs of funerals today. Many contributors believe they have paid for their funeral and have taken this burden away from their loved ones. Unfortunately, this has not always been the case in the past. Many family members cannot understand the difference between the amount of money contributed and the cost of the funeral. The removal of the limit should assist in reducing this confusion. The introduction of the client care statement will assist in the explaining of the contract in a manner that will be understood more easily by the consumer. This will also assist family members understanding the contract in more detail, therefore reducing the angst during this emotional time. In relation to the Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984 and the Pawnbrokers Act 1984, second-hand dealing and pawnbroking are related businesses in that they both involve the resale of preowned goods. There are currently 2,492 second-hand dealers, 54 collectors and 214 pawnbrokers licensed in Queensland. Some 189 of the pawnbrokers are also licensed as second- hand dealers. As a consequence of this connection, a combined NCP review was undertaken of both the acts. The objectives of the acts are to deter crime in the second-hand property market and to help protect consumers from purchasing stolen property. The NCP review identified a number of licensing and business conduct restrictions on competition in both acts which have been addressed in this bill. I am pleased to see that because I know constituents of Springwood have raised with me the fact that they are wary about buying second-hand goods and certainly do not want to be left with stolen property. So this act certainly will be helping the people of Springwood who have raised that concern with me. The bill consolidates the two acts into a single piece of legislation and modifies the licensing requirements. The bill introduces a single license type for both second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers and multisite licenses. The license application process has been modernised, replacing the fit and proper person test with a suitability test for applicants. Second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers will have the option of extending their licensing period from one to three years. Other key aspects of the bill include the introduction of the optional auctioning of the unredeemed pledges by pawnbrokers, which is widely supported by industry, and the option for second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers to record their transactions electronically. So this bill provides greater consumer protection, and I commend the bill to the House. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (3.38 p.m.): I rise to speak in support of the Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill and the review of the Funeral Benefit Business Act 1982. Like other speakers, I welcome any changes to the Funeral Benefit Business Act that will give consumer protection. That is not to say that every business that holds out to sell prepaid funeral plans to consumers does the wrong thing. I guess the majority of them do the right thing. However, because of that small group that attempt to con consumers, it is essential that the minister continues on in a vigilant role to protect the consumers of Queensland. The difficulty with prepaid funeral benefits is that if the company holding out the benefits does turn out to be less than bona fide in its dealings, often that is not identified until the contract is called up for use, which is a time of great sadness for the family. As the minister stated in her second reading speech, often it is the more senior members of our community who are offered these funeral plans at a time when they have just experienced a loss, often of someone very close to them. The funeral home can take the opportunity to offer them, the remaining person, a contract that will save them any financial grief at the time of their own passing. Being conscious of 16 Oct 2003 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 4277 the strain that organising a funeral creates, they are often very vulnerable to accepting the funeral plan. Some of the funeral parlours are actually operating for another vendor and they are holding out the plan for a more centralised company. Often the local undertaker is acting in good faith, but the company that has offered them the scheme may not always be as upstanding and honest as the local undertaker believes. The protection that this gives the consumer is welcome. As I said, usually an error or a lack of bona fides is not identified until there is a loss in the family and the actual contract is called up. It is only then that its weaknesses are identified. One month for a person taking out a new contract to review that contract is welcome because of their vulnerability at the time of accepting the contract. The second part of the legislation deals with the Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill. As others have said, it simplifies the licensing process. It rolls the two licences into one and gives applicants or those renewing licences an opportunity to renew it for up to three years. That is welcome. Paperwork is a real pill when it comes to licensing. It has to be done every year, and that year rolls around very quickly. The statistics in the second reading speech are that there are 2,492 second-hand dealers, 54 collectors and 214 pawnbrokers licensed in Queensland. That is a significant number, but it is not surprising. There has been a real growth in the interest in purchasing pre-loved items of furniture and other things—and I mean that in a positive way—particularly in stripping down furniture and refurbishing it into something that can be really quite spectacular. So I am not surprised that there are so many licensed dealers in Queensland. I looked through the bill fairly closely. If I have interpreted it wrongly I would appreciate clarification, but I was pleased to see that the amendments that are proposed do not impinge on those people who, as a hobby, might purchase one or two pieces of furniture, refurbish it and sell it at a later date. It is not a business; they do it as a hobby. It would be tragic if governments—the current government or a future government—became so strict that this sort of legislation affected families where both people are retired and both are on pensions, or one person may have a disability or whatever, and they do that as a genuine interest. It is only a hobby, not a business. I am pleased to see that this legislation does not impose any unnecessary red tape on those people. There would be some dealers who would have a significant problem with people whom they would see as competitors, but in reality they do it as a hobby. They may buy one or two pieces a fortnight or a month and do the pieces up. It also gives the definition of a market operator as somebody who holds trash and treasure markets, flea markets, antique markets and antique fairs. Right across Queensland there is a real growth in those activities. Some of these markets are quite large. We have a historical village in my electorate, the Calliope Historical Village, which holds markets every three months. Then there is a charity market on the off months, the Calliope River Historical Village markets. They are significant affairs where a lot of market stall holders present the goods that they have made right across Queensland. Those people usually do it as a hobby. They make things and sell them usually to recoup enough to buy more materials and make more, whether it is handcraft, cooking or whatever. Some people grow plants. It would be a tragedy to see those people licensed or regulated out of enjoyment. I am not for one minute encouraging people who act wrongly or who do act as second-hand dealers or pawnbrokers without a licence. Those people do need to be dealt with. But these are people who, as a hobby, use the skills that they have, create goods and then sell them, usually for small amounts of money. They make goods available to those of us who do not have the time or the talent to do pottery, sewing or cooking. We are able to access quality goods and everybody is a winner. I looked through the bill very closely to see if those sorts of groups were impacted on, particularly the small operators. I am pleased to say—and I hope my understanding is right—that they are not impacted on. I wish all of those people who hold stalls right across Queensland every success, because they have become very much part of the social fabric of our community. They add colour and interest to our community, to our fairs and markets, and I wish them well. I commend the minister for the bill. Ms BOYLE (Cairns—ALP) (3.46 p.m.): I am pleased to support the Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 2003. As honourable members have already been informed, this bill arises out of the competition policy agreement requiring all state and territory governments to review and, where appropriate, reform all anticompetitive legislation. That is what we have done. We 4278 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 16 Oct 2003 have taken the opportunity in the process to modernise three different acts. I do not particularly want to comment on the changes to the Funeral Benefit Business Act 1982, other than to say that I think it is timely that we update the funeral benefit business industry in general and ensure that practices are proper for modern times. I did want to mention in particular the importance of second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers in a city like Cairns. They are not always regarded as people in mainstream industry. They are not always attended to by chamber of commerce style businesses or spoken about in terms of awards and innovations, yet they are very important businesses in a place like Cairns. Cairns has always been a place at the end of the line, as it were, where people would come, sometimes for a new life, sometimes escaping a past life and sometimes simply for a warmer and more relaxed lifestyle than they have had in southern cities. Whatever the reasons, often in the process of moving to Cairns there has been a need to suddenly establish a new household at quite a distance from cities like Sydney and Melbourne. You can understand that many of the people who move to Cairns do not bring much with them. They set up house once they get there and try it out, as it were. In the process, they will generally be purchasing some second-hand goods to get the house up and running and to establish their lifestyle. Equally, there are a good number of people who exit Cairns every year. It is a place where teachers, nurses, doctors, policemen and others come and work for a couple of years and then, often in the context of promotions, move on. In so doing they do not take all of their goods with them; they go to second-hand dealers. So the second-hand market in particular has always been a vibrant market in Cairns. Nonetheless, I was surprised to discover through this bill that there are some 2,500 second- hand dealers registered in the state of Queensland, 54 collectors and over 200 pawnbrokers. It is right and proper therefore that we not only make sure that their practices are not anticompetitive but also make sure that we bring in some provisions that are going to make the business that bit more accountable, particularly towards ensuring that there is not crime associated with the second-hand property market to help protect consumers from purchasing stolen property. One of the benefits in the bill for those who are in this industry is that it offers the option of extending licensing periods from one to three years, and I have no doubt that all of the dealers in Cairns will be pleased about this. I am pleased to support this bill. Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (3.49 p.m.): The Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill is the result of a national competition policy review of the Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984, the Pawnbrokers Act 1984 and the Funeral Benefit Business Act 1982 in accordance with the competition policy agreement. The bill will implement the national competition policy that legislation should generally not restrict competition unless it is in the public benefit. I will confine myself to commenting on the Funeral Benefit Business Act as it is of concern to my constituents. The NCP report found that the benefits of the anticompetitive provisions contained in the Funeral Benefits Business Act 1982, the FBB Act, outweigh the costs to the Queensland community as a whole. Nevertheless, the report recommended a number of reforms to the FBB Act in order to meet policy objectives in a more cost-effective manner. There are approximately 5,500 people aged 60 and over in the Mount Ommaney electorate. Mount Ommaney provides aged-care facilities at the Bethesda Caring Centre and the Hopetoun Aged Persons Centre, Canossa Care Centre at Oxley, the James Ommaney Village, the Jindalee Nursing Centre in Jindalee and the Sinnamon Village Aged Complex in Seventeen Mile Rocks. Many of these vulnerable people have contributed to funeral benefit funds administered by funeral businesses. These businesses are generally principled, honest and provide exactly the services required by the benefit contributor. Unfortunately, there are some who prey on the susceptible and defenceless nature of our oldest citizens, and this legislation will go a long way to ensuring funeral benefit contributors obtain the benefits they have paid for. There will be no changes to existing contracts to ensure the rights and obligations of the parties under these contracts are not changed. Therefore parts 3 and 4 of the FBB Act will be retained. New contract requirements will introduce a cooling-off period of 30 days to protect these people who sign up during a distressing time such as the loss of a partner. The act will apply to any business that sells a funeral benefit in Queensland or to Queensland residents, and all such businesses will be deemed trustees under the Queensland Trusts Act 1973 in respect of prepayment money entrusted to them unless they are already regulated under relevant Commonwealth legislation. 16 Oct 2003 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 4279

Funeral benefit contributors may choose whether they deposit their prepayment money with a funeral director or with an authorised investment manager, and if contributors deposit their prepayment money with a funeral director rather than an authorised investment manager the funeral director must comply with the provisions of part 3 of the Trusts Act in respect of the investment of those prepayment moneys. The rights and responsibilities of each of the parties to the contract must be detailed in plain English in a statement drafted or approved by the Office of Fair Trading. This statement must be explained to the contributor and duly signed by both parties, who must sign it as proof of mutual understanding of the terms and the conditions. It is pleasing to note that substantial penalties for non-compliance with the act are to be introduced, and this may deter rogues from the industry. I believe that this bill will provide greater security of mind for both our senior citizens and anyone else interested in funeral benefits issues. I commend the bill to the House. Ms MALE (Glass House—ALP) (3.52 p.m.): I rise in support of the Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill because it tackles some very important issues. Despite its name, the bill contains some crucial changes to the funeral industry, and I want to concentrate most of my time on these changes. In recent times we have heard some outrageous horror stories about some rogue elements of the funeral industry. These have included high-pressure sales tactics and insider trading between some morgue staff and funeral firms for referrals. A study of the fringe element of the industry in Queensland would give enough storyline ideas for the television series Six Feet Under to enable it to run for decades. A person's death is a very traumatic time for family and friends, and they must have the utmost confidence in the people who are helping them make the funeral arrangements. It would be easy for these people to be preyed on at these vulnerable times, and unfortunately this has taken place. This bill implements a mandatory client care statement which will go a long way to reducing the incidence of inappropriate practices. It is backed up by increased penalties for non- compliance, and this also is a good step forward. In addition, this bill provides for those people who have the foresight to preplan their own funeral arrangements. It allows for a 30-day cooling- off period to overcome any chance of high-pressure tactics being enforced and allows people to change their mind if it is not exactly what they want. A similar cooling-off period was introduced into the real estate industry, and I know some practitioners are complaining that some house buyers abuse this cooling-off period to force further changes to the contract or to pull out of it at the last minute. Similar complaints may come from funeral directors but, like the real estate agents, all I say is that self-regulation of the industry has clearly not worked to protect clients so it is incumbent on the government to step in to fix the problems. The bill also removes the loopholes which discriminate against young people and low- income elderly people when arranging funerals. These loopholes included the $5,000 cap on funeral benefits, and this will have very beneficial flow-on effects for a large number of people. On a related issue, I want to inform the House very briefly about the Beerburrum cemetery. The Beerburrum cemetery has been closed for decades. It was set up as a settlers cemetery in the 1930s and contains a number of ex-soldiers' graves. Over the years it was left to deteriorate quite significantly to the stage where many headstones cannot be recognised or found. The Caloundra City Council in conjunction with the Glasshouse-Landsborough RSL got together to repatriate the cemetery. They dedicated a memorial stone to the graves that could not be located and have since funded some new gates and reopened the Beerburrum cemetery. All of the people in the area are very happy with the work that has been done, and I congratulate the Glasshouse RSL for having the foresight to do the research that was needed and to provide the funding. I also thank the Beerburrum State School, because it has agreed to become the custodian for the area and will go there every week to ensure that it is being well looked after and well cared for. It is nice to see the Beerburrum community getting together to support this very worthwhile cause. Those who know me would know that I have actually written into my will that I want to be buried at the Beerburrum cemetery. It had been closed for so long that I did not think that that was possible, so hopefully some time in the very, very, very distant future I will certainly be able to utilise the Beerburrum cemetery, because it is in a splendid location at the base of Beerburrum Mountain. Beerburrum is the town where I grew up and it is certainly a place that I would like to return to. That said, I have spoken about only a small number of provisions in this bill. It contains a large number of other important changes to legislation which other members have touched on, so I will not reiterate those points. In conclusion, I would urge the Office of Fair Trading to continue to 4280 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 16 Oct 2003 closely monitor the effectiveness of this legislation and related legislation, because the funeral industry and the second-hand and pawnbrokers sector need constant review. By their very nature, these two business sectors are open to inappropriate practices re-emerging if any chinks in the legislation can be found. I congratulate the minister and her staff in the department on their work in this area, and I commend the bill to the House. Hon. M. ROSE (Currumbin—ALP) (Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading) (3.57 p.m.), in reply: I thank all members for their contributions. In summing up, the main objective of this bill is to implement NCP recommendations for the Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984, the Pawnbrokers Act 1984 and the Funeral Benefits Business Act 1982. The NCP report for the Funeral Benefits Business Act 1982 made a number of recommendations which have been included in the bill. One recommendation was to retain all of the existing consumer protections in the current act to ensure that the rights and responsibilities of parties to current contracts remain unchanged. With respect to new contracts, the bill will provide a 30-day cooling-off period, the provision of a client care statement and the introduction of substantial penalties to deter industry from breaching the new requirements. The NCP report for the Second-hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984 and the Pawnbrokers Act 1984 made the following recommendations which have been included in the bill. They are consolidation of the two acts into a single piece of legislation and repeal the provisions relating to collectors, as no other state licenses collectors and collectors are restricted in that they can only sell to other licensed dealers. If existing collectors wish to sell any second-hand goods they collect, they must obtain a second-hand dealers licence and they will no longer be restricted to sell to licensed dealers. Other recommendations include modification of the licensing requirements, including introduction of a single licence type for both second-hand dealers and pawnbrokers; multisite licences; replacement of the fit and proper person test with a suitability test for applicants; a new option for one- to three-year licence renewals; introduction of optional computerisation of transaction records; and the current disposal of unredeemed pledges by auction has been made optional. The modernised licensing requirements recommended by the NCP report for the Second- hand Dealers and Collectors Act 1984 and the Pawnbrokers Act 1984 and the amalgamation of the two acts will be far more efficient and provide much more flexibility to licensees. This bill is supported by community and government stakeholders and demonstrates some of the beneficial results that we will be achieving by acting on recommendations from the NCP review. I would like to thank the member for Callide for his and the opposition's support for this bill. The member did raise an issue in relation to unredeemed pledges. Under the old act, unredeemed pledges could be sold only at auction. This bill gives pawnbrokers the option to sell them over the counter for a fixed price. This is more efficient for many pledged items, which may not recover the amount of the loan at auction. The member for Mansfield wanted to know what safeguards are available if a funeral operator goes out of business. The funds are actually held in a trust account and are distributed to the contributors where the funeral operator goes out of business. The member for Gladstone wanted to know whether the bill would have any effect on people collecting and restoring old furniture as a hobby. The response to that is no. Hobbyists are not required to be licensed, which is probably just as well, because I have restored a few pieces of furniture myself. Only if sales are regular enough to meet the test of carrying on a business will hobby stallholders be required to hold a licence. The same sort of criteria are applied by the Taxation Office for GST and income tax purposes. I sincerely thank all members for their support. I would particularly like to thank Office of Fair Trading staff Anthea Walsh, Kerry Kahl, Ron Holt and Catherine Niven and also my personal staff Harold Thornton and David Smith. I commend the bill to the House. Motion agreed to.

Committee Hon. M. ROSE (Currumbin—ALP) (Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading) in charge of the bill. Clauses 1 to 139, as read, agreed to. 16 Oct 2003 Second-Hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Bill 4281

Clause 140— Ms ROSE (4.02 p.m.): I move the following amendment— 1 Clause 140— At page 62, line 24, 'of State'— omit, insert— 'or State'. I table the explanatory notes. Amendment agreed to. Clause 140, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 141 to 177, as read, agreed to. Clause 178— Ms ROSE (4.03 p.m.): I move the following amendment— 2 Clause 178— At page 74, lines 25 and 26, and at page 75, lines 1 and 2— omit, insert— ' 178 Amendment, relocation and renumbering of s 69 (Powers of inspectors) '(1) Section 69(1)(a), 'corporation or any person carrying on'— omit, insert— 'corporation or an unincorporated body, or any person, carrying on a'. '(2) Section 69, as amended— relocate and renumber in part 8, as section 81.'. The amendment is required to correct an error due to an oversight associated with the complex drafting of the NCP amendments to the Funeral Benefit Business Act 1982. The inconsistency became apparent after the bill was drafted. The amendment is required as the bill inadvertently restricts the application of the inspectors' powers to current registered funeral benefit providers, and there are only 15 registered corporations in that category. The amendment is required to ensure that Office of Fair Trading inspectors can exercise their powers for future funeral benefit contracts. The inspectors will need to be able to check that client care statements and copies of agreements are provided and that cooling-off periods are complied with. The restriction was not readily apparent at the time of the drafting. The amendment is required to allow inspectors to enforce both existing and future funeral benefit contracts. A minor typographical error will also be corrected. Amendment agreed to. Clause 178, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 179 to 182, as read, agreed to. Clause 183— Ms ROSE (4.05 p.m.): I move the following amendment— 3 Clause 183— At page 76, line 3, '81 to 88'— omit, insert— '82 to 89'. Amendment agreed to. Clause 183, as amended, agreed to. Clause 184, as read, agreed to. Schedules 1 to 3, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, with amendments.

Third Reading Bill, on motion of Ms Rose, by leave, read a third time. 4282 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003

MANUFACTURED HOMES (RESIDENTIAL PARKS) BILL Second Reading Resumed from 19 August (see p. 2936). Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (4.07 p.m.): It is my pleasure to make a contribution to the debate on the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 2003. This is a bill that I do not believe is controversial. It is one that, although there are a few matters of detail we can probably explore during consideration in the parliament this afternoon, generally will be receiving the support of the opposition. The Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill sets out to put in place a regulatory process to control the interrelationship between people who own manufactured homes and the people who provide sites for those homes to be situated on. This is something of an emerging industry. I noted some of the figures that were given in the explanatory notes. I was quite surprised at the size of the industry and the number of people who will be affected by this legislation. The explanatory notes that accompany the bill state that some 10,000 people reside in this type of manufactured home, in some 160 different parks across Queensland. That is quite a surprising figure. I think to most people it would come as a surprise to know that that many people live in these types of situations and will be affected by this legislation. It indicates the rising popularity of this type of arrangement. It probably is also reflective of the rising cost of traditional type housing, and that rising cost is reflected in the numbers of people who find this alternative a better one for them. It is distinctly different from the situation that exists with caravan parks and caravan park owners. I guess the main difference is the mobility that is associated with caravans that owners of manufactured homes do not have. While they were traditionally referred to as mobile homes—and I note that the previous act was called the Mobile Homes Act and referred to them in that way, which gives the idea that they are somehow mobile—a very different situation in terms of mobility confronts owners of these manufactured homes. They do not have the option of moving on anywhere near as readily as the owners of caravans or a more mobile type of accommodation unit. That in itself lends the situation to areas of conflict that cannot be resolved simply by moving somewhere else. If the owner of a caravan or a more mobile unit has a situation of conflict with the owner of the site where they are living, they can very quickly move. That is an option that is open to them. It may or may not be an acceptable option, but at least it is an option. That option certainly does not exist anywhere near to that the extent for owners of these manufactured homes. It certainly puts a different perspective on the rules that govern the interrelationship with the site owner and how all of those issues that are involved need to be resolved. This bill sets out to define some of those processes that should be involved to ensure that there is a balance between the rights of the manufactured home owner and the site owner. In that sort of situation I would be bold enough to suggest that we can never please everybody when we try to put in place a process that seeks to control what in a great many cases are competing rights. We can never please everyone with the controls we put in place. What has been arrived at in this bill before the House this afternoon is pretty much a fair compromise in most of the situations that it covers. This bill covers a whole range of situations that have to be decided between the owners of the manufactured homes and the owners of the land that constitutes the site on which those homes are placed. They are listed in the first part of the bill in clause 4. Clause 4 deals with the areas that the bill sets out to cover. The first thing that the bill does is declare particular rights and obligations of the park owner and the home owner. So it establishes what the rights and the obligations of both parties are. Obviously with the range of people who are involved, the range of enterprises and also the range of manufactured homes—and what constitutes a manufactured home varies widely and we used to refer to them as mobile homes—each of those people quite possibly sees that their particular rights and obligations vary differently. This bill sets out to declare just what those particular rights and obligations are in an attempt to avoid some of the conflicts that can and have arisen. The bill also facilitates information disclosure about the residential park to prospective home buyers—the types of information that needs to be disclosed about what is required and what is intended. It also regulates the making, the content, the assignment and the ending of site agreements. It is those site agreements that are the basis of the relationship between the owner of the manufactured home and the park owner. Under this piece of legislation those site 16 Oct 2003 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 4283 agreements will take something of a more formal format. Their content will be set by regulation. That will hopefully avoid some of the potential for disagreement and conflict. The bill also regulates the sale of an abandoned home and what the park owner's rights are in those particular cases. The area that is potentially the cause of most conflict is the variation of site rent. The bill sets out to put a process in place that is to be followed in the case of the variation of site rent. It is that variation of site rent that can quite clearly be the cause of some disagreement between the owner of a manufactured home and the owner of the park. To a very real extent, the owner of a manufactured home already existing on a site is very much at a disadvantage when it comes to negotiating the site rent. As I referred to at the beginning of the consideration of the legislation, the option to move on or to move their home to some other site is severely restricted, especially with the bigger and more complex units that are involved. The bill also facilitates participation by home owners in the affairs of the residential park and it provides means for resolving disputes. It sets out to encourage continued growth in the industry in recognition of the fact that this industry and the opportunities that it provides are required by an increasingly large number of Queenslanders. Finally, the bill provides a clear regulatory framework to ensure certainty for the industry in planning for future expansion. They are a range of areas that are difficult to regulate. They are a range of areas in which it is difficult to meet the conflicting requirements or expectations of the parties in the relationship. That, I would suggest, is something that is common to a number of pieces of legislation in this area of consumer affairs. Balancing the consumer's right with the right of the business owner that provides the service or whatever is never going to be easy. It is always a difficult task. There are not too many areas where it is more difficult than in this area of manufactured homes and park owners. The bill before the House addresses all of the issues that are likely to arise in a satisfactory and appropriate way. A number of issues have been raised with me by a small number of people in the manufactured homes association. We will deal with those in the detail of the clauses. I will be seeking some clarification on a number of those clauses as we go through. However, I think those issues are of minor detail. I think the overall thrust of the bill—the overall approach that has been taken by the drafters of this legislation—is one that should be commended. I think the House can confidently consider this legislation this afternoon. I commend the bill to the House. Mr POOLE (Gaven—ALP) (4.18 p.m.): I rise today to speak on the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 2003. Firstly, I commend the minister for this excellent piece of legislation. This bill replaces the Mobile Homes Act 1989 and strengthens provisions to protect the rights and interests of home owners. It addresses complaints that have been made concerning the lack of protection for these home owners. It will protect this growing body of Queensland citizens who elect to live in manufactured homes in residential parks from the depredation and bullying of park owners and managers. Recently my office and I had to deal with a series of complaints concerning the Garden Vale Caravan Park at Helensvale. There, a nasty, bullying manager attempted to evict long-term residents, including home and caravan owners. He was able to exploit loopholes and shortcomings in the old act. After this legislation comes into effect he will not be able to behave in such an abominable and cavalier fashion. He refused to provide written contracts to owners, threatened and bullied those residents who stood up to him, and ignored their complaints about poor service facilities and substandard living conditions. In future home owners will be able to take their complaints to the new Commercial and Consumer Tribunal for adjudication. I note with interest that a certain Ted Cameron, whom I dealt with extensively, masqueraded as a friend of the home owners. He endeavoured to mobilise support against this bill. He previously worked for one of the six-pack of conservative no-hopers who once held the Gold Coast seats in this parliament. Cameron's scandalous intervention ended in ignominious failure. It is clear from this that the opposition is opposed to any legislation that protects the average citizen from powerful organised groups. That is because they are birds of a feather. Their rich mates run in such groups. I am proud to be on the side of the average Aussie battler—the home owners who will find much-needed protection in this bill. I commend the bill to the House. Ms STONE (Springwood—ALP) (4.20 p.m.): It is indeed with pleasure that I participate in the debate on this bill today. Busy lifestyles, lack of affordable housing and single-person dwellings are some of the reasons people are choosing to live in residential parks. For many years now there have been numerous concerns raised with MPs regarding the protection of residents of 4284 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003 those parks. Current affairs programs have shown residents being charged high rentals, and intimidation by park owners who have reduced services or who have allowed facilities to deteriorate show the need for more protection of these residents through legislation. In my electorate I have Springtime Gardens Caravan Park at Springwood. It provides mixed accommodation with some residents owning their own homes, either a mobile home or a caravan, and some residents are renting mobile homes or caravans for short or long-term periods. Mobile homes have certainly changed. They are now the size of an ordinary two to three- bedroom house that we would find on the average suburban block of land. They offer all the modern appliances and decor. The only thing missing is their own suburban block of land. They certainly are not easily mobile and are fetching high prices. They have become popular, especially for those who cannot afford house and land packages. As land in Springwood becomes scarce and expensive, the caravan park certainly has become an alternative development proposition. A company associated with Motorline BMW has purchased the site. It has showrooms for BMW, Volvo and Mini Cooper currently next to the caravan park site. It has informed me of its development plans for the future. I would like to inform the House of a memo sent to the staff. It states— The purpose of this memorandum is to clarify to you the Motorline Group's position in relation to the future of the Caravan Park. No doubt from time to time you may be involved in conversations about the Caravan Park and because Motorline employs you, others may expect you to know. Perhaps you have noticed the 'Public Notice of Development' which has been erected on the Caravan Park land. Simply the notice advertises the fact that a development application has been lodged with the Logan City Council for the future development of the site. This planned development involves the following: 1. To extend the rear fence of the Dealership towards the motorway (M1). 2. To construct an under-ground parking facility for the parking, storage and custody of Dealership stock vehicles. 3. To construct an additional showroom for another franchised dealership. This planned work will necessitate the relocation of up to 12 existing sites. Due to the complexities with Architectural Design, the Logan City Council, Department of Main Roads and size of the development (estimated some $400 m) it is unlikely that any further works will commence within the next 5 years. We are very mindful of the loyalty that residents of the Caravan Park have shown towards us since our acquisition of the property, needless to say we appreciate that loyalty and our intentions are to provide those tenants with quiet living enjoyment. Our undertaking to them is that we would give a minimum of 12 months notice of any planned relocation. You will understand the sensitivity of these matters in the minds of the residents of the Caravan Park, so it is necessary for you to know the truth. On behalf of the Rose family I would ask for your assistance, whenever you are called upon, to succinctly clarify the truthful position regarding the plans for the Caravan Park and at the same time deny any rumours or conflicting statements. That may sound fine to members, and only one thing has happened that I must say has put some doubt in my mind, and that is that recently Motorline has moved those 12 caravans. That has happened without the 12 months minimum notice that they promised. But I also believe that they did assist these people and they did pay for the relocation within the park for these residents. So while I can say that I hope our communication keeps flowing and we work together, and I must say I am pleased that Motorline has helped these residents, I am concerned that the relocation happened before that 12-month period. I need to keep informing the residents and I need to keep that interaction going with them. Marlene Scott has certainly been keeping me up to date with what has been happening around the park. But it is also great when I go to deliver Meals on Wheels to some of the residents in that park. They certainly stop and tell me all of the ins and outs of the park and any plans that have been going on or any memos that may have been sent around. I appreciate them keeping me informed, just as I appreciate Motorline keeping me informed. I need to get out there and make sure that the Department of Housing, the Residential Tenancies Authority and other departments address these residents so that they know their rights so that, when the time comes, they are assisted. I give my guarantee in this House today that that is exactly what will be happening. The residents of that caravan park will be informed of their rights. They will be addressed by the departments that they need to be addressed by. We will be assisting them where we can. The residents are upset and know that the future for them will not be the same. There are few sites that have the facilities that they have at that park. There are also few sites in the 16 Oct 2003 Privilege 4285 surrounding area that are close to the shops, hotels, transport and medical services like Springtime Gardens Caravan Park. That worries them. What worries them the most is losing their home. Regardless of what you live in, or where you live, once you have made that into your home, you have pride and attachment to your property. Many of these people started living in the park in small caravans. They have added extensions, courtyards, gardens and outdoor areas that would make many of us in this place envious. They have created a lifestyle and a community supportive of each other. These people are not abundant in dollars. Many of them do not have the resources to relocate and they will need our help. I fully understand the need to balance the rights of the developer with those residents. That is why I have called on the relevant departments to assist in the process of ensuring that all parties know their rights and I hope that we will achieve a successful outcome for all involved. Motorline BMW does a lot of community work in my area and it does it with without very much self-promotion. In the past few years it has provided Christmas parties for children who may have had no Christmas celebrations due to their family circumstances. There are rides, ice-creams and, of course, Santa brings a present. Motorline has supported community organisations and has sponsored community events. I hope that Motorline's community spirit is extended to the caravan park residents. I am pleased that this bill will give greater protection and security for residents of residential parks. I am particularly pleased to see the clarification of the existing definitions, especially the definition of 'manufactured home'. Another complaint that has been raised with me is the lack of written contracts. The bill introduces written standard contracts detailing standard terms and conditions and any special conditions agreed between the parties. The other common complaint I have received is that people do not fully understand their responsibilities or those of the park owner. This bill introduces disclosure requirements to ensure that residents are fully informed of all the terms and conditions of the park and also their rights and responsibilities under the act. I believe that residential park housing has become the new affordable housing of today, but I do not believe that this is by choice. I believe that many young families have the dream of having their own home and their own backyard. That is something that is getting more and more unattainable. I know that the Minister for Housing fights hard for more funding for housing from the federal government because he, too, knows that it is what people want. They want affordable housing and they want their own homes and their own yards. I believe that all levels of government should be making this a priority and should work together to ensure that the great Australian dream is not lost. Today, we are supporting those residents who live in manufactured homes and residential parks. I fully support any bill that give these residents more protection such as this bill does. I applaud the minister, the Hon. Merri Rose, for bringing this bill to this House because it is important that we look after these people. With that, I commend the bill to the House. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Mickel): Order! Before I call the honourable member for Gladstone, I will call the Minister for Emergency Services on a matter of privilege. Interruption.

PRIVILEGE Comments by Member for Mirani Hon. M. F. REYNOLDS (Townsville—ALP) (Minister for Emergency Services and Minister Assisting the Premier in North Queensland) (4.28 p.m.): I rise on a matter of privilege. This morning during question time the member for Mirani, Ted Malone, asked whether the director- general of my department and I directed that there will not be a Queensland Ambulance Service satisfaction survey this year because of 'staff dissatisfaction with pressure put on them through community ambulance cover, staffing levels and response times.' He further asked whether this decision had been taken 'because this survey might highlight the total mismanagement of the QAS by this government in the lead-up to the state election.' The insinuation is highly objectionable and these allegations are absolutely false. The member for Mirani does himself no credit at all in raising baseless and false allegations that impact on the integrity of the staff of the Department of Emergency Services. Neither the director- 4286 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003 general nor I have ever interfered in any appraisal program within the Queensland Ambulance Service or indeed the Department of Emergency Services as a whole. As part of the continual improvement process, the QAS conducts surveys on a number of topics, such as patient satisfaction, staff satisfaction, community satisfaction and organisational assessment. The QAS has received excellent feedback from these surveys, with ambulance officers being rated the most trusted and highly regarded profession by the community. The last staff satisfaction survey was conducted in the 2001-02 financial year. The QAS does not as a rule conduct a staff satisfaction survey annually. Earlier this year the QAS conducted a survey in relation to its employment assistance scheme known as Priority 1 and the service it provides. QAS staff are currently taking part in the Department of Emergency Services' workplace harassment survey in conjunction with the Office of Public Service Merit and Equity. In addition, a decision was made by the QAS executive group earlier this year to conduct the next staff satisfaction survey in January to February 2004. The QAS is not afraid of evaluation, and the conduct and frequency of these surveys is planned and coordinated to ensure an even spread of the workload. In all of my travels around the states since the announcement of the community ambulance cover, meeting literally hundreds of ambulance paramedics, my experience is that they are delighted the government has made a decision to once and for all provide a firm, long-term and secure funding base for the QAS. The implications that have been raised in the shadow minister's question are an insult to the professionalism of the Queensland Ambulance Service, and I would ask him to respect the dedication, integrity and commitment of our QAS paramedics rather than make them a political football.

MANUFACTURED HOMES (RESIDENTIAL PARKS) BILL Second Reading Resumed from p. 4285. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (4.31 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 2003. As other speakers have said, people choose to live in caravans or mobile homes—some not so mobile—for a variety of reasons. Some people do it because of economic constraint—the capital outlay of a caravan is affordable or they rent other people's caravans in caravan parks. Some people choose to have a residential home—usually on skids, not on wheels—that are quite complicated, and it is those people who tend to stay in residential parks for extended periods of time. It is their home. It is not intended to be mobile and they develop a precinct around their home in many of the residential parks. I have a couple of parks in my electorate that have a high percentage of not so mobile caravans—homes that are on skids—which stay there for 10 to 15 years. They have little courtyards and backyards, according to the Aussie dream, and they develop a community in the caravan park over time. If there is a good proprietor and a good group of tenants, you can develop a wonderful community. I know a couple of groups who are becoming more senior but who have been together for 15 years, and they have a beer of an afternoon together, particularly the blokes, and a punt on the horses. They have developed a community there. They have been able to do that successfully because the park owner has been reasonable. I know of another caravan park owner who is an absolute fruitcake and he makes the tenants' lives a misery. They stay because of closeness to work, closeness to other facilities and closeness to family. They stay there and they put up with what most reasonable people would assess as abusive behaviour. An onlooker could say, 'Why don't they just shift?' Sometimes the 'just shift' solution is not as simple as it sounds. I welcome the legislation. It will place some constraints on caravan park owners or residential park owners to make them accountable for the treatment of their tenants. It has been argued for a number of years that they have built the facility, they have invested the capital to create the residential park or caravan park and, therefore, they can administer it as they like. They can, provided they are fair and provided they are reasonable. We probably would not be debating legislation like this today if caravan park or residential park owners had all been reasonable or if the vast majority had been. So it is obvious there has been a sufficient number of park owners who have been unreasonable and who have demonstrated unconscionable conduct for this legislation not only to be here today but also to have been in place for a number of years. 16 Oct 2003 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 4287

I think in the south-east corner development of caravan parks has been domestic living oriented rather than holiday park accommodation—the van sites. The other group of people who will benefit from this legislation are those in the community who reach retirement—they call them the grey nomads, but eventually the nomads settle down. Mr Purcell: Why? I don't think I will. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: Nobody could settle the member for Bulimba down. I do not think anyone will try. We would need a lion tamer, I think. These people sell their assets—those things that kept them contained to one area—and their home, and they buy at times very complicated rigs and travel around. Then, at the end of that time, they will often stay in one of these residential parks sometimes for a shorter period of time; other times longer. So there is that new clientele who themselves would be unaware of what their entitlements are because their experience has been in a home on their own block of land. Then they go off travelling and they confront at a more senior age this new type of residential living. To give some equity in rights to both the caravan park or the residential park owner as well as tenants is welcome. It is also welcome that the agreement between the owner and the tenant has to be in writing. I notice that in the past park owners have been required to provide only a site agreement to the new tenant within three months of the home owner's entry into the park. Three months is a long time. I think if most of us tried to remember a conversation that we had three months ago, particularly the content of that conversation in any great detail, or if we were required to recount that conversation in a court, we would be hard pressed. Mr Purcell interjected. Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: The member for Bulimba would not remember it for a week! If there are three months between when the original conversation occurred and when that agreement is produced, there is quite an opportunity for an unscrupulous park owner to misconstrue the matters discussed when the original agreement was at least verbally agreed to. The obligation to provide written paperwork up front is welcome. It gives certainty to both parties. The vast majority of park owners would be very honest, hardworking people, but legislation usually covers that smaller percentage of people who do not act appropriately. This bill also introduces a penalty if the park owner coerces the home owner to terminate an agreement, and I particularly welcome that for older park residents. A lot of younger ones—and by that I mean people in their 30s—will get up and have a good blue with anybody; they will argue the point. But more mature people, women living on their own in a caravan park, are very easily made to feel threatened, not physically necessarily but emotionally, and it is quite easy for a person trying to get rid of a long-term tenant, so they can get a new one in perhaps at an inflated rent, to subliminally intimidate such a person to feel that they have no other choice other than terminating the agreement. If the tenant does not have the foresight or the ability to understand that they could get legal advice, or they cannot afford to get legal advice, then it is very easy for an unscrupulous owner to coerce home owners to terminate those agreements. I appreciate the fact that it is going to be more targeted as far as the appropriateness of the actions of the park owners to terminate agreements. The tribunal must—not may but must—make a compensation order to cover the home owner's relocation expenses where a termination application has been made on the grounds that the purpose of the park has changed. That lack of flexibility is sometimes detrimental. However, in this instance it is clear that the tribunal will not have any other option and that the home owner's relocation expenses will be covered. That relocation would be something that they had no say in and it is something that they probably had no idea was coming. It certainly is welcome. I also welcome the constraints that have been placed on the park owners to immediately inform home owners that the rent is going to increase. That happens in all accommodation. I know that there are very strict rental conditions on home rental where rents can be raised only in very extraordinary circumstances or when a tenancy agreement expires. We had a period of time in my electorate where the rental agreements were reduced from 18 and 12 months to six months and then three months. This meant that tenants, who had been in homes for quite long periods of time, had their rent increased at every three month cycle. This has been in the last 18 months. There were countless numbers of families forced out of the area. Those families had invested a significant part of their time in our region. I believe that most people who live in an area contribute positively and beneficially to an area but they were forced to move elsewhere because the rents had escalated so much. That was because the owners of the buildings or the rental 4288 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003 agencies managing the tenancies had reduced those rental agreements to three months. I welcome the changes in this legislation that home owners cannot arbitrarily increase the rents. There is a process that has to be adhered to. I also welcome—but I am sure some of the park owners will not—the fact that now home owners are going to have a say when the rules of the park change. I do not welcome it because it will make it difficult for park owners to administer an asset that they own; I welcome it because people in these parks have actually made a lifestyle choice. They are living there usually, particularly in the non-caravans that have permanent transport ability, for the long term. They have as much right to contribute to the park rules as a person in a multistorey unit where they have an input into the rules of the building. I welcome that because the community that lives there, as much as the owners, contributes to the happiness or the unhappiness of the environment as much as the owners themselves. It will require a cooperative approach by the owners and the residents. It has the potential, if both groups are prepared to allow it, to improve the atmosphere at a park rather than reduce the happiness and the enjoyment of the caravan park or the residential park. These amendments are beneficial. Providing all parties accept the changes in a spirit of cooperation, the amendments will improve the lot of the owners and those who choose to live in residential parks. The only other matter which I wish to raise is the very advanced accommodation units that are able to be transported. They are either skidded on to low-loaders or they can be lifted by crane on to the back of tray trucks. Quite a number of years ago in Victoria they started trialling these smaller units for aged care units not necessarily in aged care home type facilities. They were actually relocated into the family environment. If an aged parent or parents needed a watchful eye kept on them, these unit accommodations could be lifted into the property of a son or daughter and they would stay in the backyard until the needs of the parents changed and they perhaps needed a higher level of care. It would be four years ago at least that I raised with the Minister for Housing the possibility of Queensland trialling these units. Many local authorities are reticent to approve the granny type flat or the extension for grandma or grandad on to an existing dwelling for fear that once the needs of the parents have changed the home owner will rent the accommodation out to unrelated persons as an extra income stream. Many of those aged care extensions have been refused by local authorities. These units, which are effectively the residential park type accommodation modules, can be lifted into an accommodation area or into a family home and then lifted out when the needs have changed. Whilst this legislation does not cover it, it is a good opportunity to raise the fact that those modules are not only beneficial in the residential parks but they could also be useful to provide accommodation for our ageing parents. It is an opportunity for them to be independent but for the family members to keep an eye on them to make sure that they are up of a morning, that they are eating properly and that they are getting their washing done. The homes that make up residential parks have a number of uses. They are beneficial. I commend the minister for this legislation and for the opportunity that it brings with it to enhance the quality of life for people in residential parks. Most people living there make the lifestyle choice but some have no choice but to be there. They still deserve protection and an enhanced quality of life. Mr CUMMINS (Kawana—ALP) (4.45 p.m.): One of the major failings of the Mobile Homes Act 1989 was that it did not require the agreement between the park owner and home owner to site the home in the park and to reside there to be in writing or to be signed by both parties. It only required the home owner to be given a statement outlining the agreement within three months of the person entering into the agreement. The statement did not have to be signed. Many people did not realise that they were supposed to get the statement, let alone take careful note of what it contained or that they should store it carefully for later reference. Unlike the bill, the act does not have any record keeping requirements. Many disputes have occurred over whether the person was actually given a statement or not. The transitional provisions upon commencement of the act stated that existing agreements continued and that a written statement of the agreement should be provided within six months. Many agreements were only verbal and where people did get written statements there was uncertainty in knowing exactly what had been agreed to. In any event, home owners could not have disputed any express terms through the Small Claims Tribunal within the next six months, as 16 Oct 2003 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 4289 was the right of new home owners entering into new agreements, as they were precluded from this provision. The existing act gave new home owners six months to make an application to the tribunal to change any express terms in the statement that they did not like. For many people it was too late before they realised that there were any problems with the agreement. This six-month period has been removed from the bill and the parties can negotiate any change. If they are not successful they may obtain an order of the tribunal. As the agreement continues to exist until terminated and as conditions and circumstances do change over time, there needs to be more flexibility. The clause allows for changes at any time. Under the existing act, while there may not have been any immediate problem if the person did not get or lost the agreement, problems have arisen where the home owner decided to sell the home or wanted to change the agreement in some way. Sometimes the park owner had left and the new park owner knew nothing of the verbal arrangements. For people to make informed decisions, they need to know up front and in writing essential information such as the rent or other charges they have contracted to pay, the park rules, how many people can live in their home, rules about guests, any limitations on using various facilities, the dispute resolution process and how agreements may be changed or terminated. The bill addresses these issues by introducing requirements for the park owner to provide a home owner's information document in an approved form, a copy of the park rules and two copies of the proposed site agreement. The bill suggests certain matters which should be contained in the information document and the site agreement. The site agreement must be in writing and contain standard forms. It must clearly identify the parties, the site, the rent and when it will be increased and signed and be signed by both parties.The park owner must retain one signed copy of the agreement and the other signed copy must be given to the home owner. This makes simple good sense. The bill also introduces a cooling-off period where home owners have time to seek legal advice before entering into the agreement. It also makes it an offence for park owners to restrict the home owner's right to obtain legal advice. The bill recognises the importance of the information document and provides that the home owner may seek termination of the site agreement if the park owner does not provide copies of the information document, site agreement and park rules. Information disclosure, transparency of process and good lines of communication are required to break down the culture of conflict and distrust which have developed in some parks. The requirements for up-front disclosure and written agreements should assist in opening up the lines of communication and develop a new trust between park owners and home owners. The up-front disclosure provisions in the bill are a vast improvement on the unsigned written statement required to be given three months after the agreement was made under the act and should go a long way to addressing many of the problems in residential park living. It is no secret that for many years people who have chosen to live in affordable accommodation and indeed those who have had little or no choice to live in these areas have often been treated like second-class citizens. In my opinion, this should not happen. Caravan or mobile home parks on the Sunshine Coast have been continually converted into unit sites and similar over many years because they often had such a prime position at or near the waterfront. Golden Beach and Kings Beach are two areas at the southern end of the Sunshine Coast that have faced such issues. When those units go up, obviously there is no ability for there to be affordable or low-cost housing which many people in our community need. Tripcony/Hibiscus Caravan Park is an ongoing saga that goes back over a decade, and it will be a continuing issue in our community. The Caloundra City Council sold the rights or the ownership to the state government over a decade ago to enable a development. The development never went ahead and the state government has retained ownership of that land and allowed a lease agreement with a caravan park. While the Caloundra council previously sold the caravan site to the state government, it is now asking for it to be handed back, which is quite interesting to say the least. It has not outlined what it wants to do with the numerous permanent residents who live on the site, and that is quite concerning not only to the outgoing member for Caloundra but those who will be facing the upcoming state election as candidates for the seat of Caloundra. While many promises and political hoo-ha will be tossed around in the coming months, I suggest to all parties to bear in mind that they are dealing with dozens of people who live in the area who have a right, while they have a roof over their head, not to be thrown out on their ear 4290 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003 and to be guaranteed that something is done if the council decides to try to purchase this site back. In my lifetime caravan parks and mobile home areas have been a great form of low-cost housing and affordable housing for many, and we must also realise the fact that many people have bought at such locations as a holiday home. Sadly, they seem to be disappearing at a very fast rate and we see more and more units going up, which can sometimes be a positive and often be a negative. I commend the minister for the legislation that she and her department have put before us. I also thank the various officers who have been of great assistance in ensuring that we are well conversed with what is before us today. I fully support the bill before the House. Mrs CROFT (Broadwater—ALP) (4.54 p.m.): I rise to speak in support of Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 2003. At the outset I take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister for Fair Trading and her department on the enormous amount of work that they have done in developing this very important piece of legislation that will provide security of tenure for residents living in mobile homes. I am very proud to stand here today representing the good people of the Broadwater electorate, many of whom live in mobile home villages and parks. In fact, there are over 1,000 residents from the Broadwater electorate who live in a number of parks that exist—Settlers Village, Harbourside Gardens, Paradise Lakes Resort, Emerald Gardens, Hammond Village. There are also a number of caravan parks in which residents reside in mobile homes. I am very proud to say that living in a couple of these mobile home resorts are family members of some members of this House. This legislation will go a long way to protecting those residents, but I acknowledge that the member for Algester's mum and the member for Springwood's nanna and uncle who live in my electorate will be most pleased to see this legislation pass through the House today. It needs to be stated that many residents living in these mobile homes have invested a substantial amount of money. In some of the mobile home villages that I visit quite regularly on my Meals on Wheels runs the places are being sold for over $100,000, so it is quite a substantial amount of these people's investments that we are talking about. What has also been brought to my attention is that they are no easier or cheaper to relocate if the need arises, and those two points have identified in this legislation. Since I was elected I have received numerous complaints that the act does not provide adequate protection for vulnerable mobile home owners. Particular concerns that were raised directly with me were high rents, the withdrawal of services from many of the parks and villages, deterioration of park facilities and alleged bullying and harassment by park owners, an issue which raised considerable concern. Under the existing act, residents and park owners can take disputes to the Small Claims Tribunal. However, much criticism has been raised regarding the determinations made by the Small Claims Tribunal. It was found that the tribunal lacked any guidelines under the act to assist in the decision-making process. I want to raise today another issue that was brought to my attention. While residents were raising their concerns about the existing act with me it was very sad to see that particular individuals took the opportunity to create fear by distributing misinformation amongst a number of mobile home villages and parks. This was most frightening to many of the residents who live in these mobile homes, particularly because they are senior residents. They want to feel secure living in their homes, but receiving such misinformation creates a lot of unnecessary concern and fear amongst them. To keep residents correctly informed about the process of the development of the bill and in order to give residents an opportunity to raise concerns directly with me and to ask questions, I actually hosted a number of forums which I invited residents to attend. The first one, at the Coombabah Hall, was attended by many residents, particularly residents who live along Hansford Road. I was very pleased that Harold Thornton from the minister's office was able to join us for that occasion. The Commissioner for Fair Trading and Mike Kelly from the minister's office also came down and spoke directly with residents. I think a lot of residents left the forum a lot more well informed. It was brought to my attention that the existing act may not have adequately protected many of the residents. A lot of residents at those forums told me that they are quite happy in the villages and parks in which they live and that a lot of the concern being raised by individuals was unnecessary and a result of conflicting personalities on particular occasions. The importance of this bill is in providing balance. As a result of a lot of misinformation being distributed, I sent to residents a letter that highlighted that there are a number of associations they can contact should they have any 16 Oct 2003 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 4291 concerns, in particular the Caravan and Mobile Homes Residents Association, which is commonly known as CAMRA, and the manufactured home occupiers association. I highlighted to residents that they are able to go to a number of these organisations and seek assistance and advice. Many stakeholders were able to comment on and provide submissions on the draft bill. I met with many residents individually as well as with representatives of residential groups who came to my office to discuss the highlights of the bill. In May this year I again hosted a forum to allow residents to discuss the proposed bill. Again, I am extremely grateful that Matt Miller, the Commissioner for Fair Trading, Ron Holt and Harold Thornton were able to attend that forum, which over 150 residents attended. The feedback from residents was that they were most pleased to have access to senior policy advisers and receive answers to their many concerns directly from them. After those forums I received quite a lot of correspondence from residents who were very interested in the development of the bill. I made representations to the minister on their behalf. The minister promptly responded. I am glad to see that many of the concerns raised by the residents in correspondence following those forums have been addressed in this legislation. One of the concerns was that the term 'mobile home' did not adequately describe what mobile homes really are. I am pleased to see that the bill introduces the new term 'manufactured home'. The bill also sets out the basic responsibilities of both park owners and home owners. Jurisdiction for the determination of disputes will lie with the new Commercial and Consumer Tribunal rather than with the Small Claims Tribunal. This, I believe, will enable the development of specialist jurisdiction and provide greater consistency of decisions. One of the other issues a lot of residents raised with me related to termination of agreements. I understand that the Mobile Homes Act 1989 provided that agreements to site a manufactured home in a park and to reside there as a person's principal place of residence may only be terminated in certain specified circumstances. This limited right to termination by park owners was intended to ensure security of tenure for home owners who in some cases had invested their life savings in providing for independent retirement living, rather than seeking public housing. Home owners were able to terminate by written notice not less than four weeks before the termination date. Park owners were restricted to making applications to the Small Claims Tribunal for an order permitting termination, providing that the grounds for termination were established. One example of this is that the home owner has committed a breach of the agreement and has failed to remedy the breach within a reasonable time. Another example is that the home owner is not occupying the home as their principal place of residence. Another example is that the recurrent behaviour of the home owner or associated person interferes with the quiet enjoyment of other residents. The existing act recognises that the purpose of the park land may change over time, particularly where the park land is redeveloped, and provides that where agreement is terminated due to the change in land use the Small Claims Tribunal must not terminate the agreement unless the park owner has paid relocation expenses. The important thing to understand is that this bill retains all of those requirements, which are the cornerstone of both the existing act and the bill. However, significant improvements to this system are made by this bill. Termination of the agreement by mutual agreement of the parties is introduced to ensure clarity of this right, with the safeguard that it is an offence if the park owner tries to coerce the home owner into terminating the agreement. The tribunal may now make a compensation order where the agreement is terminated due to land usage change. The bill also provides some guidelines in relation to matters the tribunal may take into consideration in making the order, including where a home cannot be moved to another location. As a change of land usage may not necessarily require local government approval, the park owner must provide the tribunal with certification from the local government that the park land may be used for another purpose. There is one issue that greatly affects my area. The rapid increase in land values, particularly in resort areas, has placed considerable pressure on residential parks, particularly mixed purpose caravan parks, to close and be redeveloped. One caravan park in my electorate has already closed down. Park owners have the right to use their land, subject to local government consent, for whatever purpose to maximise the financial return on their investment. However, this highlights the conflict between the responsibility of park owners who have contracted to provide long-term housing sites to home owners and the right to individual profit. It also highlights the social 4292 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003 responsibility role of the state to protect home owners who have invested in their homes and do not want to be a burden on the public purse in their retirement years. It also highlights the role of local government in providing balanced town planning—I send out a plea to the Gold Coast City Council to take some advice—which provides for different types of accommodation for its citizens. The bill does not infringe on the right of park owners to use the land for another purpose if the local government consents. However, the bill ensures that the park owner will at least contribute to the park owner's obligations by compensating the home owner for relocating the home to another location or, if the home cannot be moved, by paying other compensation as determined by the tribunal. The bill endeavours to strike a balance between the rights of the park owner and the rights of the home owner. The Commercial and Consumer Tribunal is given a greater role than its predecessor in determining adequate compensation for home owners where parks are closed or redeveloped. This will help ensure just outcomes for both park owners and home owners. I congratulate the minister, her department and her ministerial staff. I know that residents living in mobile home parks in my electorate will be most pleased with this legislation. I commend the bill to the House. Miss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (5.08 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill and acknowledge that considerable work has been done in consulting with affected stakeholders. I believe that there are many commendable aspects to this bill. I will be raising some issues that have come up in very recent consultation with some of my own park residents. They have some concerns about some developing issues as, obviously, there are a lot of changes in relation to land use. A lot of people are facing the possibility of being shifted from where they are. I want to acknowledge the policy objectives of the bill, in particular the fact that there will be a new tribunal undertaking the adjudication of issues under this Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill. This new tribunal will replace the work of the Small Claims Tribunal in these specific issues. It is the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal. It is hoped that this will lead to greater consistency in decision making as particular expertise will be built up in dealing with these particular issues. We know that people make some wonderful homes within caravan parks or dedicated manufactured home parks. Whether it is a very humble dwelling or some of the more luxurious manufactured homes, they are as much a home to the people residing in them as others who have put down extensive roots in a typical suburban house. They are very much loved. They are a form of security for people. As has also been acknowledged, a lot of people find themselves widowed or, through other family circumstances, living on their own. This provides them with a form of residency where they have company, often very good facilities on site and a lifestyle that means they are not looking after extensive landscaping. They have a very real community within these parks. As has been acknowledged, the potential for conflict also arises due to the nature of the tenure in these parks. These manufactured homes are not easily removed. Contrary to what the previous term 'mobile home' would suggest, they are not extremely mobile. Technically, yes, they are relocatable, but considerable costs are associated with such relocation. The bill in its policy objectives sets out to regulate the making, content, assignment and ending of site agreements; regulate the sale of an abandoned manufactured home; regulate the variation of site rent; facilitate participation by home owners for a residential park in the affairs of the park; and provide a means of resolving a site agreement dispute. This bill will also declare particular rights and obligations for park owners and home owners. It will facilitate the disclosure of information to prospective home owners about the park. It will also introduce a seven-day cooling- off period after the receipt of information documents. I want to raise what may potentially be a loophole. Perhaps upon the further advice of the minister we can get some interpretation as to how people will deal with one problem that has been brought to my attention. This relates to those situations where there has not been a formal termination. It is relevant to a park in my area. Some of its tenants have come to me in the last few days. They are concerned because the park owners have told them that there is the potential that the place will be redeveloped sometime in the next 10 years. Ten years may seem like a long time to many people but, in reality, if people have a manufactured home, they have put it down and have spent money securing it on that particular site. They may be 50, 60 or 70 years of age and they believe that that is the last place they will live in. They do not want to move from there but then they find out that the owners of that park have mooted an intention to possibly relocate 16 Oct 2003 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 4293 the residents in the future and to redevelop that site. However, this does not constitute formal termination. It would be arguable that it is harassment. Some would say it is just providing people with information about what may happen in the future. The difficulty that those residents face is that anybody who may want to buy their particular manufactured home in that park will fairly quickly find out from their potential neighbours that this site is a potential redevelopment site. Yet there is no formal notice to terminate that site agreement. I ask the advice of the minister's officers in this regard, particularly in relation to issues such as compensation. Maybe I am not reading the bill correctly. I would like to know if they are entitled to compensation where there has been a termination of a site agreement, but it does not relate to a cooling-off period as it involves those people already in residence. Clause 38 states— On application by the park owner under a site agreement, the tribunal may make an order ... terminating the agreement on any of the following grounds ... One of those grounds is that the park owner wishes to use the residential parkland or a part of the park on which the site is located for another purpose stated in the application. Clearly, this clause would relate to where there is an application of the park owner in order for that termination to proceed, but the compensation in clause 40 also relates to this subclause 38(1)(f). This is where I seek the minister's clarification. The way I read the bill in this regard, in order for the residents of that park to be entitled to the compensation, the termination agreement would have to have been initiated by the park owner. The problem for the home owner is that if they seek to have a termination of the site agreement because they believe that they are being moved on and they need some security and surety, they will not be entitled to that regime of compensation under clause 40 because it appears to relate only to a termination that is brought by the park owner. This potentially may be a loophole. While I note that there are provisions in the bill that deal with unconscionable conduct, I think it would be arguable that someone's future intention to close the park would necessarily be seen as unconscionable conduct. Yet we can see that people would find themselves in limbo. In some regards it is a little bit like when a major item of infrastructure such as a main road is to go through properties sometime in the future but it is not something that is currently under construction. There are policies of government in regard to that infrastructure that allow people to be bought out in hardship. While that is something that is not legally enforceable, it is a policy which is quite regularly implemented. But what do we do when a private enterprise operation—in this case an owner who has people with tenure—is talking about closing a place sometime in the next 10 years and probably redeveloping the site but they have not formally terminated or commenced that termination process? If my reading of the bill is correct in that regard, I wonder whether it necessitates a formal agreement from the owner to terminate in order for the party to receive compensation for relocation where it is clear that the intention of the owner includes redevelopment sometime in such a time frame. As I have mentioned, it is extremely distressing. While I do believe there are a lot of very beneficial elements to this legislation, this potentially is quite a loophole. What does somebody do? They are caught in limbo. If people wish to buy that particular manufactured home, they will quickly find out that the place has, if you like, the potential for redevelopment hanging over its head. People do not want to be caught with such uncertainty. Quite a number of people will potentially be affected. There are some very nice manufactured home parks in my electorate. I opened the fete at Edgewater Village, which used to be in my electorate before the last redistribution moved the boundary to the other side of Petrie Creek. The residents kindly asked me back to open that fete as the honourable member for Nicklin was away and was unable to make it. I was delighted to do that. This is a high-quality manufactured home park. There are many elements of this park that I would like to see replicated in other areas. They have great on-site facilities—quite a significant hall, a bowls club or a bowling rink and a full-size tennis court. It is almost a village in its own right, as the name Edgewater Village would suggest. These types of facilities really need to be replicated and not reduced. I would like to raise another issue which is not related so much to the bill the minister has before the House. I would like to encourage local government areas to look favourably to where such appropriate developments are allowed to go. It is getting harder and harder for people wanting set up these good-quality manufactured home parks to be able to do so considering 4294 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003 some of the difficulties they face with the development process and the length of time that process takes. I have certainly seen in my own area, as real estate has boomed, caravan parks and other areas that had been home to these types of tenancies under incredible pressure. We have seen even local governments moving to close some of their parks to turn them into open space. But as property values have, in some cases, doubled in the past two or three years, the temptation to redevelop privately owned parks to a higher use is very strong. While one can argue that that is the right of the marketplace, it leaves a lot of people in a very vulnerable situation, particularly if they believed that they would be in that tenancy or in their home for possibly decades. So, yes, there are provisions in this bill that contain a formal termination, but I think the issue is that, if there is a clear understanding that a caravan park owner or a manufactured home park owner wants to tell people that they intend to redevelop that site, some means of being able to address that in the legislation would be welcome. I would appreciate the advice of the minister and her staff as to how these particular residents would have some recourse under this legislation or potentially under any future amendments. As this is new legislation and while there has been quite considerable consultation, I would also seek advice from the minister as to the review time frame for the legislation in terms of its effectiveness in addressing some of the issues that we have raised. Obviously, with any new legislation there are always issues as to how to make sure that it is achieving its objectives. I would appreciate advice in that regard as well. There are now literally thousands of people living in manufactured home parks or caravan parks in manufactured homes. I do not believe that is necessarily a lesser lifestyle option. For people, it is a higher lifestyle option because of the benefits that they gain from living in communities—not having the encumbrance of a larger property and having other people whose company they enjoy living in close proximity to them. Some of the facilities that these parks offer even include transport or the ability to access public transport. That needs to be encouraged. In fact, these parks are another housing option for people who are in the marketplace for a house. They meet a very real need. I commend the objectives of this legislation, but, as I have outlined, I would very much appreciate the advice of the minister in regard to some of these concerns that have been raised with me just recently. Mr ENGLISH (Redlands—ALP) (5.22 p.m.): As a member of parliament and also a member of the South East Queensland South Ministerial Regional Community Forum, I have been increasingly aware of the importance of caravan park type accommodation. In recent times, in and around my electorate I have seen the closures of caravan parks. The one behind my office has been redeveloped for a shopping centre, there is the closure of the caravan park on North Stradbroke Island and, in more recent times, the caravan park at Beenleigh has been closed. I am disappointed to say that I agree with the member for Maroochydore in that as we have seen huge increases in land prices, the owners of these types of blocks of land that have been used for caravan parks are seeking a greater financial reward from other types of development. That has put significant pressure on these caravan parks. I thank the Hon. Robert Schwarten, the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing, and his department for getting involved in a number of these caravan parks that have been closed down and for trying to find alternative accommodation for the residents of those parks. As the member for Maroochydore said also, it is very, very stressful for the occupants of these caravan parks when, sometimes with very, very little lead time, they are put in the position of trying to find alternative accommodation. Minister Schwarten and his department have done an admirable job in trying to find alternative accommodation and giving assistance, such as loans for bond money and assistance to try to house these people so that they are not kicked out onto the streets. This bill is an extremely positive bill. It is about balancing the rights of tenants with the rights of park owners and park operators. Quite often in today's society we talk about rights, but with rights come responsibilities and obligations. This bill acknowledges that fact. It declares that both park owners and home owners have rights and obligations. It facilitates the disclosure of information to prospective home owners about the park. It introduces a seven-day cooling-off period after receipt of the information document. So when people are looking at buying into one of these villages, once they receive the documentation they have time to sit down and read through it. If need be they can seek legal advice. This legislation regulates the making, the content, the assignment and the termination of site agreements and any variations in site rent. It sets out a structure for any changes to rent to be 16 Oct 2003 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 4295 discussed and achieved. It facilitates the fact that the owners of these relocatable homes have a role to play in decision making about the management of the park, particularly in the making of the rules. I see this as a major step forward. Rather than the park owner or park operator ruling from above, this legislation acknowledges that the residents have a role to play. Of course, this legislation also provides a very formalised and structured way of resolving any disputes between home owners and facility operators. I regard all of these amendments as being positive. I have one caravan park in my electorate and that is the Aquatic Gardens Caravan Park at Carbrook. It is an extremely good park. In fact, when the caravan park at Beenleigh closed down, some of the residents moved into the Aquatic Gardens Caravan Park at Carbrook. I agree with the many members who have spoken in this debate in that we need to look at ways of fostering and supporting this type of budget accommodation for many, many people in our society. I thank the minister, the Hon. Merri Rose, her ministerial staff and her departmental staff for the extensive consultation that they undertook in the preparation of this bill. I believe that this bill strikes the correct balance between the rights and responsibilities of the home owners and the rights and responsibilities of the park owners. I congratulate the minister and commend the bill to the House. Hon. K. W. HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (5.27 p.m.): I rise in this parliament to support the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 2003. The Mobile Homes Act 1989 was introduced to address a situation which had arisen on the Gold Coast. A park was established and after all the homes were sold the park owner sold the park to another company, which did not recognise the existing agreements and wanted to raise the rents in that park significantly. That act was intended to provide security of tenure for home owners, many of whom had invested their life savings in purchasing homes to provide for their retirement years. Although security of tenure was the cornerstone of that act, the scarcity of detail in the act has largely been responsible for creating a culture of conflict in some parks. Over the years, home owners have complained that park owners have taken advantage of their vulnerability and many home owners see themselves as being a captive market. While their homes may be able to be moved, the cost of relocating would be prohibitive even if an alternative site was available. Many home owners have expressed the view that they have to comply with the park owner as they really have no alternative and they are concerned that they may be victimised or just told to leave if they do not comply. One of the problems has been the lack of information about the act. It was not until the advent of the first Beattie government that an information booklet titled Going Mobile was produced, which provided both home owners and park owners with a plain language statement of what the act said. The act provided for the park owners to provide a statement of the agreement between the parties. But that was often in small print and was not easy for elderly home owners to comprehend. Because of this lack of clear information, in many cases the parks have become a source of rumour and misinformation. This misinformation has created a climate of fear, and many elderly residents have become distrustful of what park owners have told them and they have been easy prey for others wanting to express other mischievous points of view. For the park owner who has to operate under two separate pieces of legislation—the Mobile Homes Act and the Residential Tenancies Act—it is easy to appreciate the confusion and the uncertainty they may have experienced. The Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill sets out to address these problems by providing for up-front disclosure, written agreements and improved dispute resolution process, and by introducing procedures to assist the parties to access their rights. The provisions will also assist park owners by bringing consistency where appropriate with the Residential Tenancies Act through clarity of park owners' rights. I think the education program proposed by the Office of Fair Trading is important to ensure that both home owners and park owners are aware of their rights and responsibilities under the new legislation. This will include visits by Fair Trading staff to relevant areas and the production of plain language publications to assist the parties to understand what the new act says. An important focus of the education program will be to encourage the parties to talk to each other, to negotiate on any problems before running off to the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal for a solution. The education campaign will be backed by a compliance program by Fair Trading inspectors to ensure that park owners are complying with the new act. The information disclosure will provide the parties with facts, not rumours. Written agreements will provide certainty to avoid arguments. The new dispute resolution mechanisms will assist in addressing the imbalance of 4296 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003 power between the elderly home owner and the younger business oriented park owner. Importantly, all parties will know where they stand, and this should lead to a better retirement for home owners and a better business for the park owner who will not have to become embroiled in time-consuming disputes. I represent the Kallangur electorate, and that contains many manufactured home parks, particularly around my electorate office at Burpengary. When I was first elected, all of the manufactured home parks in that district were in my electorate, but since then through redistributions they are not. But within a very short vicinity of my office there are a number of manufactured home parks. I am sure this bill, which has been introduced by the minister, will go a long way towards addressing issues that occur. It will, as I said before, lead to a better retirement for home owners and a better business for the park owner. I commend the legislation to the parliament. Mr CHRIS FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (5.33 p.m.): I rise to speak in support of the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 2003. Having a look at the overall intent of the bill, I would say it goes a long way to addressing some of the problems that have existed previously. It does so by providing good, clear communication and concise information as the basis of a contract between a user of the park and the park proprietor. This information, or a lack of this information, is what causes lots of business relationships to flounder. Disclosure of information to prospective home owners about the park and the bill can only be seen as a good thing. With regard to the seven-day cooling-off period, I am always in favour of that particular type of legislation because of my experience in my former role as an accountancy and financial planning practice partner. I have seen the benefits of seven-day cooling-off periods on all sorts of financial contracts. A good many times the reason people have pulled out during the seven-day cooling-off period is that they rightly identified that they did not understand at the time the implications of the offer being made to them. So I think that is definitely a good thing. Looking a little closer to home and looking at Maryborough's formerly cheap real estate—and our fair city is no different than any other cities in south-east Queensland and probably many parts of Australia—the capital values of real estate have thrived in a regime of low interest rates. That is one of the things worth noting that has caused this particular problem. To turn to some statistics, house prices in Maryborough have risen by 16 per cent in the June quarter, and that has impacted very strongly on the fact that rental prices are also soaring. Just this week Tony Dreger, who is the coordinator of Coolooli House in Maryborough which looks after homeless men, has told me that more than 200 homeless people are on Maryborough's housing waiting list and about 10 are turned away each week. The city's homeless number has blown out in past years because of this property price boom. People are seeking other living arrangements—what we formerly called mobile homes. About 300 men, women and children each night are housed in emergency type accommodation—or public housing as it is more widely known in the area. When we look at people who live in manufactured homes and residential parks, we do not have to be blind Freddy to figure out that often those people, unfortunately, live in a low socioeconomic environment. Whilst people who are very comfortable financially can afford to find themselves in a difficult situation or a tight corner from time to time, often if people who live in manufactured homes and residential parks do their dough it is their last roll of the dice on a very large capital value. So I support the intent of the legislation to make it very clear as to what is happening there. The existing act, it is said in the second reading speech, provides security of tenure for home owners by limiting the grounds upon which the agreement to cite the mobile home may be terminated. I think that is a good thing, as termination decisions, let us face it, are not always made with the consumer's best interests at heart. I say that very carefully because any member of this parliament knows that there are two sides to every story. I have some concerns that park owners are not vilified because of any inference that all park owners are scoundrels. That would be as smart as saying that all politicians are scoundrels when we know that is not true. I am sure a few members of this House would agree with that. In reference to the fact that it also provides access to the Small Claims Tribunal to determine disputes, that does not particularly light up my excitement meter because in my past business experience, unfortunately, I found the Small Claims Tribunal to be somewhat of a toothless tiger in getting a result. On balance, the existing legislation that does not require a site agreement to be in writing or signed by the parties is clearly a recipe for disaster. The only requirement currently is for a statement of that agreement to be provided by the park owner within three months of the home owner's entry into the park. That would be like buying a second-hand car and then having 16 Oct 2003 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 4297 the owner of the car give you a whole list of things that could potentially be wrong with the car within the next three months. So that is a recipe for disaster as well. Overall, and on balance, I think it is a good piece of legislation. Unfortunately, it will add to the paperwork regime of park owners, and I am sure they will be sighing and groaning like the rest of the community about the amount of paperwork that is required. But anyone who has nothing to hide has nothing to be afraid of from this legislation, and I commend the bill to the House. Mr FLYNN (Lockyer—ONP) (5.39 p.m.): I rise to give my qualified support to this bill. Whilst supporting the general thrust of this bill, I cannot help wondering if we are legislating for safe berths on the Titanic. The fact is that no amount of consumer protection will save residents of some residential parks covered in this legislation if those parks close. Hardly a week goes by without a park closing, much to the distress of long-term manufactured home owners who had the expectation that they could continue in residence until at least long into their retirement. Unlike Housing Commission tenants, residents of these mobile home parks—probably well described here as manufactured home parks—have no secure future in the event of the closure of their park. To make matters worse, many of these parks will close not because this new range of protection for residents is particularly onerous but simply because the parks tend to occupy large areas of very valuable land. On the Gold Coast, for instance, three parks in just a small area have changed hands in the last two years following a string of closures at the southern end of the coast. A developer who bought two of the parks, at Labrador and Helensvale, has been quoted as saying that the Labrador property is just too valuable to carry on as a mobile home site. That is commercial reality. Stakeholders in the industry say that all such sites in areas such as the Gold Coast, particularly near beaches, are likely to be sold. The cost of developing new parks and rising insurance premiums ruled out their replacement. Only last month we witnessed the anguish of a resident of the Stradbroke Island Tourist Park which has been closed for redevelopment. One island resident had lived in her own home there for 17 years. No amount of regulation will address her plight. Many long-term residents face an uncertain future. Pressure on developers to change the use of these sites is too great for us to ignore the problem that residents face an uncertain future, however much we regulate their tenancies. This is not the immediate concern of this bill, and I am sure that these changes are in the interests of tenants and park owners. Indeed, the provisions of this bill have been endorsed by the Caravan Parks Association of Queensland, which welcomes the clarification of the duties and rights of both parties. I understand that many owners already operate under the provisions of this bill. On the positive side, those residents fortunate enough to enjoy a fairly secure environment can take comfort from the provisions within this bill that set up a communication with the park management as well as a complaints mechanism. If the park has deteriorated or services have been withdrawn, home owners may make an application to the tribunal for a reduction in rent. This is also based on residential tenancy legislation. One of these changes will allow home owners to have a say where the park owner wishes to change the park rules. This is similar to the residential tenancy legislation and provides manufactured home owners with the same rights as persons renting manufactured homes or caravans in the park. The bill also deals with issues such as the right of home owners to quiet enjoyment, the provision of notice boards, the maintenance of park trees and the provision of mail facilities. Many such facilities that owners of fixed homes take for granted have been provided only at the whim of park owners. This legislation sets it in concrete. I applaud the sentiment conveyed in the minister's preamble that the bill underlines the government's commitment to ensuring security of a vulnerable segment of our population, who instead of seeking public housing have chosen to provide for their retirement by living in residential parks. If this security proves to be illusory, if these people are pushed out of their home sites by redevelopment, as is so often the case, it might be considered appropriate at some stage for the Housing Department to consider buying and managing sites set aside for those who wish to own their own manufactured homes rather than live in a rental environment. It is the great Australian dream to own your own home at whatever level. A little imagination, I would suggest, might go a long way to underscore the undoubted value of this bill which, before I sit down, I commend. Mr REEVES (Mansfield—ALP) (5.44 p.m.): It gives me great pleasure to speak on the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill or what we used to— Mr Seeney interjected. 4298 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003

Mr REEVES: I thank the member for Callide. At least I know the member for Callide will stay awake, unlike the member for Lockyer. It is the last time I do him a good deed! It gives me great pleasure to rise to speak on the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill. As a lot of people have mentioned, it used to be called the Mobile Homes Act. I think the term 'manufactured homes' is more precise, because if members had seen some of the homes they would agree that they are hardly mobile. Mr Seeney: Are they near the busway? Mr REEVES: There are plenty near the busway. In fact, I have four mobile home villages and they are all round the busway. They are very close to the busway. That is one of the benefits of living in a manufactured home. I have a great village, Dress Circle Mobile Village in Holmead Road, a couple of other parks on Holmead Road, and the Gateway Village at Rochedale. In common with other honourable members, I meet a lot of people in my job. Some of the most genuine people I have met are from the Gateway Village home park. They are the salt of the earth. They have much pride in their home. I speak of people like Gerard McCrenor, who has worked extensively with me, talking about mobile homes and setting up meetings for me to talk to residents and the like. It is the likes of Gerard who have motivated me to make many representations to the minister regarding the Mobile Homes Act, which is being amended by the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill before the House. I want to thank the minister for arranging some deputations as well as a briefing to put to the residents at a meeting I held at the Southern Cross Sports Club. Between 30 and 40 residents attended that meeting. It was much appreciated. The department officers, one of whom is sitting close to the chamber now, attended that meeting. I appreciated that. I will talk about that later in my contribution. I want to focus on the alleged bullying, harassment and intimidation of elderly home owners. Residential park living has become a popular retirement housing option. Statistical information is not available to give precise details of the breakdown of the number of elderly people, but purpose-built parks tend to market towards the retirement age segment. Females comprise a large proportion of park residents. One of the major concerns raised by residents is that they are fearful of the park owner or management, due to allegations of bullying and harassment or intimidation. The day we were at the Southern Cross Sports Club we heard examples of very unscrupulous, threatening and bullying tactics by park owners, particularly at the Gateway Village. It is important to recognise that many of these concerns are perceptions held by easily intimidated, elderly home owners. Examples of these concerns are that the park owners want to put the rent up. The inference drawn by the home owners is that if they do not pay the increase the park owners will kick them out of the park and they will have nowhere to go. If a home owner tries to exercise the right under the act to argue against the rent increase or other changes in the agreement by taking the matter to the Small Claims Tribunal, the fear is that he or she will be harassed, and they cannot afford to move out of the park. Another example is that the park owner will not allow park committees to operate. Even if they do, the park owner will not recognise the committee. Some park owners adopt the attitude, 'This is my park and I will do what I want.' They forget that these are people's homes. The residents should be able to do what they want to do with their home in conjunction with the park owners and the other residents in the park. If the home owner does not do as the park owners want, then the park owner will make them relocate their home a number of times to other sites of the park. These moves will cost the home owners a lot of money. The Mobiles Home Act 1989 addressed the issue of moving the house around the park to cost the home owner money, if the home owner is brave enough to complain, but lacks effective teeth to provide adequate protection for home owners. In relation to rent increases in accordance with the agreement between the park owner and the home owner, the bill puts into place procedures and requires the park owner to provide specific information on the amount, how it was calculated and when it was due. If the home owner considers the increase excessive, an application may be made to the tribunal. This application may be made by an individual or, providing the facts and circumstances are similar or the same, by a group. This is very important. This was strongly pushed by my local residents and park owners. They wanted an opportunity to go to a tribunal so they would not have to go to the Small Claims Tribunal. They wanted to be able to do it as a group action, not as 16 Oct 2003 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 4299 individuals. The minister has amended a lot of other bills to allow for collective action to be taken. It is a right for everybody to be able to take collective action in these circumstances. If the rent increase is outside the agreement, and this is probably one of the greatest causes of concern, the park owner must again state the amount, the basis for the increase and when it is payable. The home owner must advise whether or not they agree to the increase. If the home owner is happy with the proposal, the response can be in the affirmative. However, if the home owner says no, this can be done without fear of recrimination. The park owner still has the right to seek the increase through the tribunal, but this clause should reduce concerns about intimidation. I now want to address the issue of home owners committees. The home owners have complained that some park owners will not allow home owners committees in their parks and, if they are established, the park owners will not recognise the committee or take any notice of it. This situation happened at the Gateway Village. The home owners set up a home owners committee and the park owner did not recognise it. In fact, the park owner would not allow the home owners use of the recreation facilities to hold such meetings and they therefore had to leave the park to hold a meeting. This is just simply not good enough. The bill provides for the establishment of home owners committees and provides a broad framework for the committee's functions. The bill provides for the election of committee members for a term of one year and for removal by special resolution. It also allows the committee, subject to any constitution, to decide its own procedures and to form subcommittees. To establish a committee, a constitution must be adopted by a majority of home owners. The committee may deal with the park owner on the day-to-day running of the park and on any complaints or proposals about the operation of the park raised by the home owners. The home owners committee must give the park owner written notice of any complaint or proposal and the park owner must respond within 21 days. A penalty applies if this does not occur. If the response is considered unsatisfactory, the committee may make an application to the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal. The bill provides that it is an offence if a park owner interferes with the right of the home owner to participate in an organisation to represent the interests of home owners. Home owners have expressed concern about the possibility of victimisation or intimidation when dealing with park owners on an individual basis. Many home owners are elderly and the home owners committee offers a collective approach. Many home owners have complained that some park owners will only talk to people individually, not as a group. In these cases the home owner feels intimidated and is likely to agree to proposals which may not be in their best interests. The culture of conflict is evident in many parks, and this is not good for harmony or pleasant retirement conditions for home owners. While the tribunal has been given wide powers to determine disputes, the use of the tribunal should be the last resort. The establishment of home owners committees can be a force for changing this culture. Home owners committees should try to resolve problems internally and in particular deal with issues of a trivial nature. Complaints should only go to park owners when the issue is one which cannot be resolved. The park owner should be responsive to such problems knowing the matter is not trivial and that efforts have been made to deal with the problem. Some residents fear the domination of home owners committees by individuals who may either strongly support or strongly oppose the park owner. The bill does not make the establishment of the committee mandatory but provides that, if a committee is established, a constitution must be adopted by a majority of residents. Removal of members by special resolution should assist in ensuring that the committee abides by the constitution. Other remedies in the bill can be accessed by home owners without any requirement to go through the committee. I have a question for the minister in this regard. The Associations Incorporation Act is going through a review at the moment in that if there is a problem with a constitution the issue has to go to the Supreme Court to make a ruling. If there is a problem with the constitution and there is a conflict within the constitution, what actions can the residents take? Can they go to the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal, or do they have other avenues? However, if the committee is not established in a park, a group of home owners are still entitled to take representative action in the tribunal on matters arising out of the same or similar facts or circumstances. As I mentioned earlier, I have held a couple of meetings with residents in my electorate on this issue. At one particular meeting I held I invited residents only. At previous meetings I had attended, including one with residents conducted by the Residential Parks Association, the Secretary of the Residential Parks Association, Ted Cameron, did nothing to benefit the meeting, the residents or in terms of a desired outcome for the legislation. In fact, he inflamed the situation. When I conducted that meeting I said to Gerard from the Gateway Village who assisted 4300 Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Bill 16 Oct 2003 me in calling the meeting that we should limit it to the residents within my electorate. So we invited mobile home residents and not park owners to a meeting with departmental officers to explain the new bill. Because I said that I would make that meeting just for residents—and I personally invited all residents by letter—for some reason Mr Cameron decided that I barred him from attending that meeting. He put in writing that the reason I barred him from the meeting was that I was rocking the boat of a political donation and the state government was being seen to be working with his association in jeopardising a sizeable political donation by park owners. He said that I was going to have to draw my own conclusions. This was clearly defamatory. If I wanted to I could have taken both Mr Cameron and the Residential Parks Association Inc. to court. Knowing that the majority of members of the Residential Parks Association were genuine residents, I did not take the action further. Mr Cameron has done nothing to assist the work of the Residential Parks Association. In fact, Mr Cameron, who represents the Residential Parks Association, does not live in a residential park himself, even though he is the secretary. Rather, he lives on a canal site down the coast. My understanding is that he has never owned a manufactured home. He may at some time have rented one. It was a disgrace that a member of parliament called a meeting of his own constituents to hear a briefing from the department and Mr Cameron then said that I was doing that for political donations. I clearly state here in the parliament that I have never received a donation from the park owners association or any of the parks within my electorate or any other park. All I was doing was representing the residents in my electorate. Those residents were offended by this statement by Mr Cameron. In fact, the majority of them resigned en masse from the Residential Parks Association because they knew quite clearly what representations I had made. There were community cabinets; the minister spoke to the residents at the Stretton community cabinet. I made numerous representations. I think Mr Cameron has done nothing to assist the cause in this regard. It is about time that the Residential Parks Association went further to look for new executive members other than Mr Cameron. It is obvious that he had a political agenda to run. As I said, if I wanted to take it to the nth degree I could have had him up for defamation, but I knew that there were genuine people in the Residential Parks Association who would have been hurt by that action. I congratulate the minister on this great legislation which once again shows that she is the consumer's friend, and this time she is the mobile home owner's friend. I commend the bill to the House. Hon. M. ROSE (Currumbin—ALP) (Minister for Tourism and Racing and Minister for Fair Trading) (5.57 p.m.), in reply: The main objectives of this bill are to promote fair trading practices in residential parks through declaring particular rights and obligations on the park owner and home owner; facilitating the disclosure of information; regulating site agreements, including the variation of site rent; facilitating home owner participation in the affairs of the park; and providing ways of resolving disputes. Another important objective of the bill is to encourage continued growth in the industry by providing a clear regulatory framework to ensure certainty and planning for future expansion. The bill repeals the Mobile Homes Act 1989, which has been the subject of criticism by stakeholders over recent years. The bill maintains the existing rights of both home owners and park owners, particularly in relation to security of tenure, and brings consistency with the Residential Tenancies Act 1994 to ensure that home owners and renters living in residential parks have similar rights. The bill ensures that potential home owners receive up-front information on the park and on the bill, including written site agreements with standard terms to allow for the making of informed decisions. Unlike the act, which is sparse in detail, the bill puts into place procedures including the use of approved forms to allow park owners and home owners to access existing rights. Importantly, the bill introduces procedures for rent increases or rent reductions in specified circumstances. This should address many of the disputes between home owners and park owners which tend to arise due to uncertainty in this area. The bill allows for the establishment of home owner committees to deal with the park owner on behalf of members. This addresses concerns about home owners feeling intimidated when dealing individually with a park owner. The bill provides access for individuals or groups to the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal to determine disputes. Under the act the Small Claims Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine disputes, and both home owners and park owners have been critical of Small Claims Tribunal 16 Oct 2003 Primary Industries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4301 decisions. The bill provides the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal with guidelines to assist in determining key issues. The act was identified in the Queensland legislation review timetable as requiring review under national competition policy principles, and the review obligations were transferred to the bill. The NCP public benefit test report concluded that the most appropriate method for providing consumer protection for home owners and certainty for industry was by introducing the proposed bill. This bill is generally supported by community and government stakeholders, and its objectives closely follow recommendations made by a stakeholder working party which comprised residents, park owners, representatives from their respective associations, community groups, local governments and relevant government agencies. I do thank all members for their contributions. The member for Maroochydore did raise an issue about which residents had been to see her. They told her that the operators had said the site might be redeveloped some time in the future. The member pointed out that this depreciates the value of homes, but agreements are not actually terminated. The bill provides for compensation only upon termination. The position is similar to when the government announces the route of a road. The amount payable in compensation by the park operator for relocation will not be affected. The tenure of home owners is not altered by the operator flagging future intention—that is, they have tenure until their agreement is terminated by the tribunal. This can happen at any time, subject to the procedural limitations of the tribunal. If, however, home owners decide themselves to terminate then it is not appropriate for the park owner to be required to compensate. Home owners' rights to sell or reassign are not affected. There is no legal principle for compensation to be payable in terms of injurious affection arising from future acts. This is the same position faced by residents living in homes that may be resumed for a projected future road project. The member for Maroochydore also queried the timetable of the review of the act contemplated by section 145. As the section requires, the review will commence within three years. A decision will be taken at that time regarding the scope, methodology, timetable and resourcing. I sincerely thank the member for Mansfield. He does a terrific job as chair of my backbench ministerial policy committee. He always takes a very keen interest in this particular part of Fair Trading's responsibilities. He asked whether there is some conflict between the residents committee's rules and the Associations Incorporation Act and what happens if there is this conflict. The committee's constitution and rules have to be approved by a majority of residents of a park, not just those attending the meeting. They are not required to be incorporated, but if they decide to incorporate then they will have to meet those requirements in terms of rules, auditing and so on. Section 101 provides that special meetings can amend rules. If they have a problem with rules, they have a mechanism to fix it. I sincerely thank Office of Fair Trading officers Ron Holt, who actually attended the meeting of residents that was organised by the member for Mansfield, Kerry Kahl, Matt Miller, Mike Kelly and, of course, my own personal staffer Harold Thornton. I commend the bill to the House. Motion agreed to.

Committee Clauses 1 to 155, as read, agreed to. Schedules 1 and 2, as read, agreed to. Bill reported, without amendment.

Third Reading Bill, on motion of Ms Rose, by leave, read a third time.

PRIMARY INDUSTRIES AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Resumed from 21 August (see p. 3184). Mr ROWELL (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (6.07 p.m.): I rise to speak to the Primary Industries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2003. This bill seeks to amend various acts in the Primary 4302 Primary Industries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003

Industries portfolio. They are the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001, the Chicken Meat Industry Committee Act 1976, the Exotic Diseases in Animals Act 1981, the Fisheries Act 1994, the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000, the Grain Industry (Restructuring) Act 1991, the Plant Protection Act 1989 and the Stock Act 1915. The amendments to the Exotic Diseases in Animals Act 1981 are an extremely important part of the bill because they deal with foot-and-mouth disease. The simulation exercise known as Exercise Minotaur was conducted in September 2002. There was a great deal of concern about the threat of foot-and-mouth disease coming into Australia. As I understand it, there was an agreement between the various states and the Commonwealth to conduct a simulation exercise relating to what we would do in the event of foot-and-mouth disease, which has ravaged England and other countries throughout the world, getting into Australia. When we think about it, we are really extremely vulnerable. We have an enormous coastline of many thousands of kilometres. In debate on previous legislation I have talked to the minister about the possibility of foot-and-mouth disease getting into, say, the wild pig population or something of that nature. If that happened, we would have enormous difficulties in stopping foot- and-mouth disease. The legislation provides for the determination of those movements that require a licence. This is not expected to increase the risk of the spread of disease. This is quite significant because, in the event that the disease does break out somewhere, we have to have the capacity to move very swiftly. Exercising the precautions that are necessary is one thing, but acting quickly is probably more important. There are aspects which require amendment to improve the compensation claims process after destruction of an animal or property due to exotic disease. Currently, compensation is payable under the act for the destruction or death of stock as a result of exotic pests and disease. There are some amendments in that regard and the whole quarantine process has been looked at and considered. This is significant because those arrangements relating to compensation under this act will certainly encourage people to notify the authority involved, whether it is Primary Industries, a special task force that has been set up or whatever. These pests and diseases, such as foot-and-mouth disease—and there are many others out there—spread very rapidly. I turn now to the amendments relating to the Fisheries Act. Broadly speaking, the bill aims to streamline some of the fisheries planning and development processes. I will deal with aquaculture first because that is one of the areas on which a great deal of emphasis is placed in this bill. There are four main areas that currently require approvals under the Fisheries Act: licences and permits for aquaculture; permits for operational works in a declared fish habitat area; approvals for waterway barrier works, such as dams and barrages, including an associated direction to build a fish way or fish ladders; and permits to remove or destroy damaged marine plants. Often because of cyclones, et cetera, it is necessary to deal with these types of things. The whole of the permit system has been rejigged and reconsidered in terms of the future and what we might need to do at short notice. The bill removes the development related approval processes from the Fisheries Act and replaces them with provisions requiring all these approvals to be processed according to the Integrated Planning Act requirements. I believe that is a major breakthrough. I understand the implications of it. I believe it would be a satisfactory process for the IPA Act to deal with those requirements. It also provides for appeals against development related decisions to be made through the Planning and Environment Court. While development approvals will be made under IPA, the resource allocations process will remain with the Fisheries Act. Resource allocations deal with the allocation of state owned resources and access to designated reserves of unallocated state land. The bill provides for self- assessable codes for low impact forms of development. This means that many smaller developments, including maintenance of existing developments, will no longer require an assessment and approval by the Queensland Fisheries Service. I think that is really a major plus. Very often this process can get very drawn out and very convoluted for minor developments which do arise from time to time. It is quite a substantial improvement. We will just have to test the water with this, the codes of conduct and so on, and make sure that people do the right thing. Working within those codes I believe we can certainly make some significant progress in how we go about the whole process of dealing with the likely impact of a smaller development. There should be no need to go through an exhaustive process. The bill also provides for the framework to implement amendments agreed to by both the Queensland and federal governments to address discrepancies between Queensland and Commonwealth law in relation to land based aquaculture development. There is no question of 16 Oct 2003 Primary Industries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4303 the importance of this. When a person makes an application for an aquaculture development, it has to go through the Department of Primary Industries, IPA and on to the EPA. At the end of the day, because a lot of these developments are close to Barrier Reef waters and so on, it is then necessary to get the sanction of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. I know over a period there have been applications made by people wanting to get approval for this process. Sometimes it is very drawn out. It can be very convoluted. Of course, in some cases it can act as a deterrent to those people who are prepared to spend substantial sums of money to provide jobs and opportunity. I believe that in the future the aquaculture industry in Queensland could be worth billions of dollars. We do not want it inhibited. We do not want the processes unnecessarily held up. It is necessary that we go through a more direct process whereby these departments have to make a decision and come back to the person making the application and provide them with reasons why they can or cannot do it or if there is an approval with conditions on it. It is important to get on with that as quickly as possible and at the least cost to those persons willing to develop an aquaculture project. I have substantial aquaculture developments within my electorate either in operation or intended. I know the cost and the processes that they have had to go through. Sometimes it has taken years for those approvals to be granted. One particular project—and it is about a 40- hectare project—will cost something like $6 million. If someone wishes to invest that amount of money in an aquaculture development, there are a number of benefits to those communities. Earthworks is a major component of it—how they form the ponds. They now have to comply with conditions so that when they pump the ponds out they go into a settlement area, and that is a considerable proportion of the total area involved. Of course, there are future prospects for those ponds, which are enabling the nutrients to settle. I believe there are some definite opportunities for us to be looking at farming clams and other types of molluscs that could clean the water up. Quite a bit of technology has been involved up to now and there is more to go. There are some great opportunities there for Queensland. Those people are providing jobs in terms of building the ponds and then the subsequent work. It is a technology in itself. There are difficulties with feed and obtaining the right level of nutrients to enable those ventures to carry on and be profitable. This effectively means that the federal government's approval process is incorporated. As I said, that is quite an important issue. I have seen some developments held up for a considerable period of time. It is incorporated as part of this state process. It is a major plus to get the federal government to come on board and ensure that we will not have a hold-up as a result of that government wanting some particular requirement. It all has to be sorted out so that we can then go back to the person who has made the application and inform them of any additional requirements that they need to meet in order to get approval. I know that in some cases they may want to contest the decision. As I have said before, aquaculture has an enormous potential for the future employment and economic growth of Queensland. At one particular venture close to Cardwell there are probably about 40 to 50 people working there. We have thousands of hectares right across Queensland. Certainly the growth in aquaculture would create an enormous amount of job opportunities. They are not seasonal job opportunities; they go all year round. The value of Australia's aquaculture in 2001-02 was $733 million, accounting for 30 per cent of the total gross value of Australian fisheries production in that period. Recently, aquaculture has become the fastest-growing primary industry sector with growth in value averaging 10 per cent per annum for the past decade. I know that recently there has been a slowdown, but the important issue is that, over a period, the aquaculture industry has become important to Queensland because we have ideal conditions, particularly for the cultivation of prawns in the northern part of the state because of the ability of the ponds in those areas to produce something like either two crops or 1.8 crops per annum. That is something like 10 tonnes per hectare or thereabouts. That is quite significant. During 2001-02, production was 4,603 tonnes and valued at $71 million. So the amendments in this legislation should help the aquaculture industry to flourish by streamlining the myriad approvals to allow people to enter the industry and invest an enormous amount of money in it. The amendments contained in this bill will also provide the means by which to allow the waiving of fees and surrender provisions when transferring or amending fishing licences as a result of unforeseen circumstances such as divorce, bankruptcy or a death in the family. The opposition certainly supports the amendments to the fisheries process. 4304 Primary Industries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 16 Oct 2003

New section 65C, which is contained in clause 26, states— Where there is an application for a transfer or amendment of an authority. ... The application is necessary or was a result of one of the following prescribed events. The clause then goes on to refer to a matrimonial or de facto property settlement, bankruptcy, the winding-up or administration under the Corporations Act, the administration of the deceased estate of the authority holder, or the loss of the boat at sea being used in relation to the authority through storm, capsize, collision or fire. The clause states further— An example of surrender provisions discussed in (2) is section 117 of the Fisheries (East Coast) Trawl Plan 1999, which deals with the surrender of a percentage of effort units if a trawl licence is transferred in certain circumstances. So very often there are a number of reasons why we have to make some allowances for people who run into difficulties. I really applaud the minister for going through that process. It allows the minister or the staff of QFS to allow some leniency when people face difficulties. I would like to now refer to probably the most contentious part of this bill, which relates to the dairy industry. Undoubtedly, the changes that this legislation makes to the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 are its most controversial elements. A number of operators have developed schemes to sell raw milk for human consumption. Products such as bath milk, body butter and the like are being labelled as not for human consumption, but in reality they are being consumed. The bill is aimed at preventing these schemes by strengthening the laws surrounding the sale of unpasteurised dairy milk. The bill paves the way for the Queensland government to introduce regulations under the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 to prevent the sale of bath milk and other such products. This bill also cracks down on the share cow scheme where consumers could enter into a lease agreement with a farmer to legally consume the milk unpasteurised. Of course, many believe that this scheme gives a major benefit to them. I am sure that the minister would have received a large number of requests to not go ahead with this legislation in the form in which he has. I understand some of the reasoning for that and I will go into that in a minute. The government's decision to introduce these amendments has drawn a considerable amount of criticism from some sections of the community. The main criticism is that the government is not allowing consumers to choose whether or not to drink raw milk. There is a strong belief that there is an entitlement for people to do what they like in terms of consuming a product. I know how controversial this issue is, but one of the points that I certainly have to raise is that, over a period, we have looked at unpasteurised milk and we have looked at pasteurised milk. For health reasons, there is a strong determination that the best option available is to pasteurise milk. Raw milk proponents have argued that unpasteurised milk products could carry warning labels similar to those that appear on cigarettes. They also claim that if high standards were set for how the raw milk was handled, produced and packaged consumers should be free to choose whether or not to drink raw milk. I would like to examine this issue much, much closer. If those people who want to drink unpasteurised milk could develop a code of practice whereby they prove that some of the problems, such as the risk of salmonella, E. coli and that type of thing, can be contained—and temperature is critical in achieving this—there may be some good reason for looking into it. If I was in the minister's position, I would be examining these issues to determine if there is some mechanism that can be developed to provide security for the consumption of raw milk. But I do not think that it is a fait accompli. I do not think that the minister should cut any corners. I am sure that if the minister gets involved in this type of option the safety of people who buy this milk would be absolutely paramount. As I said, if there is a mechanism by which we could get the temperature right and if we could get right the time between when the cow is milked to the time that the milk is delivered and consumed, I believe that this issue should be examined. I do not know to what extent the minister has gone into doing that, but I would like to satisfy myself that all of those avenues have been explored absolutely, because it is an option for people. People believe that they would like to drink raw milk and they have come up with a range of issues. There is probably a great deal of validity in what they say, but the other side of the argument is that all dairy farmers, if they want to produce milk for sale, have to ensure it is pasteurised. There are options so far as homogenisation is concerned. Time limits, temperature and storage provisions have been proven over a period of time to make milk safe so that the likelihood of 16 Oct 2003 Primary Industries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 4305

E. coli proving dangerous as far as the consumption of humans is concerned is, whilst not totally eliminated, reduced to a safe level. I would be interested in hearing the minister's views on these warning labels because that is another option that has been presented. However, while I acknowledge the arguments of raw milk components, I also recognise the government has a responsibility to protect the public health and safety of the community as a whole. It is Food Standards Australia New Zealand, FSANZ, a bi- national independent statutory authority, that develops the standards that apply to all food products produced or imported for sale in Australia and New Zealand. That is the point that I am getting at. Anybody who has to sell food products has to comply with the standard. If there is a prospect of people complying with a standard or a code of practice, or whatever it might be, then I think we have to investigate that. I believe if they can produce a product that is safe—to the point where, as I have said, there are mechanisms as far as temperature, storage and labelling are concerned—then it should be considered. Under the joint Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code, milk is required to be processed and certainly pasteurised. FSANZ states that the requirement to pasteurise milk is a public health measure. Pasteurisation destroys harmful bacteria such as salmonella, Campylobacter and pathogens such as Escherichia coli, which may be present in raw, unpasteurised milk. These bacteria are responsible for a large proportion of food-borne illness in Australia and New Zealand. That comes from the FSANZ web site. The pasteurisation of milk goes back some 80 years and is a widespread practice throughout the developed world because, as I said, it destroys pathogens and bacteria. Obviously no government wants outbreaks of food- borne illness which would place extra stress on the already overworked health systems. A number of concerned Queenslanders have written to me to argue raw milk is healthy, and they have quoted from various scientific studies to support their argument. They have also argued that there are a number of countries and several USA states that do allow raw milk sales, albeit generally under strictly controlled conditions. That is what I was getting to—the conditions under which licences are given to people to be able to do this. While their arguments may have some merit, we as politicians need to be guided by the advice of scientific experts on issues such as these. That is really the crux of it. If it is achievable, if we can have raw, unpasteurised milk sold that is safe as far as human consumption is concerned, we certainly need to consider it. In deciding whether or not milk should be pasteurised, we rely on Food Standards Australia New Zealand. Its position as articulated in the Food Standards Code is that milk should be pasteurised. That is the general opinion of the food standards code and it is certainly FSANZ's concern. State governments have their say through the Australia New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council, which includes health ministers from the Commonwealth, states, territories and New Zealand. As such, no Australian state permits the general sale of unpasteurised cow's milk for drinking purposes or other unpasteurised dairy milk. Ms Struthers: Tea is on the table. Mr ROWELL: Tea might be on the table, but unfortunately we have a very important bill that we have to go through at a very late hour in the night—a bill that was brought on without much notice. It was not our decision, but we will certainly make sure that we go through it as thoroughly as possible. Mr Malone: The National Party wants to go through it. Mr ROWELL: That is what it is all about. I know those opposite are rushing off for tea, but there are people out there who are very much affected by this legislation, and we want to make sure that we give them a fair hearing and that the issues they have to deal with are gone through as thoroughly as we can. No Australian state permits the general sale of unpasteurised milk. FSANZ is constantly assessing information on food safety issues and monitoring developments, as part of its role is to protect the health and safety of people in Australia and New Zealand by maintaining a safe food supply. Individuals have the right to apply to the Food Standards Code, and I understand a number of raw milk supporters in Queensland have written to FSANZ requesting that the code be changed. I acknowledge their intent but safety is paramount.. In other amendments to the Food Production (Safety) Act, the bill establishes a requirement for a board of directors for Safe Food Queensland. This board will consist of three members of the community representing consumers and the directors-general or senior representatives from Queensland Health and the Department of Primary Industries. 4306 Adjournment 16 Oct 2003

I turn to the minor amendments to the legislation. This bill also amends the Plant Protection Act 1989 to provide for a review of decision making by the chief executive or an inspector to accredit or refuse an application for accreditation. The Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 is to be amended to include a reasonable excuse for failure to comply with an information requirement of an inspector if the information sought is relevant to an animal welfare decision. The Chicken Meat Industry Committee Act 1976 is to be amended to allow for the chicken meat industry committee to recoup the costs of services provided by the committee to the producer or processor sectors of the industry. The bill also amends the Grain Industry Restructuring Act 1999 to repeal various provisions of the act that are no longer relevant following termination of vesting arrangements for wheat and barley on 30 June last year. The Stock Act is to be amended to remove a redundant reference to a provision in one section of the act and to remove a redundant reference to an honorary inspector in the definition of an inspector. Overall, there are some very necessary amendments to a number of primary industries acts, particularly in the fisheries area. I look forward to finding out more from the minister in the committee stage about the changes it is making to crack down on sellers of raw milk. With those few words, I acknowledge many things which have been done as a result of the act. We have exotic disease provisions, which are particularly important to the animal industries in Australia. What is being done there is very significant, and I am very supportive of that. What we had to go through with the Minotaur exercise last year demonstrates that governments in Australia are very much aware of the disease risks that could be imposed in this great nation of ours, with our dependency on many animals that could be susceptible to the likes of foot-and- mouth disease and other pests. I support the bill. Debate, on motion of Mr Palaszczuk, adjourned.

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Hon. H. PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Minister for Primary Industries and Rural Communities) (6.39 p.m.): I move— That the House, at its rising, do adjourn until 9.30 a.m. on Tuesday, 28 October 2003. Motion agreed to.

ADJOURNMENT Hon. H. PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Minister for Primary Industries and Rural Communities) (6.39 p.m.): I move—

Land Rezoning; Mr J. Curley Mr FLYNN (Lockyer—ONP) (6.39 p.m.): I refer tonight to a case of theft. It is not the usual case of theft. It is not a case where somebody is hit on the head and relieved of his or her wallet. This is a case where a citizen has been hit with a land rezoning plan which has the capacity to rob him and his family of most of his property's true value. Mr Jim Curley is 65. He has owned a 40-acre paddock on the outskirts of Ipswich for about 45 years. In that time he has run horses and cattle on it and he looked forward to either continuing to use it for grazing or horse riding or selling it in order to buy a property further afield. In any event, he wanted to use his investment for his own purposes or for that of his children. Now, at the stroke of a pen, he may be able to do neither. His plight arises from an Ipswich City Council rezoning proposal which has the intent of declaring his land a buffer zone. The council evidently looked at the stand of trees which has grown upon Mr Curley's property and came to the conclusion, 'That's an excellent buffer zone between industry and housing'. The fact that declaring Mr Curley's land a buffer zone could impact upon his rights and his expectations does not seem to have entered into the equation. The upshot of that was that Mr Curley, who lives in another part of Ipswich, received a letter from the council informing him of the planning proposal for his land and telling him that native vegetation must be retained and, where necessary, supplemental planting is to be undertaken. Mr Curley ran cattle and horses on that block. Now, with increasing age and other commitments, he has been hard pressed to find the time to keep the timber down to manageable levels. The paddock is now overgrown, and the regrowth has crowded out the grass. Does somebody want to 16 Oct 2003 Adjournment 4307 buy this land? He is stuck with a block he cannot do a thing with. This is all the more galling when he has seen neighbouring properties zoned industrial and changing hands for large sums of money. How can we talk of this nation as an advanced democratic community when we can treat small landowners with such casual disdain and with such disregard for the consequences and insensitivity to an owner's reasonable expectations? This may be a bureaucratic slip-up. The Ipswich City Council has yet to consider the draft planning scheme and perhaps their ratepayer's plight will be recognised and his fears put to rest. What is worrying is that the Department of Local Government's planning process does not lay down conditions under which councils must prepare their own town plans, that any financial consequences to the owners of their rezoning plans must be borne in mind and that councils must automatically concede a right to compensation. I am aware that the Integrated Planning Act does allow for a two-year period in which a person in Mr Curley's predicament can seek compensation from a local authority on the basis of the land's use before rezoning. In other words, he cannot expect compensation on the notional value of his land if it was rezoned industrial. That might be fair. What is unfair is that a 65-year-old man is threatened with the loss of control of his block of land and he must use his own resources to fight for just compensation. A buffer zone, by its very definition, is of no value to anyone except the council. If they stand by their planners' recommendations, they should buy this block and let Mr Curley get on with his life.

Redlands Ulysses Club Mr ENGLISH (Redlands—ALP) (6.42 p.m.): Bikers and bikies are very different people. Last Sunday, I had the pleasure of spending an afternoon with a group of bikers, the Redlands Ulysses Club. Last Sunday, at a park near the Donald Simpson Over 50s centre, the Redlands Ulysses Club organised the Ron Power Roundup, an annual event to raise money for the Palliative Care Fund. Ron Power was a dedicated member of the Redlands Ulysses Club, a man of great strength. Ron was struck down on 5 August 2001 with cancer. As a result of this, the Redlands Ulysses Club decided to organise an annual run to raise funds to support a group that provided great support to Ron Power and his family in the last few weeks of his life. It should be noted that last Sunday the Redlands Ulysses Club raised over $10,000 to assist the Palliative Care Fund. I would like to thank Allan and Savaugn Pratt, Ian Mathers, Louise Holt and Barry Maffiscioni for their hard work in organising this great event. During the event I ran into an old friend of mine and the member for Gaven, Mr Rick Bedford. I would like to congratulate Rick on his promotion to national president of the Ulysses Motorcycle Club. I would like to thank the many Ulysses clubs in and around south-east Queensland that supported the event, including the Ulysses club from Glass House. Ms Male: And they're an excellent club who do a lot of work in their community as well. Mr ENGLISH: They do a great job. This Sunday I will have the pleasure of riding in the 000 emergency motorcycle ride. This Sunday there will be a group of bikers, not bikies, meeting at the Emergency Services precinct at Capalaba. I will be joining them on a bike kindly donated by Morgan & Wacker Motorcycles at Newstead. I would like to thank them for the donation of that motorcycle. I would like to thank Ian Skyring and all the staff of the Fire and Rescue Service in the bayside area for organising this ride. The funds raised will go towards helping children with disabilities. This is a very worthwhile cause. I ask any members of the House who are free this Sunday to please grab a bike, throw your leg over and join us at 9 a.m. at Capalaba and join in this great event which will raise much-needed funds to support children with a disability.

Mooloolah River Miss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (6.45 p.m.): This morning I heard the Transport Minister talk about the dredging being completed at the Mooloolah River entrance. I was pleased to see that dredging completed. However, I was still concerned that the Transport Minister was maintaining that the situation had become dangerous only recently. In fact, the entrance to the Mooloolaba Harbour had been dangerous for months. I had taken a deputation to the minister three to four months earlier from some of the stakeholders in that area after representations from a wide range of very concerned community members. At that deputation with the Transport Minister, he proceeded to tell me that even if he was going to approve dredging it would take three to four months to get the relevant dredging 4308 Adjournment 16 Oct 2003 approvals in place. That consequently was proven to be completely wrong. However, at that time he refused to take action. Only a matter of days later a boat overturned because of the very dangerous entrance to the Mooloolah River and a child almost drowned. As a result of the deputation that I took to the minister, he did give a commitment that officers from his department would meet with the commercial operators that work out of Mooloolaba Harbour. Members have to realise that there is an $80 million seafood industry that works out of the Mooloolaba Harbour in addition to a significant recreational industry. It is a very important jobs industry to the Sunshine Coast and it is very important to those who enjoy recreational boating. However, the Mooloolah River entrance had become extremely dangerous due to one of the worst build-ups of sand that even old-timers had seen at this particular point. It is imperative that we need to see quicker and more timely action in the future from government to ensure that we do not have this situation arising to this extent again. The National/Liberal coalition has given a commitment that there will be dredging and appropriate works undertaken on a regular basis to ensure that there is safe access to this river. We believe that there needs to be a clear message from government that it will act in a more timely manner in the future. As a result of that meeting with the deputation I took to the minister, those commercial operators told the department very strongly that the entrance to the Mooloolah River was not safe at that time—a fact that was disputed by the department. When there are people who are operating boats that can be worth $1 million and they are saying, 'We're telling you now, this is not safe' and the department is still saying it is safe, then it is a matter of grave concern. It is a matter of the utmost seriousness that the department and the government did not listen and do something about this sooner. It is time it was recognised that these issues are extremely important. Industry was threatening to go to New South Wales and take those jobs away. There must be a plan in future to ensure more timely action to address these issues. Time expired.

Rotary Clubs Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (6.48 p.m.): Rotary clubs have made an invaluable contribution to the lives of many people throughout the world. From building shade areas in public parks to raising funds for essential lifesaving services, Rotary has left its mark on many worthy endeavours. This organisation grew out of a recognition that all of us as individuals have the capacity to contribute something worth while to the community and that all individuals are worth fighting for. Community service clubs such as Rotary are major contributors to the community, providing financial assistance, lobbying power, donations, support and compassion to those who need it most. Rotary has done many wonderful things for communities around the world. To my mind, Queensland's Rotary clubs have one major thing in common, and that is helping people. Flood relief was provided to residents in Queensland's south-western and northern regions. Rotary clubs rallied behind their flood ravaged communities, providing food, clothing or an extra pair of hands to help with the clean-up. Their efforts made a real difference to those communities which were inundated and isolated by floodwaters. It is certainly heartening to see the level of commitment so many people have to their communities in times of crisis. But a lot of the volunteers I meet are not interested in adulation. They have the community's interest at heart and a successful operation is often reward enough for them. None of these people seek or expect recognition for their efforts. Their only concern is in helping others. This also epitomises the spirit of Rotary. While most people in the community are aware of Rotary, many may not realise the full extent of what it does. Rotarians constantly pop up in our communities in a variety of roles—traffic control support, flood boat rescues, road accident assistance, land search operations and disaster management coordination. Some examples of community assistance that has been brought to my attention include assistance by Rotary clubs providing trauma teddies to the Queensland Ambulance Service as a way of calming young children who have been involved in terrifying accidents. Rotarians also lend support to rural volunteer firefighters during bushfires, providing them with much needed food and drink. On an international level, Rotary clubs have assisted the people of Papua New Guinea after they were devastated by a giant tidal wave. They were also there for the people of Colombia affected by earthquakes and flooding, and they were there to assist with the rebuilding of our newest neighbour, East Timor. 16 Oct 2003 Adjournment 4309

Without a doubt we would be a lot worse off if it was not for the dedication and community spiritedness of organisations like Rotary. The Beattie government is committed to developing partnerships with community organisations through mutual respect, commitment and equality. The services clubs like Rotary are a vital ingredient in this partnership through their support of community organisations and their high standing in our community. Earlier this year I was honoured to be a recipient of the Rotary of Sumner Park's Pride of Workmanship Award. These awards are given to people who are usually nominated by their employers and who demonstrate qualities of diligence, pride and the determination to do a job to the best of their ability. Every year the Rotary club supports the Pride of Workmanship Awards concept, which evolved in 1975 with the theme, 'Do it once, do it well; build a better Australia'. Other recipients of this year's award included Kylie Alder, a practice manager; Maryan Schmitt, a receptionist at the Sinnamon Road Medical Centre; and Luke Robinson, assistant manager of Roverwood Pty Ltd. Congratulations Rotary on making these awards an ongoing event.

Queensland Ambulance Service Mr MALONE (Mirani—NPA) (6.52 p.m.): This morning I asked a question of the Minister for Emergency Services with regard to the staff satisfaction survey that is done on a regular basis for the QAS. The minister became very sensitive about the issue. It is interesting to note that he came into the House at a later stage and took a matter of privilege to get himself off the hook. When one looks into the issue they would understand that he is very sensitive about the matter, because he knows for a fact that if the survey went ahead the minister and his director-general would get a hiding over the matter. The staff satisfaction survey is done on a regular basis in the QAS. It is strange that the minister indicated that there will be no survey done until February. One has to ask the question: why is that so? As I said this morning in my question to the minister, maybe it has something to do with the election. If the staff satisfaction survey was done in February, the results would not be known until after the next election. It is not very difficult to see through the whole issue; it is transparent. Meanwhile, while all of this is going on, paramedics are going through hell. There are many times when they are unable to fill full shifts at stations. Paramedics are being bullied and there are backflips going on all the time. Indeed, quite often stations are closed for full shifts at a time and unqualified staff are manning very sensitive positions. If the minister really wants to get precious about it, I can actually name the stations that are being closed. Quite frankly, the on-road officers in the QAS are doing a marvellous job under very difficult conditions. The question on notice answer that was returned only a short time ago indicated that there is are blow-outs in response times, even when there is a transfer of code 1 call-outs to code 2. So there is manipulation of the response times. Community ambulance cover is unfortunately causing an extra workload on the QAS. The public perception of the QAS has changed tremendously. Unfortunately, there are people out there who are demanding transport by the QAS for quite minor injuries. LACs have been called on to supply thousands of dollars worth of equipment, and maybe that is the minister's way of getting the money out of the LACs before the government closes them down. Over a long time the QAS has been supported by business throughout Queensland. Unfortunately, now business is offside. One of the greatest supporters of the QAS is now— Time expired.

Pine Ridge Conservation Park; Friends of Wavebreak Island Mrs CROFT (Broadwater—ALP) (6.55 p.m.): Since the late 1980s disused Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service and former council pound buildings stood storm and termite damaged at the northern entrance of the Pine Ridge Conservation Park at Coombabah. The buildings were not only an unsightly dilapidated mess; they presented serious safety concerns as the park is popular with local residents, visitors and young children. Local residents raised directly with me their concerns regarding the buildings and I made representations on their behalf to the Minister for the Environment for the removal of these unsightly and dangerous buildings. Upon hearing about the state of the buildings, the minister visited the site on Sunday, 14 September and agreed they had to go. I am pleased to inform the House that the buildings have now been completely removed, and I thank the minister, his department and Q-Build for their swift action in responding to my request. This much-improved section of the conservation park presents an opportunity for 4310 Adjournment 16 Oct 2003 picnic shelters with interpretive signage on the cultural and environmental value of the park to be designed for installation in the future. I look forward to working with the department on this project. Last Sunday I joined the Pine Ridge Care Group for an education day in the park. Local residents Lyn and Peter Reilly, who incidentally do an incredible amount of work with the Australian Society for Growing Australian Plants, guided interested locals through the park, identifying and explaining the beautiful wild flowers and flora in the park. Following a morning tea, the group headed out again on tour with Tony Dillon, a member of the Koombummeri indigenous people. All in attendance were delighted to hear how the park was once used by the traditional owners as a meeting and trading place. It was an informative and fun day and I take this opportunity to commend the Pine Ridge Care Group for its efforts during the recent Weedbuster Day and its commitment to caring for and promoting this very unique conservation area that exists in the Broadwater electorate. This coming Saturday I will join another band of enthusiastic volunteers at the Wavebreak Island Clean-up Day. The Friends of Wavebreak Island will be joined by Queensland Transport and council officers and the volunteer coastguard of Southport in working to identifying areas on the island that can be revegetated or cleaned up. Wavebreak Island is a superb spot for boaties to pull up out of the wind and enjoy a picnic lunch. I am committed to working with council officers, the Department of Transport and interested stakeholders to identify the best options to manage Wavebreak Island. I look forward to getting out with these groups on Saturday.

Country Press Awards, Beaudesert Times Hon. K. R. LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (6.57 p.m.): I want to congratulate Beaudesert Times and give recognition for the paper's success in this year's Country Press Awards. Beaudesert Times was first published in 1908 following a merger between the Beaudesert Despatch and the Beaudesert Herald. The company was purchased by Frank Hodgson in 1930 and ownership and management remains in the family today. It is one of the few locally owned and independent newspaper companies in Queensland. This is not the first time the paper has won awards. Beaudesert Times has also gained international recognition, having won two Pacific Area Newspaper Publishers Association awards. This year Beaudesert Times received seven major awards at the Queensland Country Press Awards held on the Gold Coast on Friday, 3 October. It won the award for best newspaper with a circulation of up to 10,000; for technical excellence for a circulation of up to 5,000; for journalistic excellence in the open area; and for journalistic excellence in the weighted area, which makes allowance for the number of staff and resources available to the newspaper. It won best newspaper supplements for its Beaudesert Show feature, it won the best special publication for its Beaudesert Show feature and it won the best house advertisement. Journalist Krista Dobinson was highly commended in the individual journalistic excellence section. The Jimboomba Times won third place for the best locally produced full-colour advertisement and best house advertisement. Journalist Emma Jachimowicz was highly commended for best pictures in the sports area. Beaudesert Times Pty Ltd is a wholly independent company. All publications are produced totally in-house. Managing director Mark Hodgson was made a life member of the Country Press Association of Australia. He has been involved in the Country Press Association of Australia for 24 years. He has served as president and vice-president during that time. Mark was made a life member of the Queensland Country Press Association five years ago. I congratulate Mark and the staff of the Beaudesert Times.

Indooroopilly Railway Station Mr LEE (Indooroopilly—ALP) (6.59 p.m.): I am delighted to report to the House that the state government has announced a significant upgrade of the Indooroopilly Railway Station. From the very beginning I have worked very hard to secure what I believe is a very long overdue upgrade for Indooroopilly Railway Station. Indooroopilly is of course one of the busiest railway stations in Brisbane's western suburbs. The last time Indooroopilly station saw an upgrade of any note, I am told, was around 1972. After around 30 years of this railway station not being a priority for previous Liberal Party MPs, it is a delight for me to be able to announce that there will now be a significant upgrade at Indooroopilly to ensure there is appropriate disability and pram access. 16 Oct 2003 Adjournment 4311

I am also pleased that Indooroopilly will be part of a new after-dark security initiative providing extra security staff outside of business hours, making trains and train platforms safer for all public transport users. Queensland Rail has also undertaken a detailed study into the development of airspace above railway tracks. I am very pleased about that also. Plans of the railway station upgrade will be available for the public to view hopefully by mid-November. I would appreciate any community comments and feedback. Community access is a priority of mine. That is why I moved my electorate office to enable, for the first time, disability and pram access. The major upgrade of Indooroopilly station is great news for all people in the Indooroopilly area as not only will train users have greater peace of mind; they will also have increased and unprecedented access. With this, though, I think there is an ideal opportunity to look at long-term solutions for public transport in the western suburbs. I believe this should include increased off-street parking at Indooroopilly. I know that the federal government is making very little use of a large vacant block of land belonging to the Department of Defence adjacent to Indooroopilly Railway Station. It is the only land available for a park-and-ride facility. I have written to Defence Minister Robert Hill to suggest that this under-utilised Defence land should be utilised by the community for a much-needed park-and-ride facility, which will get commuter cars off our local streets. This upgrade at Indooroopilly is great news for our community. Like most residents of Indooroopilly, I am looking forward to work beginning.

Wide Bay Group Linen Service Mr CHRIS FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (7.02 p.m.): If Queensland is the Smart State, then Maryborough is indeed the smart city. I had the rare privilege a couple of months ago of attending a tour of the Wide Bay Group Linen Service. What a fantastic facility it is. The Wide Bay Group Linen Service was commissioned in 1996 at a capital cost of $6 million and commenced processing for the Sunshine Coast Health Service District in 1999 to bring the complement of health service districts serviced to five. The service currently provides linen services for 34 hospitals and nursing homes, oral health and the Queensland Ambulance Service. Wide Bay Group Linen Service employs 45 full-time equivalent staff for its processing plant at Moonaboola Estate in Maryborough, with vehicles stationed at Bundaberg, Maryborough and Nambour. Service output is a staggering 40,000 kilograms per five-day week, utilising a cost recovery model with an annual turnover of approximately $3 million. When I spoke to the director of Wide Bay Group Linen Service, he told me that the service does not receive any budget appropriation and is entirely funded on a user pays basis. That would be a refreshing change to any government seeking to run efficiency in its particular portfolios. Wide Bay Group Linen Service has a sterile linen department which provides sterile theatre products direct to operating theatres. This was the first such in-house facility actually commissioned by Queensland Health. I had the privilege of walking fairly close to the line there to see the process used for rejecting unsterile garments. The current charges for linen from the Wide Bay Group Linen Service are regularly the most efficient and cost-effective in the whole Queensland public health sector. The service employs state-of-the-art technology and processing, including energy and environmental best practice models which are linked by modem to international suppliers and manufacturers for benchmarking purposes. It is a phenomenal facility. The technology is just stunning. The thing that impressed me most of all with this particular place was the fact that the staff really take incredible pride in the output and the efficiency of the service. There is a competition to do things well, timely and in a cost-efficient manner. They should be congratulated.

Anti-Poverty Week Ms STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (7.05 p.m.): I was alarmed several months ago when I uncovered data that showed that 30 per cent of people in Acacia Ridge in my local area earn little more than $200 a week. This is 30 per cent of people living well below the poverty line. In fact, it is claimed that more than 13 per cent of Australians are living below the poverty line. This is Anti-Poverty Week. It is an important time for us to reflect on the fact that far too many people are struggling to put a roof over their heads. Far too many people are struggling to 4312 Adjournment 16 Oct 2003 pay food, education and health costs. Far too many people in my local area are going to bed tonight wondering if they will be able to score a job tomorrow. Despite a strong period of economic growth nationally and within Queensland, the benefits of this growth are not being shared around widely enough. It is great news to hear in Queensland that we have an unemployment rate of 6.5 per cent—the best rate in many, many years. It is due to the determined efforts of the Beattie government and our Breaking the Unemployment Cycle program as well as our efforts through State Development to generate a lot of industry, jobs and growth in Queensland. Getting a secure job is a key for people to move beyond poverty. The other important key is access to affordable housing. In this very important Anti-Poverty Week, I join the Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing, the Hon. Robert Schwarten, in calling on the federal government to develop and commit to a national affordable housing access plan. We need a national, determined effort to make sure that all people can put a decent roof over their heads. We need a national, determined effort to make sure that the sons and daughters of our adult generation will also be able to own their own homes or afford a rental property. The way things are going, housing costs will rise well above the acceptable standard of 30 per cent of weekly income. Under John Howard's policies, people are already facing rising health costs and rising education costs. Many will not be able to afford housing as well. We need a national plan that will bring some sense to the excesses of the federal government's first home owners grant and negative gearing tax arrangements on luxury investment properties. The federal government must act immediately to restore the capital funds for housing through the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement to the states. That is one key action that needs to be taken immediately. Let us reflect on these struggles of many people not only during Anti-Poverty Week; let us also take determined and committed action to do something about poverty. I can assure people in my local area, particularly in suburbs like Acacia Ridge, that I remain committed to ensuring that we continue to get our fair share of public housing. I am pleased that the minister has recently allocated a new project to Sunnybank Hills in my area. Let us act during Anti-Poverty Week. Let us not just think about the struggles people have; let us also take some determined action now.

Ms D. Podbury Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (7.08 p.m.): I wish to thank a true health professional for her contribution not just to the local residents but also to the hundreds of thousands of families north of the Brisbane River. I refer to the outgoing district manager of the Prince Charles Hospital health district, Ms Deb Podbury. In debate on the health bill I made passing reference to the contribution Deb had made. I would like now to specifically refer to the work she has done. A Victorian by birth, Deb came to the Prince Charles Hospital district with a very strong community focus. She has a love for and a commitment to the elderly and to those with specific needs, such as those with acquired brain injury. Her community health focus on things such as diabetes, drugs, alcohol and sexual health made sure that she committed resources to these needs. Deb was an approachable, ethical and competent person. She was not afraid to tackle the difficult jobs. She was a team player working carefully with the district health executive, the district council and community groups. As I said to the Health Minister earlier in the week, Prince Charles Hospital's loss is Princess Alexandra Hospital's gain. We are lucky in Queensland Health to have such health professionals as Deb and many others. I thank her for the work she has done at Prince Charles Hospital. I hope that we can see her back some time in the future. I wish her well in her new posting. Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 7.09 p.m.

K. A. TYNDALL, ACTING GOVERNMENT PRINTER, QUEENSLAND—2003